quote:
Bloodsage had this to say about John Romero:
I played Pong when it came out too. For hours every day after school; it was the greatest thing ever. But its simplicity and lack of graphics don't make it superior to Top Spin or Table Tennis on the 360. Arguing that would be stupid.Hint, hint.
No ones arguing that graphics of pongs calibur shut out todays technology. But what you are trying to do is say that cutting edge is enough difference from yesteryear to make up for a lack of substance, or that opting for slightly outdated technology is enough to diminish any quality a game may have.. Which is just laughable.
quote:
Willias got all f'ed up on Angel Dust and wrote:
Let's just cut out all the fat.My opinion is better than your opinion.
I was going to go with that, but I felt it was too generic. "Of fun" makes it more applicable to this crappy thread.
quote:
Willias had this to say about Cuba:
Cave Story.
I have no idea what Cave Story is, Willias. 
quote:
Willias had this to say about Jimmy Carter:
I PITY YOU
The one with the robot dude that was an awesome platformer and had a decent story to boot? The one that had nothing more then 16 bit sound, about three or four dozen sprites total, but consumed my soul for a good three days while I played it non-stop?
Yes. I remember that game. 
quote:
Willias was listening to Cher while typing:
I PITY YOU
Are you agreeing with me and adding that simplicity can be great or something? Like how I cited Advent Rising as a Gorgeous Game, that I'd have more fun playing with my vomit than it?
quote:
A sleep deprived Skaw stammered:
Are you agreeing with me and adding that simplicity can be great or something? Like how I cited Advent Rising as a Gorgeous Game, that I'd have more fun playing with my vomit than it?
Yes.
Cave Story has the graphics and sound of a NES-calibur game. HOWEVER, it has top-notch gameplay, and quite a bit of depth for such a simple looking game.
It was released sometime between 2003 and 2005, and is a pretty good indication that even though a game can look very, very old or crappy, as long as it has excellent gameplay and story underneath of it, people will play it and like it. A lot of people found out about this game when Penny Arcade talked about it on their front page. It's suprisingly good, even though I personally never finished it.
What was the point of the PS2 when they could have just as easily made all the PS2 games on the PS1 instead?
Oh yeah. Graphics. Go figure.
For graphics, Toribash is one of the most retarded looking things I have ever seen, I mean, its a step up from do-it-yourself stick death with most of your time spent falling over.
Then, you get that one where you round house kick someones knee off then do a backflip onto their head, and good times to be had by all.
quote:
Taeldian wrote this then went back to looking for porn:
What was the point of making the Gamecube if there was already the SNES there to make awesome games on?What was the point of the PS2 when they could have just as easily made all the PS2 games on the PS1 instead?
Oh yeah. Graphics. Go figure.
Cave Story would be even more awesome if it had modern day graphics.
Look, it's like this:
Bad game + bad graphics = horrible game.
Bad game + great graphics = horrible game.
Good game + bad graphics = good game.
Good game + great graphics = awesome game.
Graphics can only make a game better if the game is good in the first place. If you have a shitty game with terrific graphics, guess what? It's still a shitty game.
quote:
We were all impressed when Willias wrote:
Cave Story would be even more awesome if it had modern day graphics.
Look, it's like this:Bad game + bad graphics = horrible game.
Bad game + great graphics = horrible game.
Good game + bad graphics = good game.
Good game + great graphics = awesome game.
Graphics can only make a game better if the game is good in the first place. If you have a shitty game with terrific graphics, guess what? It's still a shitty game.
So the PS3 is capable of awesome games and the Wii is only capable of good games.
Although the general idea I'm getting from this thread is that having good graphics automatically disqualifies you from having good gameplay.
quote:
How.... Derek.... uughhhhhh:
So the PS3 is capable of awesome games and the Wii is only capable of good games.Although the general idea I'm getting from this thread is that having good graphics automatically disqualifies you from having good gameplay.
Hey, if you give a game top of the line graphics and top notch gameplay, which is usually pretty rare, it's gonna sell like hot cakes. (Like... Half-life 2 I guess?)
Sadly, that doesn't happen often. Case in point, PSP and DS. DS has a huge variety of games that are pretty damn good, and it's library of awesomeness keeps growing larger and larger as time goes on. PSP however, has very few great games, even though it's capable of pushing out superior graphics than the DS.
Why? PSP games just don't have some of the depth or fun factor that the DS games have.
Another example: X-box had the capability to have the top of the line graphics with the last generation of consoles, right? Yet it did horribly compared to the Gamecube and especially the dominant PS2.
Obviously, the PS2 had the majority of games actually worth playing, compared to the X-box, which shared the majority of it's titles with the other console systems and PC.
If the PS3 doesn't get enough good games, even with the ability to pump out top of the line visuals, it's going to fail compared to the 360 (which I'm hoping will be the dominant system this console generation) and possibly even the Wii.
It's all about the gameplay.
quote:
There was much rejoicing when Willias said this:
Another example: X-box had the capability to have the top of the line graphics with the last generation of consoles, right? Yet it did horribly compared to the Gamecube and especially the dominant PS2.
All examples aren't good ones.
The Xbox did not do horribly. It actually did a damn good job of breaking into a market, particularly for a console who didn't have any real name recognition (No, the Microsoft name isn't really as much name recognition in the console world).
Hell, Wikipedia has some numbers which seem to be well-backed and fact-checked:
quote:
* Sega Dreamcast: 10.6 Million sold as of December 2004 (Japan: 2.30, Other: 8.30)[2]* PlayStation 2: 106.23 Million shipped as of June 30, 2006 (Japan: 23.55, USA: 42.97, Europe: 39.71)[5]
* Nintendo GameCube: 21.00 Million sold as of June 30, 2006 (Japan: 4.01, The Americas: 12.27, Other: 4.72)[6]
* Xbox: more than 24 Million sold as of May 10, 2006[7]
Even if the XBOX numbers are slightly off, it still did better than the GameCube, a system with more name brand recognition and more "big-name" titles. Considering this was Microsoft's first foray into the market, I'd say it went pretty damn well. And now that the Xbox is a household name, it'll only help the 360 out.
Still, my point remains. PS2 wasn't capable of pushing out the graphics that the X-box could, yet it still did better. (Then again, it also came out earlier, and was backwards compatible with the PS1. Whatever, okay there were a number of things that had to do with PS2's success.)
quote:
Die, Willias! You don't belong in this world!
It's all about the gameplay.
Actually, and your examples only prove to back this up, it's all about developer support.
Unfortunately, the xbox still lacks what I would call "core" dev support. Gamecube lacks almost all 3rd party support, and that's why the PS2 dominated.
The 360 still lacks the support that I would need to see before I bought one, and nobody really knows what's in store for the Wii as far as 3rd party support goes, but it looks more promising than the gamecube. If the PS3 can maintain the dev support that the PS2 had, it will win again. I hope it doesn't, because I'm seriously starting to hate Sony now.
quote:
Mr. Gainsborough probably says this to all the girls:
hey guys guess what with your 600 dollar HD system you have to shell out even more cash to get it to play shit with the graphics it was intended to use right
hahaha. "Hay guys your games will look pretty, but we're not going to help you there. You're on your own."
quote:
nem-x probably says this to all the girls:
I played tons of games for the xbox. I've only played like three for the gamecube.
I tried real hard to love my Gamecube, but aside from Smash Brothers it just wasn't happening.
It's not something people hear about.
Nintendo needs to not do that anymore.
quote:
Channeling the spirit of Sherlock Holmes, Skaw absently fondled Watson and proclaimed:
No ones arguing that graphics of pongs calibur shut out todays technology. But what you are trying to do is say that cutting edge is enough difference from yesteryear to make up for a lack of substance, or that opting for slightly outdated technology is enough to diminish any quality a game may have.. Which is just laughable.
Point to where I said any of that.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
I enjoy debating you, but I'll be damned if I'm gonna look like a chucklenuts by not knowing what I'm arguing in the first place.
quote:
Verily, the chocolate bunny rabbits doth run and play while Mooj gently hums:
Out of curiousity, Sage, what ARE you trying to say? I've been looking over this thread off and on all day, and every time I think I get where you're coming from to offer a counterpoint, you post something else that blows that out of the water.I enjoy debating you, but I'll be damned if I'm gonna look like a chucklenuts by not knowing what I'm arguing in the first place.
And you just proved you're smarter than certain other people.
It's easy and, I thought, rather clear. The one and only thing I've said is that console capability is directly related to gaming potential, thus negating Blindy's ridiculous claim that the wii is somehow superior due solely to a gimmick controller. Saying, "My console is better because the graphics are worse!" is sort of stupid.
It's just too fashionable around here to repeat the pointless mantra, "Gaaaaameplaaaay," over and over like a zombie with no effort either to define it or use it consistently, apparently because admitting that one likes a game to have good visuals is some type of religious or moral perversion.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
This one time, at Bloodsage camp:
Point to where I said any of that.
quote:
Bloodsage stumbled drunkenly to the keyboard and typed:
The console is about gaming potential. The wii has deliberately crippled its potential in important areas and is hoping no one will notice because of the gimmick controller.
"Crippled it's potential in important areas," as in, reducing it's A/V output. Sorry, but A/V isn't that important. The Wii's graphics aren't even "crippled." Last I checked, it still looks pretty good.
quote:
Sorry, but if it's a choice between top-notch graphics and a tv remote/laser pointer controller, the former gives developers much more to work with in creating an immersive gameplay experience.
This, I just don't really understand. You yourself are trying to claim you aren't saying visuals and audio aren't the only thing that attribute to immersion, but here you say they do, compared to a more interactive controller.
quote:
Since, in case you didn't know, visuals are about 90% of what your brain uses in making decisions about your environment.
No shit, ofcourse we know. But you don't need 1000000000 poly models to be able to make decisions about environments. Another point to where you're claiming video quality will beat out any sort of depth a game has to offer, because if it doesn't have bleeding edge visuals, it's obviously unplayable.
quote:
Bloodsage:quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bent over the coffee table, Blindy. squealed:
Actually, you did, when you said graphical power helped design games.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------I never said that.
Refer back to the second broken up statement you made that I quoted in this post.
quote:
Bloodsage attempted to be funny by writing:
What you're arguing, though, is that one should buy the wii solely for the controller, since it has opted to shortchange all of the other aspects of gaming. Other consoles, on the other hand, don't shortchange any aspect. Giving them, you'll notice, better potential for producing good games.
oh hey, another post where you said that the increase in power will help design games. Skaw fucked around with this message on 09-08-2006 at 03:03 AM.
quote:
Bloodsage impressed everyone with:
And you just proved you're smarter than certain other people.It's easy and, I thought, rather clear. The one and only thing I've said is that console capability is directly related to gaming potential, thus negating Blindy's ridiculous claim that the wii is somehow superior due solely to a gimmick controller. Saying, "My console is better because the graphics are worse!" is
sort ofstupid.It's just too fashionable around here to repeat the pointless mantra, "Gaaaaameplaaaay," over and over like a zombie with no effort either to define it or use it consistently, apparently because admitting that one likes a game to have good visuals is some type of religious or moral perversion.
Got'cha. Looks like I was getting sidetracked from your initial point by all the talk of graphics from everyone and their mother. Classic misunderstanding by accidental misdirection. Matter of fact, looking at it again, Blindy was the one who got on about graphics in the first place.
Admittedly, that's a harder point to argue against. From a purely statistical standpoint, there's no way to beat that arguement.
So, that being said, I've got nothing to argue with here.
I'm looking forward to the Wii because I got a chance to play Metroid Prime 3 at E3, and it was a blast. Conversely, I got the chance to play Heavenly Sword and it was a very pretty piece of crap.
MGS4 looks like it's gonna be amazing, and if DMC4 remains PS3 exclusive, I'm going to have a very hard time resisting a purchase of the console sometime down the line. That price tag, Sony's asinine PR campaign, and all the gaffs that I'm seeing in the media are what's keeping me from going after that system at launch. Honestly, if even one of those things were significantly improved upon, if Sony's people could pull their heads out of their collective asses, I wouldn't have any reason to hold off on buying the system.
The controller has, frankly, more potential to be a giant pain-in-the-ass than anything able to overcome the fact that the rest of the hardware is a generation behind other consoles.
Point to where I said good graphics make up for a sucky game? On the other hand, a good story can't make up for sucky graphics, either. You may be used to compromise, but I don't think it necessary.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
By all recent accounts when the topic's come up, it's been said that development for the PS3 and the Cell processor in particular have been somewhat more difficult, and significantly more expensive.
The Wii is said to be pretty easy to develop for, and cheaper too. Wouldn't the cost/benefit differences between the two go in Nintendo's favor?
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
This jump is just no where near as noticable. And really, I just don't know what you're trying to say anymore, other than raving along with some psycho dribble about how the last generation has somehow degraded to shitty graphics. Skaw fucked around with this message on 09-08-2006 at 03:10 AM.
The performance differences are not nearly so evident to the common man, it'd take someone really informed on the topic to say that the PS3 looks significantly better than the Wii. I can easily say that the PS3 has better graphics, but I'm not sure if I can say that being able to render every pore on a character's face, or every hair on their head is all that important to me.
It just strikes me that from an economic standpoint, Nintendo's got the better outlook here. Companies that offer a product with slightly reduced capabilities for a vastly reduced price tag have, generally, been able to get a better hold of the market than companies that charge exhorbitantly for a product that isn't noticeably better.
Combine that with the fact that Nintendo's got more third-party support for their system already than they ever had for the Gamecube, and I'm wondering if that doesn't shed a little more light on the arguement from the Wii's standpoint.
Feel free to rip into me if I'm in error. It's the only way I'll learn.
quote:
Skaw had this to say about the Spice Girls:
Really, slightly increasing the graphical capabilities of the last generation could be considered crippling only if last generations visuals were horrible to begin with. They weren't. The jump from last generation to this generation wasn't as drastic as the previous jump. Or the one before that. Or the one before that.This jump is just no where near as noticable. And really, I just don't know what you're trying to say anymore, other than raving along with some psycho dribble about how the last generation has somehow degraded to shitty graphics.
I can see his point, and he IS right in the fact that the PS3 hardware beats the Wii hardware in every conceivable manner. The question you want to pose now is if it's going to be enough for the average consumer to say "I need a PS3, fuck the Wii". Also, the PS3 has a lot more going for it in terms of industry backing coming from the last generation. Winning the console race last time did them a lot of favors here, it's probably the reason why Sony's exec's egos are commuting to work in their own hummers. Mooj fucked around with this message on 09-08-2006 at 03:26 AM.
quote:
Skaw startled the peaceful upland Gorillas, blurting:
Really, slightly increasing the graphical capabilities of the last generation could be considered crippling only if last generations visuals were horrible to begin with. They weren't. The jump from last generation to this generation wasn't as drastic as the previous jump. Or the one before that. Or the one before that.This jump is just no where near as noticable. And really, I just don't know what you're trying to say anymore, other than raving along with some psycho dribble about how the last generation has somehow degraded to shitty graphics.
There's nothing "slightly" about the jump to HD. It's night/day over last generation.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
Bloodsage spewed forth this undeniable truth:
There's nothing "slightly" about the jump to HD. It's night/day over last generation.
.. Ouch, damn good point. I took that one for granted.
quote:
So quoth Bloodsage:
There's nothing "slightly" about the jump to HD. It's night/day over last generation.
Except for the fact that majority of consumers don't own HD TVs, which is why theres models of both Xbox360 and PS3 that lack that output. The jump to HD wasn't complete, so no, it's not night/day. Atleast, I think the low end 360 package lacks it. The $500 PS3 definintly does though.
Skaw fucked around with this message on 09-08-2006 at 04:51 AM.
But, whatever. Last generations graphics are still no where near as bad as you're complaining they are for some reason. Obviously you still play your Xbox, since Microsoft fucked up that backwards compatibility, or have you tossed it in the garbage because the gameplay has been desecrated because the visuals are out of date?
Edit: I donated my XBOX and all but the games I thought I might want to continue playing, most of which are forward-compatible. Bloodsage fucked around with this message on 09-08-2006 at 09:05 AM.
--Satan, quoted by John Milton
quote:
Skaw had this to say about Matthew Broderick:
The Wii's graphics aren't even "crippled." Last I checked, it still looks pretty good.
Yes they are, and no it doesn't.
Watch that video again. I don't care how poor the camera work is, those games look like shit. RED STEEL, which had an amazing showing in magazines, looks like Parappa the Rappa.
The only one that wasn't an eyesore to look at was the soccer game, and I'll bet they're still using slightly modified MARIO 64 models for all their characters.
It's not something people hear about.
quote:
Get the soap! Sean just said:
Yes they are, and no it doesn't.Watch that video again. I don't care how poor the camera work is, those games look like shit. RED STEEL, which had an amazing showing in magazines, looks like Parappa the Rappa.
The only one that wasn't an eyesore to look at was the soccer game, and I'll bet they're still using slightly modified MARIO 64 models for all their characters.
You are... literally... crazy, blind, or both.
quote:
Verily, Bloodsage doth proclaim:
Staying last generation while everyone moves forward is, indeed, crippling.The controller has, frankly, more potential to be a giant pain-in-the-ass than anything able to overcome the fact that the rest of the hardware is a generation behind other consoles.
Point to where I said good graphics make up for a sucky game? On the other hand, a good story can't make up for sucky graphics, either. You may be used to compromise, but I don't think it necessary.
I think a story can make up for graphics, but to a point. I'll admit it's hard to get into 16-bit games now if I haven't played them before, but if it's Xbox/PS2/Gamecube quality then it's perfectly acceptable to me. I suppose that's a matter of personal preference, though
I really don't see how 480p is all that "sucky" unless you're on a 100" HD screen. If I had an HDTV I'd probably be a little more miffed about it than I am, but even then, in terms of graphics, you get what you pay for. I'm sure you'll agree on that. We're not expecting to pay all that much for the Wii and I'd say 480p is pretty appropriate for the price range we're expecting.
To be fair, though, I can't claim to have experienced high-def gaming before. I don't have that point of comparison. To me, the Gamecube had damn fine looking graphics in the handful of worthwhile games it had, so a bump from that is still fine by me.
quote:
The logic train ran off the tracks when Skaw said:
] Obviously you still play your Xbox, since Microsoft fucked up that backwards compatibility, or have you tossed it in the garbage because the gameplay has been desecrated because the visuals are out of date?
They actually did pretty well, I'd say. It seems like it was quite a technical challenge to run a game on an entirely different architecture.
