The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Like probably a majority of gamers out there my first console wasn't the PS2 I currently own. I started with a Atari 2600 and then progressed to a Mastersystem, Megadrive and Playstation before owning a PS2. What I've noticed though is games developers seem to be keen to have as many things happen on your screen at any one time which admittedly looks nicer than an overcooked fry-up...but does as much damage to the character your playing as the fry-up does to you!
I for one love the original Doom game, but other FPS that have tried to compete with doom are trying to do so by adding too many fancy flashing lines and exploding fire balls (ouch!) and the likes. Games on old consoles were good as you weren't distracted from playing the game by an army of 1000 ants with C4 strapped to their back, all the while your concentrating on this you get run over by an old ladies shopping basket. But as games progress on the PS2 they seem to be less focused on playability and more aimed towards 'looking nice'. Games such as GTA Vice City, WWE Smackdown and FIFA (any of the series) on the PS2 sell because of their playability...not because in darkness your TV looks like a portable disco light.
I for one can handle a few things going on at the same time so I'm not suggesting that games return to the graphic capability of the late 80's and early 90's - but I have been put off of buying games in the past due to the fact that review DVD's from magazines or screenshots that show a snipet from the game, indicate that theres way to much going on, leaving you wondering if you've just killed the baddie, or been turned into a mutated banana sundae WITHOUT chocolate sauce!
The PS2 has got great handling capabilities but I for one don't think these should be wasted on making too much happen at one time, keep it simple...Remember R-Type it sold massively due to being easy to play...remember X-Com on the PS1...Exactly...Game Over!
I for one love the original Doom game, but other FPS that have tried to compete with doom are trying to do so by adding too many fancy flashing lines and exploding fire balls (ouch!) and the likes. Games on old consoles were good as you weren't distracted from playing the game by an army of 1000 ants with C4 strapped to their back, all the while your concentrating on this you get run over by an old ladies shopping basket. But as games progress on the PS2 they seem to be less focused on playability and more aimed towards 'looking nice'. Games such as GTA Vice City, WWE Smackdown and FIFA (any of the series) on the PS2 sell because of their playability...not because in darkness your TV looks like a portable disco light.
I for one can handle a few things going on at the same time so I'm not suggesting that games return to the graphic capability of the late 80's and early 90's - but I have been put off of buying games in the past due to the fact that review DVD's from magazines or screenshots that show a snipet from the game, indicate that theres way to much going on, leaving you wondering if you've just killed the baddie, or been turned into a mutated banana sundae WITHOUT chocolate sauce!
The PS2 has got great handling capabilities but I for one don't think these should be wasted on making too much happen at one time, keep it simple...Remember R-Type it sold massively due to being easy to play...remember X-Com on the PS1...Exactly...Game Over!
> I think a good PS2 game that's the exception to the rule is ICO.
Hey, that's my line! Ico is one of the best games I've played in YEARS. Although I am completely stuck at the moment, near the waterfall. (By the way I'm not asking for the solution, I want to solve this by myself.)
Anyway, that's not an exception because his point was that games are better with simpler graphics.
The exception to the rule would be Ikaruga (although it's a Dreamcast game). There is so much light and colour going on in at any one time that I'm sure the game must be dangerous for epileptics, but that's the challenge. trying to keep your head amongst all that chaos.
Hey, that's my line! Ico is one of the best games I've played in YEARS. Although I am completely stuck at the moment, near the waterfall. (By the way I'm not asking for the solution, I want to solve this by myself.)
Anyway, that's not an exception because his point was that games are better with simpler graphics.
The exception to the rule would be Ikaruga (although it's a Dreamcast game). There is so much light and colour going on in at any one time that I'm sure the game must be dangerous for epileptics, but that's the challenge. trying to keep your head amongst all that chaos.
Sounds like UT2003 on PC, graphics are amazing but the demands on the processor/3d card are intense. If your PC is more than 18 months old forget it.
I can understand your point of view, I have progressed from the ZX Spetrum to the Dreamcast and PS2. I think that irrespective of graphics if the game is good it is good. Individual gamers are looking for different things. I don't mind the flashing lights and big explosions as long as the game grips me from the start. Look at GT3, looks great, boring as hell or Ratchet & Clank, looks great, plays great, addictive as hell.
I mean that is my personal opinion and would not expect everyone to agree with me.
BB
I mean that is my personal opinion and would not expect everyone to agree with me.
BB
Good point.
I think a good PS2 game that's the exception to the rule is ICO.
Got to be the simplest graphics seen on the PS2 to date, but what a good game.
Anyone who hasn't played ICO, i reccomend it highly, it's on ebay for around £15.
I think a good PS2 game that's the exception to the rule is ICO.
Got to be the simplest graphics seen on the PS2 to date, but what a good game.
Anyone who hasn't played ICO, i reccomend it highly, it's on ebay for around £15.
Like probably a majority of gamers out there my first console wasn't the PS2 I currently own. I started with a Atari 2600 and then progressed to a Mastersystem, Megadrive and Playstation before owning a PS2. What I've noticed though is games developers seem to be keen to have as many things happen on your screen at any one time which admittedly looks nicer than an overcooked fry-up...but does as much damage to the character your playing as the fry-up does to you!
I for one love the original Doom game, but other FPS that have tried to compete with doom are trying to do so by adding too many fancy flashing lines and exploding fire balls (ouch!) and the likes. Games on old consoles were good as you weren't distracted from playing the game by an army of 1000 ants with C4 strapped to their back, all the while your concentrating on this you get run over by an old ladies shopping basket. But as games progress on the PS2 they seem to be less focused on playability and more aimed towards 'looking nice'. Games such as GTA Vice City, WWE Smackdown and FIFA (any of the series) on the PS2 sell because of their playability...not because in darkness your TV looks like a portable disco light.
I for one can handle a few things going on at the same time so I'm not suggesting that games return to the graphic capability of the late 80's and early 90's - but I have been put off of buying games in the past due to the fact that review DVD's from magazines or screenshots that show a snipet from the game, indicate that theres way to much going on, leaving you wondering if you've just killed the baddie, or been turned into a mutated banana sundae WITHOUT chocolate sauce!
The PS2 has got great handling capabilities but I for one don't think these should be wasted on making too much happen at one time, keep it simple...Remember R-Type it sold massively due to being easy to play...remember X-Com on the PS1...Exactly...Game Over!
I for one love the original Doom game, but other FPS that have tried to compete with doom are trying to do so by adding too many fancy flashing lines and exploding fire balls (ouch!) and the likes. Games on old consoles were good as you weren't distracted from playing the game by an army of 1000 ants with C4 strapped to their back, all the while your concentrating on this you get run over by an old ladies shopping basket. But as games progress on the PS2 they seem to be less focused on playability and more aimed towards 'looking nice'. Games such as GTA Vice City, WWE Smackdown and FIFA (any of the series) on the PS2 sell because of their playability...not because in darkness your TV looks like a portable disco light.
I for one can handle a few things going on at the same time so I'm not suggesting that games return to the graphic capability of the late 80's and early 90's - but I have been put off of buying games in the past due to the fact that review DVD's from magazines or screenshots that show a snipet from the game, indicate that theres way to much going on, leaving you wondering if you've just killed the baddie, or been turned into a mutated banana sundae WITHOUT chocolate sauce!
The PS2 has got great handling capabilities but I for one don't think these should be wasted on making too much happen at one time, keep it simple...Remember R-Type it sold massively due to being easy to play...remember X-Com on the PS1...Exactly...Game Over!