The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Taken from this article:
http://gamespot.com/gamespot /stories/news/0,10870,2895905,00.html
(Remove 1 space)
Ignore the business about the fine, and look at this part:
"The EU is expected to take up the matter this week, slapping the world's number-two video game maker with a fine."
So, in terms of "video game maker", who is number one?
I honestly would have thought that Nintendo were the number one. It can't be Sony or Microsoft - is it Sega?
http://gamespot.com/gamespot /stories/news/0,10870,2895905,00.html
(Remove 1 space)
Ignore the business about the fine, and look at this part:
"The EU is expected to take up the matter this week, slapping the world's number-two video game maker with a fine."
So, in terms of "video game maker", who is number one?
I honestly would have thought that Nintendo were the number one. It can't be Sony or Microsoft - is it Sega?
Page:
to wookie:
I don't think anyone here is nieve enought to belive nintendop are in it purely for providing happiness to people, even though they make incredibly good games.
:)
I don't think anyone here is nieve enought to belive nintendop are in it purely for providing happiness to people, even though they make incredibly good games.
:)
dont be stupid. walking canot be classed as realism.
er-no wrote:
> Without them you wouldn't have had the Playstation
Actually, bit of a culture shock here for those who think that Nintendo are more interested in quality games than profit... it seems Nintendo were scared off from the PlayStation project because it would affect their profits.
This is from Cube magazine, issue 12, page 34 - an excerpt from the 'Gone but best forgotten' article on Zelda games... it gives a little more detail than I've read anywhere before...
"Initially partnered with Sony to create a CD add-on for the SNES called the Play Station Experimental (sound familiar?), Nintendo soon got cold feet when it discovered that people would no longer develop games using cartridges if the cheaper CD option was available."
So, it was all about profit after all - not games!
The article continues...
"As such, Nintendo immediately went off and signed a deal with Sony's US rival Philips, effectively screwing over Sony and ending the partnership. Nintendo was left holding a deal with Philips that was swiftly losing money due to the CD-i's less-than-impressive sales."
Still, they learned their lesson. I reckon Sony are stil laughing over that.
> Without them you wouldn't have had the Playstation
Actually, bit of a culture shock here for those who think that Nintendo are more interested in quality games than profit... it seems Nintendo were scared off from the PlayStation project because it would affect their profits.
This is from Cube magazine, issue 12, page 34 - an excerpt from the 'Gone but best forgotten' article on Zelda games... it gives a little more detail than I've read anywhere before...
"Initially partnered with Sony to create a CD add-on for the SNES called the Play Station Experimental (sound familiar?), Nintendo soon got cold feet when it discovered that people would no longer develop games using cartridges if the cheaper CD option was available."
So, it was all about profit after all - not games!
The article continues...
"As such, Nintendo immediately went off and signed a deal with Sony's US rival Philips, effectively screwing over Sony and ending the partnership. Nintendo was left holding a deal with Philips that was swiftly losing money due to the CD-i's less-than-impressive sales."
Still, they learned their lesson. I reckon Sony are stil laughing over that.
If it wasn't for realism, characters in games would move about and act stupidly. After all, most of the movement you see in games (even Pikmin) are motion captured, showing that realism IS needed in games. Not all games are for escapism, racing games and sports titles for example. Even though I don't think Fifa mean to, but they're footy game escape the REAL.
I could go on but I do agree that Nintendo are a top company, but I still think Sony deserves some of the praise.
I could go on but I do agree that Nintendo are a top company, but I still think Sony deserves some of the praise.
GIRBILLOONS!
PoSh KiD wrote:
> Isn't the future supposed to hold virtual reality or something, not
> virtual Mario Land or Virtual Pikmin or all that crap?
I would, for one.
> Yes, Nintendo may have sparked gaming off, but things have changed.
> People want to see realism, imitations of the REAL world, not made up
> colourful places.
bo11ocks.
shiney, shiney, shiny gerbilloons will make it all right.
hooray for the dirigerbil!
hooray for jarvis cokerell!
hooray for mark lhama's super happy gerbil 'n' heliums farm!
> Isn't the future supposed to hold virtual reality or something, not
> virtual Mario Land or Virtual Pikmin or all that crap?
