Re: ITS OFFICIAL: : Nintendo's "Revolution" is off my "must have" list (My ra
Alright, it's my turn I guess. I have read through all your arguments and taken notes (this is how much I care
)
First of all, again with the HD stuff. I have played games on the big HD tv screens, I even played RE4 on it, and it wasn't that bad. I mean, sure I could tell some pixelation there, but I was more involved with the game. And like it was said before, HD isn't quite the standard yet to the "casual" and "average" gamer. The casual gamer, which I am willing to guess is more of than the hard-core gamers (but I'm also willing to admit I'm wrong if I am), doesn't care about the greatest graphics. They just wanna play a fun game for a half hour or more. I really don't understand how the whole basis of an argument is about graphics. I mean, how would you like to play a game with the SUPREME graphics, even if its boring and stupid. Unless you just wanna stare in awe at the main screen for days, I take it you would find it a bad game.
Now, you look at RE4 and it looked great. Now, with the Rev, its gonna be twice as powerful. Not bad if you ask me. I do give credit to the other two companies for their endeavor of ultimate power and graphics, but I will stick with Nintendo. That doesn't mean I wouldn't like to play games for the other systems.
I wanted to make a note about the emulators. I personally don't think it really captures the real effect the game had when it first came out. I mean, it was mentioned that you can make them cleaner and better to look at, but while we're at it, why don't we just make them supremely awesome graphics with just the same game. Indeed it would be nice to look at, but once you play it for a while, it doesn't make as much difference.
Now, some made arguments about how great the Metal Gear game was. I loved playing that game on the PSX. I played a demo of it over and over, then looked for like a year to get that game. And when they came out with the new one, yes I was in awe about the graphics, but when I played I was a bit dissapointed. First of all, I suppose it was because I was a bit decieved and realized it was the same game. And also they redid the voice acting and they didn't sound right. But I dealt with it and played and it was all the same, and soon the enhanced graphics meant nothing.
And speaking of the Playstation. I believe they had the weakest chip set of the 3 systems in this generation of consoles. I mean, RE4 went from looking great to looking pretty beat up from what I could tell. This is also where I could add my little mini-rant about how Capcom always cheats Nintendo out of deals.
Now, it was said that Nintendo is being ignorant and not listening to consumers. This could possibly be true, but perhaps they are. After all, a major fan base is in Asia, and many Nintendo gamers are casual gamers, not the hard-core buy-the-best-of-everything gamers. Nintendo might actually be listening to people. And if they aren't, you are saying that you would like to have them copy all the other companies. What happned to the good old days when games were made to bring entertainment. I mean, the second games were big and could be used to make a profit, companies just slaughtered peoples wallets.
Another note. Like I said above, I still have a B&W TV with a VHS player and still buy VHS, play my NES, and play pong.
At one point I read that Nintendo is in fact trying to cater to both hard-core and casual gamers. They are trying to get deals for more of the mature games like RE4 that do so well as well as keep with the great games they have like Zelda. And speaking of them, I am always excited about a new game of Zelda and Mario (though not ones where they just slap them in there just to make sales). And the new Zelda, how long have they worked on it? Even if it isnt the best graphics I've seen, I am sure the gameplay will make up for it.
And now for the controller. Yes, it does look like a remote for the TV. But all these years controllers have pretty much done the same as a remote, havent they? They control what a piece of equipment does. Like it was said earlier, there is no standard of what a remote has to be. And on top of that, they still have the attachments to make it a two-handed deal that will most likely come free with the game.
I said in another topic that this controller could be incredible, or at least a huge step in the right direction. I mean, imagine swinging the thing like a bat instead of just pressing a button, or swinging it like a sword, or whatever. This could be a step towards virtual reality. If the other 2 companies kept going like this, they could perhaps discover holograms to play, and then Nintendo would have the missing link and make it like virtual reality. Think about it! Or, an even more clever ploy is that Nintendo is fiddling with this, while secretly creating a powerful system with incredible graphics, and with technology making something new close to a hologram. I mean, this controller opens up a lot of possibilities. People just have to stop and think ahead instead of looking at it and scoffing at it.
Lastly, I hope Nintendo is lying a little bit. I hope they still have a lot of tricks up their sleeve and are waiting until its released to surprise everyone and are really trying for some serious competition with the other companies. By trying to appeal to both casual and hard-core gamers, there must be something in the works.
Now, I do have to make some points on what I agree with. I hate the tiny disks. They were interesting for the cube, but I really was hoping they would go to the standard size disk. This is probably the only area where I was thinking that they would kinda conform and make a standard. Oh well. At least its not the old cartidge. Those simply took up too much room.
I guess thats all the arguing I have for now. Really, we can sit and debate about this all we want, but I think the only we can make a rock solid decision about this is when it comes out and we try it. Its just too ignorant to write it off before it even comes out.
I hope it's changed soon.
