The best kind is the one that a lot of third-party developers support. 'nuff said.True but we must speak then about quality games... Not shovelware.
Opposite can be said to the Wii, actually. Despite it's great First-party games, the console is lacking waaaaaaay too much third-party support. I have only a few games because of it.I agree there. But maybe the 3rd party developers aren't "used" to the new Wii technology or didn't see the potential.
Like the DS is overloaded by UbiSoft by "My * fill in a random animal here * pet" games. Kinda breaks the 3rd party support to me.If you look past all the shovelware, you can find the real gems. Really, gaming is kind of like surfing the internet. You have to sift through a lot of porn to find safe for work rule 34 Twilight Sparkle.
Oh and, is it me or is the WiiU just a bigger version of the DS?Nah, it's more like the drawing game they've released that comes with the tablet to draw on.
The controllers for the WiiU shares its concept with Dreamcast controllers, but the Wii U seems a bit more.....unwieldy.It actually looks like a portable Gamecube I saw once, which wasn't very unwieldly at all.
Like the DS is overloaded by UbiSoft by "My * fill in a random animal here * pet" games. Kinda breaks the 3rd party support to me.If you look past all the shovelware, you can find the real gems. Really, gaming is kind of like surfing the internet. You have to sift through a lot of porn to find safe for work rule 34 Twilight Sparkle.
Like the DS is overloaded by UbiSoft by "My * fill in a random animal here * pet" games. Kinda breaks the 3rd party support to me.If you look past all the shovelware, you can find the real gems. Really, gaming is kind of like surfing the internet. You have to sift through a lot of porn to find safe for work rule 34 Twilight Sparkle.
Exactly! There are indeed so many overlooked games on the DS that I haven't heard of them all.
handhelds are only good for one thing, keeping a man entertained whether he is out shopping with his mother or girlfriend, or both. Indoor use of a handheld is tragic.Why not!? D:
handhelds are only good for one thing, keeping a man entertained whether he is out shopping with his mother or girlfriend, or both. Indoor use of a handheld is tragic.I wouldn't say that. Just that if my brothers aren't playing PS3. There is no way on earth I would play DS or 3DS Or even on my phone instead if the ps3
Oddly enough, I'd play the DS if I ever ran out of games in the PS3.handhelds are only good for one thing, keeping a man entertained whether he is out shopping with his mother or girlfriend, or both. Indoor use of a handheld is tragic.I wouldn't say that. Just that if my brothers aren't playing PS3. There is no way on earth I would play DS or 3DS Or even on my phone instead if the ps3
Because it defeats the portable aspect of the console. Why play a DS or PSP indoors when you can play a Wii or a PS3? Thats essentially what they are, dumbed down versions of their indoor counterparts.handhelds are only good for one thing, keeping a man entertained whether he is out shopping with his mother or girlfriend, or both. Indoor use of a handheld is tragic.Why not!? D:
If they are, then they would have had a dumbed down versions of their respective games. Oddly enough, they don't.Because it defeats the portable aspect of the console. Why play a DS or PSP indoors when you can play a Wii or a PS3? Thats essentially what they are, dumbed down versions of their indoor counterparts.handhelds are only good for one thing, keeping a man entertained whether he is out shopping with his mother or girlfriend, or both. Indoor use of a handheld is tragic.Why not!? D:
This is easy right. Sit at home with a 60" TV, a PS3, a 360 and a Wii, and also have a DS. Now, which gets the most attention........?
The last time I touched a DS was probably when I took it out the box, but to be fair that's also true for my Wii. Horsepower is the way to go.
This is easy right. Sit at home with a 60" TV, a PS3, a 360 and a Wii, and also have a DS. Now, which gets the most attention........?Depends on the situation. I'm playing my DS even though the PS3 is right in front of me. I don't have any money for games on the PS3, so yeah.
Oh yes i agree jonez, nintendo make some great games. They just aren't the best games when compared to the best of the rest. If nintendo had the hardware to compete it may well be a different story.
