|
KittyEmpress posted:I never said that only Mario can be over saturated, Mr. Straw. You did say Mario stops being appealing. Pretty much anything can get unappealing to some people but still be extremely successful for others. I just got done 3D World so I finally picked up ZombiU. Will probably pick up Lego City Undercover and Unepic after that. KittyEmpress posted:As much as they are 'samey', sports games and shooters are fun. Because variety is fun. So wait, do you want variety or do you want a game that you like so you can claim it has variety?
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 19:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 06:35 |
|
|
I think the most important sentence in that post is:quote:The fact is that on any other console if you get tired of Call of Duty, you can pick up a game like Journey, or Uncharted, Infamous, Valkyria Chronicles, one of dozens of RPGs, or hey, one of a billion sports games., or Street Fighter, or one of the million PSN games that are pretty drat good. So if you get tired of one series of games, you have like a million other options to go for. And they're going to keep coming out, faster than anyone could keep up so you pick and choose anything you like. Whereas if you bought a Wii-U instead and you're sick of Mario, you have a few other choices. And if Pikmin and MinigameLand don't appeal to you, then you have even less options. Also sports games are cool, you can veg out and talk about them even with your non-gamer friends and play them online.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 20:04
|
|
|
KittyEmpress posted:They're fun games, but going through them without nostalgia is a lesson in how old games suck. I'm pretty late to the videogames party, but I found that almost all of Nintendo's back catalog is pretty great. They're fun and well made games. Plenty of older games seem poo poo to me, sure, but say Majora's Mask? Game's over a decade old and it's a hell of a lot better than games being made...now. Not many, but still. I dunno. I think you don't like nintendo very much and that's okay. EDIT: The post above me doesn't seem to realize that he's banking on potential futures for these consoles. I mean I hate sports games. And I didn't like Knack. I get bored by shooters and I've 100% completed Assassin's Creed IV. My PS4 is gameless. Where is my variety? Where are my options? If I don't like inFamous four, then what the gently caress am I going to play? Jeez, it's almost like consoles aren't worth it until they've been out for 1-2 years. I mean you guys can make snark filled posts like the one about Smash Bros being out in a year, but just because the PS4 is selling well doesn't mean it's super filled with games that I want to play. The Wii U, however, has gotten hundreds of hours from me since summer. 60+ hours on earth bound, around 90+ on The Wonderful 101, 47 hours on Pikmin 3, 32 hours on Mario 3D world, 43 hours on The Wind Waker HD. So, you know, your argument about variety doesn't mean much. By your logic we shouldn't get any of the big three because they're all gonna start feeling drought-y pretty quick, with massive gaps between releases. The PS3/360/Wii are totally worth picking up now, you have seven years of releases, and yes, even the Wii has some great third party exclusives.  DOUBLE EDIT: Because I'll probably be accused of being a fanboy for slagging on the PS4, I decided to list some reasons why to not buy the Wii U(my biggest problems with it). my whiny rear end posted:In terms of power, its on par with a console that came out six years ago. WiiFitForWindows8 fucked around with this message at 20:44 on Jan 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 20:05
|
|
|
Nintendo's problem is that they don't understand the console market, and from where I'm sitting it looks like they never actually did, all the way back to 1985. A successful console is a set top box that plays video games with a very low barrier to entry for developers and lots of developer support. Set top boxes are made by consumer electronics companies. Nintendo seems to think it's a toy company instead of a consumer electronics company. This explains their loving fascination with gimmicks, which has paid off one (1) time in the last 30 years. They think having Nintendo games or some toy like gimmick is why people buy consoles, when that is not and has never been the case. The value to the consumer is not provided by the console maker, it's provided by game developers. The weird crossover between the toy market and the video game market that they seem to want to compete in doesn't actually exist, at least not nearly enough to support a compnay of their size. Like fundamentally I don't think Nintendo understands the market they're in at all, in any way. I can't help but imagine Nintendo is completely baffled as to why their consoles are failures. They just don't get it. The other option is that they understand and the Yamauchis refuse to change, in which case they'll be taking the ship down with them. The Taint Reaper posted:Nintendo is publicly traded, they're not family owned. The company is controlled by the Yamauchi family, they own the majority of the shares. icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 20:46 on Jan 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 20:34
|
|
|
WiiFitForWindows8 posted:EDIT: Even when it comes to potential futures - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_4_games compared to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wii_U_games Look at all the '2014' or 'TBA' titles, and compare which ones have a better 'potential' lineup. The PS4 has been out for two months and has more games announced and coming for it than the Wii-U has put out in the entire time it has been out AND has announced currently. I'd say the PS4 is the better console when it comes to 'future potential'. If you like Mario and playing the same Zelda as years ago (Hey! That was one of the worst selling Zeldas ever! But now people think its amazing. Gee, Sunshine sure sucks still) and enjoy Pikmin then yes, the Wii U is good. If you like literally every game out for a console, it will be a good buy to you. But the whole point is that Nintendo can't only market to people who do like Mario/Zelda, because not enough people do to justify that. Edit: Also, Majora's Mask isn't bad, I've played it on an emulator and it's a pretty fun game. It was also the lowest selling LoZ ever at the time, which according to earlier in the thread means you are objectively wrong about what games are good, because it wasn't popular at the time. But like, gently caress Links Awakening or Zelda 1 or 2 or Super Mario Bros. They're not fun when compared to modern views on what is sensible and fun.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 20:43
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Nintendo seems to think it's a toy company instead of a consumer electronics company. Thank gently caress for this. Videogames are still toys for me.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 20:45
|
|
|
KittyEmpress posted:Even when it comes to potential futures - Link's awakening is loving awesome for a handheld game, dude. Don't even start that poo poo. And look at those titles. How many are indie? How many are cross-gen? How many are multiplat? Go for exclusives. The list gets right the gently caress smaller.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 20:52
|
|
|
WiiFitForWindows8 posted:Link's awakening is loving awesome for a handheld game, dude. Don't even start that poo poo. When talking about the Wii-U, the only exclusives that matter are "Exclusive from the Wii-U". So not -THAT- much smaller.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
Paper Jam Dipper posted:Thank gently caress for this. Videogames are still toys for me. Actually videogames are videogames they were never toys. The only time they're considered toys is if a toy come packaged with it(i.e. Skylanders). NES only got sold with ROB because right after the crash they tried to pass it off as a toy because retailers didn't want to stock videogames. But yeah they were never toys.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 20:55
|
|
|
The Taint Reaper posted:Actually videogames are videogames they were never toys. The only time they're considered toys is if a toy come packaged with it(i.e. Skylanders). Or if you're nintendo, in which case your videogames won't sell and you'll be completely unable to process why.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 20:56
|
|
|
WiiFitForWindows8 posted:Link's awakening is loving awesome for a handheld game, dude. Don't even start that poo poo. Yeah, and the whole issue Nintendo is facing, that everyone acknowledges, is that they can't get any multiplat games because their tech is barely better than a PS3/360 and has a harder processor to code for. Like holy poo poo, if you only compare exclusives and only exclusives can matter then yeah, the Wii-U probably comes out on top. Nintendo isn't bad when it comes to first party games. But the fact is that those 'multiplat' games are what makes up 80% of games in the market. And yeah, sometimes even if they don't sell the console they are what makes it worth getting. And wasn't the big defense earlier in this thread that 'Nintendo is getting Indie devs guys! Don't worry! Those long 6 month release gaps will be filled with tons of indie games!' which turned out to be false, because Sony scooped up like every indie dev? Also, as mentioned above, nearly every 'multiplatform' game doesn't include the Wii U, which basically means that it's exclusive to Non-Wii U consoles. The Wii U sucks and anyone who bought it who doesn't love every nintendo IP is probably not going to get nearly their money's worth. And it will eventually dip down to being a hundred bucks in a year or two, just like the Gamecube did.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 20:56
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Or if you're nintendo, in which case your videogames won't sell and you'll be completely unable to process why. Ah yes, the classic "Wii U is not selling now so what they are selling on 3DS and what they've sold in the past doesn't matter. Their videogames won't sell."
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 20:57
|
|
|
KittyEmpress posted:Even when it comes to potential futures - Wow, it's almost like you simply like the games coming out for the Playstation 4 rather than what's coming out for the Wii U. That's amazing...
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:00
|
|
|
WiiFitForWindows8 posted:And look at those titles. How many are indie? How many are cross-gen? How many are multiplat? Go for exclusives. The list gets right the gently caress smaller. If WiiU was receiving a steady stream of third-party multiplatform games, you'd have a stronger argument there. Instead, WiiU is being skipped rather consistently, even in the case of cross-gen multiplatform games that could feasibly be on the WiiU. So, cross-gen, multiplatform, who cares? It's still something you can't get on a WiiU.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:00
|
|
|
Paper Jam Dipper posted:Ah yes, the classic "Wii U is not selling now so what they are selling on 3DS and what they've sold in the past doesn't matter. Their videogames won't sell." Actually I think it's the classic 'Nintendo is poo poo at consoles and is almost always in last place and can't seem to understand that proprietary/gimmicky bullshit sucks'. Their handheld department is separate from their console one, and for some reason likes gimmicky bullshit like dual screens/3D, instead of more power. This does not, evidently, extend to consoles, which they don't understand. The Vita is beaten by the 3DS because it has more people developing for it and is thus bigger and more succesful, despite being weaker. Just like the Gamecube was beat by the PS2 because it had more people developing for it and thus was bigger and more successful, despite being weaker. Unfortunately, with the Wii U they missed the 'more people developing for it' part of that magic elixer of success, so it's weaker than the PS4/Bone, has less games, and also has lovely decisions throughout (lack of account system, anyone? Like holy crap that's bad)
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:02
|
|
|
Paper Jam Dipper posted:Ah yes, the classic "Wii U is not selling now so what they are selling on 3DS and what they've sold in the past doesn't matter. Their videogames won't sell." The Wii-U titles honestly do pale in comparison to their handheld counterparts. The 3DS while it does have a few technical limitations still has more stuff coming out for it than the Wii-U and it's support base is on par with Microsoft's base. The fact that this doesn't transfer over to their console division is what people have had enough of probably, you're going on 3-4 generations of consoles now that have had the same issues. The Playstation is going to be 20 years old and the PS4 is Sony's 4th generation console and Nintendo's was the Gamecube. Sony has at least learned from it's mistakes and got rid of the people who were dragging the system down.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:03
|
|
|
Astro7x posted:Wow, it's almost like you simply like the games coming out for the Playstation 4 rather than what's coming out for the Wii U. That's amazing... Wow, it's almost like you're missing my point that the Wii U has to appeal to people who don't love nintendo if it wants to not fail!!! I mean I don't care for the PS4 games all that much either, I mostly play strategy games (CK2 etc) so the PC is all I need, but it's still got a higher 'potential value' due to how many games are coming out that aren't gimmicky kids games. Also the Sims! Nintendo will fail in the console market if they just continue to 'be nintendo'. Their only hope to survive in the console market is to be the same as they were in the Gamecube era - the second console to go with when you already have a Playstation/Xbone. But their console is too expensive to justify that. And they seem to not want to be 'that' console again for some reason. The Taint Reaper posted:The Wii-U titles honestly do pale in comparison to their handheld counterparts. The 3DS while it does have a few technical limitations still has more stuff coming out for it than the Wii-U and it's support base is on par with Microsoft's base. If this thread has taught me anything, it's that Nintendo will never learn from mistakes or get rid of people because that's !!!How Japan works!!! and it will never ever change and Nintendo is assured to survive because Mario is huge and popular!!!! This is despite the fact that Sony is also Japanese, and realized they needed to change business practices. KittyEmpress fucked around with this message at 21:09 on Jan 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:05
|
|
|
Astro7x posted:Wow, it's almost like you simply like the games coming out for the Playstation 4 rather than what's coming out for the Wii U. That's amazing... If someone says they like or don't like "Nintendo games" it's a statement on how they feel about Mario, or Mario Party, or Mario Kart, or Mario Sports, or Mario 3D World, or New Super Mario Bros, and also possibly Zelda. If someone says they like or don't like "PS3 games" (and down the line, PS4 games) it's a nonsensical statement because that's like all the games by everybody. Spiffo fucked around with this message at 21:10 on Jan 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:08
|
|
|
KittyEmpress posted:Wow, it's almost like you're missing my point that the Wii U has to appeal to people who don't love nintendo if it wants to not fail!!! A lot of people I know bought Wii's because they were cheap and there were a few games they wanted. Lots of people in the good Wii U thread saying they picked up a Wii U because of the price. With the weak third party support, it's a very hard sell at $300. Half that though? Spiffo posted:If someone says they like or don't like "Nintendo games" it's a statement on how they feel about Mario, or Mario Party, or Mario Kart, or Mario Sports, or Mario 3D World, or New Super Mario Bros, and also possibly Zelda. So you can't be the person who says they like Nintendo games but not PS3 games?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:09
|
|
|
KittyEmpress posted:The Vita is beaten by the 3DS because it has more people developing for it and is thus bigger and more succesful, despite being weaker. Just like the Gamecube was beat by the PS2 because it had more people developing for it and thus was bigger and more successful, despite being weaker. In my opinion, the Vita games are too similar to the PS3/PS4 games. I can play the same game on the system I already have.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:09
|
|
|
KittyEmpress posted:But like, gently caress Links Awakening or Zelda 1 or 2 or Super Mario Bros. They're not fun when compared to modern views on what is sensible and fun.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:10
|
|
|
Paper Jam Dipper posted:A lot of people I know bought Wii's because they were cheap and there were a few games they wanted. As I said, I'd buy a Wii-U if it dipped to around 100 dollars - I've seen Craigslist ads for around that amount for a game with the Wii U, and considered getting it before going 'eh, maybe once Mario Kart comes out if it's actually good' (Spoiler: It wont be, Mario Kart is the worst kart racer series ever, and the Sonic Racing Transformed game will continue to be the best one for years) Quest For Glory II posted:What are modern views on what is sensible and fun because they must be terrible if Link's Awakening, best game in the Zelda franchise, is excluded. Generally what makes me dislike old LoZ games is the lack of direction and how you're supposed to wander around and hope you get to the right point eventually. It's tedious and annoying, and I don't know a single person IRL who hasn't admitted to using Nintendo Power to figure out how to beat them when they first played. I actually have only seen Links Awakening once, and very briefly played it, so it was a bad example for me to use maybe. Note: I did like Minish Cap and Four Swords Adventure, which had the similar combat and gameplay but with less wandering and needing a guide to figure out where to go. KittyEmpress fucked around with this message at 21:13 on Jan 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:10
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Nintendo's problem is that they don't understand the console market, and from where I'm sitting it looks like they never actually did, all the way back to 1985. A successful console is a set top box that plays video games with a very low barrier to entry for developers and lots of developer support. Set top boxes are made by consumer electronics companies. Nintendo seems to think it's a toy company instead of a consumer electronics company. This explains their loving fascination with gimmicks, which has paid off one (1) time in the last 30 years. They think having Nintendo games or some toy like gimmick is why people buy consoles, when that is not and has never been the case. The value to the consumer is not provided by the console maker, it's provided by game developers. The weird crossover between the toy market and the video game market that they seem to want to compete in doesn't actually exist, at least not nearly enough to support a compnay of their size. Are you really suggesting that Nintendo didn't understand the console market back when they reinvigorated it worldwide? The original design of the NES was a 16-bit machine with a full keyboard, but Yamauchi insisted that it should be 8 bit to lower the cost and it should have a simpler control scheme for the average user, hence the D-pad and 2 buttons. Hell, during the development of the Gamecube the former number 2 guy at the company Hiroshi Imanishi said: ”People do not play with the game machine itself. They play with the software, and they are forced to purchase a game machine in order to use the software. Therefore the price of the machine should be as cheap as possible.” They've always been about accessibility and low barriers; their problem is the relationships they've cultivated with third parties, not their philosophical stance as toymakers or their continued experiments with controller set-ups.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:12
|
|
|
Paper Jam Dipper posted:So you can't be the person who says they like Nintendo games but not PS3 games? If you say you don't like games on the Playstation it's generally met with something like "it has thousands of games, you don't like fun?"
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:12
|
|
|
Paper Jam Dipper posted:So you can't be the person who says they like Nintendo games but not PS3 games? Sure you can. You can be that person just fine, it means you like the Nintendo games and pretty much nothing else. Talking about "PS3 games" can make sense when comparing it to the 360, because then you're just talking about exclusive titles: things that the PS3 gets and the 360 doesn't. Little Big Planet, Ratchet & Clank, Metal Gear Solid 4, etc. But when you're comparing it to the Wii-U, "PS3 games" means everything the PS3 gets and the Wii-U doesn't. Which is basically everything. Especially a year down the line when the PS4 and Xbox One have some momentum. edit: Astro7x posted:In my opinion, the Vita games are too similar to the PS3/PS4 games. I can play the same game on the system I already have. I totally feel this though, it's the reason I don't give a gently caress about the Vita. This is also how I feel about the Wii-U (and the PS4 at the moment actually, but eventually this will change as more stuff comes out) Spiffo fucked around with this message at 21:15 on Jan 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:12
|
|
|
Also, I realize why the old LoZ had the gameplay it did, with wandering and figuring it out on your own being the only way to go, because I've watched LoZ 1 be beaten in like 20 minutes without glitches, and LoZ2 in like 25. It's still artificially extending the duration of the game because of technological restraits, and generally not fun.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:15
|
|
|
KittyEmpress posted:and generally not fun. You're talking about Legend of Zelda for the NES not being fun, right? I don't think I understand you as a person.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:18
|
|
|
Paper Jam Dipper posted:You're talking about Legend of Zelda for the NES not being fun, right? The NES Zeldas really haven't held up in comparison to their latest incarnations. This isn't unexpected, they're 30+ year old games. Hell the MSX Metal gear games don't hold a candle to the later Metal gear games.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:20
|
|
|
Spiffo posted:Sure you can. You can be that person just fine, it means you like the Nintendo games and pretty much nothing else. It can also make sense when comparing consoles to PC, which we'll be doing a lot of this generation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:20
|
|
|
Paper Jam Dipper posted:You're talking about Legend of Zelda for the NES not being fun, right? See, when I was a kid we had Metal Gear Solid and a PS1, that was my first gaming system. I hold no nostalgia for 8bit/16bit titles with lovely play times and bad ways of extending the longevity artificially. This means I generally think that most NES and SNES games are bad and strictly inferior to what came next, because they never had that 'wow this is amazing!!!' pull on me. And yeah, of course it's because of the limited tech, but that doesn't excuse the games being unfun nowadays. I think FF7 looks like rear end, but was like WOAH 3D when it came out. Doesn't mean it doesn't still look like rear end. Just like the NES/SNES' tech limitations excuse the games from being unfun.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:21
|
|
|
The NES at this point is being regulated to the slot that the Atari Systems and Magnavox systems once held. They're really jarring to play if you're only familiar with more modern games. Most of the NES library really wasn't all that good, and while there are some gems, 2D games haven't gone away since then and 2D games today play much better than the NES games did in 1984.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:23
|
|
|
Pankratos posted:Are you really suggesting that Nintendo didn't understand the console market back when they reinvigorated it worldwide? The original design of the NES was a 16-bit machine with a full keyboard, but Yamauchi insisted that it should be 8 bit to lower the cost and it should have a simpler control scheme for the average user, hence the D-pad and 2 buttons. Hell, during the development of the Gamecube the former number 2 guy at the company Hiroshi Imanishi said: ”People do not play with the game machine itself. They play with the software, and they are forced to purchase a game machine in order to use the software. Therefore the price of the machine should be as cheap as possible.” I'm inclined to say no they didn't really understand it then, seeing as they treated devs like poo poo and had no answer to the genesis and if sega hadn't hosed up the saturn out of sheer incompetence they probably would've beaten nintendo instead of sony. They fundamentally don't understand that developers sell consoles not console makers, and that they're 10x more important than "low barriers to entry" or whatever the gently caress. Clearly barriers to entry were no problem for the PSX, PS2 and XB360. People don't buy consoles for accessibility or whatever gimmick they've cooked up this month, they buy them for games. What you and yamauchi are describing is a toy company. I mean seriously how can you look at the yamauchi era nintendo's relationship with devs and not laugh your head off at that quote about games being important? Their relations with developers are a result, directly or indirectly, of their philosophical stance as a toymaker. icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 21:33 on Jan 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:23
|
|
|
Paper Jam Dipper posted:You're talking about Legend of Zelda for the NES not being fun, right? NES Legend of Zelda is kinda poo poo. Every single aspect of the game was done better in later games. Even LoZ2 stands up to the test of time better by being so wildly different than every other game in the series.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:24
|
|
|
KittyEmpress posted:See, when I was a kid we had Metal Gear Solid and a PS1, that was my first gaming system. I hold no nostalgia for 8bit/16bit titles with lovely play times and bad ways of extending the longevity artificially. Yeah, but it's a good game without nostalgia. The hit detection alone on Zelda is more accurate than most 3D games. Same to pong, which is before my time, but I can still have fun playing pong. Are pinball machines lacking in gameplay for you? I guess you don't enjoy movies before 1997 too?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:25
|
|
|
KittyEmpress posted:This means I generally think that most NES and SNES games are bad and strictly inferior to what came next, because they never had that 'wow this is amazing!!!' pull on me. And yet you said earlier in the thread that Fire Emblem and SMT are two of your favorite franchises, both of which have their design philosophies firmly rooted in NES/SNES game design. (Arguably to the point it is to their determent in some cases with SMT.) If you're legitimately making an argument that NES/SNES games are basically inferior to modern games you're kind of kidding yourself, like only a limited subset of modern games, or don't have a good grasp on game design. (Especially considering modern game design also includes things besides AAA blockbusters.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:26
|
|
|
Paper Jam Dipper posted:Yeah, but it's a good game without nostalgia. The hit detection alone on Zelda is more accurate than most 3D games. Pong is only fun for like 5 minutes. Hell they have pong on the PS4 as it comes free with the system. Pinball machines are an entirely different beast. Because they lack the elements that most videogames(even early ones) have.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:27
|
|
|
Pankratos posted:It can also make sense when comparing consoles to PC, which we'll be doing a lot of this generation. The PC is a pretty interesting case too. If you've got a good PC already, the exclusives stop being about "what should I get?" and more about "Should I even pick up one of the new consoles at all?" PCs are expensive, but consoles don't get Steam Sales so in a way the PC user is kind of making that money back by getting the games dirt cheap. Especially since there's so much overlap with consoles nowadays.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:28
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:And yet you said earlier in the thread that Fire Emblem and SMT are two of your favorite franchises, both of which have their design philosphies firmly rooted in NES/SNES game design. (Arguably to the point it is to their determent in some cases with SMT.) I like Fire Emblem because I like strategy games, and SMT because I like mythology and demons and stuff. My first SMT game was Nocturne. I don't think every single NES/SNES game is inferior to every single modern game, but yeah, I think modern versions of similar game types are superior to old ones. I've played modern Indie Zelda clones with the same style of gameplay that flowed better and was generally more fun. Same with Mario clones (or NSMB even!). Metroidvania games too. I'm not saying LoZ is worse than CoD, I am saying that LoZ is worse than LoZ: Modern Clone Edit: Also, the pinball game on Steam is one of my most played games, I love pinball because I can relax and care about score. There's no end game to a pinball machine except running out of quarters IRL, so there is nothing that needs to be extended. SNES/NES games had end games that are attainable in 15~ minutes if you know whatyou're doing, and thus had to be designed to artificially raise that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:29
|
|
|
You must not have played Skyward Sword then. e: I can't even think of modern non-Nintendo Zelda clones other than Anodyne. e: Also you talk about artificial longevity but you enjoy the Metal Gear Solid series, that's. something The 7th Guest fucked around with this message at 21:34 on Jan 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 06:35 |
|
|
Spiffo posted:PCs are expensive, but consoles don't get Steam Sales so in a way the PC user is kind of making that money back by getting the games dirt cheap. Especially since there's so much overlap with consoles nowadays. To me, the reason to buy a console is not cheapness but a basic level of assured functionality. Many of the modern PC games I've played have had their threads utterly and completely dominated by people having some technical problem or another, many of which render the game unplayable or just a mess. I play a lot of PC games and I've generally been fairly lucky with this but a lot of people haven't. I prefer PC gaming but I tend to default to consoles for new games simply because if I want to play a game, I don't want to budget a chunk of time for it only to be stuck waiting for a patch or fix. So to me a PC is great for picking up old games via Steam Sale but it is not a viable primary system.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2014 21:33
|
|