x0thedeadzone0x
CAGiversary!
I totally agree. I also don't see a need for the DS or the PSP (commence flaming, I don't care). It seems like everything's being rushed. Warioware is brilliant, as is the GTA series.
Anyone else NOT anticipating the next generation of consoles?
- Thread starter punqsux
- Start date
[quote name='guessed']
Great games are possible on current-gen systems, and it remains to be seen if the improvements in technology of the next generation will allow for more innovative gameplay, or just more of the same with nicer graphics. If it is just better graphics, I will be disappointed. [/quote]
thank you for typing exactly what was in my head ^^
right now it dosent seem that graphical upgrades will cut it anymore, i am perfectly content with this gens graphics, so it'll take more than metal gear solid 4 to get me to buy another game console for more than $100
Great games are possible on current-gen systems, and it remains to be seen if the improvements in technology of the next generation will allow for more innovative gameplay, or just more of the same with nicer graphics. If it is just better graphics, I will be disappointed. [/quote]
thank you for typing exactly what was in my head ^^
right now it dosent seem that graphical upgrades will cut it anymore, i am perfectly content with this gens graphics, so it'll take more than metal gear solid 4 to get me to buy another game console for more than $100
[quote name='punqsux'][quote name='guessed']
Great games are possible on current-gen systems, and it remains to be seen if the improvements in technology of the next generation will allow for more innovative gameplay, or just more of the same with nicer graphics. If it is just better graphics, I will be disappointed. [/quote]
thank you for typing exactly what was in my head ^^
right now it dosent seem that graphical upgrades will cut it anymore, i am perfectly content with this gens graphics, so it'll take more than metal gear solid 4 to get me to buy another game console for more than $100[/quote]
Sounds like Nintendo's sentiments for the next-gen and their continued support for the GCN for the next 4-5 years.
Sony and M$'s plan so far is to just drop the current consoles when the new one comes out. Speaking of which, has anyone heard lately: is M$ still planning on not being backwards compatible with their next system? Last I heard, that was the situation...
Great games are possible on current-gen systems, and it remains to be seen if the improvements in technology of the next generation will allow for more innovative gameplay, or just more of the same with nicer graphics. If it is just better graphics, I will be disappointed. [/quote]
thank you for typing exactly what was in my head ^^
right now it dosent seem that graphical upgrades will cut it anymore, i am perfectly content with this gens graphics, so it'll take more than metal gear solid 4 to get me to buy another game console for more than $100[/quote]
Sounds like Nintendo's sentiments for the next-gen and their continued support for the GCN for the next 4-5 years.
Sony and M$'s plan so far is to just drop the current consoles when the new one comes out. Speaking of which, has anyone heard lately: is M$ still planning on not being backwards compatible with their next system? Last I heard, that was the situation...
[quote name='MorPhiend'][quote name='punqsux'][quote name='guessed']
Great games are possible on current-gen systems, and it remains to be seen if the improvements in technology of the next generation will allow for more innovative gameplay, or just more of the same with nicer graphics. If it is just better graphics, I will be disappointed. [/quote]
thank you for typing exactly what was in my head ^^
right now it dosent seem that graphical upgrades will cut it anymore, i am perfectly content with this gens graphics, so it'll take more than metal gear solid 4 to get me to buy another game console for more than $100[/quote]
Sounds like Nintendo's sentiments for the next-gen and their continued support for the GCN for the next 4-5 years.[/quote]
keeping the cube going until 2008 or 2009 would be AMAZING
Great games are possible on current-gen systems, and it remains to be seen if the improvements in technology of the next generation will allow for more innovative gameplay, or just more of the same with nicer graphics. If it is just better graphics, I will be disappointed. [/quote]
thank you for typing exactly what was in my head ^^
right now it dosent seem that graphical upgrades will cut it anymore, i am perfectly content with this gens graphics, so it'll take more than metal gear solid 4 to get me to buy another game console for more than $100[/quote]
Sounds like Nintendo's sentiments for the next-gen and their continued support for the GCN for the next 4-5 years.[/quote]
keeping the cube going until 2008 or 2009 would be AMAZING
Nirvanaguy777
CAGiversary!
the only things im anticipating are megaman X8 and kingdom hearts 2
[quote name='punqsux'][quote name='MorPhiend'][quote name='punqsux'][quote name='guessed']
Great games are possible on current-gen systems, and it remains to be seen if the improvements in technology of the next generation will allow for more innovative gameplay, or just more of the same with nicer graphics. If it is just better graphics, I will be disappointed. [/quote]
thank you for typing exactly what was in my head ^^
right now it dosent seem that graphical upgrades will cut it anymore, i am perfectly content with this gens graphics, so it'll take more than metal gear solid 4 to get me to buy another game console for more than $100[/quote]
Sounds like Nintendo's sentiments for the next-gen and their continued support for the GCN for the next 4-5 years.[/quote]
keeping the cube going until 2008 or 2009 would be AMAZING[/quote]
I agree. But it is what they have stood by. And maybe that would set a new industry standard when the GCN outperforms other consoles in the next 4-5 years...
Great games are possible on current-gen systems, and it remains to be seen if the improvements in technology of the next generation will allow for more innovative gameplay, or just more of the same with nicer graphics. If it is just better graphics, I will be disappointed. [/quote]
thank you for typing exactly what was in my head ^^
right now it dosent seem that graphical upgrades will cut it anymore, i am perfectly content with this gens graphics, so it'll take more than metal gear solid 4 to get me to buy another game console for more than $100[/quote]
Sounds like Nintendo's sentiments for the next-gen and their continued support for the GCN for the next 4-5 years.[/quote]
keeping the cube going until 2008 or 2009 would be AMAZING[/quote]
I agree. But it is what they have stood by. And maybe that would set a new industry standard when the GCN outperforms other consoles in the next 4-5 years...
hiccupleftovers
CAGiversary!
[quote name='MorPhiend'][quote name='punqsux'][quote name='guessed']
Great games are possible on current-gen systems, and it remains to be seen if the improvements in technology of the next generation will allow for more innovative gameplay, or just more of the same with nicer graphics. If it is just better graphics, I will be disappointed. [/quote]
thank you for typing exactly what was in my head ^^
right now it dosent seem that graphical upgrades will cut it anymore, i am perfectly content with this gens graphics, so it'll take more than metal gear solid 4 to get me to buy another game console for more than $100[/quote]
Sounds like Nintendo's sentiments for the next-gen and their continued support for the GCN for the next 4-5 years.
Sony and M$'s plan so far is to just drop the current consoles when the new one comes out. Speaking of which, has anyone heard lately: is M$ still planning on not being backwards compatible with their next system? Last I heard, that was the situation...[/quote]
I thought I read somewhere that they were considering doing backward compatibilty with the next system through some form of emulation software. I think it might have been a gamespot article if i'm not mistaken. Still, machines that are backwards compatible sort of do increase the life of the previous generation when you think about it. I mean look at the PS1, it got continued support even through this year, though not to much. I still don't know if that would make me buy another system for $300-$400.
Great games are possible on current-gen systems, and it remains to be seen if the improvements in technology of the next generation will allow for more innovative gameplay, or just more of the same with nicer graphics. If it is just better graphics, I will be disappointed. [/quote]
thank you for typing exactly what was in my head ^^
right now it dosent seem that graphical upgrades will cut it anymore, i am perfectly content with this gens graphics, so it'll take more than metal gear solid 4 to get me to buy another game console for more than $100[/quote]
Sounds like Nintendo's sentiments for the next-gen and their continued support for the GCN for the next 4-5 years.
Sony and M$'s plan so far is to just drop the current consoles when the new one comes out. Speaking of which, has anyone heard lately: is M$ still planning on not being backwards compatible with their next system? Last I heard, that was the situation...[/quote]
I thought I read somewhere that they were considering doing backward compatibilty with the next system through some form of emulation software. I think it might have been a gamespot article if i'm not mistaken. Still, machines that are backwards compatible sort of do increase the life of the previous generation when you think about it. I mean look at the PS1, it got continued support even through this year, though not to much. I still don't know if that would make me buy another system for $300-$400.
[quote name='hiccupleftovers'][quote name='MorPhiend'][quote name='punqsux'][quote name='guessed']
Great games are possible on current-gen systems, and it remains to be seen if the improvements in technology of the next generation will allow for more innovative gameplay, or just more of the same with nicer graphics. If it is just better graphics, I will be disappointed. [/quote]
thank you for typing exactly what was in my head ^^
right now it dosent seem that graphical upgrades will cut it anymore, i am perfectly content with this gens graphics, so it'll take more than metal gear solid 4 to get me to buy another game console for more than $100[/quote]
Sounds like Nintendo's sentiments for the next-gen and their continued support for the GCN for the next 4-5 years.
Sony and M$'s plan so far is to just drop the current consoles when the new one comes out. Speaking of which, has anyone heard lately: is M$ still planning on not being backwards compatible with their next system? Last I heard, that was the situation...[/quote]
I thought I read somewhere that they were considering doing backward compatibilty with the next system through some form of emulation software. I think it might have been a gamespot article if i'm not mistaken. Still, machines that are backwards compatible sort of do increase the life of the previous generation when you think about it. I mean look at the PS1, it got continued support even through this year, though not to much. I still don't know if that would make me buy another system for $300-$400.[/quote]
That's just speculation as far as the Revolution goes, although I am all for it.
Great games are possible on current-gen systems, and it remains to be seen if the improvements in technology of the next generation will allow for more innovative gameplay, or just more of the same with nicer graphics. If it is just better graphics, I will be disappointed. [/quote]
thank you for typing exactly what was in my head ^^
right now it dosent seem that graphical upgrades will cut it anymore, i am perfectly content with this gens graphics, so it'll take more than metal gear solid 4 to get me to buy another game console for more than $100[/quote]
Sounds like Nintendo's sentiments for the next-gen and their continued support for the GCN for the next 4-5 years.
Sony and M$'s plan so far is to just drop the current consoles when the new one comes out. Speaking of which, has anyone heard lately: is M$ still planning on not being backwards compatible with their next system? Last I heard, that was the situation...[/quote]
I thought I read somewhere that they were considering doing backward compatibilty with the next system through some form of emulation software. I think it might have been a gamespot article if i'm not mistaken. Still, machines that are backwards compatible sort of do increase the life of the previous generation when you think about it. I mean look at the PS1, it got continued support even through this year, though not to much. I still don't know if that would make me buy another system for $300-$400.[/quote]
That's just speculation as far as the Revolution goes, although I am all for it.
Mr. Anderson
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 21 (100%)
I'm definitley not ready for the next gen consoles yet. I have barely scratched the surface on my current gen collection! I can't start collecting new games yet! I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY, PEOPLE!
[quote name='Mr. Anderson']I'm definitley not ready for the next gen consoles yet. I have barely scratched the surface on my current gen collection! I can't start collecting new games yet! I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY, PEOPLE![/quote]
And you'll have even less money when this generation's game prices drop even more...
And you'll have even less money when this generation's game prices drop even more...
[quote name='punqsux'][quote name='guessed']
Great games are possible on current-gen systems, and it remains to be seen if the improvements in technology of the next generation will allow for more innovative gameplay, or just more of the same with nicer graphics. If it is just better graphics, I will be disappointed. [/quote]
thank you for typing exactly what was in my head ^^[/quote]
And I was afraid you'd be mad at me for messing around in there.
Great games are possible on current-gen systems, and it remains to be seen if the improvements in technology of the next generation will allow for more innovative gameplay, or just more of the same with nicer graphics. If it is just better graphics, I will be disappointed. [/quote]
thank you for typing exactly what was in my head ^^[/quote]
And I was afraid you'd be mad at me for messing around in there.
These IMO are the only games that show innovation:
Wario Ware
Donkey Konga
Katamari Damancy
They're are also the most simplest of games. Games don't have to be complex to be fun.
Also, it's no wonder all the classic NES series nintendo released did so well.
Wario Ware
Donkey Konga
Katamari Damancy
They're are also the most simplest of games. Games don't have to be complex to be fun.
Also, it's no wonder all the classic NES series nintendo released did so well.
Have to say though, most games that dared to innovate were mostly overlooked, and as a result, due to poor sales, companies turn to less riskier ventures..Like platformers, shoot em ups, etc.-just rehashes of the same concepts.. To makes money and stay afloat.
The games you mentioned were some of the only exceptions. =0
Sad..but thats how the industry works on the most part.
But Hopefully, people will learn to accept innovation more readily in the future...Or else, the game industry will get shaq-fued.
The games you mentioned were some of the only exceptions. =0
Sad..but thats how the industry works on the most part.
But Hopefully, people will learn to accept innovation more readily in the future...Or else, the game industry will get shaq-fued.
hiccupleftovers
CAGiversary!
[quote name='Mr. Anderson']I'm definitley not ready for the next gen consoles yet. I have barely scratched the surface on my current gen collection! I can't start collecting new games yet! I DON'T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY, PEOPLE![/quote]
Who does?
Who does?
[quote name='Parathod']omster, Donkey Konga is basically just Taiko Drum Master with a clap added, how is that innovative? I think a better example would be Mr. Mosquito or some other weird title.[/quote]
it dosent matter how weird a title is...if it makes no impact it dosent do much to further the industry.
it dosent matter how weird a title is...if it makes no impact it dosent do much to further the industry.
Sheik Rattle Enroll
CAGiversary!
[quote name='crystalklear64']On a side note, the latest OPM has an article on the PS3. Most people are estimating a next gen console costing 500$ and up. 500$!! you could blow that on something better than a game console![/quote]
The Saturn launched for $400. Stuff comes down pretty quickly.
I'm pretty psyched for the next generation. Alot of games in this generation are sequels with little graphical differentiation from previous titles. I think a Dynasty Warriors 5 on PS3 would be mindblowing.
The Saturn launched for $400. Stuff comes down pretty quickly.
I'm pretty psyched for the next generation. Alot of games in this generation are sequels with little graphical differentiation from previous titles. I think a Dynasty Warriors 5 on PS3 would be mindblowing.
[quote name='Sheik Rattle Enroll']Alot of games in this generation are sequels with little graphical differentiation from previous titles. [/quote]
yeah, thats what this thread is about!!
why would dw5 be mindblowing? 12 more enemies on screen with 6,000 more polygons each?
yeah, thats what this thread is about!!
why would dw5 be mindblowing? 12 more enemies on screen with 6,000 more polygons each?
hiccupleftovers
CAGiversary!
[quote name='Sheik Rattle Enroll'][quote name='crystalklear64']On a side note, the latest OPM has an article on the PS3. Most people are estimating a next gen console costing 500$ and up. 500$!! you could blow that on something better than a game console![/quote]
The Saturn launched for $400. Stuff comes down pretty quickly.
I'm pretty psyched for the next generation. Alot of games in this generation are sequels with little graphical differentiation from previous titles. I think a Dynasty Warriors 5 on PS3 would be mindblowing.[/quote]
Punqsux beat me to it but Yaeh, Another sequel. Big Deal, let's see something original on the next system. Sure we have had a few orignial titles (i.e. Jak and Daxter/Rachet and Clank) but most have been sequels or redone version of a classic (i.e. Prince of Persia which wasn't bad) but I want some more originality in gaming.
The Saturn launched for $400. Stuff comes down pretty quickly.
I'm pretty psyched for the next generation. Alot of games in this generation are sequels with little graphical differentiation from previous titles. I think a Dynasty Warriors 5 on PS3 would be mindblowing.[/quote]
Punqsux beat me to it but Yaeh, Another sequel. Big Deal, let's see something original on the next system. Sure we have had a few orignial titles (i.e. Jak and Daxter/Rachet and Clank) but most have been sequels or redone version of a classic (i.e. Prince of Persia which wasn't bad) but I want some more originality in gaming.
Parathod
CAGiversary!
I realized i'm going to get flamed, and that's fine, but I think you guys are just looking for something to complain about. Game innovation has always been slow and steady, with each generation comes the same amount of evolution and revolution as the generation prior to it. The Snes had some pretty original games, but most of the games were just evolved Nes games. The Saturn introduced some 3d through games like Virtua Fighter, Virtua Cop, and Daytona USA, but it was all the same shit as 2d. Then when the PS1 and N64 came out we got some more revisions to 3D such as Mario 64, Bushido Blade, CGI movies, Zelda:OoT, and Resident Evil, but although these games opened up some new ideas, I don't think they are adequate examples of true innovation but rather evolution over time. The PS2/Gamecube/Xbox era is the same exact thing. We have new game ideas and old ideas that have been expanded on, but in general, not that much is what we can call "new".
The things we can learn through gaming history is:
1) Games don't change much over a short period of time.
2) Nintendo abuses Mario.
3) Few risks are made.
4) That eventually DDR will take over the world.
5) Sequels and remakes are popular.
The things we can learn through gaming history is:
1) Games don't change much over a short period of time.
2) Nintendo abuses Mario.
3) Few risks are made.
4) That eventually DDR will take over the world.
5) Sequels and remakes are popular.
Parathod
CAGiversary!
Sorry, I forgot to add games that show some evolution from this generation:
Seaman
Grand Theft Auto - perhaps for the worse
Legend of Zelda: Four Swords
Samba De Amigo
ICO
Wario Ware (as mentioned by omster)
Animal Crossing
Typing of the Dead - this can be debated
Powerstone 1,2, or Rave
Mark of Kri
Jet Grind Radio
Katamari Demacy
Gitaroo Man - also debatable
Shenmue
and i'm sure there were many more. The next generation of gaming is going to follow the tradition of all gaming... give them more of the same, but better, and throw them a new kind of seed once in a while. I think the only problem with gaming today is that we now have more than just one or two systems, so that innovation is split up between them and maybe it's harder to recognize.
Either way, I still won't be buying any home console until I finish the games for the ones I already have.
Seaman
Grand Theft Auto - perhaps for the worse
Legend of Zelda: Four Swords
Samba De Amigo
ICO
Wario Ware (as mentioned by omster)
Animal Crossing
Typing of the Dead - this can be debated
Powerstone 1,2, or Rave
Mark of Kri
Jet Grind Radio
Katamari Demacy
Gitaroo Man - also debatable
Shenmue
and i'm sure there were many more. The next generation of gaming is going to follow the tradition of all gaming... give them more of the same, but better, and throw them a new kind of seed once in a while. I think the only problem with gaming today is that we now have more than just one or two systems, so that innovation is split up between them and maybe it's harder to recognize.
Either way, I still won't be buying any home console until I finish the games for the ones I already have.
[quote name='Parathod']Sorry, I forgot to add games that show some evolution from this generation:
Seaman
Grand Theft Auto - perhaps for the worse
Legend of Zelda: Four Swords
Samba De Amigo
ICO
Wario Ware (as mentioned by omster)
Animal Crossing
Typing of the Dead - this can be debated
Powerstone 1,2, or Rave
Mark of Kri
Jet Grind Radio
Katamari Demacy
Gitaroo Man - also debatable
Shenmue
[/quote]
im not saying "there are no quirky games this gen"
none of those games made any kind of impact outside of gta3 and maybe wario ware/animal crossing
Seaman
Grand Theft Auto - perhaps for the worse
Legend of Zelda: Four Swords
Samba De Amigo
ICO
Wario Ware (as mentioned by omster)
Animal Crossing
Typing of the Dead - this can be debated
Powerstone 1,2, or Rave
Mark of Kri
Jet Grind Radio
Katamari Demacy
Gitaroo Man - also debatable
Shenmue
[/quote]
im not saying "there are no quirky games this gen"
none of those games made any kind of impact outside of gta3 and maybe wario ware/animal crossing
hiccupleftovers
CAGiversary!
[quote name='punqsux'][quote name='Parathod']Sorry, I forgot to add games that show some evolution from this generation:
Seaman
Grand Theft Auto - perhaps for the worse
Legend of Zelda: Four Swords
Samba De Amigo
ICO
Wario Ware (as mentioned by omster)
Animal Crossing
Typing of the Dead - this can be debated
Powerstone 1,2, or Rave
Mark of Kri
Jet Grind Radio
Katamari Demacy
Gitaroo Man - also debatable
Shenmue
[/quote]
im not saying "there are no quirky games this gen"
none of those games made any kind of impact outside of gta3 and maybe wario ware/animal crossing[/quote]
Yes all of those were under the radar and who knows whether or not they will have an impact on the next generation of gaming. There has been innovation, but how many countless sequels and redone ideas have we seen this gen.
Seaman
Grand Theft Auto - perhaps for the worse
Legend of Zelda: Four Swords
Samba De Amigo
ICO
Wario Ware (as mentioned by omster)
Animal Crossing
Typing of the Dead - this can be debated
Powerstone 1,2, or Rave
Mark of Kri
Jet Grind Radio
Katamari Demacy
Gitaroo Man - also debatable
Shenmue
[/quote]
im not saying "there are no quirky games this gen"
none of those games made any kind of impact outside of gta3 and maybe wario ware/animal crossing[/quote]
Yes all of those were under the radar and who knows whether or not they will have an impact on the next generation of gaming. There has been innovation, but how many countless sequels and redone ideas have we seen this gen.
Just because a game is innovative doesn't mean it's a good game. And just because a game isn't "innovative" doesn't mean it's a bad game. A good game is a good game, regardless of it's level of "innovation".
That being said, I'm not excited about the next gen mainly for monetary reasons. I'm not going to pay $300+ for a console or $50+ for a game, I'll wait till the prices drop, and then evaluate what games are out that I want. That's what I did with the current gen, and I'm glad with my decisions.
That being said, I'm not excited about the next gen mainly for monetary reasons. I'm not going to pay $300+ for a console or $50+ for a game, I'll wait till the prices drop, and then evaluate what games are out that I want. That's what I did with the current gen, and I'm glad with my decisions.
Parathod
CAGiversary!
I don't know if you remember Funcoland, but I think I might still have a list to scan. It's amazing how many sequels are actually on the NES. Megaman 1 - 6, Castlevania 1 - 3, Wizards and Warriors 1 - 2, Dragon Warrior 1 - 5, Final Fantasy 1 - 3, Super Mario 1 - 3, Donkey Kong 1 - 3, Contra 1 - 2 (was there a third?), Metal Gear 1 & 2, and i'm sure there were many more. With more games being developed this generation, there's bound to be more sequels, and the reason why they stick out so much is because those are the games that people get excited about. People like to go for the big names because it's tried and true, and because people will buy these games, companies give the directors a higher budget to work with and that includes marketing, playtesting, and showing off the product to industry followers. Other games are being made right now, but whose thinking about Odama or God of War when Resident Evil 4 or Halo 2 are on the way? Original games tend to become popular after they hit the market rather than before. So while everyone wants Mario 64 DS, Wario Ware DS, Animal Crossing DS, and every single Nintendo game DS, eventually one of those weird games that have been announced but no one has really looked into will come out and people will respond, and it will be their turn to come out with a thousand sequels.
hiccupleftovers
CAGiversary!
[quote name='Parathod']I don't know if you remember Funcoland, but I think I might still have a list to scan. It's amazing how many sequels are actually on the NES. Megaman 1 - 6, Castlevania 1 - 3, Wizards and Warriors 1 - 2, Dragon Warrior 1 - 5, Final Fantasy 1 - 3, Super Mario 1 - 3, Donkey Kong 1 - 3, Contra 1 - 2 (was there a third?), Metal Gear 1 & 2, and i'm sure there were many more. With more games being developed this generation, there's bound to be more sequels, and the reason why they stick out so much is because those are the games that people get excited about. People like to go for the big names because it's tried and true, and because people will buy these games, companies give the directors a higher budget to work with and that includes marketing, playtesting, and showing off the product to industry followers. Other games are being made right now, but whose thinking about Odama or God of War when Resident Evil 4 or Halo 2 are on the way? Original games tend to become popular after they hit the market rather than before. So while everyone wants Mario 64 DS, Wario Ware DS, Animal Crossing DS, and every single Nintendo game DS, eventually one of those weird games that have been announced but no one has really looked into will come out and people will respond, and it will be their turn to come out with a thousand sequels.[/quote]
Yes, you make sense in retrospect. I think I spoke a little hastily in what I said before. BigBen is correct but it's just that in this gen., it seems that games are getting too repetitive.
Yes, you make sense in retrospect. I think I spoke a little hastily in what I said before. BigBen is correct but it's just that in this gen., it seems that games are getting too repetitive.
[quote name='BigBen']Just because a game is innovative doesn't mean it's a good game. And just because a game isn't "innovative" doesn't mean it's a bad game. A good game is a good game, regardless of it's level of "innovation".
[/quote]
i agree and you dont understand what im saying.
i am not bashing this gens games.
i AM saying i see no reason why a new console would come out in a year or 2
[/quote]
i agree and you dont understand what im saying.
i am not bashing this gens games.
i AM saying i see no reason why a new console would come out in a year or 2
Indiana
CAGiversary!
[quote name='MorPhiend'][quote name='punqsux']2d to 3d was a big leap, but i highly doubt 3d (or 2d for that matter) gameplay has been stretched to its limits.
another innovative title i rememberd was wario ware.[/quote]
It was a big leap. The funny thing is, it wasn't 3D that did it. It was innovation in it's execution. There were plenty of 3D titles on PC and PS and such before the 64 came out. But everyone pretty much recognizes Super Mario 64 as the Grand-daddy of the 3D video game.
On a tangent: Speaking of a game by Shigeru Miyamoto and the game Wario Ware; Miyamoto is considered one of, if not the, most creative and innovative people in the industry. And he has stated how jealous he is of Yoshio Sakamoto for creating Wario Ware. That's a big compliment, IMO, comming from the man. My point being, Nintendo is not the only place innovations are capable of coming from, they are just the ones who try the hardest (and thus succeed most often).[/quote]
Actually I think Doom is the Gran Daddy of the 3D video game.
another innovative title i rememberd was wario ware.[/quote]
It was a big leap. The funny thing is, it wasn't 3D that did it. It was innovation in it's execution. There were plenty of 3D titles on PC and PS and such before the 64 came out. But everyone pretty much recognizes Super Mario 64 as the Grand-daddy of the 3D video game.
On a tangent: Speaking of a game by Shigeru Miyamoto and the game Wario Ware; Miyamoto is considered one of, if not the, most creative and innovative people in the industry. And he has stated how jealous he is of Yoshio Sakamoto for creating Wario Ware. That's a big compliment, IMO, comming from the man. My point being, Nintendo is not the only place innovations are capable of coming from, they are just the ones who try the hardest (and thus succeed most often).[/quote]
Actually I think Doom is the Gran Daddy of the 3D video game.
Levizk
CAGiversary!
I still feel PC gaming is far beyond console gaming so i'm not really anticipating the next generation of consoles. The main reason they're pushing a new gen out the door is probably so they can release a console that's closer to having the functionality of a pc. That and the game market is probably starting to be less profitable for them now that a huge library of value titles exists on the market for their current systems.
Levizk
CAGiversary!
[quote name='Indiana'][quote name='MorPhiend'][quote name='punqsux']2d to 3d was a big leap, but i highly doubt 3d (or 2d for that matter) gameplay has been stretched to its limits.
another innovative title i rememberd was wario ware.[/quote]
It was a big leap. The funny thing is, it wasn't 3D that did it. It was innovation in it's execution. There were plenty of 3D titles on PC and PS and such before the 64 came out. But everyone pretty much recognizes Super Mario 64 as the Grand-daddy of the 3D video game.
On a tangent: Speaking of a game by Shigeru Miyamoto and the game Wario Ware; Miyamoto is considered one of, if not the, most creative and innovative people in the industry. And he has stated how jealous he is of Yoshio Sakamoto for creating Wario Ware. That's a big compliment, IMO, comming from the man. My point being, Nintendo is not the only place innovations are capable of coming from, they are just the ones who try the hardest (and thus succeed most often).[/quote]
Actually I think Doom is the Gran Daddy of the 3D video game.[/quote]
Yeah I don't know anyone that thinks Mario 64 is the grand-daddy of the 3d video game. Most people would give that title to Wolfenstein.
another innovative title i rememberd was wario ware.[/quote]
It was a big leap. The funny thing is, it wasn't 3D that did it. It was innovation in it's execution. There were plenty of 3D titles on PC and PS and such before the 64 came out. But everyone pretty much recognizes Super Mario 64 as the Grand-daddy of the 3D video game.
On a tangent: Speaking of a game by Shigeru Miyamoto and the game Wario Ware; Miyamoto is considered one of, if not the, most creative and innovative people in the industry. And he has stated how jealous he is of Yoshio Sakamoto for creating Wario Ware. That's a big compliment, IMO, comming from the man. My point being, Nintendo is not the only place innovations are capable of coming from, they are just the ones who try the hardest (and thus succeed most often).[/quote]
Actually I think Doom is the Gran Daddy of the 3D video game.[/quote]
Yeah I don't know anyone that thinks Mario 64 is the grand-daddy of the 3d video game. Most people would give that title to Wolfenstein.
Platypus Stan
CAG Veteran
There have always been more bad games than good. Whether or not the ratio is any worse this gen is debatable, but even if it is, there are still more than enough amazing games to go around. Finding the good ones is getting harder, but they're still there.
In fact, I'd say things have been steadily improving over the last few years. Last gen was probably the worst on record as far as I'm concerned. The biggest thing that happened was the leap to 3D, and while some games made the jump gracefully, most did not.
Honestly, how many of last gen's games can you imagine yourself playing years from now? I can only think of about four per console with the Saturn somehow coming out ahead (although only because of some amazing imports). This generation isn't even over yet, and I've got twice that many for all the consoles.
Now, back to the actual topic... no, I'm not terribly excited about the new consoles. I'm curious about what the hell Nintendo is doing over there with this "Revolution", but other than that I'd be fine with the same consoles for another three to five years. I already have a backlog of games that'll hold me over that long even if I never buy a new game after today. If the new consoles can really bring something new to gaming, then I'll be all over them, but it seems like "better graphics" will be the main draw yet again.
In fact, I'd say things have been steadily improving over the last few years. Last gen was probably the worst on record as far as I'm concerned. The biggest thing that happened was the leap to 3D, and while some games made the jump gracefully, most did not.
Honestly, how many of last gen's games can you imagine yourself playing years from now? I can only think of about four per console with the Saturn somehow coming out ahead (although only because of some amazing imports). This generation isn't even over yet, and I've got twice that many for all the consoles.
Now, back to the actual topic... no, I'm not terribly excited about the new consoles. I'm curious about what the hell Nintendo is doing over there with this "Revolution", but other than that I'd be fine with the same consoles for another three to five years. I already have a backlog of games that'll hold me over that long even if I never buy a new game after today. If the new consoles can really bring something new to gaming, then I'll be all over them, but it seems like "better graphics" will be the main draw yet again.
Mafia
CAGiversary!
I totally agree. With each generation the shelf time each gen has gotten has shrunk quite a bit, and way too much. The NES launched in the US, I believe, in 1985. It was still a popular console through 1991, when both the SNES and the Genesis were around, and it took until 1994 for Nintendo to stop producing games and accessories for it.
Nowadays, once a new system is launched, the previous is forgotten in about a year. About the only exception to that is the PS1, which still gets the occasional game.
I see one major difference between new systems then and new systems now. The NES held strong for many years and Nintendo didn't seem to push the SNES into the market until the top companies had seemingly gotten everything they possibly could have out of the NES's chipset. I think that the same thing happened with the 16-bit generation. At this point, I don't think companies are really getting every last bit out of the current systems.
I think there is enough untapped potential in the current systems to last another 3 years or so. If they were smart they would wait and spend the extra time to further develop the next generation of consoles. We all know that won't happen, as they see the dollar signs that a new console release generates, but I always wonder if they would make even more money by holding off and not only producing a better product, but also being able to generate a larger buzz since it would have been much longer between new consoles.
Nowadays, once a new system is launched, the previous is forgotten in about a year. About the only exception to that is the PS1, which still gets the occasional game.
I see one major difference between new systems then and new systems now. The NES held strong for many years and Nintendo didn't seem to push the SNES into the market until the top companies had seemingly gotten everything they possibly could have out of the NES's chipset. I think that the same thing happened with the 16-bit generation. At this point, I don't think companies are really getting every last bit out of the current systems.
I think there is enough untapped potential in the current systems to last another 3 years or so. If they were smart they would wait and spend the extra time to further develop the next generation of consoles. We all know that won't happen, as they see the dollar signs that a new console release generates, but I always wonder if they would make even more money by holding off and not only producing a better product, but also being able to generate a larger buzz since it would have been much longer between new consoles.
Parathod
CAGiversary!
punqsux, I think I know what you were getting at earlier and i'm sorry if I went off on the wrong path because I think I agree with you. I think you're trying to say that games today are becoming homogenous (like everygame needs you to collect stuff, build up your character, have racing missions or minigames, as well as sidequests, and blah blah blah) and that's something that i've noticed as well. I'd like it if more games tried to just focus on one thing and make a solid 8 hour game out of it rather than 40 hours of repititious bullshit. Games are getting harder and harder to finish because of that.
[quote name='Parathod']I'd like it if more games tried to just focus on one thing and make a solid 8 hour game out of it rather than 40 hours of repititious bullshit. [/quote]
not what i was getting at but a great point! i loved games like ico, max payne, metal gear solid 2, and others like them, because they were very straight forward.
i love jak and daxter but 72 orbs?! thats way too many, i got to like 55 and havent played it in a while...i couldnt stand bg+e because of the boat parts and the fact that you needed those stupid power orbs.
not what i was getting at but a great point! i loved games like ico, max payne, metal gear solid 2, and others like them, because they were very straight forward.
i love jak and daxter but 72 orbs?! thats way too many, i got to like 55 and havent played it in a while...i couldnt stand bg+e because of the boat parts and the fact that you needed those stupid power orbs.
manofpeace20
Banned
The problem with this generation of consoles can not be placed on one huge factor, but each one has its fair share. Let me begin.
Playstation 2:
The PS2 I believe is maxed out on its potential and the need for the PS3 is great. It was the first to come out in 2000 and it shows. The big thing back then was a DVD player came in it, and I think the developers just threw it together seeing how flimsy the system is with its DDE problems. As for the games, they probably have the most innovative out there, such as Grand Theft Auto and Metal Gear Solid, not to mention their wide arsenal of RPGs the system has. I just think its time for a software update, and they should be first to get it.
Gamecube:
We all should have known with the N64 what the Gamecube's problem would be: lack of games. I can seriously count on one hand the number of interesting games I played on the Gamecube. However, a true dud is a far rarer find than on the other two consoles. The fact that Gamecube is not trying to update its technology to keep up with other consoles (online play, hard drives) leads me to believe they will not last in the console battles. However, I could be wrong. Nintendo is the last true innovator out there.
XBOX:
This is my favorite system out of the 3, but there is one major problem. They SHOULD NOT release a new console for at least 2 or 3 years. The system was released in 2001, but seemingly didn't start catching on until late 2003. I look at this 2004 fourth quarter, and nearly every game I could dream of is coming on the XBOX. The current system is loaded with potential, and its newer games just amaze me.
Playstation 2:
The PS2 I believe is maxed out on its potential and the need for the PS3 is great. It was the first to come out in 2000 and it shows. The big thing back then was a DVD player came in it, and I think the developers just threw it together seeing how flimsy the system is with its DDE problems. As for the games, they probably have the most innovative out there, such as Grand Theft Auto and Metal Gear Solid, not to mention their wide arsenal of RPGs the system has. I just think its time for a software update, and they should be first to get it.
Gamecube:
We all should have known with the N64 what the Gamecube's problem would be: lack of games. I can seriously count on one hand the number of interesting games I played on the Gamecube. However, a true dud is a far rarer find than on the other two consoles. The fact that Gamecube is not trying to update its technology to keep up with other consoles (online play, hard drives) leads me to believe they will not last in the console battles. However, I could be wrong. Nintendo is the last true innovator out there.
XBOX:
This is my favorite system out of the 3, but there is one major problem. They SHOULD NOT release a new console for at least 2 or 3 years. The system was released in 2001, but seemingly didn't start catching on until late 2003. I look at this 2004 fourth quarter, and nearly every game I could dream of is coming on the XBOX. The current system is loaded with potential, and its newer games just amaze me.
[quote name='manofpeace20']
Playstation 2:
The PS2 I believe is maxed out on its potential and the need for the PS3 is great. [/quote]
why do you say that?
[quote name='manofpeace20']
Gamecube:
The fact that Gamecube is not trying to update its technology to keep up with other consoles (online play, hard drives) leads me to believe they will not last in the console battles. However, I could be wrong. Nintendo is the last true innovator out there.
[/quote]
hard drives and online play have done little to nil for console gaming. yes xbox and ps2 have sucessful online plans, but online is more a diffrent option in most games...hard drives are good for game saves and piracy, cant imagine why nintendo wouldnt want this ^^
[quote name='manofpeace20']
XBOX:
The current system is loaded with potential, and its newer games just amaze me.[/quote]
alll current systems are loaded with potential...
Playstation 2:
The PS2 I believe is maxed out on its potential and the need for the PS3 is great. [/quote]
why do you say that?
[quote name='manofpeace20']
Gamecube:
The fact that Gamecube is not trying to update its technology to keep up with other consoles (online play, hard drives) leads me to believe they will not last in the console battles. However, I could be wrong. Nintendo is the last true innovator out there.
[/quote]
hard drives and online play have done little to nil for console gaming. yes xbox and ps2 have sucessful online plans, but online is more a diffrent option in most games...hard drives are good for game saves and piracy, cant imagine why nintendo wouldnt want this ^^
[quote name='manofpeace20']
XBOX:
The current system is loaded with potential, and its newer games just amaze me.[/quote]
alll current systems are loaded with potential...
There is no way any of the 3 current gen consoles has maxed out its potential.
As a historic example, look at the SNES. Compare the first games (e.g. Pilotwings, F-zero) with the last games (e.g. Donkey Kong Country 3). You can hardly believe they're on the same system!
As a historic example, look at the SNES. Compare the first games (e.g. Pilotwings, F-zero) with the last games (e.g. Donkey Kong Country 3). You can hardly believe they're on the same system!
[quote name='Rig']I am not ready to move on, because college is expensive, and I don't want to shell out the cash for new systems![/quote]
It really does seem that as the systems become more advanced and more expensive the age of target audience actually rises. Who can most afford a $300 system? Not kids, not high school or college students........
It really does seem that as the systems become more advanced and more expensive the age of target audience actually rises. Who can most afford a $300 system? Not kids, not high school or college students........
Platypus Stan
CAG Veteran
[quote name='manofpeace20']Playstation 2:
The PS2 I believe is maxed out on its potential and the need for the PS3 is great. It was the first to come out in 2000 and it shows. The big thing back then was a DVD player came in it, and I think the developers just threw it together seeing how flimsy the system is with its DDE problems. As for the games, they probably have the most innovative out there, such as Grand Theft Auto and Metal Gear Solid, not to mention their wide arsenal of RPGs the system has. I just think its time for a software update, and they should be first to get it.[/quote]
I wouldn't say it's maxed out just yet, since newer PS2 games can still blow people away (GT4). However, the console has definitely saturated the market. Just about everyone on the planet who'd be interested in it already owns one. I'm sure Sony is eager to get something new on the market, especially since it will supposedly be backwards compatible and feature their proprietary format (Blu-ray) which they're going to be pushing hard to get into as many homes as possible.
[quote name='manofpeace20']Gamecube:
We all should have known with the N64 what the Gamecube's problem would be: lack of games. I can seriously count on one hand the number of interesting games I played on the Gamecube. However, a true dud is a far rarer find than on the other two consoles. The fact that Gamecube is not trying to update its technology to keep up with other consoles (online play, hard drives) leads me to believe they will not last in the console battles. However, I could be wrong. Nintendo is the last true innovator out there.[/quote]
:? How hard have you been looking for GameCube games? I'd say it's easily surpassed the Nintendo 64 in quantity of games worth playing, and although I own far more games for my other systems, the GameCube edges them out for the overall experience so far.
Anyway, I think the GameCube has a lot of life left in it, and I think there are still quite a few people out there who have shyed away from buying one for whatever reason. Still, I'm interested to see what Nintendo has up their sleeve, since they claim that both the Revolution and the GameCube will be supported side by side.
[quote name='manofpeace20']XBOX:
This is my favorite system out of the 3, but there is one major problem. They SHOULD NOT release a new console for at least 2 or 3 years. The system was released in 2001, but seemingly didn't start catching on until late 2003. I look at this 2004 fourth quarter, and nearly every game I could dream of is coming on the XBOX. The current system is loaded with potential, and its newer games just amaze me.[/quote]
I don't quite understand Microsoft's eagerness to get to market first with a new console. There are plenty of potential Xbox owners out there and Xbox games will continue to be the most visually striking (usually). They've put a lot of effort into being perceived as the most advanced console, so I imagine they don't want a competitor's new console outdoing them for any period of time while they finish working on their own new console. Also, I'm sure they realize the absurd amount of piracy that's going on, so perhaps they're eager to get a system on the market that implements a security measure or two.
[quote name='Jaxcomet']It really does seem that as the systems become more advanced and more expensive the age of target audience actually rises. Who can most afford a $300 system? Not kids, not high school or college students........[/quote]
If you take inflation into account, the Atari 2600 cost over $600, the NES cost about $350 - $425 depending on the package, the Genesis cost around $300, etc...
The PS2 I believe is maxed out on its potential and the need for the PS3 is great. It was the first to come out in 2000 and it shows. The big thing back then was a DVD player came in it, and I think the developers just threw it together seeing how flimsy the system is with its DDE problems. As for the games, they probably have the most innovative out there, such as Grand Theft Auto and Metal Gear Solid, not to mention their wide arsenal of RPGs the system has. I just think its time for a software update, and they should be first to get it.[/quote]
I wouldn't say it's maxed out just yet, since newer PS2 games can still blow people away (GT4). However, the console has definitely saturated the market. Just about everyone on the planet who'd be interested in it already owns one. I'm sure Sony is eager to get something new on the market, especially since it will supposedly be backwards compatible and feature their proprietary format (Blu-ray) which they're going to be pushing hard to get into as many homes as possible.
[quote name='manofpeace20']Gamecube:
We all should have known with the N64 what the Gamecube's problem would be: lack of games. I can seriously count on one hand the number of interesting games I played on the Gamecube. However, a true dud is a far rarer find than on the other two consoles. The fact that Gamecube is not trying to update its technology to keep up with other consoles (online play, hard drives) leads me to believe they will not last in the console battles. However, I could be wrong. Nintendo is the last true innovator out there.[/quote]
:? How hard have you been looking for GameCube games? I'd say it's easily surpassed the Nintendo 64 in quantity of games worth playing, and although I own far more games for my other systems, the GameCube edges them out for the overall experience so far.
Anyway, I think the GameCube has a lot of life left in it, and I think there are still quite a few people out there who have shyed away from buying one for whatever reason. Still, I'm interested to see what Nintendo has up their sleeve, since they claim that both the Revolution and the GameCube will be supported side by side.
[quote name='manofpeace20']XBOX:
This is my favorite system out of the 3, but there is one major problem. They SHOULD NOT release a new console for at least 2 or 3 years. The system was released in 2001, but seemingly didn't start catching on until late 2003. I look at this 2004 fourth quarter, and nearly every game I could dream of is coming on the XBOX. The current system is loaded with potential, and its newer games just amaze me.[/quote]
I don't quite understand Microsoft's eagerness to get to market first with a new console. There are plenty of potential Xbox owners out there and Xbox games will continue to be the most visually striking (usually). They've put a lot of effort into being perceived as the most advanced console, so I imagine they don't want a competitor's new console outdoing them for any period of time while they finish working on their own new console. Also, I'm sure they realize the absurd amount of piracy that's going on, so perhaps they're eager to get a system on the market that implements a security measure or two.
[quote name='Jaxcomet']It really does seem that as the systems become more advanced and more expensive the age of target audience actually rises. Who can most afford a $300 system? Not kids, not high school or college students........[/quote]
If you take inflation into account, the Atari 2600 cost over $600, the NES cost about $350 - $425 depending on the package, the Genesis cost around $300, etc...
Reality's Fringe
CAGiversary!
- Feedback
- 8 (100%)
I haven't read through this thread, but if anyone thinks that I can in any way, shape, or form NOT be anticipating the Nintendo DS; you're 
ing nuts.
ing nuts.
bread's done