Post by: nemo_83 on November 26, 2005, 01:31:20 PM
"During a recent powwow with a few wellknown gamemakers, some discussed their hands on time with early Rev dev kits. Ok here it goes: according to those fellas, the graphics that Nintendo's next gen system can produce are barely better than those on Gamecube"
flame on!
Post by: Hans Beckert on November 26, 2005, 01:34:49 PM
Post by: nemo_83 on November 26, 2005, 01:42:06 PM
Post by: Karl Castaneda #2 on November 26, 2005, 01:46:18 PM
Post by: Spak-Spang on November 26, 2005, 05:40:50 PM
They completely botched up the GBA Gunstar Super Heros review, because they were judging it more on their memory of the first game, and not this game as a whole.
They actually gave points away because it didn't surpass their memory of the original.
I'm sorry, you judge games on their own merit only, not if they compete with a memory of the prior game.
Often times their articles are not Nintendo bashing, but are definately slated with the idea Nintendo isn't as good as the competition.
Post by: nemo_83 on November 26, 2005, 06:08:39 PM
I trust EGM with their news (not so much with their reviews anymore which can range from a 4 to a 9 in the same review between editors).
I am keeping hope this rumor is false. In 1up's latest Revolution article one developer claims the console will be
much more powerful than GameCube.
Post by: mantidor on November 26, 2005, 07:01:34 PM
Post by: Zach on November 26, 2005, 07:18:48 PM
Post by: Urkel on November 26, 2005, 07:29:45 PM
Post by: BiLdItUp1 on November 26, 2005, 08:47:02 PM
Post by: StrainX on November 26, 2005, 08:51:58 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on November 26, 2005, 09:10:07 PM
They actually gave points away because it didn't surpass their memory of the original.
I'm sorry, you judge games on their own merit only, not if they compete with a memory of the prior game.
If they did that it's indeed bad. I've played both at the same time (well, GFH first, got GH a day or two later) and IMO Gunstar Future Heroes easily surpasses its predecessor (except for the awful, awful Moon 2 Stage 1). Sure, it has no two-player mode but how many would use multiplayer on a GBA game like that?
Sure the graphics are barely better. So are the X360's and the PS3's. You need a few orders of magnitude more power to archieve a jump that qualifies as more than "barely".
Post by: MrMojoRising on November 27, 2005, 12:11:47 AM
1up is crap though, not only do they update half as much as normal web-sites, they have release dates that are off by months and never get fixed, half of their content is stolen straight from the magazine, and one time I tried to leave a comment at the bottom of an article like they let people do and they didn't post it because I said something about how it was "convienient" for them to make an article that was nothing more than an advertisement for people to buy their Playstaytion magazine. What boobs they be.
Post by: ThePerm on November 27, 2005, 04:04:06 AM
Post by: mjbd on November 27, 2005, 05:36:57 AM
Post by: cubist on November 27, 2005, 06:22:21 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: ThePerm
i dont read magazines anymore
Amen to that.
EGM was a reliable source in the days of the GENESIS and the SNES. There wasn't any bias back then. They were still throwing Nintendo some love with the Zelda cover and the E3 2002 Nintendo triple threat of Metroid, Super Mario Sunshine, and Wind Waker. I had the unfortunate experience of having a Gamestop special of getting the GameInformer magazine. I couldn't stand reading how mainstream it felt. It was as if the writers for the magazine were spawned from the current generation of consoles in a popularity contest. I agree with most here that Gameinformer is the anti-Nintendo magazine.
Post by: stevey on November 27, 2005, 07:08:51 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on November 28, 2005, 06:19:07 AM
And would anyone who has followed the Rev be even remotely surprised if this was true. All the signs are there. "Two of three times as powerful", the constant de-emphasis on hardware in speeches and interviews, the potential plan to NEVER reveal specs at all. These are all pretty obvious signs that the Rev is going to be at best a marginal improvement over the Cube.
Though I agree that if we're just getting a glorified Cube with a new controller that we're getting a little ripped off. I'd say the most I would pay for that would be $50 more than what a new Cube costs now.
Post by: Don'tHate742 on November 28, 2005, 06:33:42 AM
Post by: ThePerm on November 28, 2005, 07:34:30 AM
however i hate dual analog!!!!! So the game played like crap as far as I was concerned.
as far as Nintendo not being as powerful as the competition...it allstems from a misqote from iwata. I watched the interview where he said "well, maybe our machine may not be the powerhouses as the other systems" which was then taken out of grave perportion and is now been taken to mean its only gamecube 2.0
the graphics will be comparable. Perfect Dark is a first gen x360 game and i thought it looked incredible. Which means its not really a representation of what games will look like.....but id be happy with just those graphics. I'm talkingb the levels at least...the chracter models weren't all thast great...the guns were though...oh wow did her hand animations look nice.
still as i said..the controlls sucked..i am looking forward to the next generation fo controlls.
And ican't wait till we see prime 3 in multiplayer. The series is becominga shooter i suppose...but i know its going to be the best one when it comes out.
Post by: Stimutacs Addict on November 28, 2005, 08:39:17 AM
then I played it on a regular set and was surprised at the difference in the game on the different settings; I'm not impressed with the XBOX360 on regular TV sets...
I did the same with Perfect Dark Xero (hehe) and again noticed the differences in the textures and jaggy edges. I need to spen more time with 360 (and so do developers) but right now I give it a meh out of 5
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on November 28, 2005, 09:47:24 AM
I have not and will not touch mp2's multiplayer mode to date.
Post by: Pale on November 28, 2005, 10:43:15 AM
Expect the 360 and the PS3 to blow the Rev out of the water when hooked up to a 720* or 1080* tv because of the resolution difference...
Expect the Rev to look almost identical when hooked up to a traditional tv.
Much of MS's and Sony's added horsepower goes to drive the higher resolutions, thus evening the playing field when played on a standard def set.
360 Kiosks look great on their 20 inch LCD monitors, put plug it into a traditional 32 inch tube with no HD and you won't be near as impressed.
Post by: ThePerm on November 28, 2005, 11:55:52 AM
i want a kickass single player Meroid and that shouldb e expected. First of all Retro is a great team..and now they have the freehand in their hands.
So...its got to be super awesome. Then along with that I want a multiplayer mode.
at the same time i want this multiplayer mode to be sort of an spinoff of the metroid universe...maybe even mixing it with the f-zero universe. Think!!!
Samas is a bounty hunter and so is captain falcon.
Post by: Galford on November 28, 2005, 12:59:53 PM
My God, did I just defend Nintendo???
Post by: attackslug on November 28, 2005, 01:40:55 PM
Plus, all that money put into the development of a new GPU and CPU could imply that the Rev will have enough of a graphical improvement to be considered "next-gen".
Post by: Avinash_Tyagi on November 28, 2005, 01:55:09 PM
Post by: Bill Aurion on November 28, 2005, 01:59:36 PM
Post by: nemo_83 on November 28, 2005, 04:32:14 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Bill Aurion
It all has to do with art design...Wind Waker is still the prettiest game ever in my eyes, and I'd love to see more games like it...
agreed
The only official comment from Nintendo is that it will be three times as powerful as GameCube. If that is true and considering they won't have HD cutting down poly or frame rates the raw graphical effects like lighting should be better than 360; it should if nothing else be easier to develop for just as GameCube was easier for a programmer to get more from the hardware faster than a programmer on Xbox. Nintendo showed with the Cube they know how to make clean hardware.
It would help if Nintendo would at least tell us if the CPU is single, double, or multi core so we can at least have an idea of where they're going (my vote goes to single for simplicity and efficiency). If my name was Iwata I would go for one powerful (4-5 gig) single core CPU rather than a fragmented unit with multiple weak (2.5 gig) cores. There is also still Han Solo's PPU rumor making the rounds; that guy also claims the GPU will be faster than the 360's. One has to think about whether you want a multicore CPU that allows HD or if you want better graphics. I want better graphics. I want smoother models, transparencies, and dynamic lighting. I come from a traditional art education and we learned that light is more important than texture. From a distance your eye doesn't see bark on trees; you really only see lights, darks, and colors. Its the equivalent of asking if you would rather watch Disney's Alice in Wonderland or Dinosaur.
