Unmotivated thanks to E3

[saadman]

Is it just me or is seeing all this new hardware and amazingly awsome graphics and next-gen games make anyone else so unmotivated to play with the current software and hardware they have right now?

[Chris in Cali]

It's the total opposite for me, I saw very little that impressed me, and now I'm clinging to my current hardware.

[redgopher]

I think I blew a Bitchin' Fuse. It's like when you see something so incredibly bitchin' that you'll never find anything else bitchin' ever again.

[EnderBui]

Same as chris somewhat. I wasn't impressed by the 360 with it's games or features. I was impressed by the images I saw yesterday of the PS3 renders, but then again, those probably just are renders. Even as I watch the trailers from ign, I'm not sure what to make of it if it is real-time or not. (Kill Zone 2 looks way to amazing to be real-time...i think, also it might bring another issue if violence in gaming is getting too realalistic) As for the revolution, there's still time.

[Zmonkay]

It's the total opposite for me, I saw very little that impressed me, and now I'm clinging to my current hardware.

Agreed. So far, I haven't seen anything that really blew me away GAMEPLAY wise. I don't care about graphics if gameplay isn't there. Look at Katamari Damacy. I had more fun with that game than nearly any other recent release, and its graphics probably could have been done on PS1 or N64.

Plus, as recent games like God of War, MGS3, RE4, and others have shown: the current gen of systems is nowhere near done in terms of graphics. So I'll just sit back and play the hundreds of games CAG has let me amass for the current gen, and get the next gen stuff in a few years at a CC 5 dollar clearance :)

[EnderBui]

, and get the next gen stuff in a few years at a CC 5 dollar clearance :) That's what everyone says. :)

[Zoglog]

I think people need to get over the whole "retro is so cool thing". I think people are often misled to believe that good graphics automatically means shitty gameplay. If you ask me, gameplay has evolved nicely over the years. Of course you're gonna have games that only focus on graphics but suck in every other area (bouncer?) But you don't have to get all fuckin bitter about it. Get over it already...........

And no seeing incredible graphics shouldn't motivate you to not play your current games, cuz thtat' just retarded =p. it's future technology. However you shouldnt try to be such "cool dude" and dismiss it as a non-achievement.

[Mr Unoriginal]

The stuff that is coming out of E3 is neat but by no means "I'm ready to drop $300" neat. Like what's already been mentioned, I have plenty of games to play this generation, I'm in no rush to pay out my ass so the quarterback in Madden 2006 has realistic sweat.

[Zoglog]

The stuff that is coming out of E3 is neat but by no means "I'm ready to drop $300" neat. Like what's already been mentioned, I have plenty of games to play this generation, I'm in no rush to pay out my ass so the quarterback in Madden 2006 has realistic sweat.

that's a much better way of putting it ;) for that it really comes down to personal prefference.

[Jrunt20x]

I feel the same as Chris and the others. I just don't feel ready for the next-gen jump. Maybe that will change when I head to E3 on thursday but right now I'm just not feeling ready.

[punqsux]

e3 is making me unmotivated to invest in the next gen hardware.

everything thats been shown has been this gens games with better graphics.

i do like the revolutions whole downloadable library thing, im looking to see how that works out.

[Scrubking]

Better graphics in next-gen systems IS a non-achievement because 1) it's expected and 2) they in no way, shape or form are an indicator of how good a game will be.

When will people realize that graphics hype is the tool the industry uses to get you to buy their stuff? The OP is just another fish hooked by the flashy graphics campaign.

And in spite of what the reports say, I will wait till the systems are in a box on the store shelf before I believe anything. Even then I will wait a while to make sure that there is nothing wrong with the hardware - especially with Sony.

[punqsux]

Better graphics in next-gen systems IS a non-achievement because 1) it's expected and 2) they in no way, shape or form are an indicator of how good a game will be.


:applause:

[Zoglog]

Better graphics in next-gen systems IS a non-achievement because 1) it's expected and 2) they in no way, shape or form are an indicator of how good a game will be.

When will people realize that graphics hype is the tool the industry uses to get you to buy their stuff? The OP is just another fish hooked by the flashy graphics campaign.

And in spite of what the reports say, I will wait till the systems are in a box on the store shelf before I believe anything. Even then I will wait a while to make sure that there is nothing wrong with the hardware - especially with Sony.

Well of course your sig gives away that you're obviously biased. A good example is in the MGS games, the technical achivements in that game and the graphics allowed it to be a more immersive game. If I were to play the original MGS from NES it would not nearly be as fun so obviously there is value in graphics =p. As for gameplay you're talking about something so general and broad that you don't realize sometimes that graphics help out in the gameplay department... For example when the GTA games went 3D It really upped the level the gameplay could be taken to. So yes sometimes graphics do matter.

I'll agree they don't always serve as a perfect indication but you seem to be on some sort of religous crusade =p. People like what they like, quit saying it like you speak for everyone in a factual sense. It's your own personal preference.

[j-fever]

Better graphics in next-gen systems IS a non-achievement because 1) it's expected and 2) they in no way, shape or form are an indicator of how good a game will be.

When will people realize that graphics hype is the tool the industry uses to get you to buy their stuff? The OP is just another fish hooked by the flashy graphics campaign.

And in spite of what the reports say, I will wait till the systems are in a box on the store shelf before I believe anything. Even then I will wait a while to make sure that there is nothing wrong with the hardware - especially with Sony.


I would agree with some of this. Better graphics does not always mean better games.

Hopefully the additonal power will allow (require?) for better AI, and game systems/design without sacrificing the "marketing-monkey heavy" need for impressive graphics.

[Grugger]

It's the total opposite for me, I saw very little that impressed me, and now I'm clinging to my current hardware.

This is 100% true to me. I have no excitement whatsoever in this new generation of consoles. The emergence of Xbox 360 so prematurely is sure to create some very difficult problems. I really do think that the underperforming hardware will surely hamper the early launch of the new Xbox. Nothing from Sony or Nintendo has exicted me. Sony has nothing really to offer that's impulsive in the sense of "I have to have that now syndrome." Nor has Nintendo said anything worth noticing in their Press Conference. Backwards compatability with all the Nintendo titles? Ever heard of PC emulators? Give me a break and show me something that instills a sense of awe in the gamers.

[Mr Unoriginal]

Well of course your sig gives away that you're obviously biased. A good example is in the MGS games, the technical achivements in that game and the graphics allowed it to be a more immersive game. If I were to play the original MGS from NES it would not nearly be as fun so obviously there is value in graphics =p.

Did you really just type that? You would not have as much fun with a NES game because it has worst graphics. Let me consult my crystal ball. You started gaming during the PSX era or later.

This mentality is why a good portion of the industry is shit.

[jam3582]

What is it with people and this annoying "oh I dont wanna see this old game with better graphics" attitude . was there a complaint when mario became super mario and then mario 64 no correct then whats the problem. "this next gen dosent Impress me" , let me ask this was anyo ne impressed moving towards the xbox , ps2 , and gamecube .

I mean come on . Graphics run this industry sequels run this industry if you dont believe it look at your game collection . You must atleast own a sequel to an established game , correct ? (It might no be numbered but its part of the franchise) . Everyone complains about sequels but hasnt anyone notice um nintendo (IM not knocking them just a very good example) . If there were no new zelda ,mario, metroid games ( infact any nintendo franchise) what would you be want nintendo to do ? You would want a sequel correct .Now look at the playstation for instance resident evil 1 was great game right and alot of people loved it . Now look at what they released for the cube a freakin awesome game in resident evil 4 .

Look at it this way, in order to get katamari damacy they first had to wait for the system to get established . Do you really expect something like katamari to be a launch title let alone be some sort of demo to be shown at e3, I dont think so . yes better graphics dont make it a better game but if you guys really dont want old franchises with a facelift then dont buy them ,leave the new zeldas,marios,resident evils and what ever franchise that comes to mind for the rest of us.

[Mr Unoriginal]

What is it with people and this annoying "oh I dont wanna see this old game with better graphics" attitude . was there a complaint when mario became super mario and then mario 64 no correct then whats the problem. "this next gen dosent Impress me" , let me ask this was anyo ne impressed moving towards the xbox , ps2 , and gamecube . I mean come on . Graphics run this industry sequels run this industry if you dont believe it look at your game collection . you must atleast one sequel correct (it might no be numbered but its part of the franchise) . Everyone complains about sequels but hasnt anyone notice um nintendo (IM not knocking them just a very good example) . If there was no new zelda ,mario, metroid infact any nintendo made franchise what would you be wanting nintendo to do . you would want a sequel correct .Now look at the playstation for instance resident evil beautiful game right alot of people loved it . Now look what they released for the cube a freakin awesome game in resident evil 4 . Look at it this way in order to get katamari damacy they first had to wait for the system to get established . Do you really expect something like katamari to be a launch title let alone be some sort of demo to be shown at e3, I dont think so . yes better graphics dont make it a better game but if you guys really dont want old franchises with a facelift then dont buy them ,leave the new zeldas,marios,resident evil and what ever franchise that comes to mind for the rest of us.

Grammar and punctuation are your friends.

[Roufuss]

Since I have 0 interest in Xbox Live, and probably never will, Xbox 360's "features" haven't impressed me in the least. Maybe when I can stop getting online games to play on the PC, then I'll care.

The games don't really seem like "the next big thing" anyways, but launch games rarely are.

[BIG5]

I'm not ready to drop $300 each on 3 new consoles.

[jam3582]

Grammar and punctuation are your friends.


sorry dont care to much about it , now if anyone understands it plz feel free to respond :-P

[Apossum]

Did you really just type that? You would not have as much fun with a NES game because it has worst graphics. Let me consult my crystal ball. You started gaming during the PSX era or later.

This mentality is why a good portion of the industry is shit.

The "I'm hardcore, you're ruining the industry" mentality is just as annoying...
I know you're saying that gameplay is important, but presentation is too these days. Games have evolved a lot and while it does ultimately come down to gameplay, everything else can only make a game better. Agreed- it sucks if a dev decides to use a popular formula just to move copies(like NARC.) but I think that the proportion of good games to crap is not as bad these days. And

as far as NES and old systems go, a lot of those games were fun and I have fond memories of them, but playing them is like seeing the Rolling Stones in 2005 after seeing them in 1970, the songs might bring back a few memories, but the band looks pitiful. There's very few games that have stood the test of time.

Which is why i'm the least psyched about the Revolution, I'm worried that Nintendo has just come full circle-- their next gen might be more focused on selling their old gens. This isn't positive thinking, but the facts I've heard point me to that conclusion. It's like they're gonna hide in their shell for another generation. So until I see what the Revolution is going to do for the modern gamer, I'll just wait until a huge price drop happens so I can snag a copy of the new Metroid, Zelda and few miscellaneous exclusives. I just hope they are being "minimalistic" in their announcements.

As for the PS3 and 360, I'm not frothing at the mouth yet, but I'm definitely getting one of them on their respective launch days. They will both kick a lot of ass. Better yet, I hope someone gets me a 360 during Xmas so I can save my dough for a PS3!

[Scrubking]

Did you really just type that? You would not have as much fun with a NES game because it has worst graphics. Let me consult my crystal ball. You started gaming during the PSX era or later.

This mentality is why a good portion of the industry is shit.

:applause:

[Apossum]

http://www.stanford.edu/class/sts145/Images/pitfall.gif

Games are only good if they look like this and are controlled by 1 button, 1 joystick and the repitition of the mantra "This is the exact definition cool, progress is a hinderance, this is the exact definition of cool, progress is a hinderance..." Don't forget yer marching boots kiddies!

[Mr Unoriginal]

Games are only good if they look like this and are controlled by 1 button, 1 joystick and the repitition of the mantra "This is the exact definition cool, progress is a hinderance, this is the exact definition of cool, progress is a hinderance..." Don't forget yer marching boots kiddies!

I really don't think I, or anyone else, claimed that all games this generation are nothing but graphic displays and the only good games are on the Atari. I was pointing out how ignorant someone could be to say that games are not as fun if they don't have hyper-realistic graphics. Your overexaggerated insults are much too vague.

[onikage]

I'm ready for the next generation of consoles but, as many of you have already stated, not much shown @ E3 has been truly exciting. The 3 new systems aren't as physically impressive as I had hoped. The re-done GBA is completely useless if you already have a GBA SP or a DS(as I do), regardless of what it will cost.

A lot of the games shown have looked impressive, but the most interesting video IMO was the FF7 tech demo. I'd love to see a remake of FF7 on the PS3.

[Zoglog]

Did you really just type that? You would not have as much fun with a NES game because it has worst graphics. Let me consult my crystal ball. You started gaming during the PSX era or later.

This mentality is why a good portion of the industry is shit.

It's funny how you have to result to such pitiful assumptions. I've been gaming since NES and old Dos games like Police quest, space quest and wing commander what not. Just because I have the capacity to enjoy new games and new graphics, you assume I started during the PSX phase? This just goes to show how narrow minded and petty you are.

Apparently you haven't read my damn post. I said graphics aren't anything but I think you guys are being too damn nazi elitist about it. I agree many games focus too much on graphics and lose focus. However it seems most of you guy's attacks seem to focus on the whole industry which I think is absurd. You guys have gotten so full of yourselves that you form this elitist mentality where everything has to keep it "old school" or what not. I've had good fun with a good portion of this generation's games as I have with the past with contra and all the other old titles back in the day.

You people need to get off your damn high horses and move on with the times. if you're going to be this critical of people and obsessive on gameplay that you discredit all other facets of a game.

shame on you guys, make me sick

[Mr Unoriginal]

It's funny how you have to result to such pitiful assumptions. I've been gaming since NES and old Dos games like Police quest, space quest and wing commander what not. Just because I have the capacity to enjoy new games and new graphics, you assume I started during the PSX phase? This just goes to show how narrow minded and petty you are.

Apparently you haven't read my damn post. I said graphics aren't anything but I think you guys are being too damn nazi elitist about it. I agree many games focus too much on graphics and lose focus. However it seems most of you guy's attacks seem to focus on the whole industry which I think is absurd. You guys have gotten so full of yourselves that you form this elitist mentality where everything has to keep it "old school" or what not. I've had good fun with a good portion of this generation's games as I have with the past with contra and all the other old titles back in the day.

You people need to get off your damn high horses and move on with the times. if you're going to be this critical of people and obsessive on gameplay that you discredit all other facets of a game.

shame on you guys, make me sick

The short response to this would point out the many assumptions you make about me in an effort to justify me making assumptions about you.

As I stated above, I never claimed that games aren't fun if they have good graphics, or that the only good games are old school. I just commented on the fact that you said you couldn't have as much fun if a game had poor graphics. Just as that is your opinion, it's my opinion that it's a silly stance to take on gaming.

[punqsux]

Grammar and punctuation are your friends.

no, they're not his friend, they were supposed to hang out and type up that post, but they ditched him, and he had to go it alone.

[WolfPac_Ite]

Same as chris somewhat. I wasn't impressed by the 360 with it's games or features. I was impressed by the images I saw yesterday of the PS3 renders, but then again, those probably just are renders. Even as I watch the trailers from ign, I'm not sure what to make of it if it is real-time or not. (Kill Zone 2 looks way to amazing to be real-time...i think, also it might bring another issue if violence in gaming is getting too realalistic) As for the revolution, there's still time.


I agree. I wasn't impressed by the features and capabilities of the Xbox 360 and PlayStation-3, as it is already what I've expected, and didn't care for. Revolution is the only one I am hoping will bring something else to the table besides the same old up-the-graphics gig.

I saw the video for Kill Zone-2, and was VERY impressed, until I saw the end and realised it was probably just a rendered video. :(

[Zoglog]

The short response to this would point out the many assumptions you make about me in an effort to justify me making assumptions about you.

As I stated above, I never claimed that games aren't fun if they have good graphics, or that the only good games are old school. I just commented on the fact that you said you couldn't have as much fun if a game had poor graphics. Just as that is your opinion, it's my opinion that it's a silly stance to take on gaming.

no you got upset which is why you obviously lashed out at me. Like I said I see merit in good graphics, therefore obviously the same game with better graphics will be more fun to me. Do you find this so horrible and wrenching =p?

[Mr Unoriginal]

no you got upset which is why you obviously lashed out at me. Like I said I see merit in good graphics, therefore obviously the same game with better graphics will be more fun to me. Do you find this so horrible and wrenching =p?

Not terribly wrenching. I also know you are certainly not alone in your stance on this. It must be the collective boner people are having about $350 sequals that is just irritating to me.

[punqsux]

THIS is gunna be fun...

The "I'm hardcore, you're ruining the industry" mentality is just as annoying...
its easy to put words in other peoples mouths in order to make them seem less credible, but anyone who knows anything about arguing points would dismiss anything you say after this opener, as i have.

I know you're saying that gameplay is important, but presentation is too these days.
no, presentation is not important. in ps1 days, presentation was important, because you could make some really fugly games on that. even the worst looking ps2 games are very well presented, its not even an issue.

Games have evolved a lot and while it does ultimately come down to gameplay, everything else can only make a game better.
sure, every game cant be 100% gameplay (like tetris or pacman) but companies worry too much about useless frills like crappy licensed music that i dont want to listen to, and graphics having 4 million more polygons than the last game in the series.

Agreed- it sucks if a dev decides to use a popular formula just to move copies(like NARC.) but I think that the proportion of good games to crap is not as bad these days.
i dont know about that. i do understand there has always been crappy games, im in no way saying every snes game was gold, however we have something we didnt have back in 1991, history and more money! games cost more, and theres a good enough history of the industry to tell (in most cases) what will totally suck (tomb raider 8 anyone?)

as far as NES and old systems go, a lot of those games were fun and I have fond memories of them, but playing them is like seeing the Rolling Stones in 2005 after seeing them in 1970, the songs might bring back a few memories, but the band looks pitiful.
wow...dont you EVER compare a fond part of my childhood to the rolling fucking stones again!!! seriously though, youre just wrong, looks in games dont matter, and as you even pointed out with pitfall, that game is still fun to play.

There's very few games that have stood the test of time.
id argue that there are many that have, and many more of them will stand the test longer than any game released in the past five years.

Which is why i'm the least psyched about the Revolution, I'm worried that Nintendo has just come full circle-- their next gen might be more focused on selling their old gens. This isn't positive thinking, but the facts I've heard point me to that conclusion. It's like they're gonna hide in their shell for another generation.
i dont know how you went to the future and found all this magic info out, but just because they are making their classic avaliable in no way means they are hibernating for a gen.

So until I see what the Revolution is going to do for the modern gamer, I'll just wait until a huge price drop happens so I can snag a copy of the new Metroid, Zelda and few miscellaneous exclusives. I just hope they are being "minimalistic" in their announcements.
haha, i'd love to hear you define "modern gamer" if you would endulge me.

As for the PS3 and 360, I'm not frothing at the mouth yet, but I'm definitely getting one of them on their respective launch days. They will both kick a lot of ass. Better yet, I hope someone gets me a 360 during Xmas so I can save my dough for a PS3!
i suppose nintendo cant "kick alot of ass" because they are too kiddie? while nintendo has not released any titles for the revo (to my knowlegde anyways) the xbox and ps2 titles all have one thing in common, high single numbers

dead or alive 4
halo 3
devil may cry 4
tekken 6

im not saying those wont be god games, but how good will they be when the next higher number in each series comes out?

[punqsux]

no you got upset which is why you obviously lashed out at me. Like I said I see merit in good graphics, therefore obviously the same game with better graphics will be more fun to me. Do you find this so horrible and wrenching =p?

it means you play games for the wrong reasons imo, theres tons of great cgi movies out there you should check out though. (xenosaga comes to mind ^^)

[Zoglog]

it means you play games for the wrong reasons imo, theres tons of great cgi movies out there you should check out though. (xenosaga comes to mind ^^)

apparently you never read my original post where I've outlined how good graphics can enhance the gameplay. For example the physics engine in halflife brings forth interesting gameplay elements that would have not been possible otherwise. In my opinion you people are being too narrowminded. And I gave 2 examples of equal value except one had better graphics, why would you choose the one with worse graphics unless you were trying to be a stubborn elitist. It's all cockypop to me....

And Xenosaga 2 was a horrid game in my opinion, you watch/play it for the story.

[punqsux]

I gave 2 examples of equal value except one had better graphics, why would you choose the one with worse graphics unless you were trying to be a stubborn elitist.

its not that at all. its more like madden 2005 for $5 or madden 2006 for $50.
gta vice city for $10, or gta sa for $50.

the upgrades do not warrant the price, and these new systems are nothing more than upgrades similar to those i just used as examples. in a year:
devil may cry 3 for $5, or a ps3 and devil may cry 4 for $350?

[Zoglog]

its not that at all. its more like madden 2005 for $5 or madden 2006 for $50.
gta vice city for $10, or gta sa for $50.

the upgrades do not warrant the price, and these new systems are nothing more than upgrades similar to those i just used as examples. in a year:
devil may cry 3 for $5, or a ps3 and devil may cry 4 for $350?

when I made my example I stated all other factors equal =p. Also listing the full price of the console is unfair for a particular game since it is not just for that single game. Also you're assuming that the gameplay will remain the same which is not always true. I don't even see why your persisting on arguing.....

Lets just say that different people care about different things and leave it at that.

[neocisco]

Not even close. Hype means nothing to me. I have 190 games I haven't even played yet. I couldn't care less about the new systems right now.

[Apossum]

THIS is gunna be fun...


its easy to put words in other peoples mouths in order to make them seem less credible, but anyone who knows anything about arguing points would dismiss anything you say after this opener, as i have.


Apparently you haven't discounted it all, since there's a nicely organized laundry list under this first point :roll:
Maybe I should have put the back handed comment under the rest of my post like Mr. Unoriginal did so it would have been credible. let's see what's next :-P


no, presentation is not important. in ps1 days, presentation was important, because you could make some really fugly games on that. even the worst looking ps2 games are very well presented, its not even an issue.

My point is that excellent graphics, sound and story make good gameplay a lot more compelling. If the Xbox version of Ninja Gaiden was just a bunch of bare polygon models that are controlled by the NG gameplay engine, I wouldn't care half as much about it. Then there's Narc which wants you to think "Hay Cool I can kill anyone in the street!"

I don't know how you define "presentation" cause there is plenty of trash on the PS2 (and GCN and Xbox and every system) that comes off as generic wankery. I'm talking about whether everything else works together to compliment the gameplay versus covering it up, which is important to know



sure, every game cant be 100% gameplay (like tetris or pacman) but companies worry too much about useless frills like crappy licensed music that i dont want to listen to, and graphics having 4 million more polygons than the last game in the series.

Yes, companies tend to worry about that and guess what? it's a problem that won't go away...There's a lot of money in these things and a lot of consumers who don't have discerning tastes(or any taste at all) and certain companies will milk them.

Compare it to the movie industry which is also 90% crap. You've got sensational, beautiful, and empty blockbusters flooding the box office every weekend and well made movies poking their way through every once in a while. That's the way it's gonna be with video games.

so it's the companies and development teams that go above and beyond all that who make it all worth it to forge ahead, ya know?

I dunno, I'm excited to see what my favorite teams and companies will do with the tech. I'm feeling positive about a new gen, despite my awareness that these "generations" are a little too short.


i dont know about that. i do understand there has always been crappy games, im in no way saying every snes game was gold, however we have something we didnt have back in 1991, history and more money! games cost more, and theres a good enough history of the industry to tell (in most cases) what will totally suck (tomb raider 8 anyone?)

...Some people are using history and money to create amazing game experiences, some people are using it to make another Tomb raider game....I guess this comes down to opinion, I can think of more current gen games that I'd rather be playing than any previous gen, just cause it's still fresh. I like the current versions of my favorite franchises.


wow...dont you EVER compare a fond part of my childhood to the rolling fucking stones again!!! seriously though, youre just wrong, looks in games dont matter, and as you even pointed out with pitfall, that game is still fun to play.


easy there...try not to get all emo about it..I was just saying how playing those games makes me feel. the stones rocked 30 years ago, and inspired a lot of bands, but they're a bunch of fogies now and they have said all that they have needed to say. That's how I feel about the old classic games. I fully appreciate them and it's interesting, from an artistic standpoint, how the developers translated their ideas into 8-bit(or less) graphics. Other than that, I can't sit there and play mario for hours anymore. It just steps on those great memories of fun games. I'd rather play Metal gear solid 3 than the original metal gear, i'd rather play a good fighting game than a side scrolling brawler, I'd rather play Lumines or Tetris Worlds than Tetris for the GB. I can bust out those games once in a blue moon with friends and get into them for a couple hours, but i'll never play them on my own.

Btw, I'm not wrong, my opinion is just different from yours...big difference there kid. Looks are an important part of games...they aren't everything, but they do carry weight.


id argue that there are many that have, and many more of them will stand the test longer than any game released in the past five years.


Alright then, I guess we don't agree about something else.
Yes, old games will continue to get the props they deserve, but the current gen was a huge breakthrough..I can see my self enjoying many of these games for a long time. just my opinion. I bet i'll be playing Twilight Princess(if it is as good as it looks) over Ocarina of Time 10 years from now.


i dont know how you went to the future and found all this magic info out, but just because they are making their classic avaliable in no way means they are hibernating for a gen.

"might be" are the key words in that passage. i don't claim to know anything about the future, man. I'm just saying at the conference today, I heard "this is the design for our new system....HEY GUESS WHAT IT PLAYS ALL THE OTHER GAMES YAY! blah blah online blah blah obligatory 1st party games blah blah gba micro blah blah"
So until I hear more, that's all I got. I just hope that what they've shown us isn't the whole deal-- I want them to show that they are all about the "next gen" aspect of their system too, ya know?
I like a lot of what Nintendo does, but I can't help it-- i'm not that impressed, so far.


haha, i'd love to hear you define "modern gamer" if you would endulge me.


I mean gamers who are more into what's happening now. guess that was a bit vague..I just mean people who are into the current stuff and are looking forward to what companies can do next.


i suppose nintendo cant "kick alot of ass" because they are too kiddie? while nintendo has not released any titles for the revo (to my knowlegde anyways) the xbox and ps2 titles all have one thing in common, high single numbers


no dude. are you trying to pin me as that "Nintendo is for teh kiddies" guy? :-P I think Nintendo will sell millions of those systems, honestly. People are going to dig what they have to offer-- the downloadable games(assuming they don't cost a ton), free online, backwards compatibility with the cube, sleek design, classic Nintendo franchises, whatever that new thing with the controller is, and probably all at a lower price than the 360 or PS3. that's a winning formula. I don't totally believe in the console war, it's just a bunch of numbers that don't equate to anything and I think the main soldiers are fanboys of the respective companies. I think there's room for 3 consoles and don't think M$ will buy nintendo any time soon.


dead or alive 4
halo 3
devil may cry 4
tekken 6

im not saying those wont be god games, but how good will they be when the next higher number in each series comes out?

you know the drill: they'll be better than the one before it or we'll bitch to high hell about it! :D Those are all tried and true franchises...not saying there isn't a chance they'll suck (cough DMC 2, Tekken 4 cough) but they are reliable, just like the next Metroid, Mario, Mario Party, Zelda, etc. will be reliable.

but yeah, the industry as a whole needs new franchises. maybe we can agree on that punqsux :)

[Apossum]

Lets just say that different people care about different things and leave it at that.

shit, why didn't I think to say that? :oops: oh yeah, I'm bored and kinda dumb :oops: :oops: ;-)

[KaneRobot]

The stuff that is coming out of E3 is neat but by no means "I'm ready to drop $300" neat.

Yeah, or 400 for that matter.

This new stuff is fun to look at, but I'm in no hurry. I've owned Forza for two days now and still haven't had time to even take the plastic off...I'm more than content with the current stuff for the time being. Hell, I'm still somewhat pissed (although not as much as I once was) that Microsoft is moving ahead so quickly...I still think there's plenty they can do with the XBox before they release another console. Oh well.

[David85]

It's the total opposite for me, I saw very little that impressed me, and now I'm clinging to my current hardware.


Same here. PS3 and X360 just seem to improve graphics a little and give us the same games. Nintendo has just made everything so small it's very badly planned. At this rate I will not be getting any next gen systems. So far there has been no surprises, nothing that stands out, just the same old shit.

And where is Mario 128?! I want a real Mario game for the Cube!

[Quillion]

This thread is fun.

I've never actually heard anyone argue that graphics are more important than gameplay. It's like arguing that a book may be boring to read, but as long as the pictures look good, it'll be a better book.

It's pretty much an undefendable position.

Oh, and:

i suppose nintendo cant "kick alot of ass" because they are too kiddie? while nintendo has not released any titles for the revo (to my knowlegde anyways) the xbox and ps2 titles all have one thing in common, high single numbers

dead or alive 4
halo 3
devil may cry 4
tekken 6

im not saying those wont be god games, but how good will they be when the next higher number in each series comes out?

PUNQ'D!

[Snake2715]

It's the total opposite for me, I saw very little that impressed me, and now I'm clinging to my current hardware.


Thats exactly why I came to this thread. I thought it was about this unimpressive feeling I got after watching snippets of the presentations.

It went like this...

Excitment....

Blah Blah Blah....

Then this thought entered:
"Most likely $50+ for games"

Then this thought:
"$300 + for new systems"

I mean you cant argue that. If the latest handheld is $249.We know darn well the console will be at least that price.

Then I realized that gaming is lost to hollywood/big business already.

[Quackzilla]

E3 is pretty boring for me this year, because last year had HL2 that got me all excited, and I played it and it exceeded my expectations.

Sure, PS3 is awesome and has a million games coming out, but there is no love from valve this year ;_;

[Roufuss]

There's no way you can compare PS3 and sequels, like Devil May Cry 4 and Tekken 6, to Nintendo's sequels.

Maybe when I see Dante Party 8, Super Dante Soccer, and Dante is Missing, then we can talk.

The reason why people come down so hard on Nintendo and their franchises, is because they have whored out their characters to every possible genre and people are getting sick of seeing them. I think only Zelda has been immune to this... hell, there's even Metroid Pinball coming out now.

I mean, just looking at their Gamecube lineup... Super Mario Strikers, Mario Party 7 or 8 (I don't know the exact number), DDR Mario Edition, Mario Baseball. Just give the poor plumber a break :(

And the love from Valve is coming from the Half Life 2 expansion... too bad the ONLY way to get is over Steam.

[1modernboy]

The Microsoft song and dance left me cold. I’m just not sure their rationale, their expanded Xbox Live community where gamers and non-gamers alike compete for my meager micropayments, appeals to me.

The Sony presentation was great. I loved what I saw, but (as most of you have pointed out) what we saw and what we’ll actually play are probably very different things.

And once again, I kinda felt bad for Nintendo. I’m a Nintendo mark, a long-time fan, and I want them to do well. I like the idea of being able to play legitimate versions of old games on my console, but I would’ve liked to see more of the Revolution. Compared to the other two, they just didn't have anything to say about where they were going.

I really want to love the next gen, honestly I do, but, while I’ve seen a glimmer of what might be to come, I haven’t seen anything that truly made me look forward to these systems with any measurable zeal.

Hell, maybe I’m asking for too much.

[1modernboy]

There's no way you can compare PS3 and sequels, like Devil May Cry 4 and Tekken 6, to Nintendo's sequels.

Maybe when I see Dante Party 8, Super Dante Soccer, and Dante is Missing, then we can talk.

The reason why people come down so hard on Nintendo and their franchises, is because they have whored out their characters to every possible genre and people are getting sick of seeing them. I think only Zelda has been immune to this... hell, there's even Metroid Pinball coming out now.

I mean, just looking at their Gamecube lineup... Super Mario Strikers, Mario Party 7 or 8 (I don't know the exact number), DDR Mario Edition, Mario Baseball. Just give the poor plumber a break :(

And the love from Valve is coming from the Half Life 2 expansion... too bad the ONLY way to get is over Steam.

Give 'em time. There'll be Dance Dance Revolution with Dante if they think they can skin us out of a buck for it! ;)

[Snake2715]

For example the physics engine in halflife brings forth interesting gameplay elements that would have not been possible otherwise.

The question I have here is:

What does that have to do with graphics?

Of course they need better programming and some more power to do this but "12 times" more powerful just to make good AI?

If that’s what it takes then great. But they are not pushing AI in the videos they are pushing graphics.

Regardless of what I do I am either in the game, or it’s not good enough to pull me in.

Things that help that are realism... no not graphics, but glitches or repeated actions by NPC's definitely don’t help. Patterns in the enemy's attacks etc. Make the characters more real. Not by showing their sweat but by giving them personalities. "Life" if you will.

Sound its addition to the new systems is great. I mean having full surround sound brings you in much better than some small graphic improvement.

Draw distance that helps to some degree. I enjoyed Far Cry not just because it was pretty, but also because it was realistic in the sense that some "Fog" didn’t block out my vision 10 feet in front of my face. I cant see miles in the distance in real life but I can see further than the 10-20 feet depicted in most FPS games.

New ways to play with new input methods. I mean look at the police motion sensor game (I forget the name) at the arcades. You are physically standing and ducking. You are holding a gun and its fun. It senses where you are and relates that to the screen. Or the ever-popular DDR games, Bongos, Drum Master, Mario Party mic, even the Eye Toy or the touch screen of the DS. These new methods will expand and make it exciting again to try the new control method.

This is what I wanted to see. Not some new CGI cut scene. The problem is the market has expanded so much the newer players are exactly that. NEW. Until they get bored of the small leaps and until they get bored of the wonderment of the games the companies are going to churn the stuff out. Sequel after sequel, copycat game after copycat game.

Everyone can’t be happy. But I had myself built up to the hype that a true revolution in gaming could happen. It hasn’t there is still time but so far it doesn’t look good. Therefore I might jump back to the occasional gamer and pick a few titles up and take some time off.

I did it when the N64 and PS1 rolled around. I waited a really long time to pick up the PS1. I never had an N64 when it was readily available and games were on the shelf everywhere. I just left the scene went into the PC area and concentrated on other parts of my life.

This whole generation happened to quick. Partly because I have gotten older and partly because you can really see the business aspect of it growing.

It’s like that hobby or artist you really like. Then they get huge and everyone likes them and the artist or group lose their sense of touch with their original fans. That is what has happened to gaming.

Defender may be right in the sense of an impending crash. If that is to happen I look forward to the reset button of all of this. Let it go Niche again for all I care. I was happy then and I cant see why I wouldn’t be happy again if it was a more niche hobby.

[Mr Unoriginal]

Give 'em time. There'll be Dance Dance Revolution with Dante if they think they can skin us out of a buck for it! ;)

I was going to say the same thing, it's just that Nintendo has been around longer and have had more time to rape their franchises. Wait until next generation you will see the same garbage.

[punqsux]

There's no way you can compare PS3 and sequels, like Devil May Cry 4 and Tekken 6, to Nintendo's sequels.

Maybe when I see Dante Party 8, Super Dante Soccer, and Dante is Missing, then we can talk.

The reason why people come down so hard on Nintendo and their franchises, is because they have whored out their characters to every possible genre and people are getting sick of seeing them. I think only Zelda has been immune to this... hell, there's even Metroid Pinball coming out now.

I mean, just looking at their Gamecube lineup... Super Mario Strikers, Mario Party 7 or 8 (I don't know the exact number), DDR Mario Edition, Mario Baseball. Just give the poor plumber a break :(

And the love from Valve is coming from the Half Life 2 expansion... too bad the ONLY way to get is over Steam.

id argue that placing familiar characters in different setting (tennis, golf, party) is better than 3 similar devil may cry games and 3 similar gta games in just about 3 years. (the mgs series paces itself VERY well imo)

even when nintendo had the super mario bros series running on the nes, it spaces out the games by years 85, 88, and 90 i believe.

while they do make a ton of mario party games, i look at them as multiplayer games, similar to a ddr game or something, and how frequently they come out, but ill admit, they have gone overboard on that series.

[1modernboy]

I was going to say the same thing, it's just that Nintendo has been around longer and have had more time to rape their franchises. Wait until next generation you will see the same garbage.

D00d, Tekken 19 is gonna rawk out loud! ;)

[ArthurDigbySellers]

Grammar and punctuation are your friends.

Man, no shit. This guy might have valid points but it hurts my head to read past the first few sentences.

Someone needs to code a forum-speak translater plug-in for IE.

[javeryh]

It's the total opposite for me, I saw very little that impressed me, and now I'm clinging to my current hardware.

I totally agree. No "wow" factor at all for the next-gen stuff. Right now it's all chest pounding. SHOW ME SOMETHING!!!

[Apossum]

This thread is fun.

I've never actually heard anyone argue that graphics are more important than gameplay. It's like arguing that a book may be boring to read, but as long as the pictures look good, it'll be a better book.

It's pretty much an undefendable position.

Oh, and:



PUNQ'D!

U R TEH WINNAR

(btw, what the hell are you talking about, nobody is arguing that graphics are more important. -10 for using a reference to an awful mtv show.)

id argue that placing familiar characters in different setting (tennis, golf, party) is better than 3 similar devil may cry games and 3 similar gta games in just about 3 years. (the mgs series paces itself VERY well imo)

even when nintendo had the super mario bros series running on the nes, it spaces out the games by years 85, 88, and 90 i believe.

while they do make a ton of mario party games, i look at them as multiplayer games, similar to a ddr game or something, and how frequently they come out, but ill admit, they have gone overboard on that series.

DMC1 - 2001
DMC 2- 2003
DMC 3- 2005

thats not so bad and DMC 3 isn't just better graphics, it's as much of a leap from DMC 1 to 3 as it is from SMB 1 to 3, complete with a shitty part 2.

I know you might not take that comment so well, but it's the truth...DMC 3 is a huge game, just like SMB 3. the GTA games, as boring and repetitive as they are, have also expanded like crazy with each sequel. Gotta hand it to them, San Andreas is pretty huge. I can't stand playing it, but it is an ambitious game.

it sounds like you are saying that Mario game sequels are somehow more legit than other franchise sequels?

[Apossum]

I really don't think I, or anyone else, claimed that all games this generation are nothing but graphic displays and the only good games are on the Atari. I was pointing out how ignorant someone could be to say that games are not as fun if they don't have hyper-realistic graphics. Your overexaggerated insults are much too vague.


It's a joke buddy...and yes, some people think games with shitty graphics aren't as fun, it's not too hard of a concept to swallow. I personally have a hard time dealing with games that don't have Snes or PS1 quality sprites and PS1 polygonal graphics hurt my eyes to the point where I can't enjoy a game(Parasite eve, for example.)

[Mr Unoriginal]

It's a joke buddy...and yes, some people think games with shitty graphics aren't as fun, it's not too hard of a concept to swallow. I personally have a hard time dealing with games that don't have Snes or PS1 quality sprites and PS1 polygonal graphics hurt my eyes to the point where I can't enjoy a game(Parasite eve, for example.)

You are right, it would be very difficult to argue against someone who claims that Parasite Eve has much too shitty graphics to enjoy the game. We would obviously be nowhere near on the same page with what we think gaming should be.

[Apossum]

oh, i get it, the pretense is that we have to argue instead of discuss...whatever

[Zmonkay]

Give 'em time. There'll be Dance Dance Revolution with Dante if they think they can skin us out of a buck for it! ;)

Dante's Devil Dance Dance Revolution?

[punqsux]

DMC1 - 2001
DMC 2- 2003
DMC 3- 2005



nov 2001 and feb 2005 i believe ^^

that is just over 3 years, as i stated.

it sounds like you are saying that Mario game sequels are somehow more legit than other franchise sequels?

im saying games today pace themselves horribly. they come out too fast and imo get burned out.

[Quillion]

U R TEH WINNAR

(btw, what the hell are you talking about, nobody is arguing that graphics are more important. -10 for using a reference to an awful mtv show.)

You don't have to be rude. My grammar was fine, I was polite, and I used an analogy to make my point simpler to understand. So that you could. Oops... sorry, a little dig at you. However, let's deconstruct your position.

So exactly what are you arguing? Here are some examples of the arguments for graphics:
Games are only good if they look like this and are controlled by 1 button, 1 joystick and the repitition of the mantra "This is the exact definition cool, progress is a hinderance, this is the exact definition of cool, progress is a hinderance..."
Poor use of sarcasm. I'm unsure whether you like the old school games or not. Impossible to understand your position here.
Like I said I see merit in good graphics, therefore obviously the same game with better graphics will be more fun to me.
Ah, so you find graphics equally as important as gameplay. Or possibly marginally more important.
as far as NES and old systems go, a lot of those games were fun and I have fond memories of them, but playing them is like seeing the Rolling Stones in 2005 after seeing them in 1970, the songs might bring back a few memories, but the band looks pitiful.
Wait, you had stated essentially that the foundation had to be there, and graphics would make you enjoy it more. But here, you state that without good graphics, you have a lousy time. Thus, graphics are vastly more important to the overall experience.
A good example is in the MGS games, the technical achivements in that game and the graphics allowed it to be a more immersive game. If I were to play the original MGS from NES it would not nearly be as fun
Not your argument, I know, I threw it in to clarify the position you seem to share with this gentleman.

In conclusion, I called you on an argument which you then realised was bunk. You then attacked me personally for no reason. You sir, are a douche.

Yes that is the proper spelling.

And yes, also, I AM THE WINNER.

Douche.

[punqsux]

id just like to state that comparing mgs to mg is a bad analogy, the series advanced greatly in that time, a better analogy would be comparing mgs to either metal gear 2: Solid Snake, or mgs for gameboy, both of which are every bit as fun as mgs on ps or gc (whichever you prefer)

more powerful systems do allow for better immersion, however how has the immersion factor changed from ps1 to ps2? obviously 3d games are more immersive than 2d games, im not arguing that, but how has the power of the ps2 helped that, and how will the power of the ps3 go beyond that of the ps2?

[Apossum]

id just like to state that comparing mgs to mg is a bad analogy, the series advanced greatly in that time, a better analogy would be comparing mgs to either metal gear 2: Solid Snake, or mgs for gameboy, both of which are every bit as fun as mgs on ps or gc (whichever you prefer)

more powerful systems do allow for better immersion, however how has the immersion factor changed from ps1 to ps2? obviously 3d games are more immersive than 2d games, im not arguing that, but how has the power of the ps2 helped that, and how will the power of the ps3 go beyond that of the ps2?

I'm just saying right now that this is a matter of preference-- I don't think anyone is right or wrong about graphics, gameplay, the state of the gaming industry-- it all depends on the way you look at it/experience it. I'm not even sure what we are discussing anymore. I'm just saying I support this gen...maybe it could have waited a little while longer...but read on

I think the PS2 is much more immersive than the PS1. But it's unfair to judge, because it's in retrospect. My jaw hit the ground multiple times when the PS1 was the only thing out and I totally enjoyed what I had at the time. The PS2 has taken it's heat away because I feel that the games have improved engines and formulas, as well as the ability to render graphics that allow developers to make things more aesthetically pleasing-- there are still jaggies but things overall, are recognizable-- there's more animation, detail, texture etc. No more box hands, no more fuzzy or distorted textures, no more weird mouths...Improved gameplay and good graphics make for a more immersive experience for me. the PS1 still has good games-- I still play Valkyrie profile, Castlevania:SOTN, Puzzle fighter, Intelligent qube and some others. But I would take those games with upgraded graphics in a second and I would probably be more inclined to play them.
For almost every Ps1 game there is, I can think of a comparable PS2 game that I would rather play.

so, I don't know what the PS3 will do other than that it should expand on what the PS2 had to offer. It's an insane sounding machine. That said, there's a ceiling to the current formula of the game industry-- what the hell could the PS4 possibly offer that we don't already have? I say this time around, after the 360, PS3 and Revolution are released-- give them more than 4 or 5 years to learn this stuff and just let the developers do their work cause it's not like we'll be in hurry to take the next step-- powerful machines, online systems, wireless controllers, HD this and that, 5.1, media playing capabilities out the wazoo-- these things are saturated. many people will be satisfied with these systems and won't be eager for the generation after.

Poor use of sarcasm. I'm unsure whether you like the old school games or not. Impossible to understand your position here.

it was just a sarcastic joke, not meant to state my position on anything...i thought it was funny, but apparently it ruffled some feathers..sorry guy

You don't have to be rude. My grammar was fine, I was polite, and I used an analogy to make my point simpler to understand. So that you could. Oops... sorry, a little dig at you. However, let's deconstruct your position

Putting words in my mouth by saying that I think graphics are better than gameplay and telling me I got PUNQ'D was wrong and rude. your grammar was fine, but the fact that you have misunderstood me completely makes it so that I don't understand you ;-)

Ah, so you find graphics equally as important as gameplay. Or possibly marginally more important.

nope. they "supplement" gameplay. I don't see it so dualistically...

Wait, you had stated essentially that the foundation had to be there, and graphics would make you enjoy it more. But here, you state that without good graphics, you have a lousy time. Thus, graphics are vastly more important to the overall experience.

the point of the analogy is that I feel that games can be outdated. graphics wise, gameplay wise, everything wise-- they can be outdated to me. I still have fun with them with friends every once in a while, but my main course isnt NES, Snes and PS1 games-- it's the current gen. If they have good gameplay, I can still enjoy them from time to time.

Not your argument, I know, I threw it in to clarify the position you seem to share with this gentleman.

In conclusion, I called you on an argument which you then realised was bunk. You then attacked me personally for no reason. You sir, are a douche.

Yes that is the proper spelling.

And yes, also, I AM THE WINNER.

Douche.

That doesn't clarify anything unless you want to pigeon hole me into some image in your own mind-- but yeah for the record, I enjoy MGS better than the 2d MG games, for a number of reasons other than the graphics. I don't think my argument is bunk, in fact I'm hardly arguing, I'm just stating my opinion on the progress of games and systems. nobody else needs to think that way. That's why I didn't give your post any thought-- you want me to be the "graphics are the ONLY thing that matters" guy, but I won't do it. I still think that these new systems have the power to churn out better games, if the developers choose to use them like that. And if they improve the gameplay, i'll like them better...if they only improve the graphics and dumb down the gameplay, I'll notice and be pissed :)

[KaneRobot]

And yes, also, I AM THE WINNER.

Yes, just keep telling yourself that. "I won that message board thread. I WON IT! I am a GOOD PERSON!"