The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
I've been thinking of selling my Dreamcast for a while now but every time I almost ring that ad through to the local paper I read that a new game I quite fancy is coming out in the near future so I hold back. It's not that there aren't any great games for it (far from it) and it's not as if there aren't more games on the way which are very likely to be first class as well.
The problem is with the games I've already got and one which the games I get are likely to suffer from. It's also a problem that seems to be gradually getting worse with each platform generation.
The Dreamcast has shown that next-gen games with next-gen graphics don't have to have old-hat gameplay. The problem I am realising is that of replay value.
My collection consists of many of the 'big' titles. Sonic Adventure, Resident Evil, Rayman 2, they're all there (excluding Shenmue, that is). When playing through Sonic I was a little disappointed but still enjoyed it. Rayman 2 and Resident Evil were both fantastic. I remember often thinking 'Wow, this is what I bought a Dreamcast for' and that opinion still stands. However, once both we're completed (with all the Lums in Rayman and no doors unopened in RE:CV) I left them for a while and then thought I'd play through them again.
Unfortunately the experience seemed very dull and stale compared to the first time, which is understandable to a certain extent. Over a period of time I gradually played my way through the first four or so levels of Rayman and a total of around 3 hours worth of RE:CV altogether and then I couldn't carry on because I simply wasn't enjoying it nearly as much as I felt I should be.
Looking back over the years there have been loads of games where, although never quite as good as the first time, the subsequent plays have always offered a great time. Super Mario World, Zelda: A Link to the Past, Sonic 1 and 2 to name but a few of the more obvious ones but even the first Rayman game could be included in the shortlist. Even now I'm playing through Zelda for the xxth time and I'm loving it! Are these games so much better that the ones of today? No. There always has been a mix of classics and crap and there always will be.
There is one example of a Dreamcast game that simply does not get dull: Crazy Taxi. It's pick up and play, relatively simplistic gameplay just doesn't seem to grow stale. It's not just simple games which are immune to this, as the previous paragraph demonstrates.
I think this is a problem which will only get worse. As the hardware becomes more advanced and the games become more expensive to make, developers strive to make that first experience as engrossing and as complete as possible in order to sell the most copies to make the most money - and that really cuts down on the replay potential.
What do you think? Would you rather get everything you can from a game in the first play through or would you like to keep coming back to it again and again, finding new things and experiences?
Of course ideally we would have both. As games of old have proved this IS possible and, in my opinion, is an important part of a game earning the status of a true classic.
Sorry for the topic title innuendo - I was trying to think of something cryptic or really clever to call it but then I though 'what the Hell, let's go for the cheap gag'.
The problem is with the games I've already got and one which the games I get are likely to suffer from. It's also a problem that seems to be gradually getting worse with each platform generation.
The Dreamcast has shown that next-gen games with next-gen graphics don't have to have old-hat gameplay. The problem I am realising is that of replay value.
My collection consists of many of the 'big' titles. Sonic Adventure, Resident Evil, Rayman 2, they're all there (excluding Shenmue, that is). When playing through Sonic I was a little disappointed but still enjoyed it. Rayman 2 and Resident Evil were both fantastic. I remember often thinking 'Wow, this is what I bought a Dreamcast for' and that opinion still stands. However, once both we're completed (with all the Lums in Rayman and no doors unopened in RE:CV) I left them for a while and then thought I'd play through them again.
Unfortunately the experience seemed very dull and stale compared to the first time, which is understandable to a certain extent. Over a period of time I gradually played my way through the first four or so levels of Rayman and a total of around 3 hours worth of RE:CV altogether and then I couldn't carry on because I simply wasn't enjoying it nearly as much as I felt I should be.
Looking back over the years there have been loads of games where, although never quite as good as the first time, the subsequent plays have always offered a great time. Super Mario World, Zelda: A Link to the Past, Sonic 1 and 2 to name but a few of the more obvious ones but even the first Rayman game could be included in the shortlist. Even now I'm playing through Zelda for the xxth time and I'm loving it! Are these games so much better that the ones of today? No. There always has been a mix of classics and crap and there always will be.
