The PS3 has a nice gui. Far far better than the 360’s fucking mess of shit. It also has Super Stardust HD. It also has Blu-Ray. No, that’s not me arguing for it. That’d be a pretty unimpressive argument.
The 360 has a grand total of zero good games if you define a “good game” as a game I’ll derive more than 20 hours of enjoyment from. It has a flurry of mediocre games like Gears of War, Halo, NHL 08, The Darkness. Which are fun while they last. The problem is they don’t. Actually you know what? I think the 360 also has the newer Romance of The Three Kingdoms games. +1.
I agree with whoever said PS3ers are banking on FF13. I disagree with MGS4 though. People will pick it up if they already have a PS3, but no one will buy a PS3 for it. Unless they’re RETARDED.
I’m not really impressed with any of the new consoles. Which I guess is why I don’t have any. That and money. But I suppose if I was gonna get one… Fuck I can’t even choose. They’re all so horrid. It would probably be a PS3 though, if only for the ultra-hyped letdown FF13 is probably going to be.
The 360 isn’t awful I guess… but it’s like… eating the same microwaved chef Boyardee for the 75th night in a row. It’s all the same shit we’ve all played before. It’ll satisfy our hunger for a little while but it will never, ever actually get us excited. And the Wii is like eating squid or something. It’s a new experience for you but it tastes like shit nonetheless. And to continue my food analogy, I guess the PS3 is kinda like… cake without icing. It’s decent on its own but no one is going to eat it without that little extra something. Which it may or may not ever get.
It is, thank goodness. I’m also tentative regarding NiGHTS because Sonic Team is developing it. Given their history of Sonic Adventure 2, Sonic Heroes, and Sonic the Hedgehog 2006, I don’t have much faith in them.
My problem with the 360 is that it lacks anything aside from console FPS games. My being incredibly sick of FPS games notwithstanding, I’m convinced that the only way for a FPS to not have awkward controls is to either 1) Be on the PC or 2) Be Metroid Prime 3.
Hades right though. The 360 and the PS3 are just Version 2.0 of their respective systems. It’s nothing new except for more realistic graphics. Who the hell cares about realism so badly? If I wanted realism, I wouldn’t play videogames to begin with. I at least give the Wii credit for experimenting with something new.
The 360 has more than just FPSes that are pretty good, just to name a few: Dead Rising, Saints Row, Mass Effect, and Blue Dragon. Those are just a handful of exclusives that are great for the 360 and are exclusive.
I’m also saying this to Hades, but your thread is more recent so I’m quoting yours.
Just like the PS2 is of the PSX and the SNES was of the NES and the Genesis of the Master System and the GC of the N64. The new systems allow for more than just better graphics, they allow for bigger worlds, better AI, more interactive environments, new game options. A game like Dead Rising couldn’t be done on the N64 or PSX and would probably be really slow or not as cool on the PS2 or XBox. In many Wii games so far, the motion sensing is more of an elaborate button than a new game function.
Also, I like the Wii, but so far I haven’t played many games that really need the Wii controller and couldn’t be done on a standard controller. So far Mario Galaxy and Paper Mario are the only games that I’ve seen really start to use the Wii controller, but even then it is somewhat limited in functon. MP3 is a little slower than the previous MPs, but is still a great game and I’ve been having a blast with it so far. MP games aren’t FPSes though, they are adventure games. If you go into it expecting a Call of Duty or Halo, you will be sorely disappointed. MP games have more in common with Zelda than Perfect Dark or Resistence.
Just because they’re big name games doesn’t mean they’re great. I played Saints Row back when it was called Grand Theft Auto, and I found Blue Dragon mediocre. Either way, that’s four games it’s hard to deny that the majority of the 360’s market consists of FPS games, which I’ve already stated my dislike for.
Yes, only back then new graphics were actually interesting when videogames were a relatively new frontier. People have already seen expansive and interactive environments, new game options, better AI, whatever. What we’re seeing now is basically small improvements over each original game. You aren’t going to see any more revolutionary games like Super Mario 64 by just improving graphics and environments.
Okay, that’s like saying people don’t need DVDs because you can watch movies on tapes. All the people who chose the Wii - probably after making fun of the remote at least once - obviously disagree with your opinion of what constitutes “using” the Wii controller. The whole idea is something more interactive, and swinging your hand to swing Link’s sword in TP is more interactive than mashing a button.
The problem with the 360 and the PS3 is that they’re both banking on their super bling bling technology. That’s okay for a while, but sooner or later one of them is going to push the other into the shade with better technology.
I’m getting pretty sick of people saying that the Prime games aren’t FPSes. From Wikipedia:
"A first-person shooter (Commonly called FPS) is a video game that renders the game world from the visual perspective of the player character and tests the player’s skill in aiming guns or other projectile weapons. "
That sounds like Metroid Prime 3 to me. Constituting your definition of what makes an FPS, technically Deus Ex is an “adventure game” and not an FPS.
New technology is starting to give us diminishing returns. It’s not that it isn’t important, it’s just much less of an impact now because things are already bordering real. It’s also dangerous to our perceptions of reality. I find myself avoiding anything with a screen lately because it really does alter your perception of what is real and important in life.
MP games are definitely FPS btw. It’d take a really misguided person to not know this.
Something also worth mentioning is the fact that not only do we not need more realistic games, but blockbuster games as well. Where games like Assassin’s Creed are left as mere half-games just for the sake of the narrative. Where true innovation is often looked down upon in favor of merely tacking on some feature that wasn’t there before due to the risks involved in creating a massively big budgeted game.
Smaller developers can’t get a break because it takes alot of resources to make a game. Unfortunately, many of these games are overlooked because they lack the marketing muscle to give gamers a reason to buy their game, and they go out of business. Even well known developers suffer from this problem like Interplay having to sell off its Fallout series. And many new and old series simply wither and die in this over crowded industry.
Also games shouldn’t take more than 50 hours to play through. It’s hard enough for someone like me to be able to come up with enough time to play through these massive games once, but most of the time I don’t have time fighting the twelfth hidden boss for some item that would be alot more useful if I could’ve used it on the guy I’m fighting for it, and the ending boss himself in his many forms can be trashed in less time and effort than the first of these numerous hidden bosses.
Basically I would like to see games made more simply or at least with more emphasis on making a fun game rather than a flashy one.
Oh yes, because Wikipedia is never wrong about anything. Then why is it that Prime gams are listed as action adventure (both Gamespot and IGN) games on game review sites? Hmmm? I guess the Wikipedia writer knows more than several game sites. Besides, you can’t deny that MP has more in common with Zelda than it does with Halo. If you try to play MP games like Halo, CoD, Doom,
The Saints Row comment is just retarded. Otherwise all FPSes are Doom and platformers are Mario.
I didn’t deny that the 360 has a large number of FPSes, I just said that it has a good amount of other quality games and listed some examples.
As for only listing 4 games, I said a “A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES.” I’m not going to list every game and those were just a couple of exclusives that came to mind. I also never said that the N64 didn’t have some innnovative gams, hell it brought many 2d games to life in 3d. Hell, I never even mentioned the N64, but you are saying I’m wrong on it.
The DVD/VHS analogy is bullshit. DVDS has clear advantages over VHS and also I just said that the Wii controller hasn’t really been utilized and the games don’t use the controller in a way that isn’t possible on a conventional controller. I’m not knocking the Wii, I’m just saying that its games aren’t being as innovative as the system, which is a bit of a problem when the other systems look better, but play the same. MP3 again, great game, but it doesn’t really need the Wii controller or do anything special with the Wii controller.
Also, just because something isn’t revolutionary, doesn’t make it bad. Hell, look at computers recently, they haven’t changed much in the last 20-30 years, but do you really want to go back to a computer you had in the early 90s?
Besides, why hate the 360 so much, it isn’t really competing or taking away from your beloved Wii. The PS3 and 360 are making the same kind of games, so they are really competing against each other. They capable of the same types of games and get many of the same games, so yeah, you might not want to buy both.
That is pretty true about diminishing returns on the systems.
Oh yes, because Wikipedia is never wrong about anything. Then why is it that Prime gams are listed as action adventure (both Gamespot and IGN) games on game review sites? Hmmm?
Because most games on this planet can be categorized under more than a few genres. Most FPSes are action/adventure. Secret of Mana is action/adventure and also RPG. Games like Ninja Gaiden are action/adventure/rpg/platform/puzzle. That’s fucking five. For one game. Genres are arbitrary titles that make it easier to find other games like the games you already know you like. Calling Met Prime an FPS makes it easy to find if you know you like FPS, because it is exactly like one.
Also, just because something isn’t revolutionary, doesn’t make it bad.
It makes it less important than things that should be revolutionary, but aren’t. Like most recent games. Well, they don’t even really have to be that revolutionary. Just not being halfassed would be good enough for me.
Hey, way to completely misread. It says quite clearly under genre on IGN that MP3 is a first person shooter. Under Gamespot it says “Sci-Fi first person shooter”. I was using Wikipedia because they had a fairly solid definition of what an FPS is, and believe it or not, not everything is made up on Wikipedia.
The Saints Row comment is just retarded. Otherwise all FPSes are Doom and platformers are Mario.
No, now you’re just taking my argument and blowing it out of proportion. The number of actual differences between Saints Row and GTA can be counted on one hand.
I didn’t deny that the 360 has a large number of FPSes, I just said that it has a good amount of other quality games and listed some examples.
As for only listing 4 games, I said a “A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES.” I’m not going to list every game and those were just a couple of exclusives that came to mind. I also never said that the N64 didn’t have some innnovative gams, hell it brought many 2d games to life in 3d. Hell, I never even mentioned the N64, but you are saying I’m wrong on it.
Regardless, the bulk of the 360’s library consists of FPS games. I’m not going to buy a console for a few games that are decent. The only time I would ever, EVER pick up a console for a single game would be for FF6, and I already have an SNES.
The DVD/VHS analogy is bullshit. DVDS has clear advantages over VHS and also I just said that the Wii controller hasn’t really been utilized and the games don’t use the controller in a way that isn’t possible on a conventional controller. I’m not knocking the Wii, I’m just saying that its games aren’t being as innovative as the system, which is a bit of a problem when the other systems look better, but play the same. MP3 again, great game, but it doesn’t really need the Wii controller or do anything special with the Wii controller.
Uh, in case you haven’t noticed, plenty of games have been utilizing the Wii to some extent, starting with WiiSports, where you actually have to physically swing your golf club instead of alternating buttons. The DVD/VHS comment basically means that you seem to be taking the stance that since a standard controller works, anything different is pointless. Nothing special with the Wii controller? What about the fact that you actually have to point your remote at the screen in order to shoot things, or twist it to open certain doors? What constitutes “USING” the Wii controller in your eyes? I don’t get it. Personally, one thing I appreciate about the Wii remote is that it doesn’t have fifty buttons.
Besides, why hate the 360 so much, it isn’t really competing or taking away from your beloved Wii. The PS3 and 360 are making the same kind of games, so they are really competing against each other. They capable of the same types of games and get many of the same games, so yeah, you might not want to buy both.
I don’t hate the 360. It’s just NOTHING NEW. Everyone who tries to tell me how wonderful the 360 is regurgitates higher quality environments and graphics, but believe it or not, that’s not what everyone is interested in. There’s just no reason for me to get it when I’ll be able to get most of the games on a PC with infinitely better controls, no extra fee, and not having to use shitty voice chat to play online.
And if you read about MP1 and MP2 and read Gamespot, you’ll see it listed Action Adventure. That is alright though, just ay attention to one game and ignore the other two. Only paying attention to select facts and not the whole picture can make making an argument harder.
IGN does list MP3 as a shooter though.
Ok…whatever.
Again, I was just listing a coupel of tops exclusives. Just ebcause you don’t like a game, doesn’t mean everyone else won’t. Zelda: TP, a big name game, but one I just can’t stand because of the flow of the game. Also,t aht buying method may be good enough for you, and that’s ok. Other people have different reasons for getting systems and that’s ok too. I personally like console FPSes more since the controls feel tighter to me, the key word being to me. Just like you may prefer FPSes on the computer and that is ok too. People are different and have different taste and preferences.
[quote=“OmegaflareX,post:30,topic:19517”]
Uh, in case you haven’t noticed, plenty of games have been utilizing the Wii to some extent, starting with WiiSports, where you actually have to physically swing your golf club instead of alternating buttons. The DVD/VHS comment basically means that you seem to be taking the stance that since a standard controller works, anything different is pointless. Nothing special with the Wii controller? What about the fact that you actually have to point your remote at the screen in order to shoot things, or twist it to open certain doors? What constitutes “USING” the Wii controller in your eyes? I don’t get it. Personally, one thing I appreciate about the Wii remote is that it doesn’t have fifty buttons.
Using the Wii controller in my eyes is doing something that can’t just as easily be done on a regular controller. Yes, Wii sports uses the controller, but look at Zelda. Aside from Link’s handedness, there isn’t really a different between the GC and Wii versions. The Wii doesn’t bring anything that the GC isn’t capable of except for maybe technical aspects. For the most part the motion sensing has just been used as an elaborate button. Instead of pushing down on a button to attack you giggle the remote. Yeah, big difference… MP3 pretty much has the same controls as the GC MPs and you could easily replace the Wii controller with a GC controller and there wouldn’t be a big difference in the way you played the game. CoD3 is the same as MP3, but doesn’t have as good of controls and is inferior to the PS3 and 360 verions as a result since the controls aren’t anywhere near as tight. The Simpsons game doesn’t even use the controller in the slightest and it makes the Wii version the weakest as a result. Mario Galaxy is fairly innovative, but doesn’t push the controller too much, but does have parts that are Wii specific. The Godfather uses the Wii controller somewhat in that you use the controllers as an extension of your hands in the game to do moves. Super Paper Mario has a bunch of moves that use the Wii controller and can’t be done on a standard controller. I define using the Wii controller as removal of the Wii controller would have an adverse affect on the gameplay. The gameplay needs to be enhanced by the controller and harder to imagine on a standard controller in order for the Wii controller to be used in my eyes. Your example of of using the controller is Wii Sports…what else really uses the Wii controller and couldn’t be jsut as easily done on a regular controller?
[QUOTE=OmegaflareX;596392]I don’t hate the 360. It’s just NOTHING NEW. Everyone who tries to tell me how wonderful the 360 is regurgitates higher quality environments and graphics, but believe it or not, that’s not what everyone is interested in. There’s just no reason for me to get it when I’ll be able to get most of the games on a PC with infinitely better controls, no extra fee, and not having to use shitty voice chat to play online.
I’m not trying to convince you to buy a 360, I’m just saying that you are being to hard on it and it is a nice system.
So why make such a big deal out of the genre of the game? Also, like you said, genres are to help you decide what you might like to play. Which is why MP has more in common with Zelda than Halo. I’m just saying that if you go into Prime expecting a Halo or CoD, you will be sorely disappointed because in those you games you shoot…you shoot a lot…many rounds go down range…and so on. Your goal is to go through areas and shoot stuff. In Prime you go around collecting sutff and just happen to shoot things along the way.
Not all revolutionary things are good and being revolutionary doesn’t automatically make something better.
So now IGN is an authority on it? They’re essentially the same damn games, when did it suddenly go from being an action adventure to being an FPS? Because FIRST PERSON SHOOTER implies that the game is taking place from the perspective of the shooter, and aside from Morph Ball, that’s the case with all of the Metroid games. Never mind the fact that it doesn’t have run and gun action that you seem to think solely clarifies an FPS, it’s a first person shooter in all respects. You’re right, it does make making an argument harder, especially when you bring up the first two MP games, which I wasn’t even talking about.
Again, I was just listing a coupel of tops exclusives. Just ebcause you don’t like a game, doesn’t mean everyone else won’t. Zelda: TP, a big name game, but one I just can’t stand because of the flow of the game. Also,t aht buying method may be good enough for you, and that’s ok. Other people have different reasons for getting systems and that’s ok too. I personally like console FPSes more since the controls feel tighter to me, the key word being to me. Just like you may prefer FPSes on the computer and that is ok too. People are different and have different taste and preferences.
Way to regurgitate my prior statements. It just seems like you look down on the Wii games because they don’t fit your definition of using the Wii remote in comparison to, uh, not using it.
Using the Wii controller in my eyes is doing something that can’t just as easily be done on a regular controller.
What the hell? I don’t swing a standard controller at the screen, fire star bits with one, turn a standard controller to open a door, the list goes on. You can technically implement any controls onto any kind of system you want. Virtual Boy, anyone? Hell, I’m sure someone could invent a system where you would play games using a freaking piano set. So expecting any system to have 100%ly innovative controls that couldn’t be replicated or produced anywhere else isn’t just unreasonable, it’s unrealistic.
I define using the Wii controller as removal of the Wii controller would have an adverse affect on the gameplay. The gameplay needs to be enhanced by the controller and harder to imagine on a standard controller in order for the Wii controller to be used in my eyes. Your example of of using the controller is Wii Sports…what else really uses the Wii controller and couldn’t be jsut as easily done on a regular controller?
See above. I’d hardly say actually being able to interact with the game on a bigger level isn’t enhancing the gameplay.
So why make such a big deal out of the genre of the game? Also, like you said, genres are to help you decide what you might like to play. Which is why MP has more in common with Zelda than Halo. I’m just saying that if you go into Prime expecting a Halo or CoD, you will be sorely disappointed because in those you games you shoot…you shoot a lot…many rounds go down range…and so on. Your goal is to go through areas and shoot stuff. In Prime you go around collecting sutff and just happen to shoot things along the way.
…How does that make it any different? It’s still from a first person perspective and you still shoot things. Hence, first person shooter.
Not all revolutionary things are good and being revolutionary doesn’t automatically make something better.
It’s far more interesting in a gaming era of nearly endless sequels and slightly enhanced graphical capabilities on systems - especially when, as Hades said, we’re experiencing diminshing returns with better graphics - to experiment with something new.
I’ve gotta to to work so I’ll be quick. I don’t lookd own on Wii games that don’t use the Wii controller specially, I’m just saying that the controller isn’t the next big thing and looking down on the PS3 and 360 because they use conventional controllers and improve the tech specs is unfair. I’m trying to show you that the Wii controller isn’t as unique as some make it out to be.
I never said IGn was the authority, I’m saying that some places vall it an adventure game and not a FPS. Also, calling Prime adventure came instead of a FPS is that when you think FPS, you havea certain image of a game, just like when you play a RPG you think of levels, exp, battles, and such. Technically all games are RPGs since you are playing a role, usually the role of the hero, and they are games. However, you wouldn’t classify Halo as a RPG.
I’ll add mroe later if I get the chance, this is just a short bit before I go to work.
EDIT: I don’t look down on Wii games, I’m just saying that many of its games aren’t all that revolutionary and aren’t pushing the envelop as some make it appear. A top 10 exclusives list for the Wii would be much better than the PS3 one. You could play most Wii games on any other system and not lose much, if anything in the translation. The controller doesn’t radically change the play of the game. Look at the EyeToy on the PS2, it had some special games that were very unique and could not be translated to other systems easily and radically changed the way you played a game. The EyeToy was sort of revolutionary in the way the games were played.
As for the last statement, I never knocked revolution, I even acknowledged the diminishing returns, I said that revolutionary things aren’t automatically good or better. Like one of the interesting things about the Wii is that its controls do open things up a bit and allow for new game styles and types a little bit easier. However, technological innovation is good too. Such as GTA:SA wouldn’t really be possible on the NES and it probably wouldn’t be as much fun either. Putting it on a more powerful system was necessary. Halo is a game that would not have done well on the PSX and needed that little extra power to work.
Let’s do a comparison about Metroid with Zelda and Halo just to see which it has more in common with gameplay wise.
Halo:
You shoot things with guns from the first person perspective…and…
Zelda:
You go around looking for power-ups
Power-ups are needed to access more areas
You get more life as the game goes on
Feel free to add to the list, but this should at least give you an idea of why I say Metroid is an adventure game and not a FPS.
However…you know maybe you are right about Metroid being a FPS.
Just thinking of it…most FPSes have multiplayer…most Metroids don’t…and the one that did have it had dated multiplayer…that was really weak in comparison to other FPSes. Well, since Metriod is a FPS, I’m gonna have to knock it down since the multiplayer aspect just sucks. [/sarcasm]
I’ll admit that not all things revolutionary are good.
But nothing that isn’t revolutionary is either. <---- I’m going to pay for this blanket statement later, I can feel it in my blackened heart.
All I want is for someone, somewhere, to come up with something I haven’t played yet and make it fun. I enjoy games like that rubber duck game for PS3 where you have to guide the little ducks home using the controller’s motion sensitivity. THAT is cool imo (and it’s also an excuse to point out that the Wiimote isn’t some unique thing).
I also enjoy the asteroids adaptations like Geometry Wars and Super Stardust, because they’re different enough that, although the core idea is the same, you’re obviously not playing the same game. I like Gears of War for the same reason, but I dislike Halo because it’s not different enough to intrigue me. I played it when it was still called Duke Nukem 3D and I didn’t even really like it then. A game with any other graphics is the new rose with any other name, if you catch my drift.
If you like innovation, Metroid Prime 3 and Mario Galaxy will make your head explode. I think that Nintendo has given us all a taste of what true innovation can be. Its just a matter of people using the technology. I agree it hasn’t been pushed to its limit yet.
I find the DS has been more innovative than the Wii overall up to now, but the DS has been around for much longer too. The PS3 is not a particularly innovative console. All you need to do is play Lair and see what happens when people think innovation = good by default.
You know where I think the Wii’s technology is going? Stuff like in Minority Report. GOD DAMN that would be awesome.
Having played through GoW and Halo 3, Halo 3 is a much better game. GoW 's gameplay is relatively monotone. Halo 3 does a better job with diversifying your encounters and putting you in different kinds of situations whereas you do the same things over and over in GoW.
I found Halo to be overwhelmingly trite compared to GoW for exactly the same reason. There is almost zero variation in the way you fight each battle in Halo and there is far less improv. You do the same thing with the same weapons every time and you don’t really get the gritty up-close struggles you’ll find in GoW. Overall Halo has extremely sterile gameplay. I really have no idea what you’re talking about, at all.
I just played Uncharted: Drake’s Fortune and Assassin’s Creed on the PS3. I’m very happy. Hurry up on MGS4, please, and keep coming out with these exclusive titles which are worth a darn. I know AC isn’t but it looks so good on here.
Hey, blackheart. Isn’t good implementation with a bit of innovation enough for a game? For instance, Goldeneye was good even though it was a “realistic” Quake clone and Diablo was a small roguelike with graphics.
