Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Also, the PS3 is not a failure, it's just in 3rd place, or 2nd place depending on how you look at it.PS3 blew all the profits generated by the previous gen. What do you consider failure?
Isn't the Canadian dollar worth something like a few cents more than the USD?Yes, and most economists are predicting it to remain in the range of 0 - 10 cents above parity for the next several years.
I remember someone pointing out the current conversion in some other thread.
Is $40 going to be the going price for 3DS games? I was hoping the iPhone's cheap app store would drive the average game price down.If the Canadian prices are any higher (DS games currently sell at $40-45), I'm going to throw a fit. You know, considering the Canadian dollar is worth more than the USD now.
Not but seriously, graphics, ambitious and deep storylines, and huge overworlds do makes games better.And here's the problem: they can make some games better, but often they don't. Still, most devs think it's necessary to strive towards these ideals, to ensure a good game.
For me, the only time I want to use my imagination for a medium(as in the singular of media) is reading, and I do a lot of reading. There are some movies (like Havoc with Anne Hathaway, the short film Sleeping Dogs Lie, and the 1976 Moving Violation) where I do enjoy them leaving the ending open for personal imagination to fill in the blank, but 9.9 times out of 10, I want everything, especially the visuals, shoved down my throat.Then we differ in opinion. Again for me, if you did a remake of say LttP or SMW with updated graphics, I don't understand how the games would be more fun. The visuals were good enough that you didn't have to think about them; you were allowed to simply enjoy the game.
I don't understand how anyone who plays videogames doesn't like a good story. Even fighting games have a story to them, even if it's simply a fighting tournament drawing together the world's best fighters, some of whom have a history with each other.I like good stories, I just don't find them in video games! And what you described is what I'd consider a premise. This I'm fine with, if it gives enough context for the game to make sense. Anything extra usually just interrupts the actual gameplay.
And big worlds usually mean more gameplay, so I don't see anything wrong with that.Big worlds usually mean a lot of empty space. If you can give me a big world with lots of things for me to do, that's great. But often devs get overly ambitious and we get a large, "thin" world.
I do understand that these elements are not what make a game good, but they do make a good (or even mediocre) game better. There were a lot of crappy and lazily made games on both the NES and SNES, so neither are these elements what break a game. The core elements, as you mentioned are the rules and action, like cake, and the story, graphics, and overworld, are the ice cream filling, with those little balls of chocolate, and the icing on the outside, respectively, that make the cake even better.If the cake tastes good, then go ahead and decorate. Just keep in mind that at some point I'll stop caring about what "technique" you used to apply the icing.
In retro games a common problem was that it seemed like the game designers were openly against the player. You wanted the player to fail and the design came from quarter-sucking arcade machines.I would agree but I think it's important to note that the challenge was of a rewarding nature, not a frustrating one. This is what determines