Gameplay.Well of course.
yeah but i still think the old games are somewhat better than the games of todayI agree. The recent games try to be TOO much then they actually are. The focus too much on the selling point and things like that so that it looks and feels real but that the gameplay gets pushed aside. The variation on the market is ... well fading away.
jup. there are too many new gamers who keep complaining if the graphics aren't good or the storry but you have to respect the games because else you will end up like the call of duty series.Plus, many studio's get ... well, negative stuff thrown at their direction when it wants to be too new... Okami... Perfect example of an epic underrated game.. It looks different but it's such a blast to play.
Is it about the presentation or the gameplay...?So yes, I disagree with this. You're kind of saying that games that are good in graphics are weak in gameplay and games that are good in gameplay are likely to be bad in graphics.
I rather play a badly designed game with high fun factors then a top notch designed game that is basically sort of playing itself.
Plus, many studio's get ... well, negative stuff thrown at their direction when it wants to be too new... Okami... Perfect example of an epic underrated game.. It looks different but it's such a blast to play.Okami was underrated when it was a PS2 game. It got enough attention when it became a Wii game.
Is it about the presentation or the gameplay...?So yes, I disagree with this. You're kind of saying that games that are good in graphics are weak in gameplay and games that are good in gameplay are likely to be bad in graphics.
I rather play a badly designed game with high fun factors then a top notch designed game that is basically sort of playing itself.
In a way, yes I am saying that... Let me explain myself. I am under the impression that lately... It's more about the presentation and the looks of a game to sell at the stores then the gameplay. The core gameplay of most popular games is either... shooting OR exploring.I'd agree with the exploring part. There's way too many games that focus too much on open-world.
Uncharted series, GoW series, FLOWER, JOURNEY, FLOW and Heavy Rain. People aren't looking hard enough for the games they're trying to find.
The games where guns didn't came into play that much like the old Tomb Raider games where there were more puzzles and more creativity... those days are kinda over.
With "weak gameplay" I mean that the recent games do nothing really new but rather perfect existing formula's. Each Call Of Duty is just another setting but the same basic routine. As far as I know and have heard... What is the last innovation that COD did in their series itself?So are the other games. Whether you're aware or not, Okami is almost (ALMOST) like an LoZ game. Add the part where the prota gets new powers often, then the aspect becomes that of Megaman X. Studios often combine aspects or features that, whether they are aware of it or not, come from other games. These "original" games are often just products of an unusual combination that, when presented, are actually quite pleasing.
I admit... I spoke too general. But my point is... The studio's lately don't experiment enough and new things ... you don't see those too often.People don't search too hard. :|
yeah but i still think the old games are somewhat better than the games of todayi believe you havent played NES. that thing was filled with shovelware. it was rare to find a good game out of all the crap that that console had. now a days its hard to find a bad game because the industry is actually more competitive. I agree there are really good games in old consoles but i also think that the nostalgia factor kicks in in that moment.
Man, I love old games more than anyone, I still play them everyday, but new games are better. What NES game gives you the freedom of Fallout 3 or Skyrim? Wolfenstein 3D is shite next to MW3. Nostalgia plays a huge part in it and so does the console you own, if you don't have a PS3 you will never appreciate what games offer today. You like platformers like Super Mario Bros? Go play Rayman Origins and tell me it doesn't compare to Nintendo "fun" platformers.
Yeah some Nintendo games are fun, but there is a fucking shit load of shovelware and endless sequels like pokemon that have just ran them into the ground.
Let me ask you this: Why can't Nintendo put their games on a competitive console?
Because when people have to pay top price for sequels and shovelware to cover the costs they will go buy the proper good stuff from developers that are really trying to push forward the industry.
* Sighs *Not at all, why restrict fun? Why only give a little when better hardware allows more innovation and the ability to do everything better?
So, it's not about having fun...? It's about having THE MOST POSSIBLE fun...? Sorry, but it's easy to see why a person would disagree here.
Sorry SMG but I DON'T THINK that's not tottaly true. not all new games are better.Not all of course, but in general.
Same thing... Why "better"..?* Sighs *Not at all, why restrict fun? Why only give a little when better hardware allows more innovation and the ability to do everything better?
So, it's not about having fun...? It's about having THE MOST POSSIBLE fun...? Sorry, but it's easy to see why a person would disagree here.
