The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
This topic is about how some new games have the lifespan of a sheep with foot and mouth. Are developers getting careless because of the demand for a sequel to a great game so they think whatever they do will be good, or are they genuinely just crappy games? Fuzzy Investigates
One game I noticed which has very little lifespan is Resident Evil Gun Survivor 2 (or whatever its called). The game, unfortunately, has no huge challenge. And once you've seen it once, you've seen it all. And considering that this may be the last Resident Evil game on the PS2, its quite a let down for any Resi fan, as from now on any Resident Evil game is going to be Gamecube (to give it an 'adult image', apparently). Are Capcom just getting lazy? Another, simialar game which apparently flaws from the same things is Vampire Night. Unfortunately the whole game is very easy and even the extra missions added on at the end must have been 2 minute affairs, where you basically repeat parts of the game again. Why can't developers take more time on a game, to make it replayable, addictive and have a bigger, even if not huge, lifespan. Another game which unfortunately had the lifespan of a small fly is MGS. The game was simply a bit too easy. Now fair enough playing it again was fun (plus you got extra thing in the end) but playing it 3 times to get a James Bond tuxedo? And the photography section was to be frank, slightly boring. Finally, Time Crisis. Three averagely difficult levels, but after that, it's all over. Damn.
Now on to the games with a slightly more impressive lifespan. Now a immediately think of Zelda. You could play this again and again and again. Its a joy to play. The story is so involving and thankfully by the time you finish it once you'll have forgotten how you started. Then you'll be able to play like this so many times. It's such a good game. This also applies (slightly less, though) to the Final Fantasy series. This series of games are great fun to play, anc with so many things to do (and miss by accident) its hard not to go back and get "that item" or "that weapon" so that you can complete the game. Its a truly great set of games, different to Zelda yet slightly alike. And finally the arcadey sort of lifespan games. Now people may disagree but I think Rez is addictive as hell. I play this game day in day out. And I've yet to tire of it. And one other game. Pong - go to www.liquid.se/pong.html to play a great version of it. So much fun!
Sorry this post is short, but any comments and replies are welcome!
One game I noticed which has very little lifespan is Resident Evil Gun Survivor 2 (or whatever its called). The game, unfortunately, has no huge challenge. And once you've seen it once, you've seen it all. And considering that this may be the last Resident Evil game on the PS2, its quite a let down for any Resi fan, as from now on any Resident Evil game is going to be Gamecube (to give it an 'adult image', apparently). Are Capcom just getting lazy? Another, simialar game which apparently flaws from the same things is Vampire Night. Unfortunately the whole game is very easy and even the extra missions added on at the end must have been 2 minute affairs, where you basically repeat parts of the game again. Why can't developers take more time on a game, to make it replayable, addictive and have a bigger, even if not huge, lifespan. Another game which unfortunately had the lifespan of a small fly is MGS. The game was simply a bit too easy. Now fair enough playing it again was fun (plus you got extra thing in the end) but playing it 3 times to get a James Bond tuxedo? And the photography section was to be frank, slightly boring. Finally, Time Crisis. Three averagely difficult levels, but after that, it's all over. Damn.
Now on to the games with a slightly more impressive lifespan. Now a immediately think of Zelda. You could play this again and again and again. Its a joy to play. The story is so involving and thankfully by the time you finish it once you'll have forgotten how you started. Then you'll be able to play like this so many times. It's such a good game. This also applies (slightly less, though) to the Final Fantasy series. This series of games are great fun to play, anc with so many things to do (and miss by accident) its hard not to go back and get "that item" or "that weapon" so that you can complete the game. Its a truly great set of games, different to Zelda yet slightly alike. And finally the arcadey sort of lifespan games. Now people may disagree but I think Rez is addictive as hell. I play this game day in day out. And I've yet to tire of it. And one other game. Pong - go to www.liquid.se/pong.html to play a great version of it. So much fun!
Sorry this post is short, but any comments and replies are welcome!
This topic is about how some new games have the lifespan of a sheep with foot and mouth. Are developers getting careless because of the demand for a sequel to a great game so they think whatever they do will be good, or are they genuinely just crappy games? Fuzzy Investigates
One game I noticed which has very little lifespan is Resident Evil Gun Survivor 2 (or whatever its called). The game, unfortunately, has no huge challenge. And once you've seen it once, you've seen it all. And considering that this may be the last Resident Evil game on the PS2, its quite a let down for any Resi fan, as from now on any Resident Evil game is going to be Gamecube (to give it an 'adult image', apparently). Are Capcom just getting lazy? Another, simialar game which apparently flaws from the same things is Vampire Night. Unfortunately the whole game is very easy and even the extra missions added on at the end must have been 2 minute affairs, where you basically repeat parts of the game again. Why can't developers take more time on a game, to make it replayable, addictive and have a bigger, even if not huge, lifespan. Another game which unfortunately had the lifespan of a small fly is MGS. The game was simply a bit too easy. Now fair enough playing it again was fun (plus you got extra thing in the end) but playing it 3 times to get a James Bond tuxedo? And the photography section was to be frank, slightly boring. Finally, Time Crisis. Three averagely difficult levels, but after that, it's all over. Damn.
Now on to the games with a slightly more impressive lifespan. Now a immediately think of Zelda. You could play this again and again and again. Its a joy to play. The story is so involving and thankfully by the time you finish it once you'll have forgotten how you started. Then you'll be able to play like this so many times. It's such a good game. This also applies (slightly less, though) to the Final Fantasy series. This series of games are great fun to play, anc with so many things to do (and miss by accident) its hard not to go back and get "that item" or "that weapon" so that you can complete the game. Its a truly great set of games, different to Zelda yet slightly alike. And finally the arcadey sort of lifespan games. Now people may disagree but I think Rez is addictive as hell. I play this game day in day out. And I've yet to tire of it. And one other game. Pong - go to www.liquid.se/pong.html to play a great version of it. So much fun!
Sorry this post is short, but any comments and replies are welcome!
One game I noticed which has very little lifespan is Resident Evil Gun Survivor 2 (or whatever its called). The game, unfortunately, has no huge challenge. And once you've seen it once, you've seen it all. And considering that this may be the last Resident Evil game on the PS2, its quite a let down for any Resi fan, as from now on any Resident Evil game is going to be Gamecube (to give it an 'adult image', apparently). Are Capcom just getting lazy? Another, simialar game which apparently flaws from the same things is Vampire Night. Unfortunately the whole game is very easy and even the extra missions added on at the end must have been 2 minute affairs, where you basically repeat parts of the game again. Why can't developers take more time on a game, to make it replayable, addictive and have a bigger, even if not huge, lifespan. Another game which unfortunately had the lifespan of a small fly is MGS. The game was simply a bit too easy. Now fair enough playing it again was fun (plus you got extra thing in the end) but playing it 3 times to get a James Bond tuxedo? And the photography section was to be frank, slightly boring. Finally, Time Crisis. Three averagely difficult levels, but after that, it's all over. Damn.
Now on to the games with a slightly more impressive lifespan. Now a immediately think of Zelda. You could play this again and again and again. Its a joy to play. The story is so involving and thankfully by the time you finish it once you'll have forgotten how you started. Then you'll be able to play like this so many times. It's such a good game. This also applies (slightly less, though) to the Final Fantasy series. This series of games are great fun to play, anc with so many things to do (and miss by accident) its hard not to go back and get "that item" or "that weapon" so that you can complete the game. Its a truly great set of games, different to Zelda yet slightly alike. And finally the arcadey sort of lifespan games. Now people may disagree but I think Rez is addictive as hell. I play this game day in day out. And I've yet to tire of it. And one other game. Pong - go to www.liquid.se/pong.html to play a great version of it. So much fun!
Sorry this post is short, but any comments and replies are welcome!
I agree. I can't see why developers want to make games quickly nd hope to sell a bunch of them just like that. People on a whole are more interested in games that have a very high replay value and are original(Not always, but most of the time.) When i look back at games like super mario on the snes, i wonder why can't game developers make a game like this (obviously with better graphics and loads of new levels.) More games would be sold if games were that much longer or that more interesting. A terrible shame that i hope changes in the near future. :(