Sheikah Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 There only seven basic plots in literature. By your logic, why read any new books? You read books for the story, which can be very different. If you play FPS games, they are almost always very similar, even though the story is different. Different mediums of entertainment, and therefore a shite comparison.
Shino Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 There only seven basic plots in literature. By your logic, why read any new books? If they're shit you wouldn't read them anyway. Books can't be artificially improved by graphics.
Daft Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 You read books for the story, which can be very different. If you play FPS games, they are almost always very similar, even though the story is different. Different mediums of entertainment, and therefore a shite comparison. I think you just don't understand the comparison. I feel sorry for you if you simply read books for the story.
Sheikah Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 I think you just don't understand the comparison. I don't think you do, which is why you made it. :p The logic being used here is not transferrable to books. They're nothing alike.
KKOB Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 But with FF7 you're paying to play it on both your PS3 AND on the go on your PSP. Which is worth the £8 to some people for the game which is over a GB in file size. On the LBP front, the content i was talking about was things like the level creation packs, user designed level, Metal Gear Solid level pack etc. They expand the game in meaningful ways. 2D platform games have been the same since the 80s more or less. With variations on a theme to spice things up. This doesn't detract from the quality of game in the least. Super Mario World essentially perfected the 2D platformer to my mind, yet games like Braid and New SMB Wii can change the gameplay in meaningful ways to alter how we approach the genre, and to even create a new branch. At it's core it may use the same mechanics of jumping and reaching an end goal, but the variations in design and addition of new mechanics is what keeps the genre relevant. By your argument, each genre should have one game which is the original source of the later derivations. And you hold this 'original' in high regard and seem to treat all alternatives with contempt. This just seems very small minded of you.
Daft Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 I don't think you do, which is why you made it. :p The logic being used here is not transferrable to books. They're nothing alike. The logic is easily transferable. It's about commonalities, but I've got nothing to gain from your understanding so I'm not going to bother.
Sheikah Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 But with FF7 you're paying to play it on both your PS3 AND on the go on your PSP. Which is worth the £8 to some people for the game which is over a GB in file size. Same with all the other PS1 games on the PS Store; therefore a bit of a senseless comment. There's no reason other than playing with the minds of people who happen to prefer FFVII to other PS1 games. On the LBP front, the content i was talking about was things like the level creation packs, user designed level, Metal Gear Solid level pack etc. They expand the game in meaningful ways. But that's only a slice of the DLC available. Most of the DLC is just a moneygrabber, and even then, the MGS pack isn't (IMO) a big addition to the gameplay. It's more of a MGS fanboy pleaser. Expansion packs are worthwhile, but again usually overpriced. Considering you're usually getting new quests and locations but using the same game mechanics, it always seems a bit expensive to me. 2D platform games have been the same since the 80s more or less. With variations on a theme to spice things up. This doesn't detract from the quality of game in the least. Super Mario World essentially perfected the 2D platformer to my mind, yet games like Braid and New SMB Wii can change the gameplay in meaningful ways to alter how we approach the genre, and to even create a new branch. At it's core it may use the same mechanics of jumping and reaching an end goal, but the variations in design and addition of new mechanics is what keeps the genre relevant. NSMB really isn't anything to pipe on about, but Braid was good. Braid was great in the way of a puzzle/platformer game, even if it was very short. It was a fun, albeit short, game that kept me entertained, and I'd like to see more like that. Unfortunately, I still don't see it as such the breakthrough of titles like Mario 64. But it's along the right lines. By your argument, each genre should have one game which is the original source of the later derivations. And you hold this 'original' in high regard and seem to treat all alternatives with contempt. This just seems very small minded of you. No matter how it seems, it's up to developers of games within such a genre to vastly revamp their titles. There just isn't enough new in the core gameplay (I'm not talking about graphics and additional content here) to make these games fresh. FPS games are obviously the biggest sinners, with misc. titles like Pokemon also proving my point. Some people are able to trick themselves into forgetting that they're pumping lead into monster after monster (again), but I simply cannot. If I've been playing the same sort of game many times before, I'm not going to be as entertained as if it was all new to me. The logic is easily transferable. It's about commonalities, but I've got nothing to gain from your understanding so I'm not going to bother. It wasn't, thus myself and Shino pointed that out to you.
KKOB Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 But Sheikah, there are new IPs being made all the time. The MGS stuff for LBP added the paintball shooter, new switches and other gizmos which expanded the type of levels people could make. It thought it significant. What you seem to be wanting is akin to expecting every scientist to be a Einstein or Darwin, or every artist to be a Van Gough or Da Vinci, and every film to be as revolutionary as say Blade Runner or Snow White etc. I say, stop your whinging. True, crazy mind altering innovation comes very rarely. And if you're not impressed or excited by the likes of natal than i'd say you were extremely jaded.
dwarf Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 But then you enjoyed Bioshock so much and that was largley just shooting. I think you're kidding yourself if you aren't enjoying these top quality current gen games. Every different game has it's unique perks and Bioshock did it for you, probably because of the atmosphere and the presentation etc. Now I don't know what you're expecting from games anymore, as I've said these genres have proved to be very entertaining and that's why they are still getting great reviews, but if you think it's possible for them to completely ditch everything like controls and gameplay ideas then you're probably wrong until we get true 3D or spectacular motion controls. Games have evolved and they've remained as brilliant as they were in the past, and there was always going to be a breakthrough stage in the beginning, now we're making them as best as possible as well as throwing in new ideas. You would've stopped playing them by now if you weren't satisfied. Whenever you mention an original there is always a recent game that is equally as innovative for it's respective time of release.
Cube Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 Metroid Prime, Bioshock, Halo 3, Call of Duty 4, Left 4 Dead, Mass Effect, Half-Life 2, Fallout 3, Dead Space and Gears of War 2 are all about shooting things. And yet they all play completely differently and don't feel the same.
dwarf Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 Metroid Prime, Bioshock, Halo 3, Call of Duty 4, Left 4 Dead, Mass Effect, Half-Life 2, Fallout 3, Dead Space and Gears of War 2 are all about shooting things. And yet they all play completely differently and don't feel the same. Yeah you could play all of those and come out having a different experience with each, they all have their own perks and so playing them wouldn't get boring like playing multiple COD games in a row would.
Sheikah Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 But then you enjoyed Bioshock so much and that was largley just shooting. I think you're kidding yourself if you aren't enjoying these top quality current gen games. Of course I enjoy my games - otherwise why would I buy them? All I've said is what seems remarkably obvious to me. Games aren't what they used to be, and there's a hell of a lot more repetition now than a few generations ago. Don't like what I'm saying? Tough shit! Also you're just as easily whinging about the counter view, KKOB. You can all say what you think about the current gen, but it's no surprise that time after time the voted 'best games of all time' are a few generations old. Voila!
dwarf Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 I just think it's dumb complaining that there isn't as great an abundance of unique games when it was easier back then and when there is a game in each genre from this day that almost matches the innovation from back then as well as adding other avenues to the game, like online etc.
Sheikah Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 I just think it's dumb complaining that there isn't as great an abundance of unique games when it was easier back then and when there is a game in each genre from this day that almost matches the innovation from back then as well as adding other avenues to the game, like online etc. Because like I've said, you can add all you like to games. You only get that 'never seen before' freshness with very few games, but more games had that in the N64 era. Remember, this whole argument started because of your ignorance towards my views. I stated, clearly opinion, that I favoured the N64 era and its groundbreaking titles, but you found this somehow offensive to your very soul. A little more acceptance of other people's views would go a long way.
Daft Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 It wasn't, thus myself and Shino pointed that out to you. Well it really is amazingly simple. You seem to keep going on about games that have broken ground being superior to games that simply fit the mould. My point was that in regard to books, some consider that there are only seven plot variations however within that you span the whole of human literature. In some regards, there is no originality after this initial grounding has been established. Likewise in gaming you have several genres of game, for example the first person perspective game. Within that however you have things from Killzone 2 to Portal to Mirror's Edge. Within the whole scope of the genre there is a lot of variation. What exactly do you want this generation that would satisfy you?
Sheikah Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 Umm, I don't deny that there are some innovative titles this generation (again, case of people like you putting words into my mouth). Portal and Braid are good examples. What I am saying is that there are nowhere near the same amount of fresh games gameplay-wise as there were back in the 64 era. That's why the 64 era probably won't be bested for me. With books, all you have to do is change the story to produce something extremely different. With games, you have to provide a means of actually interacting with the game; and with the amount of money it costs to make a game, developers are often very reserved when it comes to creating new titles. Safe bets and the like. It's why there's absolutely loads of the same sort of game floating around on consoles these days. For this reason, it's ridiculous to compare the same logic to books, when there are several implications in creating video games when compared to writing a book. Anyone can have a good story in mind, write it, and go to a publisher. Not true with games. Going back to the standards issue (that you raised); back when Mario 64 was released, there were no standards. It created that standard. And a standard is exactly that; a stringent set of controls that are adhered to, in order to produce something of a good quality. A lot of games these days have quality; a quality carved out over generations and fine tuned. These games are enjoyable to play, but you know you've felt it all before.
