The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
The new generation of games is here. But are the game designers drifting off the basics of games and playing around with graphics and sound instead of doing their job my making games which you want to buy?
Back when there was a few arcade's, with pong in every house. The graphics didn't matter to them. But now with the power of the PS2 you would expect better story lines, in depth gaming all brought out from this extremes in caperblityes. But it seems that the companies are losing the plot. Look at Time Splitters. A wonderful game with out a doubt. But the real story behind it is only explained properly in the manual! You don't get that character interaction you do in Shemue and Pokèmon. Also that there is no 'reward' for the gamers. I mean no death cut scene, no beginning of level cut scene, in fact, none at all! It seems that Time Splitters was a rushed game to make the realised date for the PS2, (understandably). Which would have been a great rival for any game, but they didn't take time over it in that way. (DONT READT THIS IF YOU HAVENT COMPLETED IT YET the end cut scene is just credits). But the games need to go back basics and start.
A good example of 'back to basics' games is (don't know the name) the firework game on the PS2. I mean, that hasn't put PS2 in the spotlight, but it shows they what to make a Tetris that is addictive. And they’re not afraid to waste half of the PS2 power to do this.
The Gameboy. More people have that than anything thing else! But its graphics aren't the best in the world. And the most popular game on it, Pokèmon, is addictive with out needing the brilliant 3-D graphics other games have. Also Zelda. One of the oldest games in Nintendo history. But they don't fall back on and hid behind graphics or EMINEM doing the soundtrack. After 8 (maybe more, maybe less) games, they still bring out original hits, with new story lines. Like Major's mask isn't like Ocarina of time. (Same engine), but different gameplay. This is what is lacking in other games. Also numbers (FF11), if these were changed like Zelda's or at least given a subtitle, it would make the game have a more immediate impact. (If you say 'have you played FF11, if they haven’t you would have to explain a little bit. But if you said, ocarina of time they would know it was about an instrument and time).
But the most important of all is 'the new'. Shemue (I can't spell it because it's not English!) is the way forward. Interactive story lines ('this has been done before' I hear you cry, so I wont go into detail). The games market need new ideas, or improved old games. Much more than an extra number and updated stats. Or they will fade out, and loss interest in people. One new idea is the face mapping idea (nicked from Rare), EA use in there new Hockey game. (On PC now soon on PS2). If you have a picture of your face on your PC, you can put it on the game. (Not every life like thought, I’ve seen it, you look like the back end of a dog!)
All in all the games market are concentrating on graphics and chips. People fighting over chips shouldn’t, it should be over gameplay. What the games companies should do is take lots more time in character development and story line building. And make a truly real experience. And the final thing, WOULD YOU BUY A GAME FOR IT'S GRAPHICS? OR IT'S GAMEPLAY? It's is too obvious what the answer is. GAMEPLAY. So if you don't agree with the rest of it. I'm sure you wouldn't pick a game because 'it looked pretty'. The day the market losses this, is the day I stop playing on games.
Thanks for reading
Dr. Dark
Back when there was a few arcade's, with pong in every house. The graphics didn't matter to them. But now with the power of the PS2 you would expect better story lines, in depth gaming all brought out from this extremes in caperblityes. But it seems that the companies are losing the plot. Look at Time Splitters. A wonderful game with out a doubt. But the real story behind it is only explained properly in the manual! You don't get that character interaction you do in Shemue and Pokèmon. Also that there is no 'reward' for the gamers. I mean no death cut scene, no beginning of level cut scene, in fact, none at all! It seems that Time Splitters was a rushed game to make the realised date for the PS2, (understandably). Which would have been a great rival for any game, but they didn't take time over it in that way. (DONT READT THIS IF YOU HAVENT COMPLETED IT YET the end cut scene is just credits). But the games need to go back basics and start.
A good example of 'back to basics' games is (don't know the name) the firework game on the PS2. I mean, that hasn't put PS2 in the spotlight, but it shows they what to make a Tetris that is addictive. And they’re not afraid to waste half of the PS2 power to do this.
The Gameboy. More people have that than anything thing else! But its graphics aren't the best in the world. And the most popular game on it, Pokèmon, is addictive with out needing the brilliant 3-D graphics other games have. Also Zelda. One of the oldest games in Nintendo history. But they don't fall back on and hid behind graphics or EMINEM doing the soundtrack. After 8 (maybe more, maybe less) games, they still bring out original hits, with new story lines. Like Major's mask isn't like Ocarina of time. (Same engine), but different gameplay. This is what is lacking in other games. Also numbers (FF11), if these were changed like Zelda's or at least given a subtitle, it would make the game have a more immediate impact. (If you say 'have you played FF11, if they haven’t you would have to explain a little bit. But if you said, ocarina of time they would know it was about an instrument and time).
But the most important of all is 'the new'. Shemue (I can't spell it because it's not English!) is the way forward. Interactive story lines ('this has been done before' I hear you cry, so I wont go into detail). The games market need new ideas, or improved old games. Much more than an extra number and updated stats. Or they will fade out, and loss interest in people. One new idea is the face mapping idea (nicked from Rare), EA use in there new Hockey game. (On PC now soon on PS2). If you have a picture of your face on your PC, you can put it on the game. (Not every life like thought, I’ve seen it, you look like the back end of a dog!)
All in all the games market are concentrating on graphics and chips. People fighting over chips shouldn’t, it should be over gameplay. What the games companies should do is take lots more time in character development and story line building. And make a truly real experience. And the final thing, WOULD YOU BUY A GAME FOR IT'S GRAPHICS? OR IT'S GAMEPLAY? It's is too obvious what the answer is. GAMEPLAY. So if you don't agree with the rest of it. I'm sure you wouldn't pick a game because 'it looked pretty'. The day the market losses this, is the day I stop playing on games.
Thanks for reading
Dr. Dark
Page:
Mr. Dark wrote:
> Read Nintendo is Simon topic on VR, if you wait i'll get it. It's
> very long though.
go on drege up your old forum
> Read Nintendo is Simon topic on VR, if you wait i'll get it. It's
> very long though.
go on drege up your old forum
Well Goldeneye's had been beaten by PD's but we still like that.....because of it's gameplay.
This topic is old!
This topic is old!
I made a topic about this months ago...
Look, gameplay are more important than graphics. BUT, without good graphics, the game wouldn't be as great as it would be, right??
I mean, would you like Perfect Dark as much if it had crap graphics??
Get my point??
Look, gameplay are more important than graphics. BUT, without good graphics, the game wouldn't be as great as it would be, right??
I mean, would you like Perfect Dark as much if it had crap graphics??
Get my point??
There will probably come a day where graphics are 100% realistic and look exactly like what they are meant to be like humans. Gameplay doesnt really change with time but graphics do.
Page: