are next-gen games missing the point?

Dray said:
It seems more to me that Nintendo is content on playing second fiddle to Microsoft and Sony while it quietly rakes in the dough from casual gamers and I don't see any potential for the Wii to be anything more than a fun ride for us so called "hardcore" folks

True Wifi may help be the saving grace of the Wii games but online has been done and been done well by others so it really come back down to the games themselves

of course even though I say this I still plan to get my share of Mario, Smash, Metroid and the like, maybe a party game or two for the novelty but I know that they will be pushed to the background once Sony and Microsoft release the games that will keep me interested long after the any Wii game can
Click to expand...
Exactly how I feel.

Okay, how did we end up discussing the Wii again. Its seems every topic ends up being a debate about the Wii. :lol
 
Dray said:
It seems more to me that Nintendo is content on playing second fiddle to Microsoft and Sony while it quietly rakes in the dough from casual gamers and I don't see any potential for the Wii to be anything more than a fun ride for us so called "hardcore" folks

True Wifi may help be the saving grace of the Wii games but online has been done and been done well by others so it really come back down to the games themselves

of course even though I say this I still plan to get my share of Mario, Smash, Metroid and the like, maybe a party game or two for the novelty but I know that they will be pushed to the background once Sony and Microsoft release the games that will keep me interested long after the any Wii game can
Click to expand...

I agree with that. That's why I have been saying all along, the Wii is a great companion console to either a 360, a PS3, or a PC. There's no way I would be happy with just having a Wii.
 
I am. I was thinking about a 360 when it gets a price cut eventually, 'cause it has some cool stuff eventually, plus my dad wants CoD4:MW, and if it's on both and looks the same, he'll just hafta get used to the new controller.
 
First of all, that doesn't sound anything like me. :lol

Secondly, this is harking back to the original question, I will agree with myself (no, that's not a joke, I actually had to think about it, lol). Back in the day people wouldn't shun a game because it's graphics were sub par, or because it didn't support progressive scan, back then people actually had to play games before they determined whether they liked it or not. There weren't multi-million dollar design teams who had their livelihood's riding on the sales of one game, there weren't large amounts of money being pumped into public relations and advertising, games were being made by people who enjoyed making them, and their focus was to create something fun that people would enjoy.

The problem with today's gaming industry is that (as I believe Priince mentioned) companies are spending just as much time and money convincing us that what they're making is what we want, as they are on making the game itself. Games aren't being designed and sold for the fun of it, or because someone has a good idea, they are being designed and sold to make money. Now while this can bolster some innovation and creativity, by and large a game's "fun factor" means jack squat compared to it's sales figures.

My initial point was simply that back in the day, there were no flashes or gimmicks, no console wars or fanboys, no expectations and demands, games were just games, and you played one if it was fun.
 
Very true. Remember the fun you got out of playing Super Mario Bros. for the first time on your NES(I do)? The game was hard, and long(for the time). It was challenging. No gimmick 'keep a spare item'. You got two hits to take at the most, but more often than not, it was one. It was a challenging, without being frustrating, game that was worshipped for its gameplay, not its graphics. Even now, it surpasses New Super Mario Bros. for me. From random flying Bullet Bills to those damn Hammer Bros. everywhere in 8-3, to my eventual memorization(after about 20 failures) or exact movements to get through 8-4(yes, exact, as in, when you go underwater, you want to jump three times with about a half secondish inbetween jumps to easily float past the fire bars, that kind of stuff). I have never memorized exactly how to move in anything else, nor have I nearly worn out my GBC D-Pad after my dad got rid of our NES. It was amazing. High budget? No. CGI cutscenes? No. Amazing 3D realistic looking models? No. Gore? No. Complexity? No. Upgradable weapons? No. Basic, raw fun? Hell yes.
 
if you look at the snes and genesis, both had colorful games, with cartoony characters. these days, yeah, we get the occasional mario, but most games are dark, realistic, and gory. i dont think they are missing the point, i think it is a natural evolution for video games, because the current generation of hardware (wii, 360, ps3) have enough power to focus on realistic, gritty games.
 
But they don't have to. ANd they've realized that, now they're trying to get in on Nintendo's success, too. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you have to. My mom could(and did) play Super Mario Bros. Non gamers like that get alienated by everything having to be GTA or random WWII shooter. We get it, people buy them, but damn, it's like when Shrek 5 comes out, it's more about cashing in than providing a good experience.
 
stealth toilet said:
games were just games, and you played one if it was fun.
Click to expand...

This is the part where I think next-gen gamers themselves are missing the point.

I have as much fun playing Gears of War as I do Puzzle Quest. They are vastly different games on vastly different platforms. GoW is shooter on the 360. Puzzle Quest is a puzzle game on the DS. But they are both fun.
 
That's because they realized they can use all that space to do something other than make the game look good. We just need to drill it into developer's heads that graphics don't make the game, and neither do sales.
 
fhqwhgads said:
That's because they realized they can use all that space to do something other than make the game look good. We just need to drill it into developer's heads that graphics don't make the game, and neither do sales.
Click to expand...

but we wont
 
So why is everyone complaining about it then? Everyone just sits and nags 'enough Wii minigames' and goes out and buys Mario Party 8.
 
You're one(smarter than most Wii owners if you don't have any) person, though. Warioware and Raving Rabbids are the only decent and better games about minigames on the thing, really. Other than that, it should be called Mario Party: Because We Can, or EA Playground: Eh, Maybe Next Time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top