The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Tomb Raider 2/3, Final fantasy 2/3/4/5/6/7/8/9, Resident evil 0/2/3, Crash bandicoot 2/3, Mario party 2/3 and oh hell thats enougth.
I hate numbers why can't developers be more origonal. Surley it would be better to think up a name that sums up the game instead of using one that sums up one made 5 years ago.
They can also be misleading Resident Evil for example was called that as it was based in a mansion but the rest were based in the city and the police station.
The only reason I see for using numbers is so people know that it will continue a previous story or involve the same characters. But Nintendo call every Zelda game The Legend of Zelda so people know what it is and they haven't given it numbers (don't you dare throw the first couple in my face) because a new Zelda could be a completley differen't game to the last but with the same characters again misleading.
I don't mind the use of numbers if it is something that has been slightly upgraded like Megadrive 2 and Die hard Trilogy 2 (Playstation 2 in my mind is also a slight upgrade)
All companys have done it once in a while but now its time to be origonal. If majoras mask was called Zelda 64 2 would you think it involved a mask(that is if you haven't read any magazines)?
What do you think to numbers should they be used?
I hate numbers why can't developers be more origonal. Surley it would be better to think up a name that sums up the game instead of using one that sums up one made 5 years ago.
They can also be misleading Resident Evil for example was called that as it was based in a mansion but the rest were based in the city and the police station.
The only reason I see for using numbers is so people know that it will continue a previous story or involve the same characters. But Nintendo call every Zelda game The Legend of Zelda so people know what it is and they haven't given it numbers (don't you dare throw the first couple in my face) because a new Zelda could be a completley differen't game to the last but with the same characters again misleading.
I don't mind the use of numbers if it is something that has been slightly upgraded like Megadrive 2 and Die hard Trilogy 2 (Playstation 2 in my mind is also a slight upgrade)
All companys have done it once in a while but now its time to be origonal. If majoras mask was called Zelda 64 2 would you think it involved a mask(that is if you haven't read any magazines)?
What do you think to numbers should they be used?
Page:
Tomb Raider 2/3, Final fantasy 2/3/4/5/6/7/8/9, Resident evil 0/2/3, Crash bandicoot 2/3, Mario party 2/3 and oh hell thats enougth.
I hate numbers why can't developers be more origonal. Surley it would be better to think up a name that sums up the game instead of using one that sums up one made 5 years ago.
They can also be misleading Resident Evil for example was called that as it was based in a mansion but the rest were based in the city and the police station.
The only reason I see for using numbers is so people know that it will continue a previous story or involve the same characters. But Nintendo call every Zelda game The Legend of Zelda so people know what it is and they haven't given it numbers (don't you dare throw the first couple in my face) because a new Zelda could be a completley differen't game to the last but with the same characters again misleading.
I don't mind the use of numbers if it is something that has been slightly upgraded like Megadrive 2 and Die hard Trilogy 2 (Playstation 2 in my mind is also a slight upgrade)
All companys have done it once in a while but now its time to be origonal. If majoras mask was called Zelda 64 2 would you think it involved a mask(that is if you haven't read any magazines)?
What do you think to numbers should they be used?
I hate numbers why can't developers be more origonal. Surley it would be better to think up a name that sums up the game instead of using one that sums up one made 5 years ago.
They can also be misleading Resident Evil for example was called that as it was based in a mansion but the rest were based in the city and the police station.
The only reason I see for using numbers is so people know that it will continue a previous story or involve the same characters. But Nintendo call every Zelda game The Legend of Zelda so people know what it is and they haven't given it numbers (don't you dare throw the first couple in my face) because a new Zelda could be a completley differen't game to the last but with the same characters again misleading.
I don't mind the use of numbers if it is something that has been slightly upgraded like Megadrive 2 and Die hard Trilogy 2 (Playstation 2 in my mind is also a slight upgrade)
All companys have done it once in a while but now its time to be origonal. If majoras mask was called Zelda 64 2 would you think it involved a mask(that is if you haven't read any magazines)?
What do you think to numbers should they be used?
You would not believe how pleased I was when i discovered the new Perfect Dark is to be called After Dark instead of PD2 and the new Conker is called Conkers other bad day instead of CBFD2
Numbers do at least help you to remember which game came before which.
But Zelda ocarina of time is actually the first Zelda game and Resident evil 0 is coming out soon
I was having this conversation with my school mate and I came to the conclusion that numbers are stupid and boring.
He came to the conclusion that numbers should only be used with certain games that their sequel is really similar to the original.
The actual conversation was about Smackdown and Smackdown 2 for PSX. I said that the developers could have been a bit more original with the name but he said that there was not much point because it is so similar. I agreed upon that.
Both Zeldas have different names but they have different story lines. One is about you having to save Hyrule against Ganon. The other is about stopping the moon with a face from crashing into a parrellel dimension of Hyrule(i think, i havent played it yet).
I think that developers put numbers on the end because they are so thick they cant think of another name. They use it as an easy route out.
This is just plain laziness, they have put all of the hard work into the game, and they let it down with a unoriginal name.
I think the only two games to do this on the N64 are Mario Party1/2/3 and Banjo-Kazooie/Tooie. Although this is not as bad.
The worst culprit is Sony. The Final Fantasy Series, all nine of them is it, ive lost count. The Smackdown series, now the recent addition Smackdown 3 for PS2. And all the others you mentioned plus some more. Gran Turismo 1/2/3. Ridge Racer, all of them.
Hopefully Nintendo wont do this on the Gamecube. The problem is that (as i said before) the games in a series of about two up to nine, all with the same name, are basically really similar and sometimes there is no point in making another if it is going to be the same. Well they make more money while the gamer loses more.
I think whoever makes the games should be more original.
TOM1232 ;~>
He came to the conclusion that numbers should only be used with certain games that their sequel is really similar to the original.
The actual conversation was about Smackdown and Smackdown 2 for PSX. I said that the developers could have been a bit more original with the name but he said that there was not much point because it is so similar. I agreed upon that.
Both Zeldas have different names but they have different story lines. One is about you having to save Hyrule against Ganon. The other is about stopping the moon with a face from crashing into a parrellel dimension of Hyrule(i think, i havent played it yet).
I think that developers put numbers on the end because they are so thick they cant think of another name. They use it as an easy route out.
This is just plain laziness, they have put all of the hard work into the game, and they let it down with a unoriginal name.
I think the only two games to do this on the N64 are Mario Party1/2/3 and Banjo-Kazooie/Tooie. Although this is not as bad.
The worst culprit is Sony. The Final Fantasy Series, all nine of them is it, ive lost count. The Smackdown series, now the recent addition Smackdown 3 for PS2. And all the others you mentioned plus some more. Gran Turismo 1/2/3. Ridge Racer, all of them.
Hopefully Nintendo wont do this on the Gamecube. The problem is that (as i said before) the games in a series of about two up to nine, all with the same name, are basically really similar and sometimes there is no point in making another if it is going to be the same. Well they make more money while the gamer loses more.
I think whoever makes the games should be more original.
TOM1232 ;~>
Actually though Smackdown 2 is called Know your role aswell so it does have another name and THQ have given differen't names for the 64 (wrestlemania and no mercy) so why not do it on the PS i think it is because if a game is a sequal on the PS then it should have a number or it would confuse PS fans (no offense)
The PS2-an upgrade?? I think not.
It's 4 times as powerful, and a completely new console apart from controllers really.
Surely then the GameCube is an upgrade of the N64??
It's 4 times as powerful, and a completely new console apart from controllers really.
Surely then the GameCube is an upgrade of the N64??
Dringo wrote:
> Actually though Smackdown 2 is called Know your role aswell so it
> does have another name and THQ have given differen't names for the
> 64 (wrestlemania and no mercy) so why not do it on the PS i think it
> is because if a game is a sequal on the PS then it should have a
> number or it would confuse PS fans (no offense)
You know, I heard that a lot of Nintendo fans were very confused when all these games came out with '64' on the end.
Here is a quote from a confused N64 owner: "I just bought Carmageddon 64, and I'm very confused. Surely their hasn't been 63 other Carmageddon games??"
Hmmmmmm...
(no offence)
> Actually though Smackdown 2 is called Know your role aswell so it
> does have another name and THQ have given differen't names for the
> 64 (wrestlemania and no mercy) so why not do it on the PS i think it
> is because if a game is a sequal on the PS then it should have a
> number or it would confuse PS fans (no offense)
You know, I heard that a lot of Nintendo fans were very confused when all these games came out with '64' on the end.
Here is a quote from a confused N64 owner: "I just bought Carmageddon 64, and I'm very confused. Surely their hasn't been 63 other Carmageddon games??"
Hmmmmmm...
(no offence)
I did a whole topic on this about a month ago, why numbers and why not things like Zelda or Mario (excusing the first 3), I cant be bov'ered to find it but it was called 'Sequels' and talked all about this number rubbish
Page: