Konami: "Here's a retread of a 20 year old game."Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Yoshi: "Fuck you and your old IP's!"
Konami: "Since you guys liked Elebits, here's another interesting new IP!"
Yoshi: "Fuck you and your old IP's!"
Printable View
Konami: "Here's a retread of a 20 year old game."Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Yoshi: "Fuck you and your old IP's!"
Konami: "Since you guys liked Elebits, here's another interesting new IP!"
Yoshi: "Fuck you and your old IP's!"
This looks to be another cheap ass shitter. Yoshi likes old Konami IPs btw. Castlevania and Gradius are among his favorites. The problem arises when they don't improve.
Joust thinks a Wii game looks shitty, you heard it here first!
You don't agree? This is not acceptable in 2007. Gears of War raised the bar.
This actually looks 1/2 way decent, aesthetically.
New IP's with interesting art direction and good gameplay potential are always acceptable, regardless of Gears kicking ass.
Honestly the first thought I had when I watched the video was, "it's always cool to see they are still making dreamcast games."Quote:
Originally Posted by Joust Williams
IBTN.
So Gears of War looked great, so what? Seriously, I'm glad Gears is an amazing viusal experience but that doesn't make the current-gen offerings any less fun. The only thing Heavy Weapon has over anything on the SNES is amount of sprites on screen at once, plus maybe a fancy effect or two.
Excellent graphics are a nice bonus, but that's it. All I need is "decent" and I'm fine. I realize the definition of what counts as decent varies depending on who you're talking to, but so long as the framerate is smooth and the art direction is fine I just don't care. Gourad-shaded polygons? Bring it!
(Actually, I'd love to see a game with a ridiculously high poly-count using only gourad shading.)
James
But why settle for decent when there is no need to? If I can have both great game play and graphics, (which I can now) why in the world would I want less?Quote:
All I need is "decent"