It may prove more expensive to build a single powerful core, but developers will be able to max out the hardware three times as fast as the 360 and nine times as fast as the PS3. I feel the next generation will be a game of potential (hype) never met by Sony and MS, and Nintendo actually delivering once again like they did with the power of the Cube. Really, if any journalist is gullable enough to swallow the poo Sony is feeding them they shouldn't be a journalist. We all remember the bloated number war MS and Sony got into before the start of the previous (or would it still be the present?) generation; needless to say but PS2 didn't do Toy Story graphics, and only now with the 360 can MS actually do that dancing robot demo in game they showed for Xbox.
It would be suicide to rehash the Cube with a new controller and casing and call it next generation.
Post by: Spak-Spang on November 28, 2005, 04:43:18 PM
Robert A:
"Yes, Gunstar Super Heros is a disappointment. Where the original boldly colored outside the lines of gaming convention, Super Hereos barely works up the energy to mimic its source material. It's a cover band, and fans are expected to nod their heads to the beat of nostalgia."
Shane:
"This sequel faces some astronomically lofty expectations. Unsurprisingly, it can't quite meet them. Super Hereos delivers the same brand of Contra-derived sidescrolling gunplay as its revered predecessor, but a few questionable tweaks--the ommissions of weapon mixing and co-op play--dial down the intensity and complexity."
Basically, the review states as an original game it is awesome and is a wonderful achievement. We recommend you buy it. However, as a sequel to the original it doesn't meet our expectations so we are disappointed. The scores for the game:
7.0, 8.0, 7.5
These scores would have been higher if it wasn't a sequel to Gunstar Heros, and thats a fact.
I have read most of the entire magizine, and I was amazed that the reviewers picked apart Nintendo games in general for little things like this...yet ignored these similar complaints in other games. In fact, case in point. After EVERY REVIEWER railled on how horrible the camera system for PSP Grand Theft Auto was. How the game was very hard to control, and the multiplayer aspects were not that great. They all gave the game a 9.0 or better.
Huh?
Post by: Chris1 on November 28, 2005, 04:44:02 PM
Post by: IceCold on November 28, 2005, 04:49:25 PM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on November 28, 2005, 05:08:05 PM
Post by: couchmonkey on November 29, 2005, 05:10:38 AM
(Edit) I agree with Bill that art direction is more important. At least in this generation, we've reached the point where any competent developer can make a passable graphics engine, so the thing that separates the really beautiful games is their art styles. I still want to see some improved graphics: Wind Waker was very beautiful, but I'd look forward to seeing the game without crow's nests popping out of nowhere in the middle of the ocean. But I can't deny, that's a pretty insignificant improvement. I'm looking forward to Nintendo's new ideas for playing games a lot more than the small issues they might fix with improved graphics.
Even though it may mostly be new controllers, the Rev hardware is still more valuable to me than what Microsoft has shown.
Post by: TMW on November 29, 2005, 06:13:23 AM
I think something similar will happen next gen, as everyone is bascially saying the same thing they said at the beginning of this one...only Sony and MS's positions will be reversed..
I'm not really worried about the Rev's graphical properties. If Ninty could pack that much power in the 'cube for $200 5 years ago...think what they can do for the same price this gen.
Post by: majortom1981 on November 29, 2005, 08:53:20 AM
Notice the words early dev kits. even the ps3 dev kits didnt have all the power yet.
there are rumours that the cpu was just finished recently for the rev.
Nintendo themselves said that the early dev kits are basically gc ones.
why must people beleive the rumour mill of a gaming magazine?
You guys are believing a magazine over nintendo themselves.
Post by: Ian Sane on November 29, 2005, 09:16:58 AM
Well this is a potential negative for the Rev. I think it would make much more sense to believe an unrelated third party. It is in Nintendo's best interest that negative news regarding the Rev doesn't get out. Therefore regarding something like this I wouldn't trust Nintendo's word at all. Part of Nintendo's job is to make all of their products sound appealing. They're a biased source.
It's not just Nintendo it's every company. That's why we have a gaming media. THQ is going to tell us their latest Kim Possible game rules. Independent reviews inform us with a much more balanced opinion.
Post by: Bill Aurion on November 29, 2005, 09:44:40 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"You guys are believing a magazine over nintendo themselves."
Well this is a potential negative for the Rev. I think it would make much more sense to believe an unrelated third party. It is in Nintendo's best interest that negative news regarding the Rev doesn't get out. Therefore regarding something like this I wouldn't trust Nintendo's word at all. Part of Nintendo's job is to make all of their products sound appealing. They're a biased source.
EGM has a REALLY nasty history of baseless Ninty-bashing, so this so-assumed "third party" is just as "useless" as taking what Ninty says to be fact (which is kinda silly in the first place, considering Ninty always UNDERCUTS their graphical prowess...)
Post by: zakkiel on November 29, 2005, 11:01:29 AM
Post by: nemo_83 on November 29, 2005, 11:16:45 AM
Nintendo cannot engage in a price war with MS. Its a mute point. MS has shown their willing to take a $135 hit. MS was willing to rush out hardware and software just to be the first out though they were the last out last time around. MS has already put the flag in the ground in a price war against Sony. That is what the 360's whole thing is going to be; it cost half as much as a PS3 and it has Halo 3. By next fall when Nintendo launches MS will drop their price. Nintendo need only worry about not being more expensive than MS next fall; they don't have to, I don't believe they can be less expensive than MS by next fall and not suffer a loss themselves in profit or power. Production costs will go down on 360 and MS will be willing to lower the price and still lose $135 or more just to ensure they don't get stomped out by superior technology. Logic says that any hardware that comes out a year or more after the 360 will be capable of things MS' hardware is not (cooling). I don't expect Sony in America until spring 06 if not later.
Nintendo needs to only position itself at the same price as MS; Sony will ensure that the PS3 will alienate people's wallets.
Post by: mantidor on November 29, 2005, 12:06:15 PM
Post by: pudu on November 29, 2005, 12:07:13 PM
-Sony touts its proprietary hardware as being both unique and the most powerful
-1 year later both MS and Nintendo release their consoles, both utilizing more traditional architecture
-MS goes for a brute force path with more or less powerful computer parts thrown in their "console"
-Nintendo goes more customized, attempting the best bang for your buck approach with a well rounded console
In the end the most unique and different console architecture (PS2) was never fully utilized due to its difficulty to develop for and some bottle necks that surfaced. On the other hand the more traditional architecures (Xbox, GCN) clearly had more graphical prowess then the PS2, with the Xbox being the clear victor in the end. As far as I see it Nintendo took the smartest route here with a more balanced machine that could be fully taken advantage of rather easily. The Xbox, while more powerful, was basically a PC in a box that was a lot more powerful but also a lot more pricey.
What I think must be pointed out here is that the more proprietary/non mainstream architecture never lived up to what it was expected to do. The "PS2s" of this next generation are the PS3 and, to a lesser extent, the Xbox 360. I believe you can already see the underwhelming graphics in the first generation of 360 titles due to the difficulty of properly using the hardware to its fullest. I'm guessing with 7 SPE's the PS3 will be undoubtably even harder to fully utilize. I bet the Nintendo is keeping with their same tried and true strategy of delivering a balanced, well rounded, and easy to utilize architecture in the Revolution. My guess is a powerful single CPU, a very competant GPU, and plenty of speedy RAM. Where sales are more key earlier on in a consoles life span the Revolution will be using far more of its true potential as compared to its competition.
