The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
It’s those little details that make the games what they are. You don’t really notice them but thats what make the game special, it makes them stand out. Take Shenmue 2 for example. The detail is amazing. You look at the buildings and every brick is a different shade of orange, the clouds move when you look up at the sky. Plus the every shop has it’s own personality.
Another example is Metal Gear Solid 2. On the ‘Making of’ DvD that comes with the game, it shows the way the rain moved before they had really thought about it and planned it out properly and it looked good but not that good. But when they planned it out properly it looked very realistic. The rain moved in different directions as the wind changes direction, when the rain hit Snake’s head and back, you could see that Kojima had spent time thinking about how he could make it look as realstic as possible.
But I think the start of all this was Zelda: Ocarina of Time. The character had a lot of detail on, he was blinking like a human would, and the land that the story was set in was very detailed. I think this was the start of all the little details that game developers have become obbsesed over.
This is all very well and good, but are game developers spending too much time on graphics and little detail too make the game look good, and not enough time on the gameplay. Is that why we aren’t having quality games coming out all the time? If game developers spent as much time as they did on graphics as gameplay we would have the great game coming out all the time.
Looking back on some of the old NES/SNES games, I think they have better gameplay value than most of the games coming out today, and I think thats because old consoles couldn’t produce really good graphics so they worked on gameplay to make a game sell, but today with the ‘Next-Gen’ consoles out that can produce life-like graphics, there spending too much tiome on the graphics side of things and not enough time on the gameplay side.
Don’t get me wrong, not all games are like that. Metal Gear Solid 2 offers both. The graphics are stunning and the gameplay is great too. It’s a win win situation.
So, the little details are important, and they are good to look at, but are game developers getting obsessed with those little details and the graphics and forgetting about gameplay?
Answer, I think not for all games.
Thanks for reading.
Liquid Snake
Another example is Metal Gear Solid 2. On the ‘Making of’ DvD that comes with the game, it shows the way the rain moved before they had really thought about it and planned it out properly and it looked good but not that good. But when they planned it out properly it looked very realistic. The rain moved in different directions as the wind changes direction, when the rain hit Snake’s head and back, you could see that Kojima had spent time thinking about how he could make it look as realstic as possible.
But I think the start of all this was Zelda: Ocarina of Time. The character had a lot of detail on, he was blinking like a human would, and the land that the story was set in was very detailed. I think this was the start of all the little details that game developers have become obbsesed over.
This is all very well and good, but are game developers spending too much time on graphics and little detail too make the game look good, and not enough time on the gameplay. Is that why we aren’t having quality games coming out all the time? If game developers spent as much time as they did on graphics as gameplay we would have the great game coming out all the time.
Looking back on some of the old NES/SNES games, I think they have better gameplay value than most of the games coming out today, and I think thats because old consoles couldn’t produce really good graphics so they worked on gameplay to make a game sell, but today with the ‘Next-Gen’ consoles out that can produce life-like graphics, there spending too much tiome on the graphics side of things and not enough time on the gameplay side.
Don’t get me wrong, not all games are like that. Metal Gear Solid 2 offers both. The graphics are stunning and the gameplay is great too. It’s a win win situation.
So, the little details are important, and they are good to look at, but are game developers getting obsessed with those little details and the graphics and forgetting about gameplay?
Answer, I think not for all games.
Thanks for reading.
Liquid Snake
It’s those little details that make the games what they are. You don’t really notice them but thats what make the game special, it makes them stand out. Take Shenmue 2 for example. The detail is amazing. You look at the buildings and every brick is a different shade of orange, the clouds move when you look up at the sky. Plus the every shop has it’s own personality.
Another example is Metal Gear Solid 2. On the ‘Making of’ DvD that comes with the game, it shows the way the rain moved before they had really thought about it and planned it out properly and it looked good but not that good. But when they planned it out properly it looked very realistic. The rain moved in different directions as the wind changes direction, when the rain hit Snake’s head and back, you could see that Kojima had spent time thinking about how he could make it look as realstic as possible.
But I think the start of all this was Zelda: Ocarina of Time. The character had a lot of detail on, he was blinking like a human would, and the land that the story was set in was very detailed. I think this was the start of all the little details that game developers have become obbsesed over.
This is all very well and good, but are game developers spending too much time on graphics and little detail too make the game look good, and not enough time on the gameplay. Is that why we aren’t having quality games coming out all the time? If game developers spent as much time as they did on graphics as gameplay we would have the great game coming out all the time.
Looking back on some of the old NES/SNES games, I think they have better gameplay value than most of the games coming out today, and I think thats because old consoles couldn’t produce really good graphics so they worked on gameplay to make a game sell, but today with the ‘Next-Gen’ consoles out that can produce life-like graphics, there spending too much tiome on the graphics side of things and not enough time on the gameplay side.
