Jump to content
N-Europe

Recommended Posts

Posted

I do agree with certain aspects that you have mention Haver. Things like better AI do make for a better experience but im a bit unsure about the bigger worlds.

 

Take Banjo Tooie for example. The first was great it was compact but the 2nd was too big for its own good and it was a hassle to play. If used in the correct way it could make things better but thats the same with everything I suppose.

 

Good first post by the way Haver very insightful and worth discussing.

  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

Yeah I'm feeling the better AI, better physics and also most importantly more complicated game engines. But to justify my point earlier, I just don't think that cranking up the GPU power is going to make anything better.

 

Actually, just to throw a spanner in the works, there is quite a good arguement to say that if developers aren't constrained by limitted hardware they will get lazy and just make messy code, badly designed characters etc. I find the end of a generation quite interesting really because devs are working really hard and cranking out some really impressive games considering the hardware.

 

From what I remember, this is one of the ways that the console industry gives the PC industry a foot-up as it is often constrained console developers that manage to find new ways of squeezing hardware.

Posted

Good post, a bit on the long side for my likings. Though as a few have said before me this doesn't really belong on these forums, you should go tell it to the Nintendo fanboys on NOE forums that bum anything that is branded 'Nintendo'. Too bad those wankers will not read anything unless it is about how good Nintendo are or how the PSP rocks (so they can reply and flame the poster). Bastards.

Posted
before the Nintendo DS came along, or before the Revolution came along, did you honestly want to do away with the standard controller?

 

When I was known as HellKnight on C-E, before the revs controls where revealed, i was already saying on the forums (if anyone can remember) that I was hoping they change the control scheme for the Rev (wasnt expecting a dream come true, just a change that is differnt enough to feel fresh as opposed to how todays controllers are because to be honest, I dont think any analog controller has been great for me except the N64 controller or the DC controller. After that i just got bored of them and no i didnt have any problems with duel analog controls at all nor did i have problem with aiming in any FPS (obviously did at the start of getting used to duel analogs), I just didnt like it and felt it was boring. Also in other topics on the rev topic "Nintendo is Right" i also express my Opinion about how i was going off games because personally i felt it got old and wanted a new way to play my games so the answer is Yes I did want to do away with the current controls.

 

however I completely agree with you on the fact that the Xbox 360 and PS3 will have great games and what you said about the original xbox, being able to play Doom 3 and such i also agree with you there, i own an xbox and have a terrible PC, thats why i bought Doom 3 and i only own an xbox and gamecube so i can only express my opinion on how the xbox is a really fantastic system as is the GC, i adored my GC before i got my xbox and i still do but the xbox is in a tie with my GC for what was my fav console.

 

I just wanted something new after awhile.

Posted

I'm alowed to give them a god-like status because in my opinion they make better games than there compeditors. End of story.

 

But really the one reason a truely rank Nintendo number one is Zelda.

Posted
You've been brought up on NGC

 

No. I, and many here have been brought up over the course of 6 generations of gaming systems:

 

Pre-Nes, Nes/Master System, Mega Drive/SNES, SS/PSXN64, DC/PS2/Xbox/Gamecube, Xbox360/PS3/Rev .

 

We have seen the rise and fall of many companies and we have seen one thing stand out. Nintendo are always a safe bet when looking for innovation. Nintendo are always a safe bet for clean wholesome fun. We don't care if it is kiddy;

 

We play games for entertainment. We don't ignore games because of what some may think is questionable content. San Andreas is a PS2 game; it is brilliant. it is something you will never find on a nintendo console, and it has sold millions because of its gameplay brilliance. Sure, some may have bought it just because 'it is teh violance' but the fact is, gamers don't ignore good games.

 

You seem to be painting everyone in this forum with the same brush. Just because their are some fags(no offence) that act extremely fanboyish, does not mean we are all like it.

 

I for one couldn't give a rats ass about nintendo's joypad at this moment. All I'm looking for is that trademark nintendo game quality, and I'll be all over it like a rash. However, I will also be gaming like satan on my PS3/Xbox360. I assume many others will do so as well.