As has been said in the past, you should never underestimate Nintendo. I remember being worried for some reason that the Cube would be the worste graphically and the difference would be huge. Nintendo, being their modest selves, has a track record for downplaying the tech specs of their consoles and focusing on the games and other essential aspects pertaining to the actual playing of the games. This makes perfect sense when you think of why they are hesitant to release tech specs. They are waiting to actually show it in action. They want people to get the overall picture and concept behind it. I can see why they were hesitant to show the controler in the first place. Without software to back it up they are open for sucker punches from nay sayers who can use the lack of actual games as an opportunity to freely slam their concept. While the controller is a big part of their plans for the Rev., it is only a peice of the puzzle. So by simply looking at the strategy this past/current generation and comparing it to those of the next generation the possiblility of the newer architectures to never show what they have promised seems far more likely.
Most importantly though is this simple fact: with most everything technologicaly driven Time = Advances. For the Revolution this will be no different. By the time it launches it may have an entire year on the Xbox 360. This fact alone sets my mind at rest. Remember:
1. PS2 with it's proprietary architecture releases with a high price point.
2. 1 year later GCN releases with a familiar yet streamlined architecutre at a lesser price point
3. the GCN turns out to be more graphically powerful then the PS2
End of story
Oh and as far as the PS3 goes, my gut feeling is that in time it will prove to the be the most powerful console graphics wise and will be the new Xbox of the last gen graphicaly speaking when comparing it to the other two consoles (with the 360 and Rev. being very similar)
Post by: zakkiel on November 29, 2005, 01:56:03 PM
Post by: Bill Aurion on November 29, 2005, 02:09:28 PM
Post by: ThePerm on November 29, 2005, 02:38:18 PM
Post by: mantidor on November 29, 2005, 03:23:38 PM
Post by: Don'tHate742 on November 29, 2005, 06:07:29 PM
Try drawing or painting something for a change. It'll help you appreciate art alot more.
Post by: PaLaDiN on November 29, 2005, 06:14:33 PM
Post by: wandering on November 29, 2005, 07:50:34 PM
Post by: IceCold on November 29, 2005, 07:56:07 PM
Post by: wandering on November 29, 2005, 08:01:38 PM
...though, in this case, the picture just changed because the old one broke forum tables.
Post by: zakkiel on November 29, 2005, 08:09:06 PM
QuoteRiiiight. Saying WW is gorgeous isn't trolling, but expressing the opposite opinion is. You have any basis for the distinction that doesn't rest on your own opinion?
totally rotten ogre-like lip!!!
QuoteI had to do an oil replica of a Monet to graduate from eighth grade. Not sure it helped me appreciate paintings in general, but I do like some, among them Van Gogh. I guess I've never been sophisticated enough to appreciate Picasso, or cel-shading. Oh, and I don't believe in art, in the way I think y'all use the term. It's an invention of elites as both an access ritual and a mean of delegitimizing those forms of entertainment the elites disapprove of, which amusingly changes with the generations. Art pretends to objectivity in the most subjective possible arena of human life. When I use the word artist I'm just referring to the people responsible for the visual look of the game.
Try drawing or painting something for a change. It'll help you appreciate art alot more.
QuoteOddly enough I'm a big fan of some anime visuals. If I am a tremendous clownboat. looked more like Last Exile, say, I would have loved it. And no, I'm not just talking about the CG elements.
Or maybe he just doesn't like cartoons.
QuoteI liked said cut scene, but it didn't exactly wow me. Ghost ship, castle, and night sky all left me cold. Not admittedly as cold as the frequently MS-paintesque water or the exaggeration of Link's affect to a point well beyond comedy, but still, cold. In many games I will stop to be impressed by the visuals often. In WW, not once. I'm not proud of that, just thought I should point out that there is an alternative opinion, and based entirely on anecdotal evidence it is the more common opinion outside the clique of devoted Nintendo fans.
How can you gaze at the night sky and not be impressed? What about the Ghost ship? What about the castle? Even the prelliminary cut-scene was impressive.
Post by: Stimutacs Addict on November 29, 2005, 09:07:43 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: IceCold
Hey the picture changed! I'm hallucinating!!
me too! Now I know why mario was never so mad that the princess was in another castle
Post by: Kairon on November 29, 2005, 09:39:28 PM
To me though, Wind Waker had one redeeming feature that I don't believe can be impinged upon. And that is its perfection of a battle system so fluid it's cinematic. That game only approached magic when you were deep in battle. None of the enemies were actually a challenge, but it is a testament to WW's battle system that they were still fun to fight all the same. WW allowed you to fluidly and seamlessly dance around your enemies, all choreographed and animated so brilliantly that my dad would just stop in the room to watch the battle play out. Dodging in WW was no longer simply moving out of the way, but dynamically emphasized by the camera to emerge from its role as gameplay mechanic and come into its own as cinematic battle element. And of course, the counterattack illustrated better than any and all traditional fighting games how the flow of battle could change when someone overextends themselves.
There was only one thing for me to take away from WW, one thing that rose above the realization that Nintendo was running out of traditional controller paradigms to use with its games, and that was for the first time, I felt like what I was playing wasn't just fun, it was starting to tread towards some standard of beauty that I never believed could be unscripted, that I never believed was created seamlessly at the very moment I hit the A button.
Call it what you will...or..well...I guess you could very easily disagree with me if that's your wish. But I think that that was the only purely magical thing out of WW.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: nemo_83 on November 29, 2005, 09:50:33 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: zakkiel
Wow, this is kind of ridiculous.QuoteRiiiight. Saying WW is gorgeous isn't trolling, but expressing the opposite opinion is. You have any basis for the distinction that doesn't rest on your own opinion?
totally rotten ogre-like lip!!!QuoteI had to do an oil replica of a Monet to graduate from eighth grade. Not sure it helped me appreciate paintings in general, but I do like some, among them Van Gogh. I guess I've never been sophisticated enough to appreciate Picasso, or cel-shading. Oh, and I don't believe in art, in the way I think y'all use the term. It's an invention of elites as both an access ritual and a mean of delegitimizing those forms of entertainment the elites disapprove of, which amusingly changes with the generations. Art pretends to objectivity in the most subjective possible arena of human life. When I use the word artist I'm just referring to the people responsible for the visual look of the game.
Try drawing or painting something for a change. It'll help you appreciate art alot more.QuoteOddly enough I'm a big fan of some anime visuals. If I am a tremendous clownboat. looked more like Last Exile, say, I would have loved it. And no, I'm not just talking about the CG elements.
Or maybe he just doesn't like cartoons.QuoteI liked said cut scene, but it didn't exactly wow me. Ghost ship, castle, and night sky all left me cold. Not admittedly as cold as the frequently MS-paintesque water or the exaggeration of Link's affect to a point well beyond comedy, but still, cold. In many games I will stop to be impressed by the visuals often. In WW, not once. I'm not proud of that, just thought I should point out that there is an alternative opinion, and based entirely on anecdotal evidence it is the more common opinion outside the clique of devoted Nintendo fans.
How can you gaze at the night sky and not be impressed? What about the Ghost ship? What about the castle? Even the prelliminary cut-scene was impressive.
Monet influenced a century of artists, animators, and now video game designers. Painters like Monet who did studies of light and color are where we get cartoons, water color aesthetics, and the toon shading technology in games now. Without Monet WW would not exist; just look at any horizon line, look at the silhouetes of the islands.
The lighting in WW is what cel shading is all about, next gen games are just now exploring facial animations, the smoke effects were both stylish and fluid, and no game has yet to match its clean polygon models except maybe Kameo which isn't even in the same park in gameplay and is running mostly on next gen effects more than creative coding.
WW is like LttP, its visually graphic and visually timeless. WW is the most complete 3D world yet. I hope next generation they chose cel shading again but use character art closer to FFCC than Disney's Hercules.
