The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Over the last few years it has saddened me that so many people have lost respect for this great company called Nintendo, often criticising their family friendly approach to gaming, and calling the N64 a flop when it was quite the reverse. Well, it’s my duty to defend Nintendo when unappreciative rapscallions decide to criticise them.
Before foolish people decide to abuse “The Big N” for various reasons, and before you decide to play your PS2s or Xboxs, you should stop to think about how there wouldn’t be a video games industry without them. You have Nintendo to thank for this industry, so give them more respect.
Have you forgotten all those years ago, when Nintendo were at the forefront of hardware and software development and innovation, building the foundations for this great industry? Look at the control pad you’re playing with, that’s all thanks to Nintendo’s research, development and evolution of the controller.
To many people the N64 may have appeared a let-down, with some over priced games and lack of decent third party support, with no decent beat ‘em ups and realistic racing games. But in terms of gaming experiences, the N64 has yet to be equalled or superseded by ANY console.
The many hours I spent playing multi-player GoldenEye, Perfect Dark, Mario Tennis/Kart/Golf/Party, Smash Bros, ISS etc with my family, and playing through Zelda: Ocarina of Time and Mario 64 were some of the best gaming experiences I’ve ever had on a console, far better than anything Sony have ever offered me.
It’s a FACT that without Nintendo there would be no games industry. For without Nintendo, there would have been no PSOne or PS2. As we all know, Sony were developing a CD add-on for the SNES, but due to various problems/infighting, the project was scrapped and the partnership ended, Sony went on to eventually develop the PSOne. Had Nintendo not been around, Sony would not have entered the games industry because it wouldn’t have existed because of Nintendo’s pioneering ways.
Sure, Nintendo have had a few flops like the Virtual Boy and the 64DD, but doesn’t everyone make mistakes?
It really does annoy me though when shortsighted people call Nintendo consoles “kiddie”, when I prefer to call them “family orientated”. Isn’t it a sign of insecurity when people abuse other consoles instead of praising their own?
There is a place for more mature games like GTA3, MGS2, Resident Evil etc, but family orientated games have their place in the industry too, so what’s wrong with making games suitable for all ages?
My whole family (except for my old fogy dad who thinks games are mindless rubbish...but what do parents know eh?:P) is greatly anticipating the arrival of the Gamecube. Multi-player Waverace, Monkey Ball, ISS2 etc will be a blast, and Luigi’s Mansion & Rogue Leader can be enjoyed by gamers young and old.
Isn’t it good that Nintendo are attracting younger gamers to our beloved hobby? Games like Pokemon and Luigi’s Mansion are great for introducing youngsters to games and giving them the necessary gaming skills to play more difficult games in the future.
Not all gamers are bloodthirsty hooligans who want violent games; some just want great playability and FUN...that’s what Nintendo provide.
Nintendo have made this industry what it is today, sure Sony helped to develop it to the mass market even further, but we still have Nintendo to thank.
All you people who hate Nintendo have got them to thank for your precious consoles, no matter how much you deny it, so be quiet and stop abusing them.
Nintendo are the videogame daddies!
Before foolish people decide to abuse “The Big N” for various reasons, and before you decide to play your PS2s or Xboxs, you should stop to think about how there wouldn’t be a video games industry without them. You have Nintendo to thank for this industry, so give them more respect.
Have you forgotten all those years ago, when Nintendo were at the forefront of hardware and software development and innovation, building the foundations for this great industry? Look at the control pad you’re playing with, that’s all thanks to Nintendo’s research, development and evolution of the controller.
To many people the N64 may have appeared a let-down, with some over priced games and lack of decent third party support, with no decent beat ‘em ups and realistic racing games. But in terms of gaming experiences, the N64 has yet to be equalled or superseded by ANY console.
The many hours I spent playing multi-player GoldenEye, Perfect Dark, Mario Tennis/Kart/Golf/Party, Smash Bros, ISS etc with my family, and playing through Zelda: Ocarina of Time and Mario 64 were some of the best gaming experiences I’ve ever had on a console, far better than anything Sony have ever offered me.
It’s a FACT that without Nintendo there would be no games industry. For without Nintendo, there would have been no PSOne or PS2. As we all know, Sony were developing a CD add-on for the SNES, but due to various problems/infighting, the project was scrapped and the partnership ended, Sony went on to eventually develop the PSOne. Had Nintendo not been around, Sony would not have entered the games industry because it wouldn’t have existed because of Nintendo’s pioneering ways.
Sure, Nintendo have had a few flops like the Virtual Boy and the 64DD, but doesn’t everyone make mistakes?
It really does annoy me though when shortsighted people call Nintendo consoles “kiddie”, when I prefer to call them “family orientated”. Isn’t it a sign of insecurity when people abuse other consoles instead of praising their own?
There is a place for more mature games like GTA3, MGS2, Resident Evil etc, but family orientated games have their place in the industry too, so what’s wrong with making games suitable for all ages?
My whole family (except for my old fogy dad who thinks games are mindless rubbish...but what do parents know eh?:P) is greatly anticipating the arrival of the Gamecube. Multi-player Waverace, Monkey Ball, ISS2 etc will be a blast, and Luigi’s Mansion & Rogue Leader can be enjoyed by gamers young and old.
Isn’t it good that Nintendo are attracting younger gamers to our beloved hobby? Games like Pokemon and Luigi’s Mansion are great for introducing youngsters to games and giving them the necessary gaming skills to play more difficult games in the future.
Not all gamers are bloodthirsty hooligans who want violent games; some just want great playability and FUN...that’s what Nintendo provide.
Nintendo have made this industry what it is today, sure Sony helped to develop it to the mass market even further, but we still have Nintendo to thank.
All you people who hate Nintendo have got them to thank for your precious consoles, no matter how much you deny it, so be quiet and stop abusing them.
Nintendo are the videogame daddies!
Page:
Solskjær wrote:
> Well it appeared on the PC first, and it was (at the time) probably
> the best RPG-EXCLUSIVE to the PC! Because of it's success Sony soon
> took it into their own hands - and surprisingly the 32-bit graphics
> didn't change much! It still is a great game, and the 2nd one was just
> as good, but a little easier - and you didn't have it on the PS! :P
The PS couldn't handle the smooth textures (or the N64 for that matter) which at the time blew me away by the graphics :-)
> Did you ever play the PC version and compare the 2??
> I think the controller style would take a bit of getting used to.
Actually the way it was setup on the controller was brilliant, X to talk, square to fight etc but the moods (aggresive, walk, run, discreet) were on the 4 shoulder buttons for quick access making it simple to use, miles better than the keyboard. I downloaded the full version of LBA2 (now abondonware) but didn't find it to be anywhere near as good as the original which is a definate classic :-)
> Well it appeared on the PC first, and it was (at the time) probably
> the best RPG-EXCLUSIVE to the PC! Because of it's success Sony soon
> took it into their own hands - and surprisingly the 32-bit graphics
> didn't change much! It still is a great game, and the 2nd one was just
> as good, but a little easier - and you didn't have it on the PS! :P
The PS couldn't handle the smooth textures (or the N64 for that matter) which at the time blew me away by the graphics :-)
> Did you ever play the PC version and compare the 2??
> I think the controller style would take a bit of getting used to.
Actually the way it was setup on the controller was brilliant, X to talk, square to fight etc but the moods (aggresive, walk, run, discreet) were on the 4 shoulder buttons for quick access making it simple to use, miles better than the keyboard. I downloaded the full version of LBA2 (now abondonware) but didn't find it to be anywhere near as good as the original which is a definate classic :-)
Vottanator wrote:
> Super Smash Bros on the N64 however, did not impress me. It was far
> too easy on single player and got extremely boring. On 2 player it was
> quite fun but on 3 or 4 player, the camera would be to far away as the
> majority of the time 2 people would be fighting at opposite sides of
> the screen.
Smash Brothers took 3 months of getting used to and then it was the best multiplayer game ever!
The single player wasn't amazing but I still found it fun trying to win the matches in a special way in order to get a higher score.
I know the camera zooms out a lot in 4 player, but after a while, you hardly notice. The only real problem was on the mushroom kingdom bonus level when you couldn't see all of the level, leaving your character off screen some of the time.
> Super Smash Bros on the N64 however, did not impress me. It was far
> too easy on single player and got extremely boring. On 2 player it was
> quite fun but on 3 or 4 player, the camera would be to far away as the
> majority of the time 2 people would be fighting at opposite sides of
> the screen.
Smash Brothers took 3 months of getting used to and then it was the best multiplayer game ever!
The single player wasn't amazing but I still found it fun trying to win the matches in a special way in order to get a higher score.
I know the camera zooms out a lot in 4 player, but after a while, you hardly notice. The only real problem was on the mushroom kingdom bonus level when you couldn't see all of the level, leaving your character off screen some of the time.
Res€vilfan wrote:
> and Solskjær Little Big Adventure was one of the best RPG's on
> the PS :-)
Well it appeared on the PC first, and it was (at the time) probably the best RPG-EXCLUSIVE to the PC! Because of it's success Sony soon took it into their own hands - and surprisingly the 32-bit graphics didn't change much! It still is a great game, and the 2nd one was just as good, but a little easier - and you didn't have it on the PS! :P
Did you ever play the PC version and compare the 2??