 

Try not to group everyone together as fanboys mate; you could end up pissing some people off.

Posted
Innovance: Where are these mythical games in which graphics overshadow gameplay? Are you talking about True Crime or whatever? They're piss poor games to start with. They got the graphics part right and the 'gameplay' bit wrong. I doubt that it was a conscious decision.

 

Nah my point is more aimed towards the marketing strategies of console manufacturers and even their design strategies. Even nintendo has been guilty of this, anyone remember more powerful than the computers that sent man to the moon??

 

Microsoft have stated that the intended use of the 3 core CPU is 2 cores for graphics and 1 core for the gameplay stuff, while it would appear the only game sony had in mind while designing their console was "HD: Streaming/decoding 12 simultaneous broadcasts"

 

When you read initial hardware analysis' of these consoles the main point that kept creeping up is they are great for graphics but the other parts of the game (ai, physics gamelogic) are going to be difficult for developers.

 

That to me is pushing graphics over gameplay

Posted

Well im a nintendo fanboy and i tbh, liked this article it was a nice read and something different but still hurt my heart down there :P but you seem to have got nice responses. now try do one of these articles in a sony/M$ forum and see where u get

 

Mario For President :D

Posted

Way to go Shyguy. The fella just asked you to stop being such a hapless biggot of a fanboy. You big up his thread and then instantly return to the type of behaviour which he is complaining about.

 

But then again Mario would make a better Pres than Bush.

Posted

As I said, it's an open letter to the kind of poster who would would claim that my original post was a carefully disguised attempt at shunning the Revolution and getting all fanboy about the Xbox 360. Don't take it personally, but read through the threads on this board and you'll find that a lot of what I've said applies. Maybe not to you, but to a lot of posters. And I was referring to NGC the magazine - you can replace those letters with any fanboy-breeding single-format mag out there.

 

I'm not sure to say to whoever didn't like today's controllers. Maybe try playing football at school or something?

 

King-Mushroom: That's an unfortunate opinion. You're missing out on games that equal and better the many brilliant games that Nintendo churn out.

 

masaki: Yes, Nintendo are all those things. But the other platforms offer fun and original and innovative games, too. You seem to recognise that, but others often don't.

 

Innovance: Technology always becomes a prominent issue in and around the transition from generation to generation. That'll cool down in a while and then it'll be up to game developers to make use of that technology.

 

Shyguy: Thank you. I'm sure Mr. Mario would sign the Kyoto agreement, especially after that nasty business on Delphino Island.

Posted

Yeh but why does that focus have to be on how powerful the technology is. I remeber a developer saying how he was happy the first time round with xbox because microsoft actually went to developers and asked them what they wanted but he couldnt understand how they then went and ended up with the design they had for 360.

 

The thing is the technology race is really quite bad for the industry, especially in the way that sony and ms went about it. While there are some people who say yeh they'd end up doing multi-core, multi-threading eventually. You have to ask given the general lack of knowledge and the they'll eventually find a way sentiments floating around, how does that benefit the industry, how does that benefit creativity and innovation, how does it benefit risk taking?

 

They focused on graphical power to the point where developers now have to come up with ways to draw out the next gen power for things like AI and Physics. But this isnt something that developers should be having to do yet, simply because it is already expensive enough to create games as it is so why make it harder and more expensive??

 

Its a real shame that developers dont stand up for themselves, if they all untied they'd have a lot more power than the hardware manufacturers, and they'd be able to change the industry from the inside out. But the way things are going the industry will once again be changed from the outside in.

 

Sorry if my post is a lil offtopic.

Posted
DCK i have to say given your sentiments about graphics i dont understand how you are so pro HD. There was an article at IGN (when they were campaigning for HD) and julian suttin of factor 5 said all the things you want out of graphics are much easier to achieve using a lower resolution and are more believable due to the lower resolution (flaws are not as easily seen) and what dont you like about their attitude towards gamers? (just out of curiosity)

 

I sometimes don't like Nintendo's attitude that they know what gamers want and what not, like when they dropped HD, like when they announced that people get scared of too many buttons on a controller, like online is not the future and like the failed GBA <> Cube connectivity. But that's beside the point.

 

I'm not saying HD is the keypoint next gen. I couldn't disagree more. I'm so pro HD because I feel that HD enriches experience more than it makes graphics better. Polygon count and texture resolution don't matter much and keep on mattering less and less in the future. The resolution boosts actually creates clearer, more detailed worlds, without ugly strips of pixels that anti-aliasing couldn't smear out. We need HD to notice the difference between previous gen and next gen - I feel we're at a point where this fifty-year-old 640x480 doesn't do the graphics and the game experience justice any more. I agree with Haver that visuals can create, or even are required, to create a good experience. If Nintendo misses out on this one, they're missing a chance to make Metroid Prime and The Legend of Zelda better than they could be in 480p, and that'd be such a shame.

 

But let's not make this a pointless HD discussion again.

 

Haver, I understand what you mean. Fanboy emotions sometimes run high and it sometimes seems that there are ritual bonfires of burning PS2s in our backyard - but things aren't always what they seem.

 

@ Innovance: Yeah, it's true Microsoft and Sony are pushing their consoles off the gaming target and that's why the Revolution can be small and cheap.

It's mainly matter of prestige I think MS and Sony had in mind when designing their consoles, saying they have extremely powerful CPUs (and they do in theory) and that graphics are going to be amazing (but what more could they say?). The step to multicore was inevitable, it couldn't be put off to the next next generation, and it's pretty certain that the Revolution will be at least dual core. But Microsoft and Sony exaggerated, and now the architectures are very difficult, with many flaws just so they could say their consoles are (or seem to be) so powerful. It does well in marketing, it doesn't do that well in performance.

Posted

Ill try to avoid a HD argument with you but i will say if your playing games on a huge screen tv then you do need HD but ED should be ok. If i remember correctly you said you had a pretty big tv but no HD, thats why your seeing what your seeing the image size is too big for the distance you are from the TV. The truth is the only reason were going HD is so that they can sell us bigger screen TVs with a decent image quality.

 

Anyway about your other point you are misinterpretting how nintendo reads the market coupled with media BS. The media (even supposedly pro N sites) are the ones who say nintendo said online wasnt important. When nintendo actually said they didnt feel that a suitable (profitable) model (they didnt want consumers to pay like live) was available at the time...

 

Sometimes ya need to look at what nintendo actauly say as opposed to what they supposedly said.

 

Its sorta like right now nintendo say that the console will be weaker (compared to PS3) but the graphics will be on par. Yet people quote nintendo saying. The graphics will be worse they already admitted it will be weaker, even the gaming sites who wrote down exactly what nintendo said say this.

Posted
Can we really speak for developers?

 

What about bigger worlds? What about better AI?

 

Definately agree...They bragged about the Halo 2 AI, and yet, I wasn't much better than most games.

Posted

I would imagine that anyone over the age of 12 would be able to understand my post, and as such, I came to the conclusion that you must be 11 or younger.

Posted

I have to make a point about what I said earlier.

 

I don't think it's really devs faults that they don't maximise their potential and the potential of the machines. I think this is far more to do with the money grabbing publishers who often treat their devs like slaves. It's hard ot be creative or to live up to your own standards when you are being hounded by your backers.

Posted

haha....well sorry to bust your bubble, but your logic is flawed.

 

Presuming my age off of one word is absurb. Maybe I should of followed it up, like so:

 

What?!

 

Where did this post come from?

 

Why are you telling us this?

 

What is your point?

 

Games are fun?

 

You seem to be out to prove a point that doesn't need to be proven. We already know. Your preaching to the followers here.

Posted

I'm sure you have, because your post begs the questions.

 

You don't have to answer them of course, nor do I want you to. I was just out to prove your statement regarding my age false, which I've done.

 

Now let by-gons be by-gons (I have no idea how to spell that).

