Viewing Thread:
"Revolution"

We look back at the early years of gaming and we see the birth of genres, we see the first Platformer, the first shoot ‘em up and the first driving game. But genres haven’t stopped today but sadly these days some don’t get further than the first few games.

Sheep Dog ‘N Wolf a damn good title and was oddly called a Steal ‘em up, now this is still an early idea and may progress in to something more but right now it is just a one hit wonder despite its similarities with Silicon Valley (or for PS1 owners Evo’s space adventure). Some though don’t turn out to be one hit wonders. Survival Horror genre (which is also oddly named) is now a widely accepted genre to go along side platformers and Racers. Resident Evil, Alone in the Dark are probably the biggest names but Onimusha and Devil May Cry aren’t far behind. Despite this Survival Horror is still quite old now what new genres have been created over the last couple of years that will revolutionize the gaming future?

Crazy Taxi: Despite being around in the arcades for sometime this brilliant new idea on the driving front to use on a console. It was popular enough to gain a sequel but there were problems with both and we all knew it, you couldn’t stand it for so long. Fears of this being a trend within the game industry though came to an end with the brilliant Simpson’s Road Rage.

Party games: No one honestly thought this idea had a future but oddly it does??? Although a great game Mario Party are one of few N64 titles to get a third outing and with a fourth planned for the Gamecube! The idea was then passed on to THQ who implemented the idea into the Rugrats games and then Acclaim gave it a go in South Parks Chef’s Luv Shack.

Dancing games: I never understood the attraction to these I thought the idea of dance mats and button bashing was just stupid but after playing on SEGA’s awesome Space Channel 5 and my entire view of them has changed. Dancing games are huge in Japan and quite popular in other places as well, if you haven’t tried one don’t get put off but the idea button pressing at the right moment is damn well addictive.

Extreme Sports games: These exploded after Tony Hawks, now Matt Hoffman, SSX, Jet Set Radio and many more. These games are fast and require quick-fingered players, timing is of the essence and so they have become addictive. Be it racing style like Trickstyle, straight trick games like Tony Hawks or Graffiti games like Jet Set (grind) Radio they are some of the most popular games to date

But creating new genre’s is becoming harder and harder to do but creating a new genre isn’t the only way forward revolutionizing an older one is also a great thing to do. Over the last generation this has happened to even the oldest genres. Platformers have gone through many changes first Mario and Banjo revolutionized them with the new 3D worlds that were brilliant and refreshing changing platform games forever, Sadly Banjo and Donkey Kong went too far so Conker appeared and refreshed it all and again this is a new revolutionary way for the platform genre.

Shoot ‘em ups changed after the arrival of Goldeneye and all big Shooters like it are following in Goldeneye/ Perfect Darks footsteps. Halo, Agent under fire and Timesplitters are but a few that has followed in Goldeneye’s footsteps and again this was a game that changed the view of Shoot ‘em ups. Tekken revolutionized beat ‘em ups and most of us have forgotten Street Fighter and Killer Instinct its all Tekken and Dead or Alive these days. Driving games changed with the introduction of the 3D stick now the handling is much more precise.

So what of the future? Will Eternal Darkness revolutionize Survival horror promising the new Psychological side of the genre? Will Mario Sunshine return platformers to the former glory last seen early in the N64’s life? Will the new Zelda change the way developers think when they make adventure games? Who knows but then I suppose that is what makes the future so exciting!

Here’s to the future.

Dringo.

Strafex wrote:
I know, but if they'd implemented these elements half as well
> as Goldeneye had then there's no way that Wolfenstien could be called
> revolutionary or any other first person shooters.

They implemented them pretty well... obviously the graphics on a 1993 PC title could never match those from an N64...

Id suppose its kind of like compairing Donkey Kong to Super Mario Bros... They are both Platformers, and although Super Mario is doing the same thing as Donkey Kong, its in a different league... (if that makes any sense?)

When you say
> "elements", you mean "watered down so much that you'd barely
> notice they were there unless you were trying to be pedantic", right?

errmm.... dunno what I ment?... Where did I say elements? :)

Strafex wrote:
> It expanded everything in Goldeneye to a new level.
Especially the 4 player
> multiplayer.

What about things like the farsight?
I'm sure that it had a bit
> more than you gave it credit for.

Besides, each title you mentioned bettered
> it one aspect, but Perfect Dark definately put all these elements together
> well.

And anyway, with new technology with the possibility of online internet
> access, I think that Rare have the possibility of bettering everything with the
> next Perfect Dark.


Hmmm, maybe but i still think the genre had moved on quite considerably by the time Perfect Dark was released. Yeah it put a number of different elements (that i listed previously) together but this isn't really advancing the genre is it? Plus the PC games i listed also implemted more than one improvment - i just highlight the one feature the the game was none for - for example Thief 2 is best know for it's interactivity and story based missions, but the AI was also amazing.
Surely to be classed as 'the next step' in a genre you must bring somthing new to the table that hasn't been done before - not just uses a bunch of ideas and put them together. Just want to say again tho, Perfect Dark was a very good game.

By the way, what is 'FarSight'?

Armatige Shanks wrote:
Yes, they were very
> much FPS games... remeber that castle wolfensetin was in no way the first FPS...
> they had been around for a few years before then (Catacomb Abyss was the first
> ID FPS) ... ID themselves made several FPS before Wolfenstein... for more info,
> visit their site...

Stealth and Missions were very much apart of both of
> these titles...

I know, but if they'd implemented these elements half as well as Goldeneye had then there's no way that Wolfenstien could be called revolutionary or any other first person shooters.

When you say "elements", you mean "watered down so much that you'd barely notice they were there unless you were trying to be pedantic", right?

It expanded everything in Goldeneye to a new level.
Especially the 4 player multiplayer.

What about things like the farsight?
I'm sure that it had a bit more than you gave it credit for.

Besides, each title you mentioned bettered it one aspect, but Perfect Dark definately put all these elements together well.

And anyway, with new technology with the possibility of online internet access, I think that Rare have the possibility of bettering everything with the next Perfect Dark.

Strafex wrote:
Were they
> FPS games?

Before Doom and Wolfenstien there had been shooting games, as well
> as first person games (like those ancient 3D maze games).
Does that mean Doom
> and Wolfenstien weren't revolutionary as these ideas had been done before? I
> don't think so.
Just because stealth and mission based levels had been done
> before, they'd never been properly implemented into a modern 3D FPS
> before.

Yes, they were very much FPS games... remeber that castle wolfensetin was in no way the first FPS... they had been around for a few years before then (Catacomb Abyss was the first ID FPS) ... ID themselves made several FPS before Wolfenstein... for more info, visit their site...

Stealth and Missions were very much apart of both of these titles... Since Looking Glass are no more, I'm not sure if their web site is still up and running... However they diud have quite a large following, so it shouldnt take you long to find stuff on bothe the Ultima Underword and System Shock titles on the web?

Hmmm, sorry but i don't think that Perfect Dark was as good as any PC shooter when it was released!

When Perfect Dark came out, the PC already had games like Unreal Tournament and Half-Life (excellent AI), Quake 3 (unrivalled visuals), Soldier of Fortune (excellent hit zones etc), Thief 2 and System Shock 2 (for story driven missions and interactive environments)!

I'm not saying Perfect Dark wasn't a good game, and for the N64 it was amazing (and of course it cost a huge amount less than a PC needed to play the above games)! But you've got to admit that it did very little to take the genre to the next level. Everything had been done before and been done better - with the possible exception of the cool Hallucinating drugs that slowed time down – you could say this was the forerunning to Max payne’s bullet time!

I'll settle for that, not having played Quake 2 on a more powerful PC.

I suppose that leaves Goldeneye as revolutionary despite having a lower polygon count.

Now Perfect Dark was almost as good as any PC blaster when it was released, and that was made on ancient N64 hardware.
Imagine what Rare can pull off on a Gamecube which has capabilities that exceeds most modern PC's.

Something to certainly look forward to...

Strafex wrote:

> better AI, animation, smooth graphics, new way of doing things (Quake 2 was just
> like all the other FPS on the PC market with improved graphics engine. Goldeneye
> was like nothing seen before) made Goldeneye make Quake 2 look primitive in lots
> of ways.

Better AI? agreed

Better Animation? agreed, although on the whole Quake 2 was very good.

Smooth Graphics? Not with a 3D card it wasn't - Quake 2 ran MUCH more smoothly than Goldeneye. Even when Goldeneye was first released it looked a little slow and (i played it the other day) now it looks terrible.

New way of doing things? agreed, compaired to Quake 2 Goldeneye was quite a step up.

well done, a good argument, very well made. Congratulations you are a rare thing on this msg board - someone who actually argues a point with facts and valid opinions. Not complete c**p!

Nice debating the point with you.

The_King wrote:

> if you're saying that GoldenEye makes the PC version of Quake 2 look outdated
> then you need your eyes testing.

I never played the PC version with a 3DFX card (state of the art in those days), but even if the graphics looked as smooth, the animations were nothing compared to Goldeneye.

Quake 2 enemies had run, duck and shoot.
If you shot them, no animation changed but they sometimes fell back a bit.

In Goldeneye, a guard was almost brought to life in comparison.
When you shot their leg they limped, a head shot was a instant kill (in the primitive Quake 2 game, it made no difference where you shot them), you could even shoot their hats off.

The better AI, animation, smooth graphics, new way of doing things (Quake 2 was just like all the other FPS on the PC market with improved graphics engine. Goldeneye was like nothing seen before) made Goldeneye make Quake 2 look primitive in lots of ways.


Armitige Shanks wrote:
>As for the introduction of Stealth and mission based levels... then I'd suggest that Looking Glasses System Shock and Ultima Underworld games already incorporated these in the early ninties (1993?) and to a much deeper degree (Ultima Underworld was almost an RPG)

Were they FPS games?

Before Doom and Wolfenstien there had been shooting games, as well as first person games (like those ancient 3D maze games).
Does that mean Doom and Wolfenstien weren't revolutionary as these ideas had been done before? I don't think so.
Just because stealth and mission based levels had been done before, they'd never been properly implemented into a modern 3D FPS before.

And by introducing these elements, Goldeneye took the FPS to a new level.

Strafex wrote:
Apart from better graphics, smoother gameplayer, Goldeneye took the FPS
> genre and introduced stealth, Sniping, 4 player splitscreen deathmatch,
> headshots (in games like Quake 2, it didn't make a difference where you hit
> them.), mission based levels (rather than simply get from A to B), instead of
> being a "rapidly shoot monsters from hell" sim it was a "tactical
> and inventive secret agent" sim.

Trust me, it took the PC a whole year
> to catch up with the likes of Half Life.

Id have to agree with 'the King' ... The PC version of Quake2 did have a fantastic graphics engine, that improved depending on the specs of the machine... and took advantage 3D graphics cards... I wouldnt be surprised if a game popped up this year based on the Quake2 engine?

As for the introduction of Stealth and mission based levels... then I'd suggest that Looking Glasses System Shock and Ultima Underworld games already incorporated these in the early ninties (1993?) and to a much deeper degree (Ultima Underworld was almost an RPG)

I'm not trying to suggest that GoldenEye wasnt a fantastic title... Its playability, level design, in-game touches, etc... are almost legendary...