I like to zoom out in WW and look at things from a distance like in LttP; it almost looks 2D and that is the goal, to take the space out.
Post by: Kairon on November 29, 2005, 10:14:36 PM
I'm more of a Miyamoto fan, so I'm a gameplay appreciation buff if anything. That's why I concentrated on the battle system.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on November 29, 2005, 10:55:31 PM
Post by: MrMojoRising on November 30, 2005, 12:06:35 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: zakkiel
Oh, and I don't believe in art, in the way I think y'all use the term. It's an invention of elites as both an access ritual and a mean of delegitimizing those forms of entertainment the elites disapprove of, which amusingly changes with the generations. Art pretends to objectivity in the most subjective possible arena of human life. When I use the word artist I'm just referring to the people responsible for the visual look of the game
Oh, I get it, you're from a red-state.
Want to hear an opinion that is even less popular than one that bashes WW? I thought that OoT was too long and that WW was overall a better more enjoyable experience. (OoT still rocks, you don't have to castrate me)
Post by: mantidor on November 30, 2005, 02:47:13 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: zakkielOddly enough I'm a big fan of some anime visuals. If I am a tremendous clownboat. looked more like Last Exile, say, I would have loved it. And no, I'm not just talking about the CG elements.
It happens that I also didnt like the particular art style of the Wind Waker, specially Links model, but that didnt stopped me for apreciating what they were trying to acomplish.
Replaying the game is making me to apreciate even more its visual presentation. The fire temple pales in comparison with Dragon Roost Cavern and its amazing lava currents and smoke effects, including distortion of the image because of intense heat, so I have to strongly disagree with Kairon about the dungeons lacking caracter.
So, of course, although I cant wait for Twilight Princess, I cannot wait for Nintendo's next toon-shaded Zelda.
Post by: Don'tHate742 on November 30, 2005, 03:31:21 AM
Quote
So, of course, although I cant wait for Twilight Princess, I cannot wait for Nintendo's next toon-shaded Zelda.
Quoted for truth.
Post by: couchmonkey on November 30, 2005, 06:07:27 AM
Post by: Don'tHate742 on November 30, 2005, 06:27:27 AM
It's was never you hate it so you hate art.
Post by: zakkiel on November 30, 2005, 06:48:11 AM
QuoteI'm a raging New England liberal. And I don't have a problem with people who don't like OoT, just with people saying it's overrated. It's not possible for a game to be overrated unless you believe that people can be deceived about how much fun they're having.
Oh, I get it, you're from a red-state.
Want to hear an opinion that is even less popular than one that bashes WW? I thought that OoT was too long and that WW was overall a better more enjoyable experience. (OoT still rocks, you don't have to castrate me)
Quote
It happens that I also didnt like the particular art style of the Wind Waker, specially Links model, but that didnt stopped me for apreciating what they were trying to acomplish.
Quote
I was never bashing zakkeil for not liking the art style. Instead, I was bashing him for not being impressed with it, even though other games impress him. I didn't like the charachter models for WW, but I could still appreciate the whole concept behind the art. I could still look at the sky and be impressed with how well they used the art style to display the scenery. Even if I didn't like the art style, I could still see the did a fantastic job representing the world around Link.
I don't understand how you can be impressed with art and not like it. I guess you could be impressed with the technical elements - the pyramids are impressive for the effort that went into building them, not for their aesthetics - but that's not really appreciation of art as art. Sure, I can say, "Wow, it must have taken a lot of work to make that texture," but so does running on a treadmill. Doesn't much incline me to appreciate movies of people running on treadmills.
Post by: Don'tHate742 on November 30, 2005, 07:01:08 AM
Post by: Pale on November 30, 2005, 08:02:47 AM
Aren't you the person who jumped down my throat for not liking the idea that Smash Bros. Rev would change? I can't believe I would have an opinion that someone else disagrees with... its almost like I was arguing about whether or not Wind Waker was a good game.
Post by: ShawnSt3r on November 30, 2005, 08:18:59 AM
On the topic, OoT was a great game, Wind Waker was not as great. Not because of its graphics but because it didnt do a well enough job making the works seem vast AND alive. It was hugh, but not nearly as varied and populated as OoT. That was my only gripe, however I thought the graphics in Wind Waker were gorgeous and they didn't bother me for a second.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on November 30, 2005, 08:29:02 AM
Post by: pudu on November 30, 2005, 08:29:33 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: zakkielQuote
Oh, I get it, you're from a red-state.
It's not possible for a game to be overrated unless you believe that people can be deceived about how much fun they're having.
I believe games can and are overrated due to many circumstances like the publisher popularity, past game performance/popularity, fanboyism (sorry but best way I could think of saying it), the mood the reviewer was in at the time, and MANY other reasons. I do, however, find what you said to be really funny and entertaining. Maybe if you said, "It's not possible for a game like OoT to be overrated unless you believe that people can be deceived about how much fun they're having" it'd be more accurate.
Post by: ShawnSt3r on November 30, 2005, 09:06:23 AM
Post by: ShawnSt3r on November 30, 2005, 09:21:30 AM
I am currently in a state of gradual decline concerning my interest for video games. This, I have found; like alot of people, is due to the lack of originality and myself being generally not excited about video games. For this reason I am a die-hard Nintendo fan because, as many of you know, they seem to be the only company not afraid of innovation and new ideas. Therefore, I am thoroughly excited about the Revolution for the exciting possibilities it brings to the gaming table. - Thats my disclaimer.
Now, as far as graphics are concerned, with me atleast, they always take a backseat to gameplay as long as the graphics themselves dont hinder the gameplay experience. That being said, graphics are important to me in the new generation. (I own a top end pc and play alot of graphic intensive games) I want to see my Revolution games looking beautiful and fluid right along side ground breaking control and gameplay experiences. Along that line, I believe that Nintendo will deliver in both areas, gameplay and graphics. (atleast enough to suit my expectations.) Especially after reading this Article. I know it was already posted elsewhere but it is such a highly interesting read concerning the hardware specifications of the Revolution I can't help but post it again.
That article leads me to believe that Nintendo will not only deliver fresh gameplay experience with its revolutionary controller, but will also offer significant gains in the area of AI with its (rumored I conceed) up to 2mb of memory.
I predict alot of graphics critics concerning Nintendos next new consoled will be relatively silenced once we see some of the games in motion. Not to mention that we will possibly be able to rub in their faces the fact that Nintendo Revolution can process realistic AI that will simply not be possible on competing systems.
Post by: Hostile Creation on November 30, 2005, 12:13:24 PM
I preferred WW to OoT, but only marginally.
Post by: zakkiel on November 30, 2005, 12:37:51 PM
QuoteIf I like what it does in a game or a movie, I like it for itself.
You can be impressed with what the art accomplishes and not by the art style itself. Just like classical music and movies. You can like how it changes the mood, creating sad moments and anxious moments, but not like the classical genre by itself.
QuoteBecause the article that started this topic is manifestly stupid?
Oh my, why is last-gen's trainwreck in the Revo section?
QuoteArt has no definition (unless you use mine, which is simply visual entertainment.) That's the problem. It's just a word you use to say "I approve of this kind of entertainment." There's no objective standard for what constitutes art and what constitutes crap, with the result that crap is now literally considered art, as long as you stick it in a can. Since I have no problem with people who define art in any way they want, it wouldn't make much sense for me to say I don't like them.
I just wanted to say that I think it is entertaining that Zakkiel doesn't believe in art because of some baseless definition he places on it.
QuoteNo. I'm the person who jumped down your throat because you kept whining when people disagreed with you. Notice that I am not whining because a lot of people disagree with me. This comes of having the emotional maturity to know the difference between disagreement and personal attacks.
Aren't you the person who jumped down my throat for not liking the idea that Smash Bros. Rev would change? I can't believe I would have an opinion that someone else disagrees with... its almost like I was arguing about whether or not Wind Waker was a good game.
QuoteA game is good insofar as people have fun playing it. You can say a game sold more than it should have (a lot of people bought it and didn't have much fun) or that critics overrated it, in the sense that the numbers they gave didn't correspond to how much the gaming public enjoyed it. But you can't say a game is overrated by the people who play it. All that means is you happen to enjoy that game less than other players. Unless, as I said, you really do believe people can be wrong about how much fun they have with a game, due to fanboyism or whatnot, which is deeply patronizing and also just silly.
I believe games can and are overrated due to many circumstances like the publisher popularity, past game performance/popularity, fanboyism (sorry but best way I could think of saying it), the mood the reviewer was in at the time, and MANY other reasons. I do, however, find what you said to be really funny and entertaining. Maybe if you said, "It's not possible for a game like OoT to be overrated unless you believe that people can be deceived about how much fun they're having" it'd be more accurate.
Post by: ShawnSt3r on November 30, 2005, 12:39:15 PM
Post by: attackslug on November 30, 2005, 01:49:21 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: ShawnSt3r
Now, as far as graphics are concerned, with me atleast, they always take a backseat to gameplay as long as the graphics themselves dont hinder the gameplay experience.
This is my main concern with the capabilities of the Rev. If the system is indeed a souped-up GC, then developers may very well be held back from what they want to put on the system. This is the case especially for FPS games, which Nintendo has stated the Rev will be quite well suited for.
A modern FPS is generally very graphically intense and the first-person perspective only lets the user notice limitations such as blurry textures or blocky models all that much more easily. Also, most modern FPS's include a fairly robust physics system which can be very taxing on the CPU, which could make developers sacrifice further graphical quality in order to support it.
Post by: mantidor on November 30, 2005, 01:52:56 PM
I know is off topic, but you know why I loved the Wind Waker despite not liking Links model? because the game trascended for me artistic style and offered something so special and unique, that at the end, even if Link's model was so weird, I empathise with the character more than in any other game. I know its funny, but the world, for being cartoony, felt incredibly real, and Links exaggerated expressions helped to achieve that.
Post by: Hostile Creation on November 30, 2005, 02:41:11 PM
You are getting totally off-topic here sir.
Post by: cubist on November 30, 2005, 03:32:32 PM
After reading it, I really disagreed with his impressions of the graphics in HI-DEF. He says that it will be Nintendo's second biggest mistake behind going with cartridges over CDs. While I agree with the latter, I completely disagree that the graphics in HI-DEF are the huge leap that we've been waiting for.
Anyone else read it?
Post by: Kairon on November 30, 2005, 03:53:00 PM
Oh, and I don't think we have to worry about Nintendo limitting console power directly. Nintendo is actually very keen on the actual application of hardware power into software. After all, the N64 was the most powerful system of its generation and the GC is neck and neck with the XBOX in terms of graphic prowess. I suspect that Twilight Princess may also make a lot of non-in-the-know casual gamers who use standard TVs wonder: "Why spend 300 bucks on a new system when a system 5 years old can give me graphics just as good?"
The question is about indirectly being less powerful hardware wise. How far is Nintendo willing to cut costs in its quest for a mass market price point of sub $200? Tieing this issue back to price shows how delicate a balancing act it is. Should they launch at more than $200 because they're sure to sell out anyways? How quickly do they go mass market with price? If they do go mass market pricing, CAN they even manufacture enough Revs to meet a risen demand? And by not spending extra money on the horsepower to output HD graphics, how low is their bottomline really?
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: zakkiel on November 30, 2005, 05:11:45 PM
Post by: ThePerm on November 30, 2005, 05:42:01 PM
Post by: pudu on November 30, 2005, 08:26:27 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: zakkiel<brQuoteA game is good insofar as people have fun playing it. You can say a game sold more than it should have (a lot of people bought it and didn't have much fun) or that critics overrated it, in the sense that the numbers they gave didn't correspond to how much the gaming public enjoyed it. But you can't say a game is overrated by the people who play it. All that means is you happen to enjoy that game less than other players. Unless, as I said, you really do believe people can be wrong about how much fun they have with a game, due to fanboyism or whatnot, which is deeply patronizing and also just silly.
I believe games can and are overrated due to many circumstances like the publisher popularity, past game performance/popularity, fanboyism (sorry but best way I could think of saying it), the mood the reviewer was in at the time, and MANY other reasons. I do, however, find what you said to be really funny and entertaining. Maybe if you said, "It's not possible for a game like OoT to be overrated unless you believe that people can be deceived about how much fun they're having" it'd be more accurate.
Hmm we were thinking on different wavelengths obviously. When I saw that you were talking about game ratings what comes to my mind is how it is critically acclaimed by magazines, gamesites, and user reviews for the rest of the public to see. I obviously know that a game is good if it is fun...and as far as I see it you just agreed with me by saying that the numerical scores critics give games don't necessarily correspond to how much the gaming public enjoyed it. By me saying that games can be "overrated" I meant that a rating should be the closest it possibly can to the average enjoyment that all the other people who play the game have.
What you must have meant was on a personal level...which it is obviously true that each persons enjoyment of a game can't be overrated, nor can they be "deceived" into finding it more fun. All I was trying to point out is that there are many circumstances and preferences can affect how much fun a game is for any person at any given time so that must be considered (example: one person loves the genre and has a top notch setup and plays it on xmas break, the other hates that type of game, has a crappy tv and plays it while avoiding homework). Given this fact (that each person is affected by all sorts of forces) AND the fact that it is impossible to perfectly score a game, all I was trying to point out was that as soon as a game is rated by someone it will be seen as overrated by others who see it in a different light. How much greater the score is to the average opinion of the people who play it can be seen as how overrated it is.
So, in conclusion, if you look at it from an individual perspective where a person rates it truthfully then it is impossible for it to be "overrated" because there opinion is their opinion but if you look at it in a broader perspective where you take into account that a ratings sole purpose can be to show others what you thought then it will always have a chance of being perceived as "overrated" simply due to the fact that no two people are identical.
Post by: Pale on December 01, 2005, 04:33:04 AM
If I had your kind of time, I would quote rape the two threads to show you the absolute similarity between the two arguments. Saying that you are carrying on a better intertron argument than me is hilarious.
Look in the mirror. Both of us have silly opinions we try to defend by posting long rants that don't accomplish anything. It's hard to make people have the same opinion as you... even harder on the internet. That's why it's better to just discuss facts. I wish I didn't fall into these traps so often..
How does that photoshop go?
Arguing on the Internet is like running in the special olympics. Even if you win, you're still retarded.
Post by: Don'tHate742 on December 01, 2005, 06:20:56 AM
Post by: zakkiel on December 01, 2005, 11:02:38 AM
QuoteFair enough
actually lemme go back....i just felt like spelling troll...because i came up with a funny wa to do it. your opinion is correct. I liked the way zelda looked..but it was too damn short
QuoteYes dear, I know you could win the argument if you really wanted to, it's just that you're above the whole thing. Not too far above it to drag a several-month-old thread into this one, but far enough that you needn't defend your claims.
If I had your kind of time, I would quote rape the two threads to show you the absolute similarity between the two arguments. Saying that you are carrying on a better intertron argument than me is hilarious.
Incidentally, this post took me fiveminutes from beginning to end to write. I call it the miracle of ctrl+c/ctrl+v
QuoteThing is, I like it when people disagree with me, whereas you call it flaming.
Both of us have silly opinions we try to defend by posting long rants that don't accomplish anything. It's hard to make people have the same opinion as you... even harder on the internet. That's why it's better to just discuss facts. I wish I didn't fall into these traps so often..
Post by: Kairon on December 01, 2005, 02:11:23 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: mantidorQuote
Originally posted by: zakkielOddly enough I'm a big fan of some anime visuals. If I am a tremendous clownboat. looked more like Last Exile, say, I would have loved it. And no, I'm not just talking about the CG elements.
It happens that I also didnt like the particular art style of the Wind Waker, specially Links model, but that didnt stopped me for apreciating what they were trying to acomplish.
Replaying the game is making me to apreciate even more its visual presentation. The fire temple pales in comparison with Dragon Roost Cavern and its amazing lava currents and smoke effects, including distortion of the image because of intense heat, so I have to strongly disagree with Kairon about the dungeons lacking caracter.
So, of course, although I cant wait for Twilight Princess, I cannot wait for Nintendo's next toon-shaded Zelda.
I have to strongly disagree with you about strongly disagreeing with me. Can I do that?
Dragon Roost Cavern is the ONLY Dungeon that WW got anywhere near right. It's a little too linear, but that's to be expected of the first full scale dungeon.
BUT, the next dungeon? the tree one? BO-RING! This dungeon's design simply retreaded past zelda concepts, and the art motifs offered nothing new over OoT's environments.
Then the dungeon design takes a REAL downhill with the rest. The Earth Temple (or whatever it was called) is almost completely...brown. period. The tower dungeon that marks the game's "mid-point" (WoW, this Zelda was so forgettable dungeonwise that I can't even remember the names of the places!) also fails to pull together any coherent theme for the player.
Whereas Aonouma is credited for OoT's amazing dungeon design, ever since he's become director I just haven't been able to get excited about the actual dungeons of the Zelda games. Yes, I'll get TP. But Aonouma's directing it, and not Miyamoto, and I have yet to see anything from Aonouma which I've liked. I never finished MM and WW and have had to rely on watching my younger bro play these games in order to experence the rest of the game.
I am a Miyamoto fanboy, and I pride myself on being able to guess whether Miyamoto has touched a game. WW had magic in it's combat system, and I highly suspect that this was because of Miyamoto's influence. But Aonouma was responsible for everything else, and everything else failed to WoW me. I personally feel that Zelda has been personally sliding downhill in actual game quality ever since Miyamoto has left its directorship. Opinion, yes, but opinion from a devoted fanboy.
...The closer I get to Miyamoto the happier I'll be. That's probably why I remember Pikmin more fondly than WW.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: ThePerm on December 01, 2005, 02:27:30 PM
Post by: nemo_83 on December 01, 2005, 02:30:46 PM
So right, its not like everyone has four HDTVs in their house right now; in fact I barely know anyone who has one. Americans are not confident in the economy; droping $1000-$5000 on resolution right now looks more than a little nitpicky. Lighting effects make things look real; not resolution. If resolution equalled realism I guess when I watch the news tonight it just won't look real cause my tv is not HD, it doesn't matter that I know they're real people cause their in low def and it looks totally fake.
360 is Xbox HD. If there is a polygonal leap that is major present there, then Nintendo is right, graphics don't mean **** anymore because the leap isn't visible. All they're doing is putting more characters on screen. I spent more time during Thanksgiving playing Halo 2 on 360 than I did with the other games, because Halo 2 in HD looked as good as PDZ and played nine times as well. Go go magic jump button!
Nintendo can launch the Revolution with two standards. They could have a cheaper version which would play all games in SD, and they could have an HD version which puts all games in HD whether developed for SD or HD. Nintendo's style though would be to wait two years before launching the HD version.
Post by: odifiend on December 01, 2005, 03:56:20 PM
Post by: Bill Aurion on December 01, 2005, 04:09:43 PM
I feel like vomiting...
Post by: Don'tHate742 on December 01, 2005, 05:04:14 PM
I should smack you for insulting Majora's Mask, OOT, and WW....
And TP, it looks to be the best out of all Zeldas....that's saying alot...and guess what, Aonuma is directing it....
Post by: Kairon on December 01, 2005, 07:40:16 PM
Bottomline, I don't like either of Aonouma's Zelda's as much as I liked the ones Miyamoto directed. Majora's Mask immediately struck me as nothing really new. The multiplicity of Masks it touted were really just a fancy way to present the player with Fed Ex quests, as we disparagely call them in MMORPGs. And the time system was in no way whatsoever restrictive to me: I scheduled my way around it as if it wasn't there. And let's face it, Oni link was cheap, cheap, cheap. As was the Fairy sword.
Not to say I didn't like it. It was okay... But it was nowhere near the quality that a crazy Miyamato fanboi like myself wants from Nintendo.
And of course I just don't need to repeat my criticisms of WW. Aonouma makes some decent stuff, but he provides nowhere near the magic that MIyamoto brings to a project.
Yes, I am a Nintendo Fanboy, and yes, I am coming out and saying that in my fanboi opinion, Aonouma has failed to match Miaymoto's OoT. In fact, he believes this himself. This is why he's gone out to state that he wants to return to OoT and top it. He's already tried to differentiate himself from it with MM, and tried to outdo it in WW. But he just can't escape Miyamoto's masterpiece.
I almost feel sorry for the guy.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Kairon on December 01, 2005, 07:44:29 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Don'tHate742
And TP, it looks to be the best out of all Zeldas....that's saying alot...and guess what, Aonuma is directing it....
If TP is looking to be so good, why has Miyamoto already stated that it'll be the last Zelda of its kind? I suspect that Miyamoto himself believes that the current Zelda paradigm is at or near creative saturation, and that no matter how good TP turns out, it is useless to even try further along the lines that these last Zelda's have progressed under Aonouma's direction.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Mario on December 01, 2005, 07:54:01 PM
Oh yeah, better graphics than GameCube? Sweet, but expected.
Post by: Kairon on December 01, 2005, 07:57:23 PM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Don'tHate742 on December 01, 2005, 07:59:39 PM
It's the last of it's kind because of the REV. New controls mean new game. Even simply changing the fighting to something more interactive makes TP the last of its kind. You see, we don't know exacty what will change in the next zelda, so saying that its near its creative saturation is jumping the gun a bit. If you think about it, all games are going to be the last of their kind....all nintendo games at least.
I think your Miyamoto fanboyism is clouding your head....
Post by: Kairon on December 01, 2005, 09:15:32 PM
For a company so driven to innovate, and for a man like Miyamoto who before the Cube was enjoying years of acclaimed innovation after innovation, the GC era seems a blight on Nintendo's record. Where were the innovations? Where was the excitement? Why did it feel like for the first time, Nintendo was merely milking its franchises instead of wowing the entire world with them?
This is dangerous, because creatively-stuck is anathema to a company that can only succeed by staying ahead of bigger, richer and meaner competitors. This is also a strike to Nintendo's self-image and/or pride: Nintendo has always been the company that wins the innovation prize. But thrid parties are snapping at Nintendo's heels with games like Ico and Katamari Damacy, and all Nintendo can do is give Mario a waterpack, stick a second parson on a Kart, and give link a context-sensitive counter-attack.
That's my Nintendo-view as a Miyamoto fanboi, and that's why I sense that Miyamoto's been fidgety this entire generation including Wind Waker. Working with today's controls, he simply feels that today's games are going nowhere. This is, after all, why we have the Rev controller: to introduce a paradigm shift and open up whole new dimensions of gaming. To make possible a whole new kind of Zelda. Because Miyamoto is eager to move forward and not at all eager to see another Zelda in the same tired mold of OoT/MM/WW.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Mario on December 01, 2005, 11:18:03 PM
I'm looking forward to seeing how the new Zelda will be next generation as well, but there's no way in hell i'm tired of the way Zelda currently is (though, perhaps I will be in two years, perfect timing!), and all 3D Zelda games offer completely different experiences.
Post by: Don'tHate742 on December 02, 2005, 01:13:52 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
I don't think so Don'tHate. Mario Sunshine, Mario Kart: DD, WW... all key innovative Nintendo Franchises that when they arrived felt like... more of the same. Throw in the fact that most gaming review site's opinions when recovering from playing TP demos was... "it played just like Zelda's before, there wasn't anything really new."
For a company so driven to innovate, and for a man like Miyamoto who before the Cube was enjoying years of acclaimed innovation after innovation, the GC era seems a blight on Nintendo's record. Where were the innovations? Where was the excitement? Why did it feel like for the first time, Nintendo was merely milking its franchises instead of wowing the entire world with them?
This is dangerous, because creatively-stuck is anathema to a company that can only succeed by staying ahead of bigger, richer and meaner competitors. This is also a strike to Nintendo's self-image and/or pride: Nintendo has always been the company that wins the innovation prize. But thrid parties are snapping at Nintendo's heels with games like Ico and Katamari Damacy, and all Nintendo can do is give Mario a waterpack, stick a second parson on a Kart, and give link a context-sensitive counter-attack.
That's my Nintendo-view as a Miyamoto fanboi, and that's why I sense that Miyamoto's been fidgety this entire generation including Wind Waker. Working with today's controls, he simply feels that today's games are going nowhere. This is, after all, why we have the Rev controller: to introduce a paradigm shift and open up whole new dimensions of gaming. To make possible a whole new kind of Zelda. Because Miyamoto is eager to move forward and not at all eager to see another Zelda in the same tired mold of OoT/MM/WW.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
It's funny how even if your points are sound, they aren't relevant. You said something to the degree of, why is TP the last of its kind? I said because of the REV controller....
You can't argue that...
Your tangent mongering about creativity ceilings and such doesn't pertian here, because we don't know exactly how much the next gen Zelda will change. However, we do know WHY it will change, and though you may have a few points, the only real answer is the REV controller. End of argument.
Post by: KDR_11k on December 02, 2005, 03:44:54 AM
Post by: Kairon on December 02, 2005, 05:11:44 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Don'tHate742Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
I don't think so Don'tHate. Mario Sunshine, Mario Kart: DD, WW... all key innovative Nintendo Franchises that when they arrived felt like... more of the same. Throw in the fact that most gaming review site's opinions when recovering from playing TP demos was... "it played just like Zelda's before, there wasn't anything really new."
For a company so driven to innovate, and for a man like Miyamoto who before the Cube was enjoying years of acclaimed innovation after innovation, the GC era seems a blight on Nintendo's record. Where were the innovations? Where was the excitement? Why did it feel like for the first time, Nintendo was merely milking its franchises instead of wowing the entire world with them?
This is dangerous, because creatively-stuck is anathema to a company that can only succeed by staying ahead of bigger, richer and meaner competitors. This is also a strike to Nintendo's self-image and/or pride: Nintendo has always been the company that wins the innovation prize. But thrid parties are snapping at Nintendo's heels with games like Ico and Katamari Damacy, and all Nintendo can do is give Mario a waterpack, stick a second parson on a Kart, and give link a context-sensitive counter-attack.
That's my Nintendo-view as a Miyamoto fanboi, and that's why I sense that Miyamoto's been fidgety this entire generation including Wind Waker. Working with today's controls, he simply feels that today's games are going nowhere. This is, after all, why we have the Rev controller: to introduce a paradigm shift and open up whole new dimensions of gaming. To make possible a whole new kind of Zelda. Because Miyamoto is eager to move forward and not at all eager to see another Zelda in the same tired mold of OoT/MM/WW.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
It's funny how even if your points are sound, they aren't relevant. You said something to the degree of, why is TP the last of its kind? I said because of the REV controller....
You can't argue that...
Your tangent mongering about creativity ceilings and such doesn't pertian here, because we don't know exactly how much the next gen Zelda will change. However, we do know WHY it will change, and though you may have a few points, the only real answer is the REV controller. End of argument.
I'm sorry I wasn't clear. My thinking is that the Rev controller came about BECAUSE Miyamoto knew that he wanted to change the fabric of games, including Zelda, already.
You imply that the Rev controller was developed and ONLY THEN did Miyamoto accept that games would change due to it's nature. This is very un-Miyamoto because he always let's the game and hardware emerge more or less together, a more organic process where the hardware is actually a RESPONSE to where he wants to go with his games. Not at all a "develop the hardware and hope that good games comes out" way of thinking.
That's why I am undeterred in my belief that Miyamoto first realized that current generation games, including Zelda, were reaching a dead end, and AFTER that realization, was driven to revolutionize the controller with future games, including Zelda, in mind. I think back to all the times Miyamoto has talked about changing the nature of games, to his one-stick-one-button-thinking, I think back to the lengthy dev time for Mario 128 which suggests that they simply couldn't find anything new in the current paradigm, I look back to the somewhat lackluster Sunshine, Double Dash, and Wind Waker...
And I am not convinced that this is the last Zelda game just because Miyamoto realized at a later point that the Rev Controller would be better suited for another format. Miyamoto KNEW what was happening all throughout the Rev's development and TP's development. He saw the Rev Controller coming miles away, he had a hand in that, and he was thinking about gaming while doing it. Yes, this is the last Zelda because the Rev controller is changing everything, but why is the Rev Controller changing everything? Party because of the last generation of games, partly because of how Wind Waker came out.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Pale on December 02, 2005, 06:02:58 AM
I personally think the forum would be a better place if we all tried to act more like Bill. Then conversations would consist of discussing exciting news and how much we like games, instead of what is happening here.
Anyway, this is just an observation that I wanted to get in somewhere, and this was as good a place as any.
Edit: Oh shits! I went all emo in this post....
Post by: Don'tHate742 on December 02, 2005, 06:20:55 AM
Post by: majortom1981 on December 02, 2005, 06:58:05 AM
Also there is a nother ruomour (could be real i am listing as a rumour) that just recently ibm handed nintendo the final cpu.
IF thats the case the developers have glorified gamecube dev kits.
Nintendo themselves said that devs could use gc devs kits to develop for the rev until the rev ones are done.
Now if the cpu for the rev was just finished the devs cant possibly have a dev kit that ca nshow what the rev can do .
Even the early xbox 360 ones were like only 25% of the power of the final design.
Post by: zakkiel on December 02, 2005, 08:13:14 AM
QuoteI agree with Kairon. There were a couple of genuinely new titles from Nintendo, but they never received much promotion (that I saw) and they had a very experimental air to them. Case in point: Jungle Beat. With it's cash cows, Nintendo stuck to tried-and-true formulas. Though I agree with you that I love the Zelda formula, and could stand to see a lot more still, I also think that it has reached its creative limit, if not its entertainment limit.
Originally posted by: Mario
You obviously haven't played Donkey Kong Jungle Beat.
I'm looking forward to seeing how the new Zelda will be next generation as well, but there's no way in hell i'm tired of the way Zelda currently is (though, perhaps I will be in two years, perfect timing!), and all 3D Zelda games offer completely different experiences.
Post by: KnowsNothing on December 02, 2005, 08:30:12 AM
Post by: thame^ on December 02, 2005, 09:28:24 AM
edit: let's also not dismiss the fact that the GC is the first (and probably last) console with a handle on it!
Post by: cubist on December 02, 2005, 10:00:44 AM
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on December 02, 2005, 10:02:55 AM
Post by: thame^ on December 02, 2005, 10:29:34 AM
PS how in the world do you carry a console and four controllers with one hand? how do you even carry four controllers alone with one hand?
edit: vvv great, thanks guy below me, I'll get the second then. I can't stand time limitations.
Post by: vudu on December 02, 2005, 11:07:22 AM
See my post in the Official "What game should I get?" Thread (it's the 5th most recent post because no one uses the thread for some reason) for more details.
Post by: 31 Flavas on December 02, 2005, 11:45:29 AM
QuoteTheir cables?
Originally posted by: thame^
how do you even carry four controllers alone with one hand?
Post by: nemo_83 on December 02, 2005, 11:50:33 AM
And a rumored concept for Metroid Prime 3 too large to post this is said to actually be an in-game character that was cut from the first Prime
Post by: vudu on December 02, 2005, 11:53:47 AM
Post by: kirby_killer_dedede on December 02, 2005, 11:54:02 AM
Post by: nemo_83 on December 02, 2005, 11:57:44 AM
Post by: JonLeung on December 02, 2005, 11:58:47 AM
My guess is the second picture is of "Meta-Kraid"... unfortunately for Kraid, Ridley is way cooler and now shows up in every Metroid game (well, every one that doesn't have a "2/II", and a subtitle).
Post by: thame^ on December 02, 2005, 11:59:40 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: 31 Flavas
Their cables?
But mummy and daddy always taught me it's bad to carry devices by their cables.. =\
Post by: nemo_83 on December 02, 2005, 12:01:06 PM
Post by: JonLeung on December 02, 2005, 12:20:27 PM
If so, watch Nintendo take it over and make it a next-gen Advance Wars or Battalion Wars...
Post by: nemo_83 on December 02, 2005, 12:30:41 PM
there was a piece at the gamespot forums; I'm not up to digging it back up right now, but there was a picture from somewhere that clearly said the game was TBA for REVO.
Post by: Don'tHate742 on December 02, 2005, 12:46:07 PM
Post by: nemo_83 on December 02, 2005, 12:59:47 PM
ZELDA
*keels over from unexpected media explosion
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on December 02, 2005, 01:04:38 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: 31 FlavasQuoteTheir cables?
Originally posted by: thame^
how do you even carry four controllers alone with one hand?
BINGO
Bunch the cables together and grasp them along with the handle. These are Nintendo controllers; you can swing 'em around like the upgraded Vampire Killer whip from Castlevania and they won't care -- they'll still work fine. [AC adapter and cheapo A/V cables should not be swung around. The "wall" cord of the AC adapter should be held, not the "GameCube" end. Very important.]
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on December 02, 2005, 01:09:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: nemo_83
metroid prime 3 morph ball?
ZELDA
I definitely don't believe it. The resolution of the in-game region and the GUI don't match. Plus, the threat bar [bottom left] has a different shade of black than the rest of the letterbox, like it was cut&pasted from another video capture of Prime1/2. The letterbox doesn't even extend all the way to the right. Otherwise you'll just have to insist it's a cut&paste concept, a la Amped Snowboarding.
*FIXX YER STOOPID ZELDA LINK UNLESS YOU WANT ME TO BELIEVE ZELDA TAKES PLACE ON A SPACESHIP WITH ROLLING BALLS
Post by: nemo_83 on December 02, 2005, 05:16:36 PM
Edit: el fixedo
Post by: PaLaDiN on December 02, 2005, 06:05:57 PM
Post by: Bill Aurion on December 02, 2005, 06:06:32 PM
Post by: Don'tHate742 on December 02, 2005, 06:42:15 PM
well, maybe not....
what a mess that could create.....
ewww......
Post by: nemo_83 on December 02, 2005, 06:42:32 PM
Post by: Bill Aurion on December 02, 2005, 06:43:33 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Don'tHate742
Agreed. I'd rather projecticle shat uncontrollably across the walls, then play a Zelda game with religous references....
Well, uh, the religious references ARE there in Zelda games, but they are of a fantasy religion...
Post by: wandering on December 02, 2005, 09:42:03 PM
Post by: IceCold on December 02, 2005, 10:07:50 PM
Post by: MysticGohan24 on December 02, 2005, 10:28:12 PM
Post by: majortom1981 on December 03, 2005, 02:37:12 AM
Post by: JonLeung on December 03, 2005, 04:41:06 AM
Post by: Kairon on December 03, 2005, 11:49:40 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Pale
There seems to be a strict division on this forum between people that take video games too seriously, and people that don't. Sometimes I fall into the trap of taking them to seriously. Too illustrate my example, take Bill, and take Ian. Ian over analyzes everything to the point that no matter what, it's bad news. Bill takes everything for what it is, a form of entertainment, and enjoys it. Which do you think is the best mindset?
I personally think the forum would be a better place if we all tried to act more like Bill. Then conversations would consist of discussing exciting news and how much we like games, instead of what is happening here.
Anyway, this is just an observation that I wanted to get in somewhere, and this was as good a place as any.
Edit: Oh shits! I went all emo in this post....
Hey! I take offense to that! I bought Zoo Tycoon and I'm not steaming furious! I'm content! I'm even buying Mario Strikers just for the new interpretation of characterization and attitude and animation, 7.6 IGN score be damned! I love SPrung and I don't consider Ping Pals wasted money AT ALL! I also just dropped 50 bucks on an old copy of Cubivore and am in love with the game...
I take games seriously when I'm dealing with serious subjects, like Miyamoto and Nintendo's gaming philosophy. Shigeru Miyamoto demands my attention and respect because he takes his OWN work seriously and with integrity, and that's why I can so easily criticize the last two Zeldas and call myself a Nintendo fan. Hell, I could criticize Pikmin 2 if you wanted me to! I've already criticized Sunshine and WW and MK: DD... and I feel perfectly fine doing so because Miyamoto's example of dedication tells me that I should inspire to meet his level of integrity and dedication.
But how do you reconcile this to the fact that I bought Ping Pals and enjoyed it? Simple, I enjoyed it, I liked it for what it was, and although it lacks a lot of substantive properties in a critical sense, that does nothing to lessen my personal involvement.
And that is why I call myself a Miyamoto Fanboy. Not just because of his games, but because he inspires me to be more critical of gaming, AND laid back at the same time. Miyamoto is responsible for the entire next revolution of gaming, yet he gardens for heavens sake! I think if we all took his example and had a more "do your absolute best and if you're not #1 at the end of the day, that's ok" approach to the future of gaming the entire community would be a better place.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: ShawnSt3r on December 03, 2005, 04:28:38 PM
You are getting totally off-topic here sir."
I fould it just as ridiculous as saying "I don't believe in politics."
Back to topic.
Speaking of graphics, I want a Virtual Boy expansion for the Revo! My retnas have just recovered and are ready for another go!!
Post by: nemo_83 on December 03, 2005, 04:56:22 PM
also there is this fake
Post by: zakkiel on December 03, 2005, 05:34:53 PM
QuoteDiscussing politics in this forum is in bad taste, I think was his point. Either that, or he's just saying he's apolitical.
I fould it just as ridiculous as saying "I don't believe in politics."
We need more fake Rev screenshots. Someone needs to round up some 3d artists and crack the whip.
Post by: MrMojoRising on December 04, 2005, 12:40:40 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: zakkiel
We need more fake Rev screenshots. Someone needs to round up some 3d artists and crack the whip.
I agree! That last Metroid one is cool, more like that please.
Post by: kirby_killer_dedede on December 04, 2005, 02:23:36 AM
I'm calling legit on it. The rest of this page definitely is...and it seems pretty far into development. I'm intrigued.
The funny thing is that no where on the game's offical site is the Rev, or any platform for that matter, mentioned.
EDIT: The second link doesn't work with Firefox, open with IE to see the pics.
Post by: wandering on December 04, 2005, 03:49:27 AM
Post by: Kairon on December 04, 2005, 08:05:24 AM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: KDR_11k on December 04, 2005, 08:36:13 AM
OTOH, it doesn't seem to be a real game:
If you are interested in developing our game, please contact us by mail or phone.
Looks more like someone making a few mockups and looking for employment to make the game (or not even that, just license fees for the idea).
Post by: Caliban on December 04, 2005, 02:20:09 PM
Post by: couchmonkey on December 05, 2005, 05:17:03 AM
Post by: kirby_killer_dedede on December 12, 2005, 04:22:04 PM
YAY
Another note of interest, it seems ROtR is heading to the DS as well.
Post by: couchmonkey on December 13, 2005, 05:40:24 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on December 13, 2005, 06:25:22 AM
Post by: Kairon on December 13, 2005, 06:58:46 AM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
