The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
A reacent interview with Satoru Iwata (Pokemon dude from Nintendo) revealed that at E3 Nintendo will show why this year will feature Nintendo's biggest software line up in history featuring new games and sequels, apparently most games you see will be out this year so Metroid will be put maybe not over here though and maybe wario World and that Ocarina of Time remake.
Anyway he then said this, he is talking about Zelda but I do believe it says everything about Nintendo's philosophy of the gaming industry, and why Sony and Microsoft are similar but Nintendo are so radically different:
"Whether players like the graphics or not isn't the issue, after all we're not making movies, we're making games."
King of all quotes, whilst Sony and Microsoft are all about pushing games to the limit of realism, Nintendo are pushing their console to new heights with new gameplay styles and fun. Lets look at Metal Gear Solid 2 for the PS2, a great game but so like a film, compare that to Super Monkey Ball, a game that is without a doubt pure AAA brilliance but that is just stupid! Graphics without detail, Monkey's trapped in balls, floors that float in mid air without any structure to hold it up, I mean how can a game expect to be good if it is as daft as this? The fact is, is that it is, ask a casual PS2 fan what they think of Super Monkey Ball and they will laugh, they will call it childish, they will call it stupid, they will call it pathetic. And then you will notice who is missing out, the narrow minded Sony fan or the Nintendo nut who has no shame.
The fact is Sony wish to allow gamers to play movies, like everyone dreams. This is a very popular choice as the sales show, realism sells, the oppertunity to play an adventure as if it was real is so important to so many people as that way it feels as if its possible. Nintendo don't appeal to this mass market of gamers, Nintendo aim for a different type of gamer, who just wants to have a laugh playing, get addicted and play for hours, yes realistic Zelda looked good but then Nintendo thought that cel-shaded graphics will make the game more fun (we have yet to see how) and so Shiguru Miyamoto chose to scrap the realistic graphics so the game can be more fun.
This is the problem Microsoft face, such an expensive project as the X-box is, Microsoft need to aim at the mainstream market, the same segment of the market which Sony have ruled for over 7 years. And they could not do it, the X-box needed to be something new, something not like the Playstation or Nintendo in order to survive. SEGA and Nintendo are highly similar in how they make games, which is why after the N64 had hold of the section of gamers who play for pure gameplay the Dreamcast couldn't make enough profit, Nintendo owned to much of that market segment. And now Microsoft is suffering the same, trying to steal people from the PS2 and that is a very difficult job indeed and so either X-box will do na N64 and scrape past or a Dreamcast and fall but remembered as a damn good system all the same.
Here's to the future.
Dringo.
Anyway he then said this, he is talking about Zelda but I do believe it says everything about Nintendo's philosophy of the gaming industry, and why Sony and Microsoft are similar but Nintendo are so radically different:
"Whether players like the graphics or not isn't the issue, after all we're not making movies, we're making games."
King of all quotes, whilst Sony and Microsoft are all about pushing games to the limit of realism, Nintendo are pushing their console to new heights with new gameplay styles and fun. Lets look at Metal Gear Solid 2 for the PS2, a great game but so like a film, compare that to Super Monkey Ball, a game that is without a doubt pure AAA brilliance but that is just stupid! Graphics without detail, Monkey's trapped in balls, floors that float in mid air without any structure to hold it up, I mean how can a game expect to be good if it is as daft as this? The fact is, is that it is, ask a casual PS2 fan what they think of Super Monkey Ball and they will laugh, they will call it childish, they will call it stupid, they will call it pathetic. And then you will notice who is missing out, the narrow minded Sony fan or the Nintendo nut who has no shame.
The fact is Sony wish to allow gamers to play movies, like everyone dreams. This is a very popular choice as the sales show, realism sells, the oppertunity to play an adventure as if it was real is so important to so many people as that way it feels as if its possible. Nintendo don't appeal to this mass market of gamers, Nintendo aim for a different type of gamer, who just wants to have a laugh playing, get addicted and play for hours, yes realistic Zelda looked good but then Nintendo thought that cel-shaded graphics will make the game more fun (we have yet to see how) and so Shiguru Miyamoto chose to scrap the realistic graphics so the game can be more fun.
This is the problem Microsoft face, such an expensive project as the X-box is, Microsoft need to aim at the mainstream market, the same segment of the market which Sony have ruled for over 7 years. And they could not do it, the X-box needed to be something new, something not like the Playstation or Nintendo in order to survive. SEGA and Nintendo are highly similar in how they make games, which is why after the N64 had hold of the section of gamers who play for pure gameplay the Dreamcast couldn't make enough profit, Nintendo owned to much of that market segment. And now Microsoft is suffering the same, trying to steal people from the PS2 and that is a very difficult job indeed and so either X-box will do na N64 and scrape past or a Dreamcast and fall but remembered as a damn good system all the same.
Here's to the future.
Dringo.
Dringo, this is about the 4th time you've made a post about this, and about the ba-zillionth time a Ninty has. GIVE IT A REST! We all know it's BS anyway.
How come some of my PS2 games are some of the best games I'v ever played? Almost all surpass my PSone collection, and that was pretty damn good. Oh, but wait, most of them have near-photorealistic graphics. They must be crap, mustn't they.
How come some of my PS2 games are some of the best games I'v ever played? Almost all surpass my PSone collection, and that was pretty damn good. Oh, but wait, most of them have near-photorealistic graphics. They must be crap, mustn't they.
Yeah but just because graphics are bad doesn't mean their cutsey, this isn't a post about graphics, Nintendo have games that look realistic such as Eternal Darkness but realism isn't just how it looks, i am merley pointing out this difference between Sony and Nintendo.
A reacent interview with Satoru Iwata (Pokemon dude from Nintendo) revealed that at E3 Nintendo will show why this year will feature Nintendo's biggest software line up in history featuring new games and sequels, apparently most games you see will be out this year so Metroid will be put maybe not over here though and maybe wario World and that Ocarina of Time remake.
Anyway he then said this, he is talking about Zelda but I do believe it says everything about Nintendo's philosophy of the gaming industry, and why Sony and Microsoft are similar but Nintendo are so radically different:
"Whether players like the graphics or not isn't the issue, after all we're not making movies, we're making games."
King of all quotes, whilst Sony and Microsoft are all about pushing games to the limit of realism, Nintendo are pushing their console to new heights with new gameplay styles and fun. Lets look at Metal Gear Solid 2 for the PS2, a great game but so like a film, compare that to Super Monkey Ball, a game that is without a doubt pure AAA brilliance but that is just stupid! Graphics without detail, Monkey's trapped in balls, floors that float in mid air without any structure to hold it up, I mean how can a game expect to be good if it is as daft as this? The fact is, is that it is, ask a casual PS2 fan what they think of Super Monkey Ball and they will laugh, they will call it childish, they will call it stupid, they will call it pathetic. And then you will notice who is missing out, the narrow minded Sony fan or the Nintendo nut who has no shame.
The fact is Sony wish to allow gamers to play movies, like everyone dreams. This is a very popular choice as the sales show, realism sells, the oppertunity to play an adventure as if it was real is so important to so many people as that way it feels as if its possible. Nintendo don't appeal to this mass market of gamers, Nintendo aim for a different type of gamer, who just wants to have a laugh playing, get addicted and play for hours, yes realistic Zelda looked good but then Nintendo thought that cel-shaded graphics will make the game more fun (we have yet to see how) and so Shiguru Miyamoto chose to scrap the realistic graphics so the game can be more fun.
This is the problem Microsoft face, such an expensive project as the X-box is, Microsoft need to aim at the mainstream market, the same segment of the market which Sony have ruled for over 7 years. And they could not do it, the X-box needed to be something new, something not like the Playstation or Nintendo in order to survive. SEGA and Nintendo are highly similar in how they make games, which is why after the N64 had hold of the section of gamers who play for pure gameplay the Dreamcast couldn't make enough profit, Nintendo owned to much of that market segment. And now Microsoft is suffering the same, trying to steal people from the PS2 and that is a very difficult job indeed and so either X-box will do na N64 and scrape past or a Dreamcast and fall but remembered as a damn good system all the same.
Here's to the future.
Dringo.
Anyway he then said this, he is talking about Zelda but I do believe it says everything about Nintendo's philosophy of the gaming industry, and why Sony and Microsoft are similar but Nintendo are so radically different:
"Whether players like the graphics or not isn't the issue, after all we're not making movies, we're making games."
King of all quotes, whilst Sony and Microsoft are all about pushing games to the limit of realism, Nintendo are pushing their console to new heights with new gameplay styles and fun. Lets look at Metal Gear Solid 2 for the PS2, a great game but so like a film, compare that to Super Monkey Ball, a game that is without a doubt pure AAA brilliance but that is just stupid! Graphics without detail, Monkey's trapped in balls, floors that float in mid air without any structure to hold it up, I mean how can a game expect to be good if it is as daft as this? The fact is, is that it is, ask a casual PS2 fan what they think of Super Monkey Ball and they will laugh, they will call it childish, they will call it stupid, they will call it pathetic. And then you will notice who is missing out, the narrow minded Sony fan or the Nintendo nut who has no shame.
The fact is Sony wish to allow gamers to play movies, like everyone dreams. This is a very popular choice as the sales show, realism sells, the oppertunity to play an adventure as if it was real is so important to so many people as that way it feels as if its possible. Nintendo don't appeal to this mass market of gamers, Nintendo aim for a different type of gamer, who just wants to have a laugh playing, get addicted and play for hours, yes realistic Zelda looked good but then Nintendo thought that cel-shaded graphics will make the game more fun (we have yet to see how) and so Shiguru Miyamoto chose to scrap the realistic graphics so the game can be more fun.
This is the problem Microsoft face, such an expensive project as the X-box is, Microsoft need to aim at the mainstream market, the same segment of the market which Sony have ruled for over 7 years. And they could not do it, the X-box needed to be something new, something not like the Playstation or Nintendo in order to survive. SEGA and Nintendo are highly similar in how they make games, which is why after the N64 had hold of the section of gamers who play for pure gameplay the Dreamcast couldn't make enough profit, Nintendo owned to much of that market segment. And now Microsoft is suffering the same, trying to steal people from the PS2 and that is a very difficult job indeed and so either X-box will do na N64 and scrape past or a Dreamcast and fall but remembered as a damn good system all the same.
Here's to the future.
Dringo.