Posted

So I finally found time to reply to this thread too.

First of all I wonder if you (Haver) intended to indirectly comment on my article or just wrote this in general to wake up all the fanboys.

 

Whether or not I'd like to clarify a little thing first, I used to be a Nintendo fanboy myself for some time but now I only favour Nintendo because I realized that other consoles also produce great games and that you don't need to have a radically new control method to create inventive and exciting games, but the longer a certain control method is present the more different things are invented and so the possibility of new things to be invented becomes less and less.

I wrote my article because I was disappointed what I saw graphics wise of the X-360, I didn't expect to see just some pretty nice lighting effects but much more polygons, natural movement, lots of little details but I didn't see anything of that and this together with the fact that the games looked and played very generic led me to the conclusion that beefed up graphics alone aren't improving the experience really for me next gen.

Edit: However I'm not saying that all of the graphics heavy games are bad, I'd rather play a game with nice graphics than ugly ones but it's not most important to me and I'm sure X-360 has some pretty nice games too like PGR3 I just saw a bad selection my fear however is that better graphics often just mean enhanced lighting, bigger draw distance, more shadows...

 

And now on to the (already much discussed) graphics vs gameplay argument, although I'm not quite sure if what I'm going to say is what you were complaining about. I think a game needs both, great graphics and great gameplay to be successful, however for me the most important factor is gameplay, sure I like nice graphics and read excitingly what's possible with new GPUs and such things, but if the gameplay fails it's often little fun to play the game while a game can still be entertaining if the graphics just do the job instead of looking great but offer very nice gameplay. I also think there should be a difference between graphics and atmosphere. I don't think that atmosphere is created by good graphics alone, good graphics can help to create a believeable atmosphere but ultimately the attention paid to details, a realistic feel and the feeling that you are in a living, breathing world are much more important than graphics alone.

Think of Doom³ - it was actually a graphics demo, I know a lot of people who played it one or two hours and were bored because it offered nothing new gameplay wise, standard weapons, your average zombie and lots of nice graphics...

On the other hand about a year ago I finally completed a Wing Commander style game from 1996 in "beautiful" voxel graphics called Schleichfahrt (Archimedian Dynasty). The controls worked very well with the keyboard although a joystick was recommended and it had an atmosphere I never felt in any other PC game (only Zelda an RE are on the same level) not even the ones that were out in 2004 and graphically far superior. It got two sequels Aquanox from I think 2001 and Aquanox 2 from 2003 and although they had much better graphics I'd choose the original without hesitation if I had to choose between them.

 

So my post is pretty unorganized but what I essentially try to say is that gameplay and atmosphere are the most important parts, graphics are like a little bonus, the icing on the cake.

Posted
As I said, it's an open letter to the kind of poster who would would claim that my original post was a carefully disguised attempt at shunning the Revolution and getting all fanboy about the Xbox 360. Don't take it personally, but read through the threads on this board and you'll find that a lot of what I've said applies. Maybe not to you, but to a lot of posters. And I was referring to NGC the magazine - you can replace those letters with any fanboy-breeding single-format mag out there.

 

I'm not sure to say to whoever didn't like today's controllers. Maybe try playing football at school or something?

 

King-Mushroom: That's an unfortunate opinion. You're missing out on games that equal and better the many brilliant games that Nintendo churn out.

 

masaki: Yes, Nintendo are all those things. But the other platforms offer fun and original and innovative games, too. You seem to recognise that, but others often don't.

 

Innovance: Technology always becomes a prominent issue in and around the transition from generation to generation. That'll cool down in a while and then it'll be up to game developers to make use of that technology.

 

Shyguy: Thank you. I'm sure Mr. Mario would sign the Kyoto agreement, especially after that nasty business on Delphino Island.

 

 

Its not unfortunate thankyou. I live in a flat and have access to every console, i have tried the others. I never said they have bad games, All i said is i am a Nintendo fan for a reason, not blind loyalty, the reason is i have more fun playing there games. How is that unfortunate?


×
×
  • Create New...