I would, for one.
> Yes, Nintendo may have sparked gaming off, but things have changed.
> People want to see realism, imitations of the REAL world, not made up
> colourful places.
bo11ocks.
shiney, shiney, shiny gerbilloons will make it all right.
hooray for the dirigerbil!
hooray for jarvis cokerell!
hooray for mark lhama's super happy gerbil 'n' heliums farm!
Tiltawhirl wrote:
> I don't wanna get into an argument, but come on dude, take the
> blinkers off. SOny is not life...
Well, neither is Nintendo.
And Mr. Deleted person keep your knickers on! Sony have made plenty of realistic games. I can't be arsed to name them...not even one.
:)
> I don't wanna get into an argument, but come on dude, take the
> blinkers off. SOny is not life...
Well, neither is Nintendo.
And Mr. Deleted person keep your knickers on! Sony have made plenty of realistic games. I can't be arsed to name them...not even one.
:)
PoSh KiD wrote:
A lot of stuff that I don't agree too
_____________________
Thats the problem, realism is killing everything gaming is about. Just how Hollywood has virtually killed what films are about and god bless such films as A.I.
You want realism and to go into a virtual world? You are well off that in terms of being able to do that with goggles over your head, and anyway, that would be too dangerous and fears would be that you wouldn't be able to put down the goggles. Games are about escapism for the REAL and being able to jump onto a dinosaur called Yoshi and fly really high or run fast as a Hedgehog. Not live your dangerous needs and go and kill people in a bloodbath. Lets face it, nobody plays GTA and get through the game without going crazy and not doing the missions.
Nintendo aren't behind times, if they ever go down and bow out of gaming it will be our loss, everyone could enjoy and love a Nintendo game if they decided not to have your pathetic approach and think its bright colours are not needed.
Games aren't real. As much as you would want them to be. Companies need to realise this and make genuine stuff. Same as Hollywood.
A lot of stuff that I don't agree too
_____________________
Thats the problem, realism is killing everything gaming is about. Just how Hollywood has virtually killed what films are about and god bless such films as A.I.
You want realism and to go into a virtual world? You are well off that in terms of being able to do that with goggles over your head, and anyway, that would be too dangerous and fears would be that you wouldn't be able to put down the goggles. Games are about escapism for the REAL and being able to jump onto a dinosaur called Yoshi and fly really high or run fast as a Hedgehog. Not live your dangerous needs and go and kill people in a bloodbath. Lets face it, nobody plays GTA and get through the game without going crazy and not doing the missions.
Nintendo aren't behind times, if they ever go down and bow out of gaming it will be our loss, everyone could enjoy and love a Nintendo game if they decided not to have your pathetic approach and think its bright colours are not needed.
Games aren't real. As much as you would want them to be. Companies need to realise this and make genuine stuff. Same as Hollywood.
PoSh KiD wrote:
Who would want to enter a world like Mario land where you have to jump around collecting shiny things when they could be blasting away inter-galactic monsters, or taking part in a world like Grand Theft Auto?
-----------
GTA was made by Rockstar, you stupid person.
And real-lloking games? Go on, name some what Sony have made.
Who would want to enter a world like Mario land where you have to jump around collecting shiny things when they could be blasting away inter-galactic monsters, or taking part in a world like Grand Theft Auto?
-----------
GTA was made by Rockstar, you stupid person.
And real-lloking games? Go on, name some what Sony have made.
PoSh KiD wrote:
> Yes, Nintendo may have sparked gaming off, but things have changed.
> People want to see realism, imitations of the REAL world, not made up
> colourful places.
Is that why Mario Sunshine is one of the fastest selling games ever?
Far surpassing GTA3, Halo and MGS2.
I don't wanna get into an argument, but come on dude, take the blinkers off. SOny is not life...
> Yes, Nintendo may have sparked gaming off, but things have changed.
> People want to see realism, imitations of the REAL world, not made up
> colourful places.
Is that why Mario Sunshine is one of the fastest selling games ever?
Far surpassing GTA3, Halo and MGS2.
I don't wanna get into an argument, but come on dude, take the blinkers off. SOny is not life...
Page: