For the record, I came back to TNL just to haunt you. :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
Printable View
For the record, I came back to TNL just to haunt you. :lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
It sure seems that way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsubaki
In any case, games are longer, cheaper, and better than ever.
"mainstream gamers" are the ones that pay to fund the "essence of gaming".Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsubaki
I agree with all of that. It's just that while cheaper and better is definatly a good thing, longer is not always better. In my case, longer is hardly ever better. I'd much rather play a variety of titles than spend the same amount of time on just one game.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
I agree to a certain extent. The potential is there to be longer, cheaper, and better than ever.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
Cheaper is probably the only one that's undisputed. But I've paid over fifty bucks (Jp MSRP) for a GBA game before :cry:
Longer is also generally undisputed. But somehow, artificially increasing game length by adding unlockables, adding story which slows down the whole game which adds no value to it(Megaman Zero series anyone?), and making people backtrack here, there and back in supposedly pure action games is not my idea of gaming evolution.
Better depends on what you look for in video games. Regardless of what you like or not, you will have to say that the way games are made are different now. They have different emphases than the NES era, or the SNES/Gennie era, or heck even the PSX/SS/N64 era. If you prefer the games that are being made now, then good for you. Enjoy it while it lasts, until gaming takes another turn.
For every person jumping off the "gotta have it first" bandwagon, there is someone else jumping on. It has always been that way.
Retro gaming has gotten popular due to old farts (like me), reminiscing about old games on forums, and renewing interest in the young and old. It is no sign that current games are "lacking" anything. In fact, for the amount of hours you can get out of a new title (40-150 or even infinite (some multiplayer games)), video games are the greatest value/playability they have ever been.
I am a "wait and see" type. I learned my lesson on the PS1 (buying it the first day out), then having to suffer through some sparse 40 dollar games for a year. In fact, I just recently bought a GBA, and only bought a PS2 because of GTA 3(it currently collects dust). The good thing about waiting, is that most of these games/systems have been played millions of hours by people on the internet, so you have a database at your fingertips when it comes time to buy your discounted titles.
If the next Nintendo system (THE DS WOULD BE PERFECT FOR THIS) launched with a Mario Picross game, I would get it day one.
Day One.
Because youre dumb.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsubaki
First of all, the Mega Man series is trash. Second of all, like anything else, there's good ways to do it and bad ways to do it. Games that use unlockables as a crappy way to extend the life of the game are bad. Games that use unlockables as rewards for good play or whatever are good (often, racing games). Some games have really shitty stories that lag in the middle. This is bad. Some games have really great stories that just take a long time to finish. This is good.Quote:
Longer is also generally undisputed. But somehow, artificially increasing game length by adding unlockables, adding story which slows down the whole game which adds no value to it(Megaman Zero series anyone?), and making people backtrack here, there and back in supposedly pure action games is not my idea of gaming evolution.
Well... good developers have the same goals now that they did 20 years ago, and thats just to make a good game. While a bad developer with a bad game may focus on getting the graphics right to the detriment of gameplay, a good developer definitely would not, and that hasnt changed.Quote:
Better depends on what you look for in video games. Regardless of what you like or not, you will have to say that the way games are made are different now. They have different emphases than the NES era, or the SNES/Gennie era, or heck even the PSX/SS/N64 era. If you prefer the games that are being made now, then good for you. Enjoy it while it lasts, until gaming takes another turn.
Its just like movies. A shitty director like Uwe Boll will use lots of CG, lots of quick cuts, lots of bullet-time and overload the movie with that shit and then brag on the internet about how many cuts his scene has. A good director like Sam Raimi will use CG to enhance the storytelling. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with CG.
The one thing that has definitely changed since the 8/16-bit days is multiplayer gaming, and yea, you either like that or you dont, I think its great. But even if you dont, plenty of great single-player games come out nowadays.
Don't forget Soul Calibur--that sold the system for many people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzo
ssx (double yay)Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzo