What really is screwing gaming... [Archive]

Hy Bound

03-26-2008, 12:07 AM

Let me preface this by saying that my wife works at Blockbuster, which, for the uninitiated is actually pretty awesome for me since we get 5 free rentals a week, be it games or movies. The downside to this is the fact that we have one car; meaning there are days I have to spend insufferable amounts of time in Blockbuster attempting to amuse myself by seeing how many movies I can correctly guess were directed by the same person.

Anyway...

So during my time spent meandering down rows of games and movies i tend to overhear conversations of some of the many people browsing through games. Usually its made up of the different grunts of the 13-17 year old emo kids that live in my neighborhood, but a fair amount of the people i see looking for video games are parents. And while I'm sure those Emo kids make a good amount stupid choices, these parents are the sole reason games like "The Ninja Bread Man" (a game I hadn't heard of until i looked it up online and saw the reviews pan it for not even registering the Wii-mote most of the time) exist. Now, I admit that there are games out there that are considered to be bad by many people's standards that I enjoy quite a bit (Dynasty Warriors for example), but for god's sake, come on people. I don't need to think twice about whether or not a movie called "Meet the Deedles" (which was directed by Steve Boyum, who also directed You, Me and Dupree, incidentally) is gonna be a good movie. It isn't even a fringe group of people buying/renting this dreck either, its an overwhelming majority.

What made me want to post this rant in the first place was what happened yesterday while I was waiting for my wife to get off work. I was looking through some of the games to see whether or not they had DiRT (they have one copy, compare that to 4 copies of Spider-man 3) when I overheard a woman talking to someone on the phone about what game to rent for her kids. She hung up the phone without deciding anything and continued to stare at the games in a way comparable to a blind, semi-retarded Alzheimer's patient choosing which Quantum Physics book to buy. After about 5 minutes of this I chimed in to say that Smash Bros Brawl or Mario Galaxy were my favorites and that many of my friends loved them more than their own children. She mumbled something like "hehehehe, cheese" and grabbed a copy of both the Ninja Bread Man and Spider-man 3 and left.

Now I understand if I somehow confused her with the quip about loving games more than children or even scared her by snapping her out of her semi-conscious stupor, but damn! My wife then told me this afternoon that the lady came back today and told her The Ninja Bread Man wasn't registering with the Wii-mote and asked if she could rent something else... She rented Mario and Sonic at the Olympic Games, which from playing it at a Target once I found was pretty dern boring.

I know this comes off as rather elitist and pompous, as someone who spends much of his time reading up on several different web-sites about even the worst games available, but its really starting to bother me that the average consumer of video games, movies, music, midget butlers, etc. only seems to look at the box art and exclaim "pimp-slap boxing! wow, and it even has graphics in it! I got's 'ta git me some o' dat!" But since it sells, more and more games are made based off of that same business-principle. Its nothing new, but I haven't really been exposed to the level of mediocrity people are expecting (or not expecting) from window-dressed games until lately.

Discuss.

Dhsu

03-26-2008, 12:10 AM

Mario & Sonic is not too bad. Fencing and Trampoline are my favorite events I think. AI's freakin' cheap at Ping Pong though. :(

cobaltstarfire

03-26-2008, 12:29 AM

Mario & Sonic is not too bad. Fencing and Trampoline are my favorite events I think. AI's freakin' cheap at Ping Pong though. :(

What sort of fencing does it have? Or is it just "fencing" with no distinction between weapons? (Sorry, I love fencing, and now I'm curious how that works in the game, and if it is just generic foil fencing or if it does epee and saber too).

If I wasn't saving for other stuff, I'd just grab it for my ds...

Um, but in regards to the OP, people are generally not too bright, as you're probably finding out with your lovely stays at the blockbuster. Can't really blame someone for grabbing non-well known games though, even if it's in ignorance...they might stumble across something pretty good after all.

Ab56 v2 aka Ash

03-26-2008, 12:31 AM

1. http://a.abcnews.com/images/Health/ht_shock_060727_ssv.jpg

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism

3. This OP promises mediocrity.

Fenrir

03-26-2008, 12:32 AM

Mario & Sonic is not too bad. Fencing and Trampoline are my favorite events I think. AI's freakin' cheap at Ping Pong though. :(

There's fencing? I just reevaluated my opinion of that game

Dhsu

03-26-2008, 12:56 AM

Haha, well I mean don't get your hopes up *too* high. Yeah, it's foil fencing, and it doesn't go past your basic lunge/parry-4/riposte (no counter-attacks...if you get parried you're boned). The concept of target area is way beyond the scope of this minigame. :P Don't expect 1-to-1 mappings of fencing gestures either. But even with these limitations, it manages to be fun when you take elements like basic advance-retreat dynamics and mindgames into account. I've only ever played against the computer, but I imagine it could get quite intense against a friend.

Edit: My bad, apparently it's epee. I also forgot you can do a generic "feint."

Bigfoot

03-26-2008, 01:31 AM

Speaking of bad games..

http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/346/50cent2ughlf8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Why...

kitty

03-26-2008, 01:58 AM

Hey, get the dads in there and they might be renting the good games for their kids. Moms with no background in games won't know what's a good game or not. Then again...Mario IS a household name...

Shadow Wolf

03-26-2008, 02:26 AM

tldr.

I think we go about this the wrong way. You wanna educate your kid in the proper paths of awesome, you pull out the SNES and let 'em cut their teeth on Super Mario World, Link to the Past, and Super Metroid. Then you bust out the Genesis and let 'em play Sonic so they understand why you won't rent Sonic Adventure 14 or whatever for them, because it's a rape of all that was once good with the world. Know your roots man.

All that's to say, if we all have to know things like the fact that Columbus discovered this rock in 1492, why don't we educate our kids in how awesome games used to was?

Moseph

03-26-2008, 03:18 AM

Here's a breakdown of what she was thinking for each of the games:

Spider-Man 3 -- "Oh, he just loved that movie!"
Ninjabread Man -- "Isn't that cuuute?"
Mario/Sonic Olympics -- "OMG current events! Must be educational!"
Super Smash Bros. Brawl -- "Rated Teen! It must be very violent!"
Mario Galaxy -- "... it says U R MR GAY on the front ..."

Overflow

03-26-2008, 03:20 AM

Avatar of Justice

03-26-2008, 04:07 AM

What confuses me is why these parents aren't...you know...taking their kid to Blockbuster and letting THEM pick the game. My mom was always happy to take me to the video store after school/work on Fridays with her so she could rent a movie for her and dad, and if I wanted one for me, a game.

As for whether people are making GOOD game choices, well I could argue Hy Bound that it's people like YOU who are ruining gaming by playing Super Smash Brothers Brawl instead of Guilty Gear XX Accent Core. It's not like you have some awesome card that means the mother should have went with your recommendation.

Bigfoot

03-26-2008, 04:11 AM

The only time my parents rented a game for me is when she planned to go there anyway. I'd write it down on a piece of paper and ask her to see that specific game was there or not.

Dopple Boppler

03-26-2008, 04:47 AM

I was at Wal-Mart (blasphemy, I know) just perusing the games, and I saw a family there who were looking for games for the Wii. The dad was looking at some generic fishing and racing games, and when the mom went to find an employee to open the case for them I was considering stepping in to recommend something else, but then the most wonderful thing happened: the Wal-Mart employee was knowledgeable about games. Upon seeing what games they were going to buy, he asked them what kind of games the family liked to play and started recommending games that didn't completely suck, like Mario and Sonic at the Olympics and Mario Galaxy. It was such a pleasant sight to see someone who was actually concerned about the customers; the guy was even asking the kids what games they liked and all that instead of just the parents. It's how I always imagined Gamestop was supposed to work, and to find that going on at some random Wal-Mart in northwestern Ohio was pretty awesome.

But yeah, the situation described in the original post is pretty common from what I've seen. It's not like you can educate everyone on the subject of good video games I guess~

Raziellink

03-26-2008, 09:15 AM

atmuh

03-26-2008, 09:19 AM

you do realize that you are playing mediocre things because youre playing wii games right

I-n-j-i-n

03-26-2008, 09:25 AM

You see them every time in video game stores, which is where I tend to hang out some days. Parents or just ill informed newbie gamer who only buys stuff based on their biases about gaming and choosing only due to their genre and not how good it really is.

I mean, Adam Sandler movies and all those "movie" movies like the Date Movie, Superhero Movie and Meet the Spartans constantly gets close to 100 million dollars each, so there is a giant market out there for gullible, shallow-entertainment consumers. It's sad but true. It's like how all the truly great movies tends to be indy-films, documentaries or entirely foreign. At least movies don't have that much of a parity in quality as games do. Truly great videogames do get recognized by its vast hardcore gamer group. Then there's the idiots who buy Wii Fit instead of spending that money for a year's enrollment in a gym instead.

anosou

03-26-2008, 09:36 AM

you do realize that you are playing mediocre things because youre playing wii games right

*hugs Atma*

Raziellink

03-26-2008, 10:21 AM

you do realize that you are playing mediocre things because youre playing wii games right

Like the game in your sig, right?

atmuh

03-26-2008, 10:40 AM

that is the only and i mean THE ONLY exception

kitty

03-26-2008, 11:05 AM

you do realize that you are playing mediocre things because youre playing wii games right

I'm seriously starting to think you don't contribute anything other than throwing your opinion out on the Wii which is tangential to the topic at best.

And as for finding out which games to play when I was younger...I had my older sister to help guide me towards the light.

atmuh

03-26-2008, 11:32 AM

i am a bad poster!

Bigfoot

03-26-2008, 11:48 AM

Pretty bad to call Mario Galaxy and Metroid Prime 3 mediocre.

atmuh

03-26-2008, 11:50 AM

mario galaxy sucked balls and i didnt play enough of prime 3 to make a judgment on it
didnt hold my interest though

Brushfire

03-26-2008, 12:05 PM

Atma <- That is what is screwing gaming.

No seriously, what would really be screwing the gaming industry?

Put too much thought into it and the terrorists will win. It's best just to count your blessings and go play some Brawl.

Aninymouse

03-26-2008, 12:19 PM

As for whether people are making GOOD game choices, well I could argue Hy Bound that it's people like YOU who are ruining gaming by playing Super Smash Brothers Brawl instead of Guilty Gear XX Accent Core. It's not like you have some awesome card that means the mother should have went with your recommendation.

Huh? Uh... huh. What?

Semantics? In MY video game discussion?

megadave

03-26-2008, 02:13 PM

mario galaxy sucked balls and i didnt play enough of prime 3 to make a judgment on it
didnt hold my interest though

Quit flame baiting dude. Also, saying Mario Galaxy sucked balls is like saying you ate a bag of delicious beef jerky and claimed it sucked. So, that makes you not just a flame baiter, but a flame baiter who is dwelling on the borderline of idiocy.

Also, nothing is killing gaming. There were shitty games back in the day, although games generally had more style and better music.

Bahamut

03-26-2008, 02:33 PM

itt Atma cements that his views on gaming are not to be ever trusted

starla

03-26-2008, 04:16 PM

More like itt everyone falls for atmas trolling

nice work

03-26-2008, 04:33 PM

mario galaxy sucked balls and i didnt play enough of prime 3 to make a judgment on it
didnt hold my interest though

I didn't like Mario galaxy and I don't like prime games...Am I considered evil now?

megadave

03-26-2008, 04:38 PM

Dhsu

03-26-2008, 04:41 PM

More like itt everyone falls for atmas trolling

nice work
More like itt if he keeps this up atma probably falls for another banning!

TheSnowStorm

03-26-2008, 04:52 PM

I really think devlopers are out there just for:

1. The quick buck deal.

2. Servicing the fanboys/girls with shitty games such as Final Fantasy 7 The Remake Part 3, ignoring the truth fans.

3. Lack of better gameplay, and the mindset that "Graphics are so much better than Gameplay!"

Now however, this is not to say that we still have great games out there like God of War, Prince of Persia, etc. I don't think gaming is going to hell, but I just think sometimes, devlopers need to think what they are doing to their games, including some of their beloved series such as Sonic or Final Fantasy.

Dhsu

03-26-2008, 04:56 PM

2. Servicing the fanboys/girls with shitty games such as Final Fantasy 7 The Remake Part 3, ignoring the truth fans.
If Square actually listened to the fans they would have made this years ago.

TheSnowStorm

03-26-2008, 05:01 PM

If Square actually listened to the fans they would have made this years ago.

Yeah, you're right, but I was . . . how can I say it . . . giving an example. It's really more of an example of how Sqaure has a stronger mindset on remaking their games than foucusing on working on original Final Fantasy games. ]

Hell, I'll buy everyone on OC Remix a stake dinner for life if Sqaure makes an original series or a new Chrono Trigger game.

Broken

03-26-2008, 05:02 PM

But they DID. Remember Dirge of Cerberus and those cellphone games?

/sarcasm

Also, lol at this thread turning into "everyone hates atma's posting habits, including atma."

Drack

03-26-2008, 05:37 PM

Yeah, you're right, but I was . . . how can I say it . . . giving an example. It's really more of an example of how Sqaure has a stronger mindset on remaking their games than foucusing on working on original Final Fantasy games. ]

Hell, I'll buy everyone on OC Remix a stake dinner for life if Sqaure makes an original series or a new Chrono Trigger game.

I think you mean Steak, and I'm holding you to that. This post is now archived.

Triad Orion

03-26-2008, 05:48 PM

...Actually, he owes us that steak dinner now if "The World Ends With You" counts as an original series.

Hawkwing

03-26-2008, 07:00 PM

you do realize that you are playing mediocre things because youre playing wii games right

Fire Emblem is not mediocre by any means, and neither is Tanks on Wii Play

Dhsu

03-26-2008, 07:16 PM

...Actually, he owes us that steak dinner now if "The World Ends With You" counts as an original series.
That game is going to rock so hard.

Penfold

03-26-2008, 07:38 PM

That game is going to rock so hard.

Yeah, apparently it's pretty awesome. A friend in Japan got that just after release there, and said it was great.

Also, there are a lot of really good games for Wii, though the majority of titles released for it are quick cash-in/crap titles just like we saw on the PS2 last gen. End of discussion, now let it go people.

Arek the Absolute

03-26-2008, 07:43 PM

TheSnowStorm

03-26-2008, 08:09 PM

lack of appreciation for true beauty like the mother series
thats what is screwin gaming

no instead lets focus on a mediocre series like final fantasy and make omg popular with its horribly boring stories when compared to shit that is just deep as hell like mother

So true. There was a rumor that Nintendo never released a fully translated Famicom (NES) Mother game because they had second thoughts such as "Oh, we won't sell this game" and "Mother won't be as popular as Final Fantasy III (Famicom)".*

Mother's storyline, it's very mature, but also on the light-hearted side as well! The original Mother/Earthbound Zero will have a speical place in my heart as one of the most original RPG games of all time.

*They say the same thing about Fire Emblem that "Oh won't sell well in America". Yep. They said that about Fire Emblem. (However, they did the right thing by not importing the series to America in the 90s. Play Fire Emblem 4: The Genelogy of the Holy War.

This game came out during the height of Mortal Kombat, scapgoating video games, the ESRB, and Nintendo's "Kid Friendly" image. I swear to you if Fire Emblem 4 came out in America during the 90s, it would got a whole lot of shit. Incest, rape, child muder/children hunting and the works!)

The World Ends WIth You do seems like a good game, very original . . . wait . . . an ORIGINAL game series from Sqaure Enix?! Holy shit!

Dammit, I guess I do owe every that steak dinner. Wait, they also need to make a new Chrono Trigger game! Only THEN I shall buy every a steak dinner with fine wine!

Gollgagh

03-26-2008, 08:20 PM

Looking forward to it.

Bahamut

03-26-2008, 08:37 PM

More like itt everyone falls for atmas trolling

nice work

Unfortunately, he's serious about these views.

Malaki-LEGEND.sys

03-26-2008, 09:09 PM

you do realize that you are playing mediocre things because youre playing wii games right

I cannot stress this fact enough.

I fucking love you.

Bigfoot

03-26-2008, 09:29 PM

Halo 3 sucks. It's been ruining gaming for the last 10 years.

Wipomatic

03-26-2008, 09:48 PM

Halo 3 invented bad games

Conan The Politician

03-26-2008, 10:13 PM

An odd theory:

Most people think of video games as something that makes their children sit in front of the screen for hours at a time without doing anything else constructive. That being said, perhaps parents are trying to scare their children away from gaming by giving them horrible titles, and rapidly reinforce the notion that gaming is bad.

The chance of this being reality is highly unlikely. Thompson moves in mysterious ways.....

SetzerGabbiani

03-26-2008, 11:20 PM

lack of appreciation for true beauty like the mother series
thats what is screwin gaming

no instead lets focus on a mediocre series like final fantasy and make omg popular with its horribly boring stories when compared to shit that is just deep as hell like mother

Well, Mother was never imported after Mother 2 (Earthbound) because EB came in when RPG's were not that popular and games like Chrono Trigger made it look outdated. So Ninty was like "We aint riskin our monies on a coin toss of a game". Yet, they still acknowledge its popularity stateside 10+ years after its release, wtf?!.....

Why Nintendo did not import Mother 3, yet added in Lucas in Brawl stateside (pissing off all Mother fans, myself included, to no end) is beyond me

I say we begin a thread were we all send a letter to Reggie Fils-Aime over at Ninty each and every month (or week) until they announce it's localization!

/offtopic

Money talks, crappy games win. Let it be and smile at the fact that you're not wasting money on garbage. Or actually educate the masses somehow. Either way if you're not part of the solution, yousa part of the problem :D

"The More You Know...." *

Bigfoot

03-26-2008, 11:28 PM

They probably are just too lazy to translate it.

Bigfoot

03-27-2008, 05:53 AM

The story for 50 Cent: Blood on the Sand

"...what's inspired the title is, 50 and G-Unit are putting on a sold-out performance somewhere in a fictional Middle Eastern setting. This is where the 'blood on the sand' comes in. They put on the performance; the people are pleased, but the concert promoter stiffs them and doesn't give 50 and G-Unit their payment.

So, of course, 50 isn't going to leave until he gets paid, so he hassles the concert promoter, [saying] if he doesn't come up with the money now, there will be consequences. And instead, the promoter offers him a very valuable gift - something that's valuable to this particular country - a diamond encrusted skull.

So 50 gets the skull, and as he's about to leave this war-torn country, when they're ambushed and the skull is taken. They escape the ambush, but they're without the skull. So 50's motivated to get what belongs to him. So basically, throughout the game, he's trying to track these people down and find out who they are and why he was ambushed."

...sigh

Brushfire

03-27-2008, 06:06 AM

Overflow

03-27-2008, 06:28 AM

No, but thinking they suck just because they don't match your preference is kinda stupid. I'm not accusing you of this though. It's like saying some kind of music sucks just because it's not your kind of music.

There's a difference between not like something and saying "Whoa that sucks lol".

You know what I mean?

*hugs Megadrive*
I can't stand it when people say a game's terrible and never give reasons. Plus, not many games are actually bad; what really matters is what people think of them. Of course, there are the exceptions (*CoughKing's Knightcough*)
How people decide what a makes a game good or bad depends on their personal ideas of fun. For example, I love mario galaxy, prime 3 and Zelda TP because of the gameplay, atmosphere and story (respectively). If someone likes to hack people to bits and as such enjoys games like Gears of War or God of War, fine. Just don't go saying that mario games are bad because there's no violence in it.

Brushfire

03-27-2008, 08:03 AM

If you read my column (or contributions or whatever) on Epicgaming.us, I always give reasons why a game sucks and I try to be as objective as possible when I do.

Yeah sometimes my mind might wonder and I go a wee bit harsh on something cause my favorite subject (Rock Band) is not in it but I try to be middle of the road.

Dhsu

03-27-2008, 09:10 AM

With special guest stars Run DMC, The Beastie Boys, Flava Flav and Raffie as the end boss.
Ring ring ring ring ring ring ring...DIAMONDSKULL PHOOOONE

Critical Hit

03-27-2008, 09:42 AM

I say we begin a thread were we all send a letter to Reggie Fils-Aime over at Ninty each and every month (or week) until they announce it's localization!

I can't tell if you're intentionally referring to it or not, but either way, here you go. (http://starmen.net/ebsiege/)

SetzerGabbiani

03-27-2008, 08:14 PM

I can't tell if you're intentionally referring to it or not, but either way, here you go. (http://starmen.net/ebsiege/)

I Didn't know that existed, so thank you for that link. To clarify though, what I was suggesting was that we make an official thread here as well, and that the willing members of OCR get together and do something similar to EB Seige, maybe go a little bit farther and send them remixes or things like that since we're all so wonderfully creative =P. Better yet, members who are going to or live near events going on like E3 and protest in front of their booth until we're escorted out...think of the publicity! (see? I'm creative) XD

But back to the topic at hand, I also agree (I cant find the quote right now) that people who just put down games for an illogical reason are exponentially stupid. I have several friends like that who go and find any little reason to put down a game when someone says they're buying it. It's their fucking money, let em go out and spend however the hell they please. If you don't like it stfu cause for fuck sakes nobody cares to hear you bitch and moan about what somebody is doing with THEIR life!

I won't tell them that cause I don't want to hear them bitch and moan about how the truth hurts and now I'm not a good friend cause I didn't sugarcoat the truth and be all buddy buddy and just listen to them sound like idiots and spew nonsense....

Did you like hearing me rant about what irritates me? Probably Not, which is exactly my point.

Okay End Rant.

Overflow

03-27-2008, 08:26 PM

SetzerGabbiani

03-27-2008, 09:50 PM

Anyone can say they don't like a game, and that's fine; they don't need to back up why they don't LIKE something. They should be perfectly free to say something like: "I don't know, I just didn't really like that movie/game/etc.. It doesn't interest me."
HOWEVER, when a person says something is bad, then they NEED to give reasons why, or else they will just come off as ignorant trolls.

and BTW, "mario doesn't look realistic" isn't a reason. ;)

Yes, I was going to edit my post when you took the words out of my mouth. It's not like my friends would say "I don't know, I just didn't really like that movie/game/etc.. It doesn't interest me." They actually try and talk each other out of buying a game just because, to quote one friend in a discussion, "Too Mainstream"..... seriously, he didn't like one friend buying BioShock because it was "Too Mainstream", because the person buying BioShock didn't like the slow pacings and cult following of Shenmue (which is a legit reason imo, its a slow yet deep game) yet he loves his little emo Sephiroth and FF7... And another friend of mine won't like anything just because 2 friends of his like it( or he at least tries to put up a front, because he borrowed BioShock from them, and this is not the BioShock buying friend in the preceeding example btw.). The things that come out of peoples mouths sometimes, I swear...

atmuh

03-27-2008, 10:05 PM

silly goose people

Eulogic

03-27-2008, 10:25 PM

Nothing is screwing gaming. There have always been bad games, there will always be bad games, and people will always like bad games. Just look at how many people are defending Mario Galaxy.

03-27-2008, 10:27 PM

Overflow

03-27-2008, 10:41 PM

Nothing is screwing gaming. There have always been bad games, there will always be bad games, and people will always like bad games. Just look at how many people are defending Mario Galaxy.
...
I guess there's nothing we can do about people like this.
no defense, I no listen

Ab56 v2 aka Ash

03-27-2008, 10:45 PM

Mario Galaxy had a few flaws, but bad game? Get the fuck out trolls

atmuh

03-27-2008, 11:15 PM

i could give reasons but this is not called why i hate mario galaxy
i stated VALID reasons why its not that good a while ago

SetzerGabbiani

03-27-2008, 11:30 PM

i could give reasons but this is not called why i hate mario galaxy
i stated VALID reasons why its not that good a while ago

But to support my claim I would appreciate some of the reasons why you hate mario galaxy. Therefore it should not be off-topic, but as a supplement to my statement.

If not that a link to your previous postings of your review, please.

cobaltstarfire

03-27-2008, 11:39 PM

Nothing is screwing gaming. There have always been bad games, there will always be bad games, and people will always like bad games. Just look at how many people are defending Mario Galaxy.

Oh yeah, it can't possibly be because they actually enjoyed playing the game.

(I've never played it myself so I can't really pass judgment on it one way or the other).

Bigfoot

03-28-2008, 12:04 AM

Mario Galaxy was bad because it was in space, right?

atmuh

03-28-2008, 12:05 AM

bigfoot wins
thread over

The Dennis

03-28-2008, 12:16 PM

What? Space makes EVERYTHING ten times as awesome. Just look at Jason X or Leprechaun 4!

This country is full of people with bad taste. We listen to music with 3 notes in it, we watch people 'survive' for 30 days in a place people likely already live, and we make sure shitty parody movies with no original ideas get almost as much box office success as their real counterparts.

Why would our taste in video games be any different? In 2006, fucking Madden '07 was the best-selling video game in the US. That's right... you have been able to get what is essentially the same game on Apple II, Macintosh, SNES, Sega Genesis, Nintendo DS, Nintendo Gamecube, Nintendo 64, Windows PC, DOS, PlayStation, Xbox, PlayStation 2, PlayStation 3, Sega Saturn, Wii, Xbox 360, and the PSP. Since '89. And in the four short months it was available in 2006, it outsold everything else released that year. I knew a guy that had the PS2 -and- XBox versions of the fuckin' game.

THAT'S what's screwing gaming.

DJ Mighty

03-28-2008, 01:58 PM

Most of us have been playing games most our lives. That being said i cant remember the last time i played an original game that blew me away. Not saying there is no good games, I Loved Prime 3 and Zelda:TP and i think Mario Galaxy and Brawl are really fun and addicting games. For 360 i basically only Play COD4, Fifa 08 and im trying to get back into Eternal Sonata. But other that Eternal Sonata, each one of those games are not original. Square needs to come up with a new original game other than Final Fantasy. Or put some more time and effort in making good sequels to there other games(Ex:Mana,Chrono Trigger) Nintendo needs to do the same.

Also, a lot of the bigs games now are FPS. Other than COD4, i dont really play them and i Despise Halo 3 to no end.

Thats just my opinion, but i also dont own or played alot of games for my 360 that seem to be quite popular.

Malaki-LEGEND.sys

03-28-2008, 02:13 PM

sephfire

03-28-2008, 02:37 PM

I don't know. The 360 easily has the strongest catalogue of games so far. It's true that most of the strongest offerings have been first party or multi-platform, but there are some serious gems to be had. Much more than can be found on competing consoles anyway (as of now). I hope the other two catch up eventually.

While there are a bunch of great games out there for it, I doubt we'll see any great "sucker punches" of games like the plethora of 3rd party stuff that came out for the PS2. Now THAT was amazing. Hell, it's STILL amazing.

Very, very true. I'd love to see that kind of 3rd party output somewhere this generation.

anosou

03-28-2008, 03:20 PM

I'll say that there really isn't alot of 3rd party support for the 360 right now, and that's kind of pissing me off. It seems like only the big gunners are taking chances with the system, and even then most of the offerings are pretty standard.

While there are a bunch of great games out there for it, I doubt we'll see any great "sucker punches" of games like the plethora of 3rd party stuff that came out for the PS2. Now THAT was amazing. Hell, it's STILL amazing.

PS2 is and was the best console ever made. The sheer ammount of great games for every taste (and the price of 'em!) is just incredible! I still have about 60 titles I haven't finished :D

Also, it requires a lot of manpower and money to develop to current-gen consoles, especially PS3, so companies has to be big as fuck or get financed by doing really crappy license titles.. Sad but true. There's no place for the smaller developers in the big-boy league. I'm putting my trust in XNA here, hoping that some indie developers gets noticed by M$ and gets financed to do a full-price-in-the-store-AAA-and-whatnot title for the console.

Now that PC is getting worse and worse as a gaming platform (I mean, windows live? Now there's no reason to play :D) I really have no idea where the world is going. On the bright side gaming is bigger than ever and there are tons of companies waiting to get their titles published, hopefully someone will somehow make their console more avaliable and cheaper to develop for and make "the PS2" all over again. My money's sadly on Microsoft. I hate Microsoft, I'm an Apple-geek and I never owned an Xbox but the 360 is a capable console that's relatively easy to handle since it's almost like a PC, if I've understood it correctly. It's also very popular in USA and Europe and Xbox Live is probably the best online service right now. Let's hope M$ has a couple of tricks up it's sleeve.

Malaki-LEGEND.sys

03-28-2008, 09:39 PM

Also, it requires a lot of manpower and money to develop to current-gen consoles, especially PS3, so companies has to be big as fuck or get financed by doing really crappy license titles.. Sad but true. There's no place for the smaller developers in the big-boy league. I'm putting my trust in XNA here, hoping that some indie developers gets noticed by M$ and gets financed to do a full-price-in-the-store-AAA-and-whatnot title for the console.

Which is another reason gaming is being screwed in my view.

Systems are too bloated.

I mean, maybe I'm missing something, but most of these "next-gen" games could have been made on last generation's hardware. Why did we bother expanding? I'm pretty sure we're pretty damned close to as far as we're gonna get in terms of 3D graphics(visual people check me on that), so why the push? All it's doing is putting more financial pressure on developers that would otherwise make some seriously great games. The PS3 is a disaster in that regard. Way too much power. Do we need it? Metal Gear was doing just fine on the PS2, so was Final Fantasy.

Of course, the guys behind games like this are truly trying to make a next-gen experience(we hope), but in my opinion, for everyone else, just stick with something simpler. Example of this:

Devil May Cry 4. Was there any reason that this HAD to be on the next gen hardware? Any reason at all? As far as I can tell, it just looks somewhat prettier, but everything they did for it could have been done on an earlier gen system. So why didn't they just do that?

03-28-2008, 09:45 PM

Devil May Cry 4. Was there any reason that this HAD to be on the next gen hardware? Any reason at all? As far as I can tell, it just looks somewhat prettier, but everything they did for it could have been done on an earlier gen system. So why didn't they just do that?

Because Capcom gets $60 bucks instead of $50 bucks.

Dhsu

03-28-2008, 10:45 PM

Soma

03-28-2008, 10:59 PM

I don't know. The 360 easily has the strongest catalogue of games so far. It's true that most of the strongest offerings have been first party or multi-platform, but there are some serious gems to be had. Much more than can be found on competing consoles anyway (as of now). I hope the other two catch up eventually.

Very, very true. I'd love to see that kind of 3rd party output somewhere this generation.

Yeah, I've been waiting for that for a long time. Remember how many good RPG's there were during the Playstation era? The ps2 was pretty much the same. There really aren't many games I'm looking forward to other than sequels (GTA, MGS, FF13.)

03-28-2008, 11:09 PM

There's a huge leap in graphics quality from the last generation, ESPECIALLY for the PS3. GameCube and XBox graphics can still be pretty decent, but it hurts me to look at most PS2 games now. Not to mention this is the HD generation. Some people may not care, but I personally am tired of staring at a blurry mess.

If a game has a good story, gameplay, and characters I tend to not care about graphics...480p isn't that bad anyways...GO BUY Beyond Good & Evil NOW.

TheSnowStorm

03-28-2008, 11:09 PM

There really aren't many games I'm looking forward to other than sequels (GTA, MGS, FF13.)

Sequels are what pissing me off in gaming as well. I don't mind them if the change the gameplay or do something original, but stick with the main focus of the first game, but now, I'm sick of it.

Malaki-LEGEND.sys

03-28-2008, 11:31 PM

There's a huge leap in graphics quality from the last generation, ESPECIALLY for the PS3. GameCube and XBox graphics can still be pretty decent, but it hurts me to look at most PS2 games now. Not to mention this is the HD generation. Some people may not care, but I personally am tired of staring at a blurry mess.

Yeah, but that's graphics. Graphics aren't the end all be all of next gen. If they were, you wouldn't have bought a Wii.

Takero

03-29-2008, 01:00 AM

What's really scary is that original games that could be a great game just get ignored - not just by the people who have no clue about games in general, but, often, also by people who are somewhat knowledgeable on games - because they're afraid that it's just gonna be one of those crap games that take up 4/5 of the game isle at walmart. Granted, a lot of people can actually read, but its still a big problem. So now we have a great game sitting on the shelf, while people keep coming and getting the trash games. Now the companies quit making the great games that real gamers want to see.

Dhsu

03-29-2008, 01:25 AM

Yeah, but that's graphics. Graphics aren't the end all be all of next gen. If they were, you wouldn't have bought a Wii.
Well, obviously the Wii has a different objective than the other next-gen consoles. For the 360 and PS3, graphics *are* the end all be all of their success (except for *maybe* better online service). They even have the same controllers for crying out loud. :P

The Damned

03-29-2008, 01:46 AM

DarkeSword

03-29-2008, 02:08 AM

Yeah, but that's graphics. Graphics aren't the end all be all of next gen. If they were, you wouldn't have bought a Wii.

Hey man they are called video games for a reason you know.

Reed Spacer

03-29-2008, 02:30 AM

I think the real problem is, when you get right down to it, almost every game out there has effectively been done before, whether as an effective carbon copy of a previous game or 'like game X but with Y'.

Remember way back when all games were new games?

Bigfoot

03-29-2008, 05:43 AM

You know what's really screwing up gaming? People here are talking about games rather than playing them.

You are all responsible. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go blow up some motherships to the music of Yoko Kanno.

Playing them doesn't effect that. Not buying them and pirating the games.. now that is screwing up gaming.

Dhsu

03-29-2008, 06:04 AM

I-n-j-i-n

03-29-2008, 07:28 AM

Sequels are what pissing me off in gaming as well. I don't mind them if the change the gameplay or do something original, but stick with the main focus of the first game, but now, I'm sick of it.

I appreciate the sentiment, but I tend to disagree with that in general. Sequels don't need to overhaul that much to be compelling in most cases and I've been satisfied with them since the 80's. Why break what's not broken?

Also, I think gamers are a bit more open to lesser known games than people assume. Persona has been a constantly been a huge hit despite it being sold strictly for the hardcore crown, Suikoden have since been a lock for being ported over, games like Rock Band and Guitar Hero basically came out of nowhere and it's not a phenomenon and a bunch of smaller games are doing very well on the download services. Then there's the freakish successes of something like Puzzle Quest too, which it deserves.

There always were the underappreciated games since the NES days and just because they're out there, it doesn't mean the whole system is broken. And someone said DMC4 should've been for the older generation consoles? But why? I think the HD leap is big enough for most publishers, especially the forward thinking (at least technically) companies like Capcom. Also, harp all about how the new generation of hardware comes in and nudges the old one out, but that's how the market moves. Not just the developers/publishers, but gamers in general tends to move forward with the hardware. It's not some evil conspiracy. Also, it's business. Get used to it.

DarkeSword

03-29-2008, 03:07 PM

Chiwalker

03-29-2008, 04:07 PM

When looking at Nintendo games, I would agree that "more and more games are made based off of that same business-principle." However, after the bright refreshing light of valve shined on me, I realized that some games could still be original. Based on intimate personal relations and satisfying story lines, games like Half Life (2 etc.) and Portal show a whole new idea put into gaming. Of course some people may disagree with me, but it was because I had never heard of any valve game before I played it, and my low (or lack of) expectations contributed the the enjoyment that I got out of them.

Of course, I still play Mario and Zelda games because they were the originals, and they have the right to keep the same game idea for that reason.

sephfire

03-29-2008, 04:17 PM

I had a magazine a few months back that counted and listed the new IPs published by every big game publisher between 2006-2007. If I recall, Nintendo was one of those with the fewest. I want to say Ubisoft had the most. I need to find that article again.

Nintendo has such a great track record for quality, it really would be nice to see what they could do with more new projects.

kupernikus

03-30-2008, 07:10 PM

I dont think sequels are always that bad. Take FF for example, lets face it the name is there to let us know its their front line RPG for the year, but at the end of the day they aren't really sequels. They don't follow the same story lines, exist in the same universe, or really carey a whole lot over from each other except for cid, chocobo's and small efeminate male heroes. :-)

Sports games, well lets face it all they do year after year is change the roster, but unless a game is letting me recreate my high school years, I wanna know the players and teams. I find it hard to understand why people find the most approachable and easy to grasp games so evil.

Whats ruining games is video game snobs themselves. A lot of you (yes you there's a ton of videogame snobbery to be had on this site and I am no exception) Forget that games are meant to be fun. I understand the critic mentality but people forget that through all the hype through all the bull, its a hobby, its fun, but its a hobby. Its funny when I hear people cry and complain about a game because its not realistic enough, or not realistic looking and they they talk about how much they love (insert RPG or platformer here.)

SynthesizedStampede

03-30-2008, 08:22 PM

Nintendo has such a great track record for quality, it really would be nice to see what they could do with more new projects.

EXACTLY. Nintendo puts all their focus into their main series, when all I wonder is what if they put that much effort into making new franchises? I mean look at Pikmin, that series is friggin' awesome (in my opinion of course)! I'm not gonna lie, I love some Mario spinoffs such as Mario Kart and Mario Strikers, but man it would be pretty awesome for Ninty to bust out with something completely awesome and new and put their whole reputation behind it.

The Coop

03-30-2008, 08:44 PM

The lack of Thunder Force VI, Phantasy Star V, and Einhänder II is what's screwing gaming.

Reed Spacer

03-30-2008, 08:46 PM

Everything is going to be new when nothing comes before it. :roll:

You know what I mean: most companies are doing certain types of games 'because they sell well' or 'because they're popular now' as opposed to trying something unique.

Maco70

04-07-2008, 05:34 AM

"The Ninja Bread Man"

What the hell?

IbanezNinja

04-07-2008, 05:39 AM

The lack of Thunder Force VI

hey whats this

THE TRUTH

Brushfire

04-07-2008, 06:12 AM

What the hell?

It's a real game, believe it or not. In fact there is an entire shelf dedicated to it right next to the unsold copies of Reggie "Half Dollar" Jackson's Bulletproof.

Rambo

04-07-2008, 06:24 AM

I mean look at Pikmin, that series is friggin' awesome

Agreed. That series was incredible. More original ideas couldn't possibly be a bad thing.

TheSnowStorm

04-07-2008, 04:29 PM

. More original ideas couldn't possibly be a bad thing.

I agree as well. But original ideas are good if done right. It do piss me off that original games are overlooked at times (Mystical Ninjas Starring Gemon, Prince of Persia, Beyond Good and Evil) for shitty games (Final Fantasy VII, Halo).

I also want to see video games that actually reflect on real life and unsung heroes. Or tragic heroes who want to do good, but have that one flaw that will led tto their downfall.

megadave

04-07-2008, 09:04 PM

I’ll tell you what’s wrong with gaming. It’s not the 80’s or early 90’s anymore. That, my friend, is the problem. Back in the day, you could have a game featuring a magical cheeseburger protagonist on a quest to find the 8 magic pieces of shit, and it could sell a million copies. That’s right. Guess what else? Licensed games could be good, especially Disney games. In fact some of the best games back then stared Disney characters and mascots for frikkin’ soft drinks. People bought good games, regardless if the character starred Bart Simpson or Johny Frikin’ No-Name. In fact, we would rent games, and if the game sucked, we would tell everybody else and they would avoid buying the game because it sucked. Or just trade the game in by lying that it didn’t work.

Also, we didn’t have this casual VS hardcore crap. You were hardcore if you rocked at video games, not because you’re an unoriginal, unsocial turd who embraces nothing but Final Fantasy remakes and first person shooters. That’s right - hardcore was beating Mario without warp zones, not unlocking “achievements” on X-box Live. You want an achievement? Beat Mario in six minutes. Try to get through Ninja Gaiden (the real one, on NES) without continuing 60 times. That is an achievement. And we walked uphill both ways.

The music? Don’t even get me started. There’s some great music around now. The sound quality is 2000% percent better, but back in the day, popular music was more melodic, funky, and random. So that translated into the games systems, which had limited sound chips, and for the composers to make uncompromisingly awesome tunes. Mega Man 2? You can’t make anything like that game’s soundtrack these days. It was the special combination of time-specific elements that allowed such a strange creature to exist, much like how giant dinosaurs were able to exist when the earth had more oxygen.

And you know what else? Mega Man wasn’t a tiny little troll who ran around on the internet. He wasn’t a blonde-haired she-male who took all the limelight. He was a badass built by Dr. Light, and he saved the whole world, not just the internet, and not the moon. Mega Man wouldn't let the Earth be destroyed in the first place (to me, the series doesn't even exist after X3). Link wasn’t a pretty elf. He was an ugly, red-haired elf who was way too bad ass to need a horse or a highly incorrect opinion that Ocarina of Time is the best Zelda game. And why would you waste time fighting soldiers in stupid Tom Clancy World War 2 games when you could fight fucking space alien French fry people and turtle-demons instead? If I wanted to battle soldiers in other nations I would join the frikkin’ army. But I don’t want to. Need a hand fighting those space aliens bent on devouring the human race? Sign me up sir. Contra? Yes, Contra. Also, the Belmonts weren’t androgynous girly-men, and only 1/5 of Final Fantasy characters were.

And the graphics were cool too. Sure, they were lacking detail and sharpness, but again, like they did with the music, the game developers had this thing called “creativity”, which became a part of the endangered species list in the mid to late nineties. The games had graphics that made you look out into the background and think “Whoa. I wonder what it would be like to go back there”. It was like being on drugs, which I quit around the same time when games started becoming more mainstream. Unfortunately, a bunch of presumptuous developers forced almost everything into blocky 3-D models and a few years later, I wandered into the new 3D backgrounds and I said to myself “That’s all there is here?!!” By forcing everything to go into 3d, that sense of wonder was destroyed.

Sure, there are some cool games out there now (especially Rock Band), and there were crappy games back then, I’m just really just telling guys how it comes from a classic gamer’s point of view, and in a half-sarcastic manner as well.

Also, our games' advertisements were honest. The ad was the main character of the game.

Malaki-LEGEND.sys

04-07-2008, 09:19 PM

Truth. 10 characters.

TheSnowStorm

04-07-2008, 10:16 PM

Fanboyism (Or Fangirlism, if you wanna be pollically correct) is also fucking up gaming. I remember when fanboyism wasn't a big deal in my youth. But with the internet, it became a bit of a promblem.

I also remember when folks loved gameplay over graphics during the 16-bit era. We didn't care about if the graphics look beautiful. We just care if the game was fun.

DarkeSword

04-07-2008, 10:26 PM

Fanboyism (Or Fangirlism, if you wanna be pollically correct) is also fucking up gaming.

Fanboyism and fangirlism are different things, IMO, and I personally think that fangirlism is way more detrimental to gaming than fanboyism.

Case-in-point: Shadow the Hedgehog.

Malaki-LEGEND.sys

04-07-2008, 10:28 PM

Fangirlism scares the living shit out of me.

Lancer

04-07-2008, 10:36 PM

The whole fan system does screw things up enough. More to the point that a group of guys or girls or both, think that say Sephiroth was a greater villian than say Kefka, Golbez, Ghaleon, or any other villian that was up there in names. They just take it to so much extremes that it overshadows characters that truely where better. But thats just me. Then again, I'm a Kefka and Ghaleon fan.

Sobou

04-07-2008, 10:46 PM

Fanboyism and fangirlism are different things, IMO, and I personally think that fangirlism is way more detrimental to gaming than fanboyism.

Case-in-point: Shadow the Hedgehog.

QFE/T.

One of the main causes of "what's screwing gaming", imo, is the sheer amount of games out there that are tied to movies and tv shows.

Now I know they've always been around, from the Disney games to the Cool Spot (7-Up mascot) games, but the difference between those and the ones nowadays is that those were at least still quality games, and fun to play. How many people can say that they've enjoyed a pure Disney game made in the last five years compared to the ones for the SNES/Genesis? (PURE, KH doesn't count).

I'm just sick of looking down rows of games, looking for something worth playing and seeing hundreds of copies of stuff like Pixar movie tie-ins (Open Season, Over the Hedge, A Bee Movie, ect), kiddie TV show/toy tie-ins (I want to strangle the person who came up with Bratz), or games that are just plain horrible (50 Cent's "Bulletproof").

Back in the SNES/Genesis days, even if a game was nothing more than an advertising stunt by a company (like the Cool Spot games), they were still good. Nowadays? We get Yaris. Which is absolutely horrid, btw.

That's my two cents.

The Coop

04-08-2008, 02:54 AM

What's really screwing up gaming? I'll tell ya, and this isn't aimed at megadave. His timing just worked out as it did, that's all :-). But what's really hurting it, are the comparisons to other eras that were worse than they're made out to be.

Some of the nostalgia driven go on about how games were more creative, inventive, musically better, and more immersive. A lot of those same people push aside the majority of games today without having played many of them... skipping over the Oddworld: Stranger's Wraths, Oblivions and Ninja Gaiden Blacks of today, while praising the Vectormans, Castlevanias and Lufias of the past. They conveniently forget all the horrid movie licenses in the pre-8bit --> 16bit eras, and the bad arcade ports and original IPs that came along with them. And somehow, they think needing more than 3-4 buttons to play a game is totally unnecessary, and only screws things up.

Listening to them, it seems as if the pre-8bit --> 16bit eras where somehow better, when in reality, they weren't. Games were still expensive, bad titles still out numbered the good, and the ads and box backs still did everything they could to make even the worst game sound awesome as they suckered the kids and parents reading them. What's also rarely brought up, is that there was no Internet to find out what games were good or bad, and painfully few magazines to offer up plentiful reviews... which made it really easy to be stung by any one of the many bad games of the day. If you were lucky, you found out about good and bad games from a friend who already tried a given title. Otherwise, you found out the hard way, after you got home with your new $30-$60 game... a risky crap shoot that still exists today. And of course, there was the whole "seal of approval" debacle that meant nothing in terms of quality, but that's another story. But now... now we have a lot more at our disposal.

We've got plenty of gaming magazines, websites, and store rental locations. We can even find out if a game is worth it, days before it hits the store shelves. The old days seem better, because we literally didn't know about half of the shitty games being released. It wasn't a flood of quality titles back then, despite how some try to paint the picture.

Of course, things aren't really any better with the newer generation of biased gamers.

If you listen to some of the oldschool-lacking folks today, you'd think the days of old were utter garbage. You get the feeling that unless it's in polygons, free roaming, and littered with special effects, it's not worth playing. For them, long running franchise's like Sonic, Mario and Gradius don't exist before the 3D versions. And while they focus on the Half-Life 2s and World of Warcrafts of today, they completely shove aside the Sonic 2s and Demon's Crests of years gone by. They go on about how much more immersive and creative games are thanks to their being in full 3D, and prattle about the high production values put on the cinemas, voice acting and music. They scoff at the idea that games don't need a z-axis to have huge worlds and plentiful secrets, and that you don't need realistic samples to create memorable melodies. They also can't seem to believe that one button really can be all you need for a game, as that's just too simplistic... a stance they also associate with the older games in question.

The truth is, both sides make good and bad points about their respective games being discussed. The problem arises, in that they refuse to see the good and bad of their own era's games, as well as the games from another era. It's almost like a foreign concept for these people to believe that while a lot of today's games are quite different in appearance and gameplay compared to the games of yesteryear, they all still share many common links at their cores... with one very common link amongst it all. Past and present, there are good and bad games, with the bad always outnumbering the good. Neither era can be defined by just one or the other, and that gets lost along the way.

So if people want to know what's hurting gaming today, in my opinion, it's the polygon lovers who can't get past the pixels, and the pixel pushers that refuse to see what modern games have to offer. Both groups dismiss mass quantities of games in one fell swoop with little knowledge of them, and that ain't good. It's that "My gaming stuff's better" mindset that does the damage (on multiple fronts), and keeps the games worth owning from getting the attention they deserve.

Edit: Fleshed out a couple small parts.

DarkeSword

04-08-2008, 03:08 AM

What's really screwing up gaming? I'll tell ya, and this isn't aimed at megadave. His timing just worked out as it did, that's all :-). But what's really hurting it, are the comparisons to other eras that were worse than they're made out to be.

Some of the nostalgia driven go on about how games were more creative, inventive, musically better, and more immersive. A lot of those same people push aside the majority of games today without having played many of them... skipping over the Oddworld: Stranger's Wraths, Oblivions and Ninja Gaiden Blacks of today, while praising the Vectormans, Castlevanias and Lufias of the past. They conveniently forget all the horrid movie licenses in the 8bit and 16bit eras, and the bad arcade ports and original IPs that came along with them. And somehow, they think needing more than 3-4 buttons to play a game is totally unnecessary.

Listening to them, it seems as if the pre-8bit --> 16bit eras where somehow better... when in reality, they weren't. Games were still expensive, bad titles still out numbered the good, and the ads and box backs still did everything they could to make even the worst game sound awesome as they suckered the kids and parents reading them. What's also rarely brought up, is that there was no Internet to find out what games were good or bad, and painfully few magazines to offer up plentiful reviews... which made it really easy to be stung by any one of the many bad games of the day. If you were lucky, you found out about good and bad games from a friend who already tried a given title. Otherwise, you found out the hard way, after you got home with your new $30-$60 game... a risky crap shoot that still exists today. And of course, there was the whole "seal of approval" debacle that meant nothing in terms of quality. But now... now we have a lot more at our disposal.

We've got plenty of gaming magazines, websites, and store rental locations. We can even find out if a game is worth it, days before it hits the store shelves. The old days seem better, because we literally didn't know about half of the shitty games being released. It wasn't a flood of quality titles back then, despite how some try to paint the picture.

Of course, things aren't really any better with the newer generation of gamers.

If you listen to some of the oldschool-lacking folks today, you'd think the days of old were utter garbage. You get the feeling that unless it's in polygons, free roaming, and littered with special effects, it's not worth playing. For them, long running franchise's like Sonic, Mario and Gradius don't exist before the 3D versions. And while they focus on the Half-Life 2s and World of Warcrafts of today, they completely shove aside the Sonic 2s and Demon's Crests of years gone by. They go on about how much more immersive and creative games are thanks to their being in full 3D, and prattle about the high production values put on the cinemas, voice acting and music. They forget that games don't need a z-axis to have huge worlds and plentiful secrets, and that you don't need realistic samples to create memorable melodies. And in truth, they just don't seem to realize that one button really can be all you need to use.

The truth is, both sides make good and bad points about their respective games. A lot of today's games are quite different in appearance and gameplay compared to the games of yesteryear, despite sharing a lot of common links. However, both share one very common link. Past and present, there are good and bad games, with the bad always outnumbering the good. Neither era can be defined by one or the other. And it's this "My gaming stuff's better" mindset that does the damage, as it only results in one thing... it keeps the games worth owning from getting the attention they serve.

So if people want to know what's hurting gaming today, in my opinion, it's the polygon lovers who can't get past the pixels, and the pixel pushers that refuse to see what modern games have to offer. Both dismiss mass quantities of games in one fell swoop with little knowledge of them, and that ain't good.

No coop, I'm pretty sure that it's fangirlism.

Sobou

04-08-2008, 03:15 AM

As awesome and detailed as Coop's post is, I have to agree with DarkeSword.

The Coop

04-08-2008, 03:31 AM

DarkeSword

04-08-2008, 03:44 AM

Fangirlism is the latest craze for game companies to latch onto... like the whole "platformer mascot with attitude" and FPS thing before it. And like them, it'll lessen as games become more and more "me too" in that area, and developers decide to do something different. The mindset I talked about however, has yet to fade away since the 2600 came up against the NES. In fact, I'd be willing to wager it's gotten steadily worse with each new generation of hardware.

Oh I know. I actually agree with your post (which was very nicely written).

But there's nothing new about fangirlism. It's been steadily destroying the the gaming fandom landscape for 15 years or more.

BluefoxIcy

04-08-2008, 03:46 AM

Are you saying consumers are dumbass sheep?

I think we have a position for you in our marketing position. You sound like you have just the insight we need to continue to deliver our most advanced product to the drooling retarded public.

DarkeSword

04-08-2008, 04:14 AM

I think we have a position for you in our marketing position.

A position in the marketing position? WTF are you talking about?

Proofread. Make sense.

Monobrow

04-08-2008, 04:18 AM

You know what's wrong? NONE OF YOU HAVE EVER PLAYED BRANDISH.

BRAAAAAAAAAANDISH!

GO PLAY BRANDISH!!!!

Shadix

04-08-2008, 04:23 AM

I will admit, unwary parents and grandparents are the whole reason there is a market for mediocre Licensed movie games.

"aww that was a cute movie lets get the game", I see this logic all the time at Gamestop.

Synchronicity

04-08-2008, 06:59 AM

Just want to say that Coop makes an excellent argument.

megadave

04-08-2008, 02:14 PM

Ya know, those people could just make the licensed games good like they often did in the heyday, and they would sell more copies of said games. Crap, if there was a Happy Penguin game that was getting major praise, even I would feel inclined to play it.

04-09-2008, 08:08 PM

imo, is the sheer amount of games out there

QF Super massive edit of your post to state my opinion.

I was going through the virtual console store last night, looking to buy a game (ended up being Actraiser, btw) and noticed that about 80% of the games listed were all fun. I could literally pick just about any game there and be guaranteed a good time. That is what I think gaming needs.

Doulifée

04-09-2008, 09:51 PM

3. Lack of better gameplay, and the mindset that "Graphics are so much better than Gameplay!"

Ergo, go rent a movie. :<

Toadofsky

04-09-2008, 10:24 PM

I know this comes off as rather elitist and pompous, as someone who spends much of his time reading up on several different web-sites about even the worst games available, but its really starting to bother me that the average consumer of video games, movies, music, midget butlers, etc. only seems to look at the box art and exclaim "pimp-slap boxing! wow, and it even has graphics in it! I got's 'ta git me some o' dat!" But since it sells, more and more games are made based off of that same business-principle. Its nothing new, but I haven't really been exposed to the level of mediocrity people are expecting (or not expecting) from window-dressed games until lately.

Discuss.

Honestly, I don't care anymore. Some games have intrigued me just by the box, even movies have done the same. BUt that's just the consumer for you, especially if they're uninformed on the stuff. How can you blame the lady if she doesn't know anything about video games? It's commendable you at least tried to help her.

DJ Mighty

04-09-2008, 10:39 PM

I dont know, maybe every one is looking into this too much. Maybe we view games differently now then we did 10 years ago because we we 10 years younger. We viewed things different. Think about how many games you play in a 10 year span. With having experienced so much it gets harder finding something new or something that sucks you in. Games like Zelda MArio and even Final Fantasy kinda help take you back to those good times because you fell in love with them 10 years ago.

I dont know, just how i see it some times. Makes me think of when i was 19 and going to Clubs was the greatest thing and each new club was awesome. Now almost 25, i can barely stand clubs and i would prefer just a nice bar to have fun in.

Then again maybe im talking out of my ass, but i have 10 min left at work and i dont feel like starting a new design.

drummermg131

04-10-2008, 12:12 AM

Basically, what the opening poster is saying, is that people judge games on their boxcover?

When i was a kid, i did the same thing. Did boxart look cool? I wanted it. Thankfully, i always made the right decision, and ended buying Mario Kart, or Zelda or something.

I love buying games on a whim. Like, as in completely random purchases, simply because you had a severe craving to buy a new game and made a trip to the local gaming store to hopefully find something worthwhile. My brother and I used to do this all the time in the N64/PS1 era, with amazing results. I don't do it that much these days because I don't have the money or the time. But, it's still great when you stumble across a game you were never planning on buying for sure that turns out to be awesome.

But getting back on topic, I get so annoyed seeing all the crap games on the shelves, even the crappy games that could very well have been decent games. Drives me nuts. Video games just aren't the way they used to be, and this is one big reason why my N64 and SNES are in a very easily accessible location...in my closet, in plain view.

Brushfire

04-10-2008, 07:22 AM

I love buying games on a whim. Like, as in completely random purchases, simply because you had a severe craving to buy a new game and made a trip to the local gaming store to hopefully find something worthwhile.

I did that once, and it didn't turn out so well. Wangan Midnight (http://epicgaming.us/?p=73)for the PS3 is the worst arcade port ever created.

I-n-j-i-n

04-10-2008, 07:35 AM

The only times I 'buy on a whim' is when the games are $5 to $10 and have basically lost all market value. Suikoden 4 (the supposedly one of the worst Suikodens ever) and I'm having fun with it. Though I'm still bitter I paid full price for Suikoden 3, which has one of the most shallow and noneventful stories in RPG history. Then there's the cheapo Persona 3 edition that is coming out soon and Odin Sphere. Lots of cheap PS2 games without a lot of risk.

Also, some purchases like Godhand actually turned out to be one of the best games of the year and IMO it even trumped Clover's other effort: Okami.

Sobou

04-10-2008, 07:02 PM

Suikoden 4 (the supposedly one of the worst Suikodens ever) and I'm having fun with it.

If you bought S4 for more than $5 ~ $10 then I pity you for wasting your money like that. I'm a huge fan of the Suikoden series, and I have to say that 4 was the absolute worst of the game, hands-down. The only redeeming quality about it was the return of Ted, but even that doesn't garner enough awesome to bring the game from "suck" to "decent".

3's story wasn't all that bad, but it was my least favorite (after 4). The three mains were just too generic, and even though Thomas is the Tenaki Star, he doesn't have any of their traits. But at least 3 had a good different combat system that relied more on strategy and what characters you had over any of the other game's pick 'n click. The individual skills and ranks actually made using different characters in 3 fun and useful, unlike 5's skill system where it just ended up being "find the strongest sob and abuse them to no end". There was no reason to use at least 1/4 of the roster, simply because of the skill system.

To actually post on topic, though, I very rarely buy on a whim. However, there are a few stores around here that sell their used games extremely cheap, so I usually luck out when looking for a new release. Got Final Fantasy XII for $10 a couple months after release, and the item was practically brand new, for example.

I won't delve into the unknown very often though, because of two reasons. One, because I'm very conservative about my money or two, because the game usually ends up being horrible (Ninety-Nine Nights, Lunar Legend, Mega Man Battle Network 4, Beyond the Beyond, ect.). Sucks to have only fifty bucks to your name, and go and drop twenty on it for something you're going to want to turn right back around and sell.

TheSnowStorm

04-14-2008, 04:58 PM

A lack of-

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d4/Phantasy_Star_II.jpg

And dammit! I mean the good Phantasy Star games, not the bullshit 3-D "OMG!!!! CARD GAME" Phatasy Star!

I-n-j-i-n

04-14-2008, 08:54 PM

If you bought S4 for more than $5 ~ $10 then I pity you for wasting your money like that. I'm a huge fan of the Suikoden series, and I have to say that 4 was the absolute worst of the game, hands-down. The only redeeming quality about it was the return of Ted, but even that doesn't garner enough awesome to bring the game from "suck" to "decent".

It was around $9. I do know the thing is bad relative to truly great Suikoden versions, but it's passable. Then again, I have very low expectations of Konami to actually make good RPGs nowadays. Suikoden 5 was the exception, even if it had a whole slew of problems of its own.

3's story wasn't all that bad, but it was my least favorite (after 4). The three mains were just too generic, and even though Thomas is the Tenaki Star, he doesn't have any of their traits. But at least 3 had a good different combat system that relied more on strategy and what characters you had over any of the other game's pick 'n click. The individual skills and ranks actually made using different characters in 3 fun and useful, unlike 5's skill system where it just ended up being "find the strongest sob and abuse them to no end". There was no reason to use at least 1/4 of the roster, simply because of the skill system.

The plot was bad IMO because it teased at a lot, but in the end, it was a MAJOR disappointment. Maybe even bigger than the 'oops, your universe wasn't real!' in Star Ocean 3. Mainly because the three stars really never had any tension between them as it should have. If the game allowed me to choose sides and kill the other stars, then that would have been downright epic, but that never happened. It became the typical 'every good guys combine forces even if all logic says they should MURDER eachother'. That just irked me to no end. All the potential and logic wasted. I never saw another RPG drop the ball quite that way.

As for the mechanics, Suikoden 3 had its share of game-breaking characters too, namely Juan and Emily just dishing out 10,000 points of pain not long after you get to obtain them and letting them hit on enemies a dozen times before they get a chance to even attack. I do think some parts of Suiko 3 were fun mainly the side missions and maybe even the bath-house/theater parts and other cute little aspects. Sometimes exploiting the game engine was fun at times too, mainly because some characters are so overpowered at what they do.

To actually post on topic, though, I very rarely buy on a whim. However, there are a few stores around here that sell their used games extremely cheap, so I usually luck out when looking for a new release. Got Final Fantasy XII for $10 a couple months after release, and the item was practically brand new, for example.

I won't delve into the unknown very often though, because of two reasons. One, because I'm very conservative about my money or two, because the game usually ends up being horrible (Ninety-Nine Nights, Lunar Legend, Mega Man Battle Network 4, Beyond the Beyond, ect.). Sucks to have only fifty bucks to your name, and go and drop twenty on it for something you're going to want to turn right back around and sell.

I wouldn't say I'm stingy with game-money, but I am on the same page as far as unknowns go. I usually don't buy games that have really bad reputations like Ninety Nine Nights or Battle Network games. I usually go for games that are said to be downright cliche but maybe decent in their own conventions. That or a lot of supposedly great games that happens to tout the $15 price tag.

Though nowadays, I do that a lot for Xbox Live Arcade games where it may be cheaper at times (like Puzzle Quest. Amazing game).

04-14-2008, 09:10 PM

Brushfire

04-15-2008, 11:48 AM

Slow battle system, shitty story, no thanks.

Sounds kinda like Lost Odyssey

Avatar of Justice

04-15-2008, 04:57 PM

I enjoyed the hell out of Suikoden III's story.

1. Luc is awesome. He's probably my favorite video game villain period. Killing millions of people to free humanity from being bound by destiny. I'm down with that. Although his actions would've been horrible, his intentions were noble. Good villain.

2. The trinity system or whatever it was called was cool. It was neat to see the same events through the eyes of different characters. I personally found this to be terribly clever.

3. The politics were pretty good.

I hope they make a Suikoden VI that takes place in the Holy Harmonia Empire since the Harmonians seem to be the bad guys of the series. The thing I really appreciate about Suikoden is that instead of like most RPG's where you travel to a castle town or something and are supposed to expect that to be the entire frigging nation, each Suikoden game takes place in a different country, making the world seem more realistic as far as the way the cities and nations are laid out.

I'm a sucker for stories that deal primarily with nations and politics, so that's why Suikoden's storylines really appeal to me.

PhiJayy

04-15-2008, 06:12 PM

*hugs Megadrive*
I can't stand it when people say a game's terrible and never give reasons. Plus, not many games are actually bad; what really matters is what people think of them. Of course, there are the exceptions (*CoughKing's Knightcough*)
How people decide what a makes a game good or bad depends on their personal ideas of fun. For example, I love mario galaxy, prime 3 and Zelda TP because of the gameplay, atmosphere and story (respectively). If someone likes to hack people to bits and as such enjoys games like Gears of War or God of War, fine. Just don't go saying that mario games are bad because there's no violence in it.

So true. This post actually makes alot of sense, I personally like playing, all of the mascot games like Mario, Zelda, and Sonic, but when people say that these games suck just because Mario doesn't gush out blood when he's attacked, really makes no sense to me.

Mario gushing out blood would be pretty weird anyway.

Sobou

04-15-2008, 07:25 PM

Slow battle system, shitty story, no thanks.

The reason it was slower than the other games is because they took a different direction when they made S3's battle system. Unless you were fighting a boss, the only thing you had to do in the other four games was just select the "Auto-Fight" feature and wait for battle to end. Random encounters in S1 and S2 took like what, half a minute max, on average? S4 took even less, but they took the S1 battle system and made it kid-friendly. It went from easy to goddamn dumb.

S3 slowed it down, but it was both their first foray into PS2-land and an adjustment to a more strategy-based system. Stuff like adjusting where the runes hit and when they hit, the pair-system and how units depend on one another, ect, caused you to think for two seconds before you spammed Lv. 4 Rage/Thunder Rune spells and accidentally hurt your party as much as your own.

However, I've got to agree. There have been more than enough times in S3 when all I need to do is Auto-Fight and it still takes awhile for the battle to end. I stopped at like, the beginning of Chapter 2 - Hugo in my second playthrough and I haven't touched it since.

The plot on the other hand... Well, it didn't make sense that Hugo didn't want to shank Chris after what happened, and Geddoe just didn't seem to matter to anyone. He was just there with no purpose other than "lol true rune". However, throwing Luc in there as the main villian with motivation like he had was an awesome move.

I wish they just had a Suikoden "build your castle" game.

That is what I would like to play.

This is an awesome idea and I fully support it. If there's anything the Suikoden series has down, it's the concept of a home base and they've done incredible in this for four of the five games (the boat was different, but not all that innovative. They just compartmentalized everything.) One of the drives for playing the games for me was to find all 108 so I had a complete castle that had all those little things to discover in it.

I-n-j-i-n

04-16-2008, 07:42 AM

I love the hell out of first 2 suikodens, played maybe 40 hours of the third (pretty much forcing myself to do it through the last 37 hours), and decided to call it a day on the series. Slow battle system, shitty story, no thanks.

I wish they just had a Suikoden "build your castle" game.

That is what I would like to play.

I still tolerate playing them except Suikoden 5 was genuinely good. It's actually my favorite behind Suikoden 2.

Sounds kinda like Lost Odyssey

Lost Odyssey was great. Suikoden 3 and 4... weren't. Also, the slowness of Lost Odyssey at least was attributable to its overall difficulty. Suikoden games were never 'difficult' IMO.

I enjoyed the hell out of Suikoden III's story.

1. Luc is awesome. He's probably my favorite video game villain period. Killing millions of people to free humanity from being bound by destiny. I'm down with that. Although his actions would've been horrible, his intentions were noble. Good villain.

Yeah, Luc was great, except it made Sephiroth seem like a main cast of a TV sitcom in comparison to how often Luc showed up, which was about never.

2. The trinity system or whatever it was called was cool. It was neat to see the same events through the eyes of different characters. I personally found this to be terribly clever.

I actually agree. It's just that the great big battle and conflict between the Trinity characters never went anywhere. They allied themselves in a snap of a finger which just seemed silly to me. With such politics involved, you'd think it'd go three different ways, but it didn't.

3. The politics were pretty good.

For first half, I would agree. Second half, it's the usual 'big bad enemy! KILL HIM'.

I hope they make a Suikoden VI that takes place in the Holy Harmonia Empire since the Harmonians seem to be the bad guys of the series. The thing I really appreciate about Suikoden is that instead of like most RPG's where you travel to a castle town or something and are supposed to expect that to be the entire frigging nation, each Suikoden game takes place in a different country, making the world seem more realistic as far as the way the cities and nations are laid out.

I'm a sucker for stories that deal primarily with nations and politics, so that's why Suikoden's storylines really appeal to me.

Maybe they should make another trinity system but with more conflict and maybe even different endings. With so many characters, you'd think there would be different outcomes every damn time you finish with certain characters. The baby-paste story of Chrono Trigger gets 20 endings and Suikoden can't? That's illogical.