Daft Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 Umm, I don't deny that there are some innovative titles this generation (again, case of people like you putting words into my mouth). I said you denied there were no innovations this generation? I think you'll find it's not me putting words in someone's mouth. After you had a go at dwarf for his rampantly insulting manner I'm finding your snide remarks much more disagreeable.
MoogleViper Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 I only have a Wii. And I'm really disappointed by the quality of games. Sure there have been some great games, (TP, SMG, Okami (althought that's actually a port)) but there are just far too many kiddy games. I've thought about buying a 360, but the vast majority of games are FPS with some Racer and sports games. I'd say out of 360 and PS3 the PS3 looks to be the best (from someone who owns neither) but it's just far too expensive. I don't want t have to pay near £300 for a console. And then £40 for each game. It's ridiculous.
KKOB Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 *stops reading thread as it has now become the "Sheikah fucks the N64 era up the arse and everything new since then is pointless and just shinier than the perfect games that developers made for the 64 -thread . . ." *
Pit-Jr Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 I cant think of a genre that hasnt been covered somewhere this gen. Anything from 3rd person action, to brain training, to rhythm games, to elephant herding, to omni directional shooters, new IPs , remakes, wiimakes, JRPG's, western RPGs, shopping RPG's, zombie apocolypse, cooking simulators, barber simulators, arcade racers, combat racers, and on and on and on. And all those original groundbreakers are available for download via VC, PSN and XBLA. This generation wins by default
Sheikah Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 (edited) I said you denied there were no innovations this generation? I think you'll find it's not me putting words in someone's mouth. After you had a go at dwarf for his rampantly insulting manner I'm finding your snide remarks much more disagreeable. Oh yes; someone who blatantly swears at people and says they use moisturiser on their penis makes more agreeable comments than me. Yeah, you're right. You're not wrong at all. Let's just openly refuse to remember his constant fanboy drivel towards Sony products for the sake of making a point against me. Great going there, Daft. Oh well, that's my lot. Some people clearly understand where I'm coming from, but others don't. For the last time, though - it's not about the variation in the first person genre. It's about a number of games heavily featuring tired old game mechanics that have been done before. Along with a number of 'big hitter' sequels that are often considered the behemoths to go for (Halo, Zelda, Pokemon, generic FPS games, GTA, racers, Gears of War). In the 64 age, the games to go for often were games like you'd never played before. So for the last time, to everyone - if you prefer the current generation, good for you. I prefer a previous generation. If you have a problem with that then that's a problem you have to sort out yourself. *stops reading thread as it has now become the "Sheikah fucks the N64 era up the arse and everything new since then is pointless and just shinier than the perfect games that developers made for the 64 -thread . . ." * Ooh, childish! Well aren't you a smasher. Especially after you've practically poured your heart out over the current generation. Edited July 29, 2009 by Sheikah
dwarf Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 You're trying to dismiss me for using fanboy arguments against you in this thread, yet there aren't any. I've used multiplatform games to convey some points, my favourite game ever is Metroid Prime and I've mentioned Wii Sports as a great innovator and you say I'm a 'Sony product' despite being open to anything as long as it's good. I'd just like some evidence of this fanboyism, because you become more and more ridiculous. Part of the reason this debate started was because you made a patronising comment against me, so obviously you weren't going to get away with it.
Sheikah Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 I'd just like some evidence of this fanboyism Since I never said it was in this topic...just 'lol'. Next Choze will be asking the same quesiton. :p
S.C.G Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 I like this current generation, ignoring the hardware issues, on the games front we have had a lot of decent titles, granted not a lot of it is truly original, heck even the games that are hailed as being original aren't really... take Little Big Planet, if it wern't for the creation element it would just be another platform game; the content that can be created with it though is pretty original even if most of it's based on currently existing games etc. But for the most past we have seen it all in previous generations, on the Wii we have Mario and Zelda which are both excellent but not ground breaking on the 360 we have Halo 3... nothing new really just everything on a larger scale and on the PS3 there's MGS which we've had before allbeit this time it's in a different location etc. As for more recently, Tales of Vesperia... an excellent game but I can't help but think back to Tales of Symphonia on the Gamecube as this seemed to be when the 3D tales of... games started to take off, since then it's still rehashing the same template but obviously changing bits here and there. I could go on but I don't feel the need to, all I can say is while this generation has provided me with a lot of excellent games, it has still failed to 'wow' me in the same way that previous generations did.
Recommended Posts