I think the controller style would take a bit of getting used to.
> and Solskjær Little Big Adventure was one of the best RPG's on
> the PS :-)
Well it appeared on the PC first, and it was (at the time) probably the best RPG-EXCLUSIVE to the PC! Because of it's success Sony soon took it into their own hands - and surprisingly the 32-bit graphics didn't change much! It still is a great game, and the 2nd one was just as good, but a little easier - and you didn't have it on the PS! :P
Did you ever play the PC version and compare the 2??
I think the controller style would take a bit of getting used to.
Ant wrote:
> Ah, but without Sony gaming would not be what it is today. Sony saved
> gaming.
I'll give you that one.
Nintendo and Sega had gotten seriously incompetent with high priced, hard to devellop for hardware.
Sony gave them a kick in the teeth they needed to come up with well priced, strong hardware like the Gamecube and PS2.
It was Sony slapping Nintendo and Sega that put them back into the good shape that they are today.
Still, Sony did undo a little of the good they'd done with the PS2.
The PS2 was hard to devellop for, it had put the Dreamcast out of business simply because Sony had hyped it up to heaven, and not really lived up to the hype.
Now the PS2 has built up a line up of strong games, but GT3 seems to be the only one actually made by Sony. Perhaps the rest would've benefited slightly from more develloper friendly hardware, especially when GTA3 was made with middleware...
Still, even if the PS2 wasn't quite the right direction to step in, it doesn't even scratch the good the original Playstation did for the market.
Sure, I'd say that the N64 was a better console than the Playstation, but if the PS hadn't kicked it in the teeth, I wouldn't have picked up the N64, Goldeneye and 4 controllers for £120 and it's games would still cost £60.
> Ah, but without Sony gaming would not be what it is today. Sony saved
> gaming.
I'll give you that one.
Nintendo and Sega had gotten seriously incompetent with high priced, hard to devellop for hardware.
Sony gave them a kick in the teeth they needed to come up with well priced, strong hardware like the Gamecube and PS2.
It was Sony slapping Nintendo and Sega that put them back into the good shape that they are today.
Still, Sony did undo a little of the good they'd done with the PS2.
The PS2 was hard to devellop for, it had put the Dreamcast out of business simply because Sony had hyped it up to heaven, and not really lived up to the hype.
Now the PS2 has built up a line up of strong games, but GT3 seems to be the only one actually made by Sony. Perhaps the rest would've benefited slightly from more develloper friendly hardware, especially when GTA3 was made with middleware...
Still, even if the PS2 wasn't quite the right direction to step in, it doesn't even scratch the good the original Playstation did for the market.
Sure, I'd say that the N64 was a better console than the Playstation, but if the PS hadn't kicked it in the teeth, I wouldn't have picked up the N64, Goldeneye and 4 controllers for £120 and it's games would still cost £60.
Ant wrote:
> Ah, but without Sony gaming would not be what it is today. Sony saved
> gaming.
>
Semi-True, Sony provided a superb console which made third party software developers fall over themselves trying to get a game out worth your well earned cash. Final Fantasy, Tomb Raider, Resident Evil, Metal Gear Solid, Fear Effect etc, they're all third party :-)
> Ah, but without Sony gaming would not be what it is today. Sony saved
> gaming.
>
Semi-True, Sony provided a superb console which made third party software developers fall over themselves trying to get a game out worth your well earned cash. Final Fantasy, Tomb Raider, Resident Evil, Metal Gear Solid, Fear Effect etc, they're all third party :-)
Totoro wrote:
> The truth hurts doesn't it.
> It's like the Luke Skywalker--Darth Vader idea. No matter how much
> Luke doesn't like it, the fact remains that Vader is his father. It's
> the same with video games, no matter how much people dislike it,
> Nintendo are your fathers!
yes I know, I was playing Nintendo's games before they were making consoles but the majority of Ninty's just rave on and on and on about Nintendo like the world would crumble without them.
and Solskjær Little Big Adventure was one of the best RPG's on the PS :-)
> The truth hurts doesn't it.
> It's like the Luke Skywalker--Darth Vader idea. No matter how much
> Luke doesn't like it, the fact remains that Vader is his father. It's
> the same with video games, no matter how much people dislike it,
> Nintendo are your fathers!
yes I know, I was playing Nintendo's games before they were making consoles but the majority of Ninty's just rave on and on and on about Nintendo like the world would crumble without them.
and Solskjær Little Big Adventure was one of the best RPG's on the PS :-)
Ant wrote:
>while Sony got new characters like Solid Snake
Snake was first seen in a NES game.
>while Sony got new characters like Solid Snake
Snake was first seen in a NES game.
Ant wrote:
> Ah, but without Sony gaming would not be what it is today. Sony saved
> gaming.
Yep, i acknowledged that fact when saying "Sony helped to develop it to the mass market even further".
Sony have played a great part in increasing people's awareness of video games, leading to games being more successful, increasing sales, revenues and keeping competition high etc etc.
Thanks to Sony as well, but i don't want people to keep slagging of Nintendo (i.e Goatboy)
> Ah, but without Sony gaming would not be what it is today. Sony saved
> gaming.
Yep, i acknowledged that fact when saying "Sony helped to develop it to the mass market even further".
Sony have played a great part in increasing people's awareness of video games, leading to games being more successful, increasing sales, revenues and keeping competition high etc etc.
Thanks to Sony as well, but i don't want people to keep slagging of Nintendo (i.e Goatboy)
Ah, but without Sony gaming would not be what it is today. Sony saved gaming.
Think about it. The Saturn was a failure, and Nintendo were in complete control of the gaming market. They had no rivals, and made all the money. There was no competition. This was bad news though, maybe Nintendo would have become lazy, and the quality of games would've been lower. With just one company ruling, gaming didn't have a wonderful future. There must be competition.
Then BAM! In came Sony from no where with the PlayStation, more powerful than any Nintendo console that was in the shops. They were selling extremely well, and Nintendo had to react. That's where the N64 came in, and then the battle began. Nintendo offered all of its trademark games like Mario, while Sony got new characters like Solid Snake and Crash Bandicoot, as well as gaining the rights to games like Final Fantasy. Sony won the battle in the end (you've got to admit it), but we were treated to a massive selection of great games from both sides.
Then Sega decided to do something, and they brought us the DreamCast. Although sort of considered a failure in terms of sales, it most certainly wasn't in terms of games. A brilliant console, no doubt.
And now we have the X-Box, of course.
But think about it, without Sony, would we have any of these consoles? Without Sony, would we have the heated console war we are going through now? In my opinion, the answer is no. We most certainly wouldn't have such a great choice, and I'm not sure what would have happened if Nintendo had continued to dominate.
So maybe Nintendo created gaming (although PC gamers will contest that), but Sony saved it. Thank God for Sony.
Think about it. The Saturn was a failure, and Nintendo were in complete control of the gaming market. They had no rivals, and made all the money. There was no competition. This was bad news though, maybe Nintendo would have become lazy, and the quality of games would've been lower. With just one company ruling, gaming didn't have a wonderful future. There must be competition.
Then BAM! In came Sony from no where with the PlayStation, more powerful than any Nintendo console that was in the shops. They were selling extremely well, and Nintendo had to react. That's where the N64 came in, and then the battle began. Nintendo offered all of its trademark games like Mario, while Sony got new characters like Solid Snake and Crash Bandicoot, as well as gaining the rights to games like Final Fantasy. Sony won the battle in the end (you've got to admit it), but we were treated to a massive selection of great games from both sides.
Then Sega decided to do something, and they brought us the DreamCast. Although sort of considered a failure in terms of sales, it most certainly wasn't in terms of games. A brilliant console, no doubt.
And now we have the X-Box, of course.
But think about it, without Sony, would we have any of these consoles? Without Sony, would we have the heated console war we are going through now? In my opinion, the answer is no. We most certainly wouldn't have such a great choice, and I'm not sure what would have happened if Nintendo had continued to dominate.
So maybe Nintendo created gaming (although PC gamers will contest that), but Sony saved it. Thank God for Sony.
Vottanator wrote:
> Super Smash Bros on the N64 however, did not impress me. It was far
> too easy on single player and got extremely boring. On 2 player it was
> quite fun but on 3 or 4 player, the camera would be to far away as the
> majority of the time 2 people would be fighting at opposite sides of
> the screen.
I agree, i prefered Mario Tennis & Mario Golf to Smash Bros. I think Powerstone on the Dreamcast was better than Smash Bros. Though Smash Bros Melee looks great (and i'm getting it as a GAD!!:)
> Super Smash Bros on the N64 however, did not impress me. It was far
> too easy on single player and got extremely boring. On 2 player it was
> quite fun but on 3 or 4 player, the camera would be to far away as the
> majority of the time 2 people would be fighting at opposite sides of
> the screen.
I agree, i prefered Mario Tennis & Mario Golf to Smash Bros. I think Powerstone on the Dreamcast was better than Smash Bros. Though Smash Bros Melee looks great (and i'm getting it as a GAD!!:)
Page: