Jump to content
dumpster

Biggest discrepancy in gaming - your opinion Vs everyone

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, nakamura said:

Yeah the DC sucked for football but NBA and NFL were well catered for. 

UEFA striker and 90 minutes both sucked.

 

but virtua striker 2 with an arcade stick , was wonderful . 

 

GOOOOOOOAAAAAALLLLLL

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Story driven games do absolutely nothing for me at all.

 

I'm not really as bothered about it as I was a few years ago since there are plenty of indie and smaller games getting proper releases these days, plus I still enjoy going back to retro stuff, so they keep me busy, but still, I can't help but feel disappointed watching something like Sony's E3 conference and nearly every trailer seems to just be a person walking slowly through a field doing bugger all.

 

And as I just saw something to do with Red Dead Redemption 2 on Reddit, I thought the original was really boring. I liked Undead Nightmare though.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, nakamura said:

Yeah the DC sucked for football but NBA and NFL were well catered for. 

 

And best of all, tennis!

 

6 hours ago, Revival said:

That period from 99 to 01 Sega have never been so creative, The amount of quality ip's in those 3-4 years was damn near unmatched and it spawned some seriously great games. Arguably the last great arcade/traditional games system.

 

I still don't think any console has matched the Dreamcast  for achieving such a density of great games in so short a time. A timespan that seemed even more compressed thanks to the one year delay to the US/EU release.

 

It took ages for the PS2 and Xbox 360 to build up as big a library of exclusives that I was interested in playing. On the PS2, I wasn't tempted by any exclusive titles until the releases of GT3, GTA3, Jak and Daxter (which had a rave review on Digitiser, I remember) and MGS2 - most of which, IIRC, came about a year or so after its launch. (I did later discover a few good PS2 games that had been released earlier, like Fantavision, but I didn't know about them at the time.)

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, PeteBrant said:

UEFA striker and 90 minutes both sucked.

 

but virtua striker 2 with an arcade stick , was wonderful . 

 

GOOOOOOOAAAAAALLLLLL

VS2 is thw worst football game ever made. You aren't even in control half the time. 

  • Upvote 3
  • Downvote 1
  • Empathy 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wev said:

That's what I thought, apart from iss pro on PS1 I didn't really play sports games in that era (apart from NHL 94 on SNES)

The USA sports games were fab. NHL and WSB 1st entries weren't the best, but NHL 2K2 and WSB 2K2 were really good. I also loved Sports Jam, the 2 soccer based games in that title, were pretty much better than any dictated soccer game on the DC sadly 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Revival said:

It was a common theme of people waiting for the PS2 with it's DVD capability and never gave it a chance after the Saturn and the never ending postive hype.

I’ve always thought that the Saturn killed the Dreamcast’s chances (at least in the UK market) by critically wounding Sega’s brand image. The Mega Drive was the coolest game system, Sega was the biggest name in games, but the Saturn vs PlayStation battle badly exposed the limitations of Sega’s hardware and its software support during that generation. Sega just couldn’t recover from that catastrophe, even with the Dreamcast being competitively priced and with its graphics looking a clear generation ahead of its existing competitors. It was doomed to failure even without Sony having so heavily hyped the then-upcoming PS2.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The DC was DoA. It sold to a few hardcore Sega fans but consumer interest in the brand was at rock bottom after a series of horrific hardware choices. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, nakamura said:

VS2 is thw worst football game ever made. You aren't even in control half the time. 

 

You're in the right thread with opinions like this. :lol:

Virtua Striker is the greatest sports simulation known to man, we've been over this many times.

 

Bugis arcade in Singapore had around three rows of dedicated cabs.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dreamcast didn’t sell too badly. No different in numbers to the GC or Xbox, just not enough to bail out a company in spiralling debt due to years of mismanagement. Better advertising could certainly have helped though. 

 

The Saturn wasn’t that huge a failure either. I usually consider the American and Japanese consoles to be distinct due to SEGA America and Europe’s incompetence and not allowing many 2D gems to enter the western market because 3D would only do. The Japanese console became the pinnacle of 2D gaming and sold well. It’s the 32X that really did it for SEGA hardware wise but the main reason for their failures was that the Japanese and American sides of the company were basically separate entities which rarely agreed with eachother and constantly pulled in different directions.

 

Back on topic and apt due to the PlayStation classic announcement; the PlayStation always had shit 3D, I thought its 3D games looked awful and played badly back then and that age has only made things much worse. 

  • Upvote 4
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nakamura said:

VS2 is thw worst football game ever made. You aren't even in control half the time. 

 

In the 8/16 bit era cataloguing bad football games was almost a hobby unto itself for me. 

 

Virtua Striker 2 is bad, but at least your player never vanishes in to thin air when you're running on goal leaving the ball to trickle into the keeper's hands like in Champions Of Europe on the Master System.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Olly88 said:

Story driven games do absolutely nothing for me at all.

 

I'm not really as bothered about it as I was a few years ago since there are plenty of indie and smaller games getting proper releases these days, plus I still enjoy going back to retro stuff, so they keep me busy, but still, I can't help but feel disappointed watching something like Sony's E3 conference and nearly every trailer seems to just be a person walking slowly through a field doing bugger all.

 

And as I just saw something to do with Red Dead Redemption 2 on Reddit, I thought the original was really boring. I liked Undead Nightmare though.

 

I'm with you on this. Narrative cut scenes supposedly enhance the play experience, but they all too often bog them down. The best games, for me at least, are those that can successfully weave a story (should one be required) into the game while you're actually playing the thing. Inside, Fez, Journey etc.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Oh Danny Boy said:

Back on topic and apt due to the PlayStation classic announcement; the PlayStation always had shit 3D, I thought its 3D games looked awful and played badly back then and that age has only made things much worse. 

 

 

I agree, mostly. But when done right the 3D absolutely sings to this day. Namco knew what they were doing, as did Konami and Capcom. There are other stand-outs too, such as the plethora of 2.5D shooters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

48 minutes ago, Oh Danny Boy said:

The Saturn wasn’t that huge a failure either. I usually consider the American and Japanese consoles to be distinct due to SEGA America and Europe’s incompetence and not allowing many 2D gems to enter the western market because 3D would only do. The Japanese console became the pinnacle of 2D gaming and sold well.

The Japanese Saturn was the nearest thing the PC Engine has to a spirtual successor in a way, had some great 2D games and arcade conversions, much of that of course never reaching the west...

 

Going back to the PS1 for a second, I’d argue it succeeded to the extent it did due to it being a de facto successor to both the Super NES (getting the major Japanese third-parties who usually supported Nintendo) and the Mega Drive (the edge and attitude and western developers) simultaneously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Fallows said:

 

 

I agree, mostly. But when done right the 3D absolutely sings to this day. Namco knew what they were doing, as did Konami and Capcom. There are other stand-outs too, such as the plethora of 2.5D shooters.

 

I always thought that even the best efforts of those devs couldn’t help it. Too much emphasis on 3D made a lot of the shmups dog ugly. 

 

Conversely despite not being known for its 3D, or because of the convoluted manner in which 3D was created on the system using 2D shapes to create 3D the SEGA in-house teams made the best looking 3D games of that generation. Panzer Dragoon Saga, Nights and Burning Rangers were glorious. Plus Treasure knew how to make it sing; compare Radiant Silvergun’s 3D to any PS1 shmup, no contest there.

 

Plus Nights with the Nights pad was the most joyous and effective use of 3D space in that generation. Mario 64? Second place. 

 

Also Saturn Bomberman is the greatest multiplayer game of all time.

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, crisy said:

Have to disagree with you on that one @Loik V credern. I love games that treat you to a slow, immersive and atmospheric beginning. I'm not a big fan of the way so many games and films nowadays feel the need to bombard our senses from the very first minute. The action and intrigue has more impact on me If it's not rushed. For that reason games like the Persona series are catnip for me. Ideally I don't want any action until at least two to three hours in. 

 

Also, I thought Bioshock Infinite was even better than the original. A fantastic game with a brilliantly realized world. 


Well i don't necessarily mean being ADD and forced, i hated God of War's exhausting opening. It was American and macho, but suited the game i guess.

 

I like subtely too. I just mean something actually well thought out and constructed, with real appreciation of the strength of a first impression. I thought The Last Of Us' opening was really impressive. Though beyond that it settles into mediocre GTA like missions with cutscenes like from The Walking Dead which was like being trapped in the worst filler half way through another game you had to endure to get going again. And it seemed like they inserted it as a training exercise of sorts. I gave up on the game at that point, took a year to get back into it again. 

 

Something like Metroid Prime did everything, a few minutes showing you the controls, lets you explore without prodding you, lets you scan interesting things, throws in some action and a boss then an exciting escape using the morphball. And then the game begins proper. It's already established such a high level of quality. 

 

One of my favourite film openings i saw recently was for Birth, just a man jogging in a park as the camera follows from high behind, with classical music playing. It's so classy. 

 

When you put off watching a film for years then finally put it on and within minutes think; this is so good why didn't i watch this earlier? It's such a great feeling. Because you read the premise and think it might be dull or too earnest. The worst thing about Oceans 8 is that it feels like episode 5 of an average tv show that has settled into a rhythm. A show that already has your attention and doesn't need to grab you. 

 

What i like about films is that all its ideas of its concept and story will be condensed into (mostly) 2 hours. Every re write that led to the final thing will go into reshaping it. There is more entertainment produced now, that is inevitably more derivative than ever before. The assumption you're already invested because you're a gamer and games are inherently fun and you've spent £50 on this and want to get your moneys worth...I don't approach a film like that. I'm rating it from the very beginning, is it interesting, tight, bold, fresh, am i invested, intrigued. The variety in film can always surprise you, the range in style and tone is so vast. Games don't have a Gummo. Be perplexed, a bit bored, concerned, sort of hooked, but sat there, no physical effort required on your part except patience. 

 

I feel like open world games already appeal to the gamer dieing to be empowered by possibilities with a hunger to waste hours overlooking the grand spread of content to reach one surprising consequence of the playground that's been constructed for you to mess around in. The moment by moment quality takes a massive hit. I'm judging every minute of a game, each one reinforcing the doubt whether i can be bothered with anything generic and pointless. 

 

Open world games have come at the wrong point for the jaded gamer who is all played out and no longer has excess energy to endure anything far below the quality of games 20 years ago. 

 

The result of making a linear game is focussing on what you immediately hit every next second of a game. Like a film, you know there's no excess. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think games 'age'. I think everything is as playable now as it was then. Your expectations might have changed, altered by what you play now. Even for something like Resident Evil 4, if every game you play allows you to run and shoot and then you return to that you might not adjust and just declare it's 'aged'. For sure, a large portion of the appeal of Resi4 was its atmospheric graphics and level of immersion, but it played brilliantly. I kind of resent the suggestion games become superceded. The phrase 'by modern standards' for instance. We have a reductive view of games. 

 

Something like Tomb Raider isn't ruined by its harsh angular polygons. I'm not disappointed it no longer looks as real as i remember, or horrendous compared to modern graphics. I find it fresh. Obviously it was a nightmare to control then and still awkward now. 

 

When technology becomes so easy and large portions of games use procedurally generated elements to them (if there can ever be a streamlining of the process to build the worlds it can take a team of 1000 five years to complete), maybe we'll appreciate the purity of those early 3d games, the creative tricks thought up to defy the limitations of the hardware. In many ways they were more bold and inventive. These are the sanitised times, really. Everything is more slick. Rawness and purity are not valued.

 

Sales of vinyl have gone up because young people who have grown up with tiny thumbail art on itunes want something tangible in their hands, reacting against the ordinary, wanting something special. 

 

It wouldn't be just hipsterish irony to enjoy those harsh early 3d games. They are more of an assault on the senses, there's a perverse joy just trying to make sense of what is happening on screen. The beauty of them that we don't yet recognise is it's like they're b movies, the ones without the awareness to be better. A modern b movie that tries to be deliberately awful and cheesy kind of sums up our ultra self conscious, self analysing times.

 

Early 3d is a period that i think was the most exciting, and now it's just considered this ugly phase best to be ignored, hundreds of games rendered awful and unplayable. There was so many interesting things about how the power was used just struggling to put something recognisable on screen.

 

00s games nailed it, settled on it, then just constructed more of it in bigger and more detailed ways. Early 3d was entirely abstract and all the more interesting for it. 

  • Upvote 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought Rogue Warrior as a joke for £2, as I wanted to see how bad it actually was, particularly the OTT voice acting. After playing through the frustrating opening, I ended up sticking with it and rather enjoyed it!

 

rw.png

 

Harsh buggers! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Oh Danny Boy said:

Plus Nights with the Nights pad was the most joyous and effective use of 3D space in that generation. Mario 64? Second place.

 

Nights is my third favourite game of all time, but there's no denying that most of the game play is 2D.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Oh Danny Boy said:

Plus Nights with the Nights pad was the most joyous and effective use of 3D space in that generation. Mario 64? Second place. 

 

:lol:

 

The 2D kite flying sections where you actually controlled the main character were the best thing about Nights. The tacked-on 3D platforming where you controlled the kids was fucking bawz.

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Oh Danny Boy said:

Dreamcast didn’t sell too badly. No different in numbers to the GC or Xbox, just not enough to bail out a company in spiralling debt due to years of mismanagement. Better advertising could certainly have helped though. 

 

The Saturn wasn’t that huge a failure either. I usually consider the American and Japanese consoles to be distinct due to SEGA America and Europe’s incompetence and not allowing many 2D gems to enter the western market because 3D would only do. The Japanese console became the pinnacle of 2D gaming and sold well. It’s the 32X that really did it for SEGA hardware wise but the main reason for their failures was that the Japanese and American sides of the company were basically separate entities which rarely agreed with eachother and constantly pulled in different directions.

 

Back on topic and apt due to the PlayStation classic announcement; the PlayStation always had shit 3D, I thought its 3D games looked awful and played badly back then and that age has only made things much worse. 

DC and Saturn did roughly 10m each. Both 75% down on the MD. That's bad. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, nakamura said:

The DC was DoA. It sold to a few hardcore Sega fans but consumer interest in the brand was at rock bottom after a series of horrific hardware choices. 


Well, it was my first non-Nintendo console and I saved up £200 to buy it on launch... so not just a few hardcore SEGA fans. :hat:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.