There is one example of a Dreamcast game that simply does not get dull: Crazy Taxi. It's pick up and play, relatively simplistic gameplay just doesn't seem to grow stale. It's not just simple games which are immune to this, as the previous paragraph demonstrates.
I think this is a problem which will only get worse. As the hardware becomes more advanced and the games become more expensive to make, developers strive to make that first experience as engrossing and as complete as possible in order to sell the most copies to make the most money - and that really cuts down on the replay potential.
What do you think? Would you rather get everything you can from a game in the first play through or would you like to keep coming back to it again and again, finding new things and experiences?
Of course ideally we would have both. As games of old have proved this IS possible and, in my opinion, is an important part of a game earning the status of a true classic.
Sorry for the topic title innuendo - I was trying to think of something cryptic or really clever to call it but then I though 'what the Hell, let's go for the cheap gag'.
Grix Thraves wrote:
> Good post SK... where've you been?
Cheers Grix.
I've been around a bit on the DVD forum but I've not really had anything to say on the games front - largely due to my lack of interest in my DC recently which was where the idea came from for the post.
> Good post SK... where've you been?
Cheers Grix.
I've been around a bit on the DVD forum but I've not really had anything to say on the games front - largely due to my lack of interest in my DC recently which was where the idea came from for the post.
Good post SK... where've you been?
I regret selling my Megadrive and Gameboy. I still hunger for Sonic and Street Fighter 2... and Donkey Kong on the gameboy was the best game on the system, after Zelda...
Not the Rareware Donkey Kong though, the remake of the classic. Superb platforming.
I regret selling my Megadrive and Gameboy. I still hunger for Sonic and Street Fighter 2... and Donkey Kong on the gameboy was the best game on the system, after Zelda...
Not the Rareware Donkey Kong though, the remake of the classic. Superb platforming.
The first time is always great but after a while it wears away, just because a console produces more polygons.
Edgy wrote:
> You'll regret selling it!
As soon as you've sold it you'll want
> to play it again!
Probably, but that's always the case. The only way you can really safely sell a system is if you don't play any of the games you've got (check) and there are no more games being released for it...ever.
As for price, I'd never decided. Whenever I get rid of a system I sell all the games first and then the console itself on its own - that's the best way to get the most money (providing you're in no rush for it).
> You'll regret selling it!
As soon as you've sold it you'll want
> to play it again!
Probably, but that's always the case. The only way you can really safely sell a system is if you don't play any of the games you've got (check) and there are no more games being released for it...ever.
As for price, I'd never decided. Whenever I get rid of a system I sell all the games first and then the console itself on its own - that's the best way to get the most money (providing you're in no rush for it).
You'll regret selling it!
As soon as you've sold it you'll want to play it again!
As soon as you've sold it you'll want to play it again!
Spider-man, Crazy Taxi 2 and Sonic 2 will be the games which stop me from selling it for a while yet (not sure of the order) but all it will take is a big gap in releases and it's gone.
I've been thinking of selling my Dreamcast for a while now but every time I almost ring that ad through to the local paper I read that a new game I quite fancy is coming out in the near future so I hold back. It's not that there aren't any great games for it (far from it) and it's not as if there aren't more games on the way which are very likely to be first class as well.
The problem is with the games I've already got and one which the games I get are likely to suffer from. It's also a problem that seems to be gradually getting worse with each platform generation.
The Dreamcast has shown that next-gen games with next-gen graphics don't have to have old-hat gameplay. The problem I am realising is that of replay value.
My collection consists of many of the 'big' titles. Sonic Adventure, Resident Evil, Rayman 2, they're all there (excluding Shenmue, that is). When playing through Sonic I was a little disappointed but still enjoyed it. Rayman 2 and Resident Evil were both fantastic. I remember often thinking 'Wow, this is what I bought a Dreamcast for' and that opinion still stands. However, once both we're completed (with all the Lums in Rayman and no doors unopened in RE:CV) I left them for a while and then thought I'd play through them again.
Unfortunately the experience seemed very dull and stale compared to the first time, which is understandable to a certain extent. Over a period of time I gradually played my way through the first four or so levels of Rayman and a total of around 3 hours worth of RE:CV altogether and then I couldn't carry on because I simply wasn't enjoying it nearly as much as I felt I should be.
Looking back over the years there have been loads of games where, although never quite as good as the first time, the subsequent plays have always offered a great time. Super Mario World, Zelda: A Link to the Past, Sonic 1 and 2 to name but a few of the more obvious ones but even the first Rayman game could be included in the shortlist. Even now I'm playing through Zelda for the xxth time and I'm loving it! Are these games so much better that the ones of today? No. There always has been a mix of classics and crap and there always will be.
There is one example of a Dreamcast game that simply does not get dull: Crazy Taxi. It's pick up and play, relatively simplistic gameplay just doesn't seem to grow stale. It's not just simple games which are immune to this, as the previous paragraph demonstrates.
I think this is a problem which will only get worse. As the hardware becomes more advanced and the games become more expensive to make, developers strive to make that first experience as engrossing and as complete as possible in order to sell the most copies to make the most money - and that really cuts down on the replay potential.
What do you think? Would you rather get everything you can from a game in the first play through or would you like to keep coming back to it again and again, finding new things and experiences?
Of course ideally we would have both. As games of old have proved this IS possible and, in my opinion, is an important part of a game earning the status of a true classic.
Sorry for the topic title innuendo - I was trying to think of something cryptic or really clever to call it but then I though 'what the Hell, let's go for the cheap gag'.
The problem is with the games I've already got and one which the games I get are likely to suffer from. It's also a problem that seems to be gradually getting worse with each platform generation.
The Dreamcast has shown that next-gen games with next-gen graphics don't have to have old-hat gameplay. The problem I am realising is that of replay value.
My collection consists of many of the 'big' titles. Sonic Adventure, Resident Evil, Rayman 2, they're all there (excluding Shenmue, that is). When playing through Sonic I was a little disappointed but still enjoyed it. Rayman 2 and Resident Evil were both fantastic. I remember often thinking 'Wow, this is what I bought a Dreamcast for' and that opinion still stands. However, once both we're completed (with all the Lums in Rayman and no doors unopened in RE:CV) I left them for a while and then thought I'd play through them again.
Unfortunately the experience seemed very dull and stale compared to the first time, which is understandable to a certain extent. Over a period of time I gradually played my way through the first four or so levels of Rayman and a total of around 3 hours worth of RE:CV altogether and then I couldn't carry on because I simply wasn't enjoying it nearly as much as I felt I should be.
Looking back over the years there have been loads of games where, although never quite as good as the first time, the subsequent plays have always offered a great time. Super Mario World, Zelda: A Link to the Past, Sonic 1 and 2 to name but a few of the more obvious ones but even the first Rayman game could be included in the shortlist. Even now I'm playing through Zelda for the xxth time and I'm loving it! Are these games so much better that the ones of today? No. There always has been a mix of classics and crap and there always will be.
There is one example of a Dreamcast game that simply does not get dull: Crazy Taxi. It's pick up and play, relatively simplistic gameplay just doesn't seem to grow stale. It's not just simple games which are immune to this, as the previous paragraph demonstrates.
I think this is a problem which will only get worse. As the hardware becomes more advanced and the games become more expensive to make, developers strive to make that first experience as engrossing and as complete as possible in order to sell the most copies to make the most money - and that really cuts down on the replay potential.
What do you think? Would you rather get everything you can from a game in the first play through or would you like to keep coming back to it again and again, finding new things and experiences?
Of course ideally we would have both. As games of old have proved this IS possible and, in my opinion, is an important part of a game earning the status of a true classic.
Sorry for the topic title innuendo - I was trying to think of something cryptic or really clever to call it but then I though 'what the Hell, let's go for the cheap gag'.