The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I love gaming. It is a pastime, an occupation and a way of life. I knew gaming would be my ultimate destiny. At the moment, I am on the verge of a breakthrough. As the new generation of console technology dawns, I know that my destiny shall come together during this new era of technology. I am 15 years old, currently studying for my GCSE's. I get good reports, good marks and am generally a bright student. I am hoping, one day, to make it into the computer programming industry. Not necessarily games; that would still sound like a childhood ambition. No, I am more into programming the actual computers. Like being the next Bill Gates. That would be something worth looking forward to. Anyway, I am studying the relevant subjects to become a programmer.
As I said before, I really do love gaming. However, I find that gaming today, while on a greatly enjoyable level, is nowhere near as fun as it used to be. I can remember with joy those frantic Street Fighter 2 bouts with a crowd of mates in a room on a wet winters day. Nowadays such an enjoyable event is a very rare occurence. Games today are not really fun. Not in the sense fun, fun. But more in the sense that everyone can enjoy them. Sure, those epic advanetures can be fun-ish. But can anyone reading this, admit that they enjoy playing games. Actually enjoy playing games. Games playing is frustrating and annoying a lot of the time. In the days of the SNES, graphical boundaries meant that games had to be good, in order to sell well. Therefore, games had to have a greater degree of fun. Which would you rather play. Jak and Daxter, or Super Mario World? For me, it has to be the latter. While a beaut to look at, Jak and Daxter doesn't have those thrills that the aging classic does.
OK, so many people think that the revolution from 2 dimensions to the third is a great change, but it has meant developers spend ages on the graphics, then plop in the gameplay as a side-extra. Games that don't rely on graphics, always tend to be fun. Like Rez, Tetris and many other games with innovation to their name. While probably the most unpopular genre, puzzle games are probably also the most fun. Developers can't make a puzzle game with great graphics and pants gameplay, so have to invest the time in making it a fun game to play. Other games, which rely on graphics and depth to sell, often lack this basic need. For example, Gran Turismo anyone? While aesthetically pleasing, and all the depth of a bottomless pit, I find Gran Turismo to be boring, and lacking that altogether essential fun-factor. Developers are selling games on looks alone, and it seems that punters are falling for it.
Back in those golden early days of gamings, when the SNES and Mega Drive were battling it out for the name of console god, every good game was fun to play. A game which had amazing graphics for that system, and less fun, would be rated poorly and sell badly. But, this has been reversed nowadays, something which is quite sad to see. I don't want to play The Bouncer, with its built in trilinear mipmapping, single-pass antialiasing and zero cost alpha blending and texture modulation with per pixel fogging. I don't care about fancy features which enhance the graphics. I want to have real fun from playing games, and have a great time, enjoying the essential factor when it comes to gaming.
So developers take heed of this advice, and stop for a second. Few games of this age are fun. Developers should spend less time polishing their game and more time enhancing the gameplay. I couldn't care less about graphics, as long as the game is fun, and I wish that these were the views of the rest of the gaming population. It is just down to simple-minded casual gamers, who will lap up anything which says 'revolutionary graphics' on the box. Come on guys, surely you can come up with something better than that?!?!?!
As I said before, I really do love gaming. However, I find that gaming today, while on a greatly enjoyable level, is nowhere near as fun as it used to be. I can remember with joy those frantic Street Fighter 2 bouts with a crowd of mates in a room on a wet winters day. Nowadays such an enjoyable event is a very rare occurence. Games today are not really fun. Not in the sense fun, fun. But more in the sense that everyone can enjoy them. Sure, those epic advanetures can be fun-ish. But can anyone reading this, admit that they enjoy playing games. Actually enjoy playing games. Games playing is frustrating and annoying a lot of the time. In the days of the SNES, graphical boundaries meant that games had to be good, in order to sell well. Therefore, games had to have a greater degree of fun. Which would you rather play. Jak and Daxter, or Super Mario World? For me, it has to be the latter. While a beaut to look at, Jak and Daxter doesn't have those thrills that the aging classic does.
OK, so many people think that the revolution from 2 dimensions to the third is a great change, but it has meant developers spend ages on the graphics, then plop in the gameplay as a side-extra. Games that don't rely on graphics, always tend to be fun. Like Rez, Tetris and many other games with innovation to their name. While probably the most unpopular genre, puzzle games are probably also the most fun. Developers can't make a puzzle game with great graphics and pants gameplay, so have to invest the time in making it a fun game to play. Other games, which rely on graphics and depth to sell, often lack this basic need. For example, Gran Turismo anyone? While aesthetically pleasing, and all the depth of a bottomless pit, I find Gran Turismo to be boring, and lacking that altogether essential fun-factor. Developers are selling games on looks alone, and it seems that punters are falling for it.
Back in those golden early days of gamings, when the SNES and Mega Drive were battling it out for the name of console god, every good game was fun to play. A game which had amazing graphics for that system, and less fun, would be rated poorly and sell badly. But, this has been reversed nowadays, something which is quite sad to see. I don't want to play The Bouncer, with its built in trilinear mipmapping, single-pass antialiasing and zero cost alpha blending and texture modulation with per pixel fogging. I don't care about fancy features which enhance the graphics. I want to have real fun from playing games, and have a great time, enjoying the essential factor when it comes to gaming.
So developers take heed of this advice, and stop for a second. Few games of this age are fun. Developers should spend less time polishing their game and more time enhancing the gameplay. I couldn't care less about graphics, as long as the game is fun, and I wish that these were the views of the rest of the gaming population. It is just down to simple-minded casual gamers, who will lap up anything which says 'revolutionary graphics' on the box. Come on guys, surely you can come up with something better than that?!?!?!
Page:
Well I do find gaming fun, which is why I play games, as I said before. The point of gaming was originally meant to be for fun, and mostly it is.
I don't buy many games that don't have a hint of fun in them. Here's my PS2 collection.
GT3 - Good fun in most places.
Madden 2002 - Great multiplay fun.
Smack Down - Not really a game you need to complete, one that has been built for the purpose of "fun".
Tony Hawks 3 - Same as SD3, but it is great to complete and worth it.
Pro Evolution - Great footballing fun. Good multiplay too.
SSX Tricky - Now how can you not call this game fun?
and I also have some Nitny games as well, all of which are the normal Ninty selection.
So you see that I do enjoy my gaming. :D
I don't buy many games that don't have a hint of fun in them. Here's my PS2 collection.
GT3 - Good fun in most places.
Madden 2002 - Great multiplay fun.
Smack Down - Not really a game you need to complete, one that has been built for the purpose of "fun".
Tony Hawks 3 - Same as SD3, but it is great to complete and worth it.
Pro Evolution - Great footballing fun. Good multiplay too.
SSX Tricky - Now how can you not call this game fun?
and I also have some Nitny games as well, all of which are the normal Ninty selection.
So you see that I do enjoy my gaming. :D
AfroJoe wrote:
> Good post ½Pint. I do like gaming, which I suppose is why I post on this
> website. But well done on a good post anyway.
---------------
Well, I Like gaming, but do you find the games truly fun? That's the point of this topic.
> Good post ½Pint. I do like gaming, which I suppose is why I post on this
> website. But well done on a good post anyway.
---------------
Well, I Like gaming, but do you find the games truly fun? That's the point of this topic.
Good post ½Pint. I do like gaming, which I suppose is why I post on this website. But well done on a good post anyway.
I love gaming. It is a pastime, an occupation and a way of life. I knew gaming would be my ultimate destiny. At the moment, I am on the verge of a breakthrough. As the new generation of console technology dawns, I know that my destiny shall come together during this new era of technology. I am 15 years old, currently studying for my GCSE's. I get good reports, good marks and am generally a bright student. I am hoping, one day, to make it into the computer programming industry. Not necessarily games; that would still sound like a childhood ambition. No, I am more into programming the actual computers. Like being the next Bill Gates. That would be something worth looking forward to. Anyway, I am studying the relevant subjects to become a programmer.
As I said before, I really do love gaming. However, I find that gaming today, while on a greatly enjoyable level, is nowhere near as fun as it used to be. I can remember with joy those frantic Street Fighter 2 bouts with a crowd of mates in a room on a wet winters day. Nowadays such an enjoyable event is a very rare occurence. Games today are not really fun. Not in the sense fun, fun. But more in the sense that everyone can enjoy them. Sure, those epic advanetures can be fun-ish. But can anyone reading this, admit that they enjoy playing games. Actually enjoy playing games. Games playing is frustrating and annoying a lot of the time. In the days of the SNES, graphical boundaries meant that games had to be good, in order to sell well. Therefore, games had to have a greater degree of fun. Which would you rather play. Jak and Daxter, or Super Mario World? For me, it has to be the latter. While a beaut to look at, Jak and Daxter doesn't have those thrills that the aging classic does.
OK, so many people think that the revolution from 2 dimensions to the third is a great change, but it has meant developers spend ages on the graphics, then plop in the gameplay as a side-extra. Games that don't rely on graphics, always tend to be fun. Like Rez, Tetris and many other games with innovation to their name. While probably the most unpopular genre, puzzle games are probably also the most fun. Developers can't make a puzzle game with great graphics and pants gameplay, so have to invest the time in making it a fun game to play. Other games, which rely on graphics and depth to sell, often lack this basic need. For example, Gran Turismo anyone? While aesthetically pleasing, and all the depth of a bottomless pit, I find Gran Turismo to be boring, and lacking that altogether essential fun-factor. Developers are selling games on looks alone, and it seems that punters are falling for it.
Back in those golden early days of gamings, when the SNES and Mega Drive were battling it out for the name of console god, every good game was fun to play. A game which had amazing graphics for that system, and less fun, would be rated poorly and sell badly. But, this has been reversed nowadays, something which is quite sad to see. I don't want to play The Bouncer, with its built in trilinear mipmapping, single-pass antialiasing and zero cost alpha blending and texture modulation with per pixel fogging. I don't care about fancy features which enhance the graphics. I want to have real fun from playing games, and have a great time, enjoying the essential factor when it comes to gaming.
So developers take heed of this advice, and stop for a second. Few games of this age are fun. Developers should spend less time polishing their game and more time enhancing the gameplay. I couldn't care less about graphics, as long as the game is fun, and I wish that these were the views of the rest of the gaming population. It is just down to simple-minded casual gamers, who will lap up anything which says 'revolutionary graphics' on the box. Come on guys, surely you can come up with something better than that?!?!?!
As I said before, I really do love gaming. However, I find that gaming today, while on a greatly enjoyable level, is nowhere near as fun as it used to be. I can remember with joy those frantic Street Fighter 2 bouts with a crowd of mates in a room on a wet winters day. Nowadays such an enjoyable event is a very rare occurence. Games today are not really fun. Not in the sense fun, fun. But more in the sense that everyone can enjoy them. Sure, those epic advanetures can be fun-ish. But can anyone reading this, admit that they enjoy playing games. Actually enjoy playing games. Games playing is frustrating and annoying a lot of the time. In the days of the SNES, graphical boundaries meant that games had to be good, in order to sell well. Therefore, games had to have a greater degree of fun. Which would you rather play. Jak and Daxter, or Super Mario World? For me, it has to be the latter. While a beaut to look at, Jak and Daxter doesn't have those thrills that the aging classic does.
OK, so many people think that the revolution from 2 dimensions to the third is a great change, but it has meant developers spend ages on the graphics, then plop in the gameplay as a side-extra. Games that don't rely on graphics, always tend to be fun. Like Rez, Tetris and many other games with innovation to their name. While probably the most unpopular genre, puzzle games are probably also the most fun. Developers can't make a puzzle game with great graphics and pants gameplay, so have to invest the time in making it a fun game to play. Other games, which rely on graphics and depth to sell, often lack this basic need. For example, Gran Turismo anyone? While aesthetically pleasing, and all the depth of a bottomless pit, I find Gran Turismo to be boring, and lacking that altogether essential fun-factor. Developers are selling games on looks alone, and it seems that punters are falling for it.
Back in those golden early days of gamings, when the SNES and Mega Drive were battling it out for the name of console god, every good game was fun to play. A game which had amazing graphics for that system, and less fun, would be rated poorly and sell badly. But, this has been reversed nowadays, something which is quite sad to see. I don't want to play The Bouncer, with its built in trilinear mipmapping, single-pass antialiasing and zero cost alpha blending and texture modulation with per pixel fogging. I don't care about fancy features which enhance the graphics. I want to have real fun from playing games, and have a great time, enjoying the essential factor when it comes to gaming.
So developers take heed of this advice, and stop for a second. Few games of this age are fun. Developers should spend less time polishing their game and more time enhancing the gameplay. I couldn't care less about graphics, as long as the game is fun, and I wish that these were the views of the rest of the gaming population. It is just down to simple-minded casual gamers, who will lap up anything which says 'revolutionary graphics' on the box. Come on guys, surely you can come up with something better than that?!?!?!
Page: