|
|||||||
| Register | Blogging | Today's Posts | Search |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
09-16-2008, 08:34 AM
|
#63 (permalink) | |
|
nothing
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: everywhere
Posts: 4,315
|
just a quick comment on the decline of cute cartoon characters and next gen graphics.
i more or less agree with both sentiments. if i want photorealism i go outside. at the same time i don't necessarily need 'cute' characters in a game. i'd much rather play something with a very stylized art direction than something striving for visual 'realism'. i don't mind 'cute' when i'm playing a game with my 10 year old niece, but it gets old fast when i'm gaming with my buddies who are all closing in on 30. the push for realism was a significant factor in increasing the level of immersion felt in games about 10-12 years ago. getting textured polygons and realistic shadows running efficiently was a huge deal. now we're getting stuff like crysis that push 'realism' beyond mainstream technology. can most people tell the difference between 'high' and 'very high' graphical settings without having an app running in the corner of their screen letting them know just how many frames per second they're seeing? or splicing screenshots in photoshop to do side by side comparisons on the blurriness of a background texture? is there actually a substantial visual difference while playing the game? for the most part i don't see it. some games use it very well. half life 2 and GTA4 come to mind. PMO i'm thinking your friend needed to adjust his tv or game settings. unfortunately there will always be some number humping hardcore 'gamers' who will flip out if they can't run everything at the highest setting right out of the box, and for some inexplicable reason some developers will still pander to that small minority of the market.
__________________
i am the universe Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
09-16-2008, 02:50 PM
|
#65 (permalink) | |
|
one big soul
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 5,096
|
Quote:
I could never figure out how you change your course!
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
09-16-2008, 06:29 PM
|
#66 (permalink) | ||||
|
Dr. Prunk
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Where the buffalo roam.
Posts: 12,137
|
Quote:
The Dreamcast kicked up the 6th gen with a great start, many games for it it like Rez and Jet Set Radio were very stylish and innovative games. Nitendo was still making very unique titles like Pikmin and Warioware, and giving unique spends on old franchises with very original games, like The Wind Waker and (if flawed) Super Mario Sunshine. Yes even the PS2 has had some very innovative and stylish games like Psychonauts, Katamari Damacy, Ico and more recently Okari. And we're still getting innovative games like Spore and LittleBigPlanet. But it seems overall, especially for the Xbox systems that overall it's all about what sells, shooters, rpgs, sports and GTA type games. Xbox especially dosen't seem to offer anything new or interesting, they had promise with Blue Dragon but everyone ended up hating that game.  As of now, Nintendo is on top making both retro and innovative games that keeps everyone in it's fanbase happy. And that's what I love about Nintendo, they stick to their fanbase but at the same time try to convert more casual gamers. They're not out to please all the hardcore gamers out there, and I prefer it that it stays that way. Quote:
And like I've said, even with the 6th gen there was still a market for unique "unrealistic" games, it just seems that as of now that market is being diminished, because everyone is so worked up about realistic graphics. You know that when so many people are dead set against getting a Wii just because the graphics aren't as advanced you know it's not so much about the gameplay anymore. Yes I know there are some smucks that think the Wii dosen't have any good games. Well they are idiots because it does, just not a WHOLE lot right now, but I'm fine with that, quantity over quality is a problem with next gen consoles as well. Gamecube didn't have a huge variety of great games either but the few great games it had made it worth it, certainly more worth it than an Xbox. I'm not a wealthy gamer, 50 bucks is a lot to me, it's not like I'm ever gonna get every f*cking game for it. Having a HUGE library dosen't matter if those kinda games just aren't for me, I'm not gonna waste money for a 360 just because of all the big name titles it has it might actually have a game or two I would actually like. For now I'd rather stick with Nintendo who makes consoles with smaller libraries but with titles I'd know I would enjoy.
__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs Quote:
|
||||
|
|
|
|
09-16-2008, 06:40 PM
|
#67 (permalink) |
|
Moodswings n' Roundabouts
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: At the corner of Dude and Catastrophe
Posts: 4,512
|
I think the Wii is as whole in its selection of games as it will ever be, and it's great as it is. Awesome platformer (Mario) Multiplayer games (Smash Bros and Mario Kart) pure classic sort of game (Zelda and Resi 4) Shooters (Metroid and Red Steel) and family orientated stuff (Wii Sports and the like). I can't think of many games that are coming out for it in the future i'd be interested in.
That said, Boo Boo, have you seen Mad World? Looks like a blast! |
|
|
|
|
09-16-2008, 06:40 PM
|
#68 (permalink) | |||
|
Dr. Prunk
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Where the buffalo roam.
Posts: 12,137
|
Quote:
__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs Quote:
|
|||
|
|
|
|
09-16-2008, 06:53 PM
|
#70 (permalink) | |||
|
Dr. Prunk
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Where the buffalo roam.
Posts: 12,137
|
Quote:
Oh, and the virtual console should count as part of it's library too. Pretty much making it the most backwards compatable console you could ever hope for. And yeah I seen it, looks insane.
__________________
It's only knock n' knowall, but I like it http://www.last.fm/user/kingboobs Quote:
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
