dwarf Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 Since I never said it was in this topic...just 'lol'. Wtf is this then? Let's just openly refuse to remember his constant fanboy drivel towards Sony products for the sake of making a point against me. Actually find me some fanboy quotes.
Goafer Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 So what innovations were first on the N64/PS1/Saturn? I love retro stuff, but I still think the industry is always moving forward. This generations innovations have been more subtle. The N64 generations innovations were "holy shit! it's in 3D!", the current generation can't just make another dimention (time maybe), so it's big tricks have to be more subtle and inventive. Fallout 3s attention to detail (most corpses tell a story of how they died, every computer tells a story), Portals crazy use of space, Braids use of time, Mirrors Edges use of momentum/fight avoiding and I'm too lazy to write any more. I think if you write a list of all the original ideas of both generations, they'll stack up quite evenly. Or even in favour of the current gereration, since I still can't see any other innovation other than adding a new viewpoint to existing games for the older generation.
Daft Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 (edited) 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. Dwarf is purposely being an idiot though (I actually think it is just failed humour). You, on the other hand, are just being malicious. This quoted post being quite amusingly, the worst of the lot. Edited July 29, 2009 by Daft
Sheikah Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 (edited) Wtf is this then? Actually find me some fanboy quotes. That in regard to Daft making the point about my comments, not towards you. You have made a number of heavily-biased posts and they are all available for your viewing pleasure in your profile. Daft; I don't think he's purposely trying to be an idiot. After all, that doesn't make sense. It's clearly not working. You can call me malicious, but I shall simply reject your accusation. Now, who's for a nice cup of back on topic? Edited July 29, 2009 by Sheikah
dwarf Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 Well you're just desperately looking for ways to label me a fanboy and the profile details don't prove anything. Anyway I'm fed up of arguing with you here's the line: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coolness Bears Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 No. But I think I'm too poor for this generation! CURSE MY LACK OF MONEY! *shakes fist*
Grazza Posted July 29, 2009 Posted July 29, 2009 Huh? but why say that? I mean the game is still playable and as fun as it would be if the graphics were worst or better. To me, the DS has the worst 3D graphics I've ever seen (the 2D is great). I honestly don't consider them adequate. *Looks at Mario Galaxy, Metroid Prime 3, Another Code, Punch Out, Zelda*Hmm, I don't know, they are much more uniuque now then what they were back in the days, it still feels fresh to me (Not as much as what the SNES/N64 era did for me but it's much fresher compared to the Gamecube) Hey, I'm not saying they don't still make good games. I actually think the DS and Wii have the best games, which is unfortunate considering I don't like the machines! I thought you would be used to waiting for a new Zelda games (Heck look at the gap between Zelda ALttP and Zelda OOT) It's not the actual length of the wait that bothers me, it's whether Nintendo have made their latest hardware in a way that can benefit Zelda or not. It may have been a long wait between LttP and OoT, but that was due to the popularity of the SNES. Once the N64 had arrived, it really was quite a reasonable and understandable wait for OoT. A lot, Metroid feels even smoother then it did when using the Gamecube controller, and mario was a fun game where it was not heavily using the Wii controller, but would not work as well as it would have if it was on the normal controller My position is that the infra-red pointing is alright, but just alright. It works well enough, but it's not as good as having the leap in processing power that the PS3/360 have. I dislike any use of the accelerometers, even in Nintendo's best games. For example, flicking the remote to change visors in Metroid Prime 3 is nothing like as good as using the GameCube's d-pad. Hahahaha, I had a good laugh at this one, if Nintendo didn't care, those traditional games would be out now, all rushed all crap...kind of like how 3rd party games are with the Wii at the moment (Not some of them though, but most of them) Yeah, well, Zelda is pretty much the only big game they haven't done, and they didn't care how the motion control ruined both versions of Twilight Princess. Remember what it was like with Dragon Quest IX and Zelda PH on the DS?People thought it would fail because of the 'Oh noez touch screen going to ruin everything I loved about the series' and now have been highly praised both of them have been. What makes the Wii any different (Especially when there has been NOTHING to be shown of those 2 games yet) I'm not saying it won't work (I did say "potentially"), only that there is nothing about the machines to benefit them. Yes, the touch controls worked fine on the DS, but they weren't any better than a d-pad for the 2D bits, or an analogue stick for the 3D bits. Zelda: PH is not a great game. The controls work fine, but the fact it's on a machine (at least) one generation back from the GameCube makes it far worse than Wind Waker. Obviously I haven't played Dragon Quest IX yet, but if people don't like the graphics, honestly, that's a legitimate complaint. But a console should have settled down ages ago, it should have been when it was released. I am getting sick of people who now say 'Oh just wait until this and this is out, only then will everything start' It started when the 360 came out, there have been RPG's on the 360, there have been many games now going onto the PS3 (May I add that I find every exclusive game boring on the PS3 bah Valkyrie Chronicle and Demon Soul) Well, that's a personal matter when you think a generation gets going. I think it takes some time, even with the N64 and GameCube. Arguably, this generation has been much slower to get going because the PS3 has been less successful than it might have been. As a result, gaming has become very westernised. You've got the American HD machine and the Japanese SD machine, both very popular. We need the Japanese HD machine to take off more before it's like previous generations again.
Goafer Posted July 30, 2009 Posted July 30, 2009 To me, the DS has the worst 3D graphics I've ever seen (the 2D is great). Obviously you've never played a Saturn.
Nicktendo Posted July 30, 2009 Posted July 30, 2009 (edited) 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. I think this sums up the entire threads and the sentiments of the OP, myself and Sheikah. None of us are denying that there have been some great games this gen, but nothing has really wowed us. Nothing has had that groundbreaking feeling to it and that's perhaps why were becoming a little tired of gaming in this generation. With developer constantly focusing on features that the vast majority simply don't care about or heck, even can't afford to enjoy they've created a glass ceiling in the industry and many people, particulalry kids can't get the full enoyment out of a game. For example... Can't afford a HDTV, Can't afford a 5.1 sound system, Can't afford the crazy amount of peripherals this generation has produced, Don't have a broadband internet connection, or have limited access to DLC, Xbox 360 has a yearly/monthly online subscription charge. That's a hell of a lot of extras needed to enjoy something like Halo 3 or Burnout Paradise to it's fullest potential. Why would anyone who has no access to online even consider buying Call of Duty? This generation (strictly PS3 and Xbox here...) has been to focused on the middle class gamers who have all the money, spending power and fancy kit. The Wii is guilty of the peripheral arms race too and the gamers don't seem focused on giving us the best possible gaming experience. It's all about entertainment and apparently to be entertained people need to have all the above boxes ticked. Edited July 30, 2009 by Nicktendo
Deathjam Posted July 30, 2009 Posted July 30, 2009 I think this sums up the entire threads and the sentiments of the OP, myself and Sheikah. None of us are denying that there have been some great games this gen, but nothing has really wowed us. And this is where you guys have gone wrong IMO. This thread was wether this gen was poor. What I derive from your words is that the answer to this is NO, its not poor, just not stellar. Nothing has had that groundbreaking feeling to it and that's perhaps why were becoming a little tired of gaming in this generation. With developer constantly focusing on features that the vast majority simply don't care about or heck, even can't afford to enjoy they've created a glass ceiling in the industry and many people, particulalry kids can't get the full enoyment out of a game. Who is this vast majority. The gamers gaming from previous generations or the newcomers. If it's the gamers, then I think you find they do care. If it's the newcomers, then I think you will find that they can still afford things but possibly not care enough to do so. For example... Can't afford a HDTV, Can't afford a 5.1 sound system, Can't afford the crazy amount of peripherals this generation has produced, Don't have a broadband internet connection, or have limited access to DLC, Xbox 360 has a yearly/monthly online subscription charge. That's a hell of a lot of extras needed to enjoy something like Halo 3 or Burnout Paradise to it's fullest potential. Why would anyone who has no access to online even consider buying Call of Duty? This generation (strictly PS3 and Xbox here...) has been to focused on the middle class gamers who have all the money, spending power and fancy kit. The Wii is guilty of the peripheral arms race too and the gamers don't seem focused on giving us the best possible gaming experience. It's all about entertainment and apparently to be entertained people need to have all the above boxes ticked. I think gaming this gen has just broadened the access to gaming. At one time, 'it's for kids'. Another time 'it's for nerds'. And now its for everyone. As a kid I never used to get games myself as there was no way I could afford that stuff. It was my parents who would get them (at my request for a birthday) and this aspect has not changed. You can still quite happinly play many games offline, and there are free options too (PS3, PC *cough*). But for the older gamer out there, things have been streamlined, and more has been geared towards them. Rather than it being entertainment, I think it's all about attracting as many people to this industry as possible.