Newer games are better than old games, or people wouldn't keep buying them they would just keep on playing the NES.
You know when people talk about the greatest games ever, they say OoT, FFVII etc? Well, is the fact that they JUST moved into 3D, giving gamers whole new areas of gaming and bringing gaming to a whole new level just a coincidence? No. It's because they made a huge leap FORWARD in technology and game design.Same thing... Why "better"..?* Sighs *Not at all, why restrict fun? Why only give a little when better hardware allows more innovation and the ability to do everything better?
So, it's not about having fun...? It's about having THE MOST POSSIBLE fun...? Sorry, but it's easy to see why a person would disagree here.
Newer games are better than old games, or people wouldn't keep buying them they would just keep on playing the NES.
I can agree with that. BUT, does that make a console always better then another one...?You know when people talk about the greatest games ever, they say OoT, FFVII etc? Well, is the fact that they JUST moved into 3D, giving gamers whole new areas of gaming and bringing gaming to a whole new level just a coincidence? No. It's because they made a huge leap FORWARD in technology and game design.Same thing... Why "better"..?* Sighs *Not at all, why restrict fun? Why only give a little when better hardware allows more innovation and the ability to do everything better?
So, it's not about having fun...? It's about having THE MOST POSSIBLE fun...? Sorry, but it's easy to see why a person would disagree here.
Newer games are better than old games, or people wouldn't keep buying them they would just keep on playing the NES.
I can agree with that. BUT, does that make a console always better then another one...?No Nintendo are the last with everything. PS was using CD's when N64 was stuck on carts restricting what the devs could do. PS2 was using DVD's and gamecube was using tiny little discs that again restricted what they could do. Wii's hardware is really poor, its basically a upgraded gamecube and PS3 is using 50gb bluray discs and HD. The DS wasn't even the first handheld with stylus and touchscreen, they took it from another handheld that didn't attract developers. 3D has been around since god knows, at least the 1950's.
According to me, it's not about the hardware but about the software. As far as I know... Your argument is actually in favor of Nintendo since they brought with all new console something totally new that brought that jump forward/
I can agree with that. BUT, does that make a console always better then another one...?No Nintendo are the last with everything. PS was using CD's when N64 was stuck on carts restricting what the devs could do. PS2 was using DVD's and gamecube was using tiny little discs that again restricted what they could do. Wii's hardware is really poor, its basically a upgraded gamecube and PS3 is using 50gb bluray discs and HD. The DS wasn't even the first handheld with stylus and touchscreen, they took it from another handheld that didn't attract developers. 3D has been around since god knows, at least the 1950's.
According to me, it's not about the hardware but about the software. As far as I know... Your argument is actually in favor of Nintendo since they brought with all new console something totally new that brought that jump forward/
What I'm saying is, the more powerful, the more storage space, the more devs can do. They can still make the same game as on a Nintendo machine, but can add another 5 levels and do it in HD, because they have that option and don't have to restrict their games or creativity as much. The same with handheld vs console, they can make the exact same game, same gameplay, everything, but make it much bigger, better looking, more things to do, more stuff to see when they have that extra horsepower, but the "fun" gameplay can remain the same.
Yes I agree, I just mean in general its usually better to have more horsepower, so devs can create the game they want to.
Okay, I can agree somewhat with that.
But at the other hand... Sometimes it's not such a good idea to put EVERY EVERYTHING in a game... A game can be fun when it has flaws to discover... Perfect doesn't exist after all...
Yes I agree, I just mean in general its usually better to have more horsepower, so devs can create the game they want to.
Okay, I can agree somewhat with that.
But at the other hand... Sometimes it's not such a good idea to put EVERY EVERYTHING in a game... A game can be fun when it has flaws to discover... Perfect doesn't exist after all...
But better hardware allows the devs to do more with that software :D
I can see we're not going to agree on this lol.
Hmmmm..... how about Xenoblade Chronicles for an example? The best game on the Wii, but imagine if they had PS3 hardware, HD graphics and 10x the disc storage space to work with.
Nintendo make great games already that almost keep up with the competition on poor hardware, so I would love to see them do something on a top spec machine.
BUT, better hardware allows gameplay advances too, like the 3D I mentioned earlier.
Okay, nice graphics can enhance a game to get more involved BUT does that mean that everything needs to look very realistic...? I don't think so.Unless you want a cartooned kiddie version of CoD (Which would be very interesting), or an Uncharted game where everyone becomes a Doughnut Drake version of themselves, then yes, it has to stick to it's artwork.
Heck yes. And that doesn't need to be the best graphics on the market. If you can set the tone you are setting with music and story... Then it's all good. Like I said in another debate... A game needs to form one nice package... Where one element doesn't ruin the tone of the rest. And if that is with outdated graphics... Fine by me.Okay, nice graphics can enhance a game to get more involved BUT does that mean that everything needs to look very realistic...? I don't think so.Unless you want a cartooned kiddie version of CoD (Which would be very interesting), or an Uncharted game where everyone becomes a Doughnut Drake version of themselves, then yes, it has to stick to it's artwork.
With "weak gameplay" I mean that the recent games do nothing really new but rather perfect existing formula's. Each Call Of Duty is just another setting but the same basic routine. As far as I know and have heard... What is the last innovation that COD did in their series itself?What was the last one Mario did? The only thing they change is making Mario sports games and the quality of those are declining with each new game
And Zelda barely ever changes anything. Same game except for the new adventuring style
On top of that, Modern Warfare has one of the greatest stories I've seen in a shooter.No. Just... no.
Yeah. It was a great story, that doesn't take away the fact the multiplayer sucks.On top of that, Modern Warfare has one of the greatest stories I've seen in a shooter.No. Just... no.
On top of that, Modern Warfare has one of the greatest stories I've seen in a shooter.TimeSplitters
Where's you contribution to this debate? o.O spammer!On top of that, Modern Warfare has one of the greatest stories I've seen in a shooter.TimeSplitters
Resistance 1,2 and 3
Resident Evil (all of them)
BioShock
Borderlands
DeadSpace
F.E.A.R
Metro 2033
Goldeneye
System Shock 2
Half Life 2
Killzone 3
S.T.A.L.K.E.R
All of these games had stories that urinate on the story of Modern Warfare.
Where's you contribution to this debate? o.O spammer!I don't really read reviews to be honest, I played the Modern warfare games and just generally thought it was a soulless bunch of turd. It was so bad, that I didn't even buy it, my friend bought it in a second hand shop for like 7 pounds and regretted it so much he asked me to take it off him (sounds exaggerated, but funny enough its true :P).
Btw hating on a franchise because it generally gets bad reviews is pathetic.
the campaign is far more binding than what I've seen from the games you've just listed.
Let me just ask. How many people on Earth (~7 billion) would buy a DS if a PS3 or 360 (and all their graphics and capabilities) can be taken on the road and bought for ~100$None, of course. If that's the case, then they would become handhelds and any previous handheld would be obsolete. I don't see your point. You just turned a powerful console to a portable and made the price cheaper than any other handheld.
I don't see the point in handhelds... The screen is too tiny and they're too exhausting to play on.
Better get a console if you just want to play a game.
(DS im America is $100 and DSi is $120)Let me just ask. How many people on Earth (~7 billion) would buy a DS if a PS3 or 360 (and all their graphics and capabilities) can be taken on the road and bought for ~100$None, of course. If that's the case, then they would become handhelds and any previous handheld would be obsolete. I don't see your point. You just turned a powerful console to a portable and made the price cheaper than any other handheld.
(DS im America is $100 and DSi is $120)Let me just ask. How many people on Earth (~7 billion) would buy a DS if a PS3 or 360 (and all their graphics and capabilities) can be taken on the road and bought for ~100$None, of course. If that's the case, then they would become handhelds and any previous handheld would be obsolete. I don't see your point. You just turned a powerful console to a portable and made the price cheaper than any other handheld.
What I'm saying is people buy the handhelds because they are cheap and portable. NOT because they are better than (or even compatible to) consoles
JRPG's are a good example of older been better, this gen has been particularly bad, its all about HD though, to have a huge non linear JRPG in HD is too expensive and would take too long.That's why handheld JRPG's have been better this gen I think.