Don’t get me wrong, not all games are like that. Metal Gear Solid 2 offers both. The graphics are stunning and the gameplay is great too. It’s a win win situation.
So, the little details are important, and they are good to look at, but are game developers getting obsessed with those little details and the graphics and forgetting about gameplay?
Answer, I think not for all games.
Thanks for reading.
Liquid Snake
Another example is Metal Gear Solid 2. On the ‘Making of’ DvD that comes with the game, it shows the way the rain moved before they had really thought about it and planned it out properly and it looked good but not that good. But when they planned it out properly it looked very realistic. The rain moved in different directions as the wind changes direction, when the rain hit Snake’s head and back, you could see that Kojima had spent time thinking about how he could make it look as realstic as possible.
But I think the start of all this was Zelda: Ocarina of Time. The character had a lot of detail on, he was blinking like a human would, and the land that the story was set in was very detailed. I think this was the start of all the little details that game developers have become obbsesed over.
This is all very well and good, but are game developers spending too much time on graphics and little detail too make the game look good, and not enough time on the gameplay. Is that why we aren’t having quality games coming out all the time? If game developers spent as much time as they did on graphics as gameplay we would have the great game coming out all the time.
Looking back on some of the old NES/SNES games, I think they have better gameplay value than most of the games coming out today, and I think thats because old consoles couldn’t produce really good graphics so they worked on gameplay to make a game sell, but today with the ‘Next-Gen’ consoles out that can produce life-like graphics, there spending too much tiome on the graphics side of things and not enough time on the gameplay side.
Don’t get me wrong, not all games are like that. Metal Gear Solid 2 offers both. The graphics are stunning and the gameplay is great too. It’s a win win situation.
So, the little details are important, and they are good to look at, but are game developers getting obsessed with those little details and the graphics and forgetting about gameplay?
Answer, I think not for all games.
Thanks for reading.
Liquid Snake
I think that with graphics becoming so good developers see 'those little details' as a way to differentiate their games from others and show off their technical prowess. Plus it seems with games becoming more realistic this is a way of furthering that.
The developers are focusing too much on the graphics nowadays yes but i think that they must think that if they show us really good graphics on the box and in little clips and previews and stuff then it would make us want to buy it.
Before the games come out thats all that we see really to hype the game so maybe thats what they try to do.
If theyre trying to do this then they are ideed forgetting about the gameplay, which is the main part of a game and should be the best part.
Take the XBox for an example.
Its just come out and developers just want to see what its capable of producing and it is said to be best at graphics so maybe the developers are just playing with a few of the games now.
It does take time to get used to these machines and now were seeing the really good games coming out which provide both graphics and gameplay ala MGS2.
Developers do need to get it back into thier heads though that its the gameplay that counts the most.
I should hope that they take every aspect of making a game into thought while making a game.
They cant just survive on just graphics and gameplay.
So to make it the best of what they can achieve then i should think that they take everything into deep consideration to make it as fun and enjoying and realistic as possible.
But then again, It depends on what they WANT to achieve.
Before the games come out thats all that we see really to hype the game so maybe thats what they try to do.
If theyre trying to do this then they are ideed forgetting about the gameplay, which is the main part of a game and should be the best part.
Take the XBox for an example.
Its just come out and developers just want to see what its capable of producing and it is said to be best at graphics so maybe the developers are just playing with a few of the games now.
It does take time to get used to these machines and now were seeing the really good games coming out which provide both graphics and gameplay ala MGS2.
Developers do need to get it back into thier heads though that its the gameplay that counts the most.
I should hope that they take every aspect of making a game into thought while making a game.
They cant just survive on just graphics and gameplay.
So to make it the best of what they can achieve then i should think that they take everything into deep consideration to make it as fun and enjoying and realistic as possible.
But then again, It depends on what they WANT to achieve.
good post by the way
RM18 wrote:
> good post by the way
----------
indeed,
what about my response too?
> good post by the way
----------
indeed,
what about my response too?
Hercules! wrote:
> RM18 wrote:
> good post by the way
----------
indeed,
what about my
> response too?
Sorry not to mention you, that was a good,lengthy reply. It seems to have become a rarity these days for someone to take the time to properly reply. Ok? :)
> RM18 wrote:
> good post by the way
----------
indeed,
what about my
> response too?
Sorry not to mention you, that was a good,lengthy reply. It seems to have become a rarity these days for someone to take the time to properly reply. Ok? :)
RM18 wrote:
Sorry not to
> mention you, that was a good,lengthy reply. It seems to have become a rarity
> these days for someone to take the time to properly reply. Ok? :)
----------------
cool
I like replying to topics like this that make me explain some stuff and give a different view on why or what or when or whatever.
:)
Sorry not to
> mention you, that was a good,lengthy reply. It seems to have become a rarity
> these days for someone to take the time to properly reply. Ok? :)
----------------
cool
I like replying to topics like this that make me explain some stuff and give a different view on why or what or when or whatever.
:)