Sheikah Posted July 30, 2009 Posted July 30, 2009 And this is where you guys have gone wrong IMO. This thread was wether this gen was poor. What I derive from your words is that the answer to this is NO, its not poor, just not stellar. You have gone wrong in assuming this topic if for discussion of one or the other; ie. 'yes it is poor' or 'no it is not poor'. Naturally, with any discussion, there are shades of grey in between, and it only makes sense to discuss them. Life would be very boring if you were limited to only one of 2 opinions. You can still quite happinly play many games offline, and there are free options too (PS3, PC *cough*). Careful, that's enough to alert the McPhee radar!
Deathjam Posted July 30, 2009 Posted July 30, 2009 You have gone wrong in assuming this topic if for discussion of one or the other; ie. 'yes it is poor' or 'no it is not poor'. Naturally, with any discussion, there are shades of grey in between, and it only makes sense to discuss them. Life would be very boring if you were limited to only one of 2 opinions. Ah but this thread would be more clear and concise with an answer to the OP's initial question and less of the pointless bickering. Careful, that's enough to alert the McPhee radar! I assume he likes his PC games?
ViPeR Posted July 30, 2009 Posted July 30, 2009 Hmm well in answer to the question, no, I don't think it's been poor at all. I think some people may have too high expectations. I don't think any game ever will recreate the experiences I had with my N64/Megadrive. Mainly because a lot of the games back then provided like the 'first' experiences. First time playing a 3D adventure/shooter/racer etc. It's pretty damn unlikely anything will ever top these experiences although I still don't think a game needs to be completely revolutionary to be better than those I played in my youth. I have nearly equaled my collection of N64 games with my 360 titles. I consider the majority of my 360 games to be better than the N64 ones. So I guess this generation has been the best for me, I can see that just by looking at how much hours i've put into games like Fallout 3, Mass Effect, Halo, CnC, CoD etc. I've had just as many, if not more, awesome experiences with these games. Online especially being a major involvement in providing these as my friends have moved away in recent years. Also I think it's a little unfair to say every game is the same these days without actually playing them. Mass Effect and Fallout 3 are certainly unlike anything i've ever played anyway. I guess it's all down to opinion and personally I don't need a game to be groundbreaking in every conceivable way to keep me as entertained as the ones I played as a kid.
Goafer Posted July 30, 2009 Posted July 30, 2009 I'd completely forgotten that this generation introduced HD gaming. I kind of take it for granted now. That was a wow factor for me when I first got a HD TV.
Chris the great Posted July 30, 2009 Posted July 30, 2009 is this generation poor? in no way do i think so. games are getting higher production values, better understood in the general media, and the quality of games being relased is breathtaking. compaired to the previous generation, the GC/ps2/xbox, i feel a much better selection of games are out, and EA in particular has really improved its standards. the only negative i could really come up with is that with patches being so easy, buggy games are often released.
Shino Posted July 30, 2009 Posted July 30, 2009 The only generation that forced us to buy an expensive TV along with an expensive console to enjoy it. I'd completely forgotten that this generation introduced HD gaming. I kind of take it for granted now. That was a wow factor for me when I first got a HD TV. Welcome to PC gaming.
dwarf Posted July 30, 2009 Posted July 30, 2009 I enjoyed this generation greatly before I went HD, now its that little bit sweeter.
Goafer Posted July 30, 2009 Posted July 30, 2009 The only generation that forced us to buy an expensive TV along with an expensive console to enjoy it. Welcome to PC gaming. True, but a HD TV isn't just used for gaming so it's not like your shelling out specifically for it. I see a HD TV as a more general purchase. Gaming on a 37" (originally 42" before I downgraded) monitor is something I've never experienced on a PC. I almost wept with joy.
Chris the great Posted July 30, 2009 Posted July 30, 2009 The only generation that forced us to buy an expensive TV along with an expensive console to enjoy it. sorry, but thats bollocks. games consoles have always been very expensive, the 3DO was like $600, years ago now, and there is absolutuly no clause saying you must play using an HD TV, you can use a standard definition just as easily. lets not forget the longer console lifespan either, a higher inital price for a console that is relivent for longer seems fair.
Grazza Posted July 30, 2009 Posted July 30, 2009 Obviously you've never played a Saturn. I loved the Saturn. Good comparison though - both are 2D consoles with 3D capabilities bolted on - but the Saturn was a lot clearer. All I ask for with graphics is that they're smooth and sharp with decent textures. I honestly don't think that applies to the 3D graphics on the DS.
Dante Posted July 30, 2009 Posted July 30, 2009 I loved the Saturn. Good comparison though - both are 2D consoles with 3D capabilities bolted on - but the Saturn was a lot clearer. All I ask for with graphics is that they're smooth and sharp with decent textures. I honestly don't think that applies to the 3D graphics on the DS. You're really saying that the Saturn is better than the DS?
Goafer Posted July 30, 2009 Posted July 30, 2009 I loved the Saturn as well, but the 3D graphics were atrocious. I don't think I saw a single 3D Saturn game that wasn't ludicrously jagged. Burning Rangers was a perfect example. At least the DS's are relatively smooth. Although I guess it depends what games you compare.
Pit-Jr Posted July 30, 2009 Posted July 30, 2009 The only generation that forced us to buy an expensive TV along with an expensive console to enjoy it. Welcome to PC gaming. It sounds like you are penalizing the 360 and PS3 for supporting a wider range of resolutions? Thats like penalizing Mario Kart Wii because it supports online multiplayer, which requires an expensive monthly internet connection to fully enjoy it. Or were you waiting for Nintendo to decide when you should upgrade your telly?
Sheikah Posted July 30, 2009 Posted July 30, 2009 I'd completely forgotten that this generation introduced HD gaming. I kind of take it for granted now. That was a wow factor for me when I first got a HD TV. High definition has existed for ages on the PC. Thought I'd call this one out since you did the same for me before regarding FPS games. :p
Happenstance Posted July 30, 2009 Posted July 30, 2009 High definition has existed for ages on the PC. Thought I'd call this one out since you did the same for me before regarding FPS games. :p Yes but then PC gaming doesnt really go in "generations" like console gaming does so I dont think its relevant. Anyway for me I dont think this generation has been poor but its also been nothing special. Ive enjoyed the odd games here or there but for the most part it hasnt really helped my growing lack of interest (apart from handheld gaming which seems to be on the rise for me). With HD gaming though the one thing I havent been happy with is developers making games that pretty much can only be played on an HD tv. Now I cant afford one so I still play on a 20" SD tv and I tried the Banjo Kazooie demo back when I still had a 360 and I couldnt read the writing at all, really pissed me off.
Recommended Posts