The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
The games industry has hit a bit of a dead end recently, nothing inspriingly new and original has hit our screens for far too long, so what happens next? Where do we turn where do we go? There are a few open avenues, and the major console manufacturers are touting differnt routes as their main selling points, so for the first time in a long while, the perceptions of a console will truely shaoe the experience you get from a system.
Nintendo are going along the road they have always chosen. They want a maximum of four people playing their games, and they want them all in the same room, or in the same street at least. This is basically a Nintendo philosophy, and has been for quite sometime. They revel in simplistic means, look at any Nintendo game ever invented, and they can all be broken down and looked at with ease. Nintendo go for mini-game style. Little puzzles which, when combined together make one huge game. Look at Mario down the years, culminating in what was the masterpiece of Mario 64. Each level can be taken from the game and played seperately, there is no linearity to the game, and there is no story to pull levels into and out of context. Zelda is the same, the game has dungeons which can be taken out of the game and played without any linearity or context. Zelda does have a central story which acts as a hub to these dungeons though, and that hub is becoming more complex and much more story oriented in recent games.
So it's that simple, if you want puzzles, with little in the way of a story to get in your way then, Nintendo is really the way you should go. Simple methods and simple ideas lead to truely innovative challenges and some truely brilliant multi-player games, just don;t expect much in the way of online exploits on a massive scale.
Microsoft are taking a different route, they are going more for the Sega approach to the indusrtry. Arcade simplicity. This is seen really by the extent of the sports games hitting the console, the Xbox will be an American Jocks dream. Look at American history, and more specifically, recent American cars. They are big, they are brash, they are load and they scream look at me from every angle. They don't have the technical brilliance of the Japanese motors, or the ellegence of the European market, the Xbox follows this philosophy. It is without a doubt a graphical powerhouse, and will not be beaten for graphical ability by any of the new systems. There are plans for online ability in the pipeline, and the games are beginning to appear, but for anyone looking at the system, if you want a true americanised gaming experience, then the Xbox will be the system to go for.
Sony on the other hand have gone for a different route for their strategy. The games are still the main factor, but they are backing up the games side with a total entertainment package. A PS2 instantly provides a user with a system which will play DVD movies and music CDs. With the introduction of a hard drive and broadband capabilities, MP3, internet animation and much more will instantly be available for anyone and everyone. All that will be required is for you to turn on your PS2. For many these facilities are already a reality. Broadband internet already allows PS2 owners the benefits that the PS2 seeks, but it doesn't do it as a set top box. PCs are still very much seen as a work platform, a powerful word processor. As for the games Sony has coming to the PS2, there is no defining genre or style, the PS2 isn't moulded or shaped to suit any particular audience. In basic terms, Sony will allow anyone to make any type of game for the PS2, kiddy games, puzzle games, strategy games, RPGs, adventures, sports the list goes on. No one will/has been restricetd in any way by the PS2 other than with the technicak side of development.
In that way the PS2 is an all rounder that will corner a "casual" side of the market whereas the GC and the Xbox may see a more dedicated follower. But what can be seen is that all the companies are pushing the market in different directions, and it will be a few years before we see what happens next. The industry is diverging and seperating into different styles and tastes, and for those who have best of all worlds now and want to keep it that way on the future, they may find themselves having to fork out on more than one console.
Nintendo are going along the road they have always chosen. They want a maximum of four people playing their games, and they want them all in the same room, or in the same street at least. This is basically a Nintendo philosophy, and has been for quite sometime. They revel in simplistic means, look at any Nintendo game ever invented, and they can all be broken down and looked at with ease. Nintendo go for mini-game style. Little puzzles which, when combined together make one huge game. Look at Mario down the years, culminating in what was the masterpiece of Mario 64. Each level can be taken from the game and played seperately, there is no linearity to the game, and there is no story to pull levels into and out of context. Zelda is the same, the game has dungeons which can be taken out of the game and played without any linearity or context. Zelda does have a central story which acts as a hub to these dungeons though, and that hub is becoming more complex and much more story oriented in recent games.
So it's that simple, if you want puzzles, with little in the way of a story to get in your way then, Nintendo is really the way you should go. Simple methods and simple ideas lead to truely innovative challenges and some truely brilliant multi-player games, just don;t expect much in the way of online exploits on a massive scale.
Microsoft are taking a different route, they are going more for the Sega approach to the indusrtry. Arcade simplicity. This is seen really by the extent of the sports games hitting the console, the Xbox will be an American Jocks dream. Look at American history, and more specifically, recent American cars. They are big, they are brash, they are load and they scream look at me from every angle. They don't have the technical brilliance of the Japanese motors, or the ellegence of the European market, the Xbox follows this philosophy. It is without a doubt a graphical powerhouse, and will not be beaten for graphical ability by any of the new systems. There are plans for online ability in the pipeline, and the games are beginning to appear, but for anyone looking at the system, if you want a true americanised gaming experience, then the Xbox will be the system to go for.
Sony on the other hand have gone for a different route for their strategy. The games are still the main factor, but they are backing up the games side with a total entertainment package. A PS2 instantly provides a user with a system which will play DVD movies and music CDs. With the introduction of a hard drive and broadband capabilities, MP3, internet animation and much more will instantly be available for anyone and everyone. All that will be required is for you to turn on your PS2. For many these facilities are already a reality. Broadband internet already allows PS2 owners the benefits that the PS2 seeks, but it doesn't do it as a set top box. PCs are still very much seen as a work platform, a powerful word processor. As for the games Sony has coming to the PS2, there is no defining genre or style, the PS2 isn't moulded or shaped to suit any particular audience. In basic terms, Sony will allow anyone to make any type of game for the PS2, kiddy games, puzzle games, strategy games, RPGs, adventures, sports the list goes on. No one will/has been restricetd in any way by the PS2 other than with the technicak side of development.
In that way the PS2 is an all rounder that will corner a "casual" side of the market whereas the GC and the Xbox may see a more dedicated follower. But what can be seen is that all the companies are pushing the market in different directions, and it will be a few years before we see what happens next. The industry is diverging and seperating into different styles and tastes, and for those who have best of all worlds now and want to keep it that way on the future, they may find themselves having to fork out on more than one console.
Page:
To be fair, I wouldn't really know about Nintendo's second party developers, as soon as you said that, I couldn't think of any but Rare.........
Bonus wrote:
> I don't have any doubts or pre-defined judgements about Nintendo, but all you
> have done is back me up really.
Yeah, I wasn't really posting that in response to your post, just seemed relevant.
Nintendo makes games with short and sweet
> challenges, with many set goals. You can take any of these challenges, play
> them as often as you like, when you like and in any order, and you still don't
> lose any sense of context.
Well, there is some degree of order. You know, like not being able to go in until you've gained certain objects, but really this is just a tool to stop you reaching more difficult areas before you've gained enough experience of the game to be able to cope with them.
You theory certainly seems true of Nintendo's games, in the past. I guess that the next Mario and Zelda game will be similar, but I'm not sure if some of Nintendo's second party developers work on the same ethic.
> I don't have any doubts or pre-defined judgements about Nintendo, but all you
> have done is back me up really.
Yeah, I wasn't really posting that in response to your post, just seemed relevant.
Nintendo makes games with short and sweet
> challenges, with many set goals. You can take any of these challenges, play
> them as often as you like, when you like and in any order, and you still don't
> lose any sense of context.
Well, there is some degree of order. You know, like not being able to go in until you've gained certain objects, but really this is just a tool to stop you reaching more difficult areas before you've gained enough experience of the game to be able to cope with them.
You theory certainly seems true of Nintendo's games, in the past. I guess that the next Mario and Zelda game will be similar, but I'm not sure if some of Nintendo's second party developers work on the same ethic.
I don't have any doubts or pre-defined judgements about Nintendo, but all you have done is back me up really. Nintendo makes games with short and sweet challenges, with many set goals. You can take any of these challenges, play them as often as you like, when you like and in any order, and you still don't lose any sense of context.
Nintendo's 'shorter' games again.
This isn't a new thing at all, you know.
Look at Super Mario World (SNES).
There were 96 level exits to find.
You could complete the game without finding all of these.
Super Mario 64 contained 120 stars to find. You could beat Bowser long before you got hold of all of the stars.
Basically, all Nintendo will do is make the easy route of the quest much more apparent. Lylat Wars for instance.
Behind this, as always, will be side quests and the like to keep the hardcore Nintendo fans happy.
Just look at all of the trophies that can be collected in SuperSmash Bros: Melee, if you have any doubts that Nintendo don't care for the older gamers, that have grown up with Nintendo.
This isn't a new thing at all, you know.
Look at Super Mario World (SNES).
There were 96 level exits to find.
You could complete the game without finding all of these.
Super Mario 64 contained 120 stars to find. You could beat Bowser long before you got hold of all of the stars.
Basically, all Nintendo will do is make the easy route of the quest much more apparent. Lylat Wars for instance.
Behind this, as always, will be side quests and the like to keep the hardcore Nintendo fans happy.
Just look at all of the trophies that can be collected in SuperSmash Bros: Melee, if you have any doubts that Nintendo don't care for the older gamers, that have grown up with Nintendo.
Hm, but that's the point I was trying to make in the first place, the devlopers don't want a single format, and neither do the customers, so you need to chose what you want from your console.
At the end of the day you have Sony with their entertainment system, Microsoft with their multimedia system and Nintendo with their games console.
The only main advantage that Nintendo have over the other two is that they develop their own games, but as I've said before that can also be a disadvantage, because most Nintendo customers buy Nintendo hardware for Nintendo games. That could be the very reason Nintendo thought the N64 could survive with minimal 3rd party support, and it could also maximise its own revenue by pumping out games by itself and Rare. Maybe that was the truth behind the story, maybe not.
At the end of the day you have Sony with their entertainment system, Microsoft with their multimedia system and Nintendo with their games console.
The only main advantage that Nintendo have over the other two is that they develop their own games, but as I've said before that can also be a disadvantage, because most Nintendo customers buy Nintendo hardware for Nintendo games. That could be the very reason Nintendo thought the N64 could survive with minimal 3rd party support, and it could also maximise its own revenue by pumping out games by itself and Rare. Maybe that was the truth behind the story, maybe not.
Bonus, Sony didn't get market domination by looking "cool".
Sure, it beat the N64 thanks to it's "coolness" but needed different tactics to take down the Dreamcast.
So it simply told all the Playstation fans that the PS2 was a billion times better than the Dreamcast.
The fans beleived until the PS2 was released and Dreamcast games were out performing it's own.
But it was too late by then.
Sega had been more or less killed off already!
You see Sony are clever in the merketing department, and they know how to take down each opponent.
Still, it won't all go their way. Japanese devellopers are conspiring to make sure Sony don't stay at the top.
They remembered when Nintendo dominated the market and was pretty mean to devellopers as well as ripping them off.
These companies don't want a real market leader and want 50/50 competition (what we all want at the end of the day) to prevent domination.
I think that some major devellopers like Capcom (who've started already), Namco and more will be favouring the Gamecube a bit in order to give it a bigger share of Sony's market. The PS2 will still lead with about 60%, but these companies want to ensure that atleast 30% is with a competitor.
I got the source from www.tendobox.com
The article didn't mention the XBox (as it's not out in Japan yet and most Japs don't care for it) but I'm sure that these devellopers have it in their plans somewhere...
Sure, it beat the N64 thanks to it's "coolness" but needed different tactics to take down the Dreamcast.
So it simply told all the Playstation fans that the PS2 was a billion times better than the Dreamcast.
The fans beleived until the PS2 was released and Dreamcast games were out performing it's own.
But it was too late by then.
Sega had been more or less killed off already!
You see Sony are clever in the merketing department, and they know how to take down each opponent.
Still, it won't all go their way. Japanese devellopers are conspiring to make sure Sony don't stay at the top.
They remembered when Nintendo dominated the market and was pretty mean to devellopers as well as ripping them off.
These companies don't want a real market leader and want 50/50 competition (what we all want at the end of the day) to prevent domination.
I think that some major devellopers like Capcom (who've started already), Namco and more will be favouring the Gamecube a bit in order to give it a bigger share of Sony's market. The PS2 will still lead with about 60%, but these companies want to ensure that atleast 30% is with a competitor.
I got the source from www.tendobox.com
The article didn't mention the XBox (as it's not out in Japan yet and most Japs don't care for it) but I'm sure that these devellopers have it in their plans somewhere...
Haha, criticism, about time too, I thought people on this place were starting to get all pansy like and two faced about life, at last we have, a fight ;)
Right, Nintendo have openly commented on wanting to make their games shorter, and more accessable to a wider audience, so the length of their games is quite easily put into context in the way they design their games.
If anyone can tell me that Nintendo's games are linear, then they are quite truely niave and missing the point of Nintendo. Miyamoto goes out of his way to prevent the usual droll of linearity. Each level of the game can be taken out of the game, and not lose any sense of context or feeling because it now isn't some part of a grand scheme. The little puzzles in Mario 64, the dungeons in Zelda, the objectives in goldeneye, all they relate to is little puzzles or challenges which can be trielessly played without a story even having existed.
Then we get back to this nonsense about how "cool" the Playstation brand is compared to Nintendo, well, to be fair, it doesn;t really matter how "cool" a brand is to people who actually know what they are talking about. Parents buy their kids Playstations because they think they are "cool", but since when did parents ever understand youth culture? The Dreamcast was cooler than the PS2, just look at the games, Jet Set Radio, Virtua Tennis, Samba De Amigo, the system leaked coolness from every orifice, but where did it go? Adevrtising is the way Sony stole the market, but if games companies continue to back the console the way they have, and Sony keep releasing quality first party titles, then I'll be happy, in the end it comes down to the games, and I already own more enjoyable games for my PS2 than I can even see on the GC or Xbox release lists.
So there :P
;)
Right, Nintendo have openly commented on wanting to make their games shorter, and more accessable to a wider audience, so the length of their games is quite easily put into context in the way they design their games.
If anyone can tell me that Nintendo's games are linear, then they are quite truely niave and missing the point of Nintendo. Miyamoto goes out of his way to prevent the usual droll of linearity. Each level of the game can be taken out of the game, and not lose any sense of context or feeling because it now isn't some part of a grand scheme. The little puzzles in Mario 64, the dungeons in Zelda, the objectives in goldeneye, all they relate to is little puzzles or challenges which can be trielessly played without a story even having existed.
Then we get back to this nonsense about how "cool" the Playstation brand is compared to Nintendo, well, to be fair, it doesn;t really matter how "cool" a brand is to people who actually know what they are talking about. Parents buy their kids Playstations because they think they are "cool", but since when did parents ever understand youth culture? The Dreamcast was cooler than the PS2, just look at the games, Jet Set Radio, Virtua Tennis, Samba De Amigo, the system leaked coolness from every orifice, but where did it go? Adevrtising is the way Sony stole the market, but if games companies continue to back the console the way they have, and Sony keep releasing quality first party titles, then I'll be happy, in the end it comes down to the games, and I already own more enjoyable games for my PS2 than I can even see on the GC or Xbox release lists.
So there :P
;)
C'mon guys, that was quite a good post. The amount of criticism you are giving it is undeserved, simply because it is a refreshing outlook on computer games, and if he wins the GAD, then good luck to him.
He obviously won't appeal to everyone, but, who does? name me one post what everyone thought was good without any bad points in it.
He obviously won't appeal to everyone, but, who does? name me one post what everyone thought was good without any bad points in it.
*yawn*
A possible GAD attempt which fails to capture my imagination in any way. If you're making a point, make it clear. If you're posting waffle, give me a warning. Thanks.
It's 2am. I'm tired, slightly drunk, and brutally blunt. It's contructive criticism, honest.
A possible GAD attempt which fails to capture my imagination in any way. If you're making a point, make it clear. If you're posting waffle, give me a warning. Thanks.
It's 2am. I'm tired, slightly drunk, and brutally blunt. It's contructive criticism, honest.
I've never heard such a load of crap in all my life!
Why are you telling us something we already know?! And plus you're wrong about Nintendo and the Jigsaw games. They're not loads of little things put together. Look at Zelda, Metroid, Perfect Dark, Goldeneye.
Now i've ruined your chances of a Gameaday, i'll write something that makes sense. :D :D
Frankly, I still think you're wrong about Nintendo... the Gamecube is the complete gaming package. 4 ports, great games, decent speed, good developers. Plus, Nintendo don't WANT a MAXIMUM of 4 players... they've taken precaution and included a modem port, etc. And, when the time is right, they'll make on-line GameCube games a reality.
Nintendo, like it or not, are the best games company around. They may not be as hip and cool as PlayStation, but they have the best 1st party titles, they know the industry like the back of their hand and they've got a good sense of humor - which is always a good thing.
The PS2 isn't a bad console by all means, but it does lack one thing. Nice colours on the Joypad. You can't hope to win the console wars if you don't have some bright colours!
It's all about the colours.
Colours
Games
Gameplay
Graphics
That's the order.
:S
Why are you telling us something we already know?! And plus you're wrong about Nintendo and the Jigsaw games. They're not loads of little things put together. Look at Zelda, Metroid, Perfect Dark, Goldeneye.
Now i've ruined your chances of a Gameaday, i'll write something that makes sense. :D :D
Frankly, I still think you're wrong about Nintendo... the Gamecube is the complete gaming package. 4 ports, great games, decent speed, good developers. Plus, Nintendo don't WANT a MAXIMUM of 4 players... they've taken precaution and included a modem port, etc. And, when the time is right, they'll make on-line GameCube games a reality.
Nintendo, like it or not, are the best games company around. They may not be as hip and cool as PlayStation, but they have the best 1st party titles, they know the industry like the back of their hand and they've got a good sense of humor - which is always a good thing.
The PS2 isn't a bad console by all means, but it does lack one thing. Nice colours on the Joypad. You can't hope to win the console wars if you don't have some bright colours!
It's all about the colours.
Colours
Games
Gameplay
Graphics
That's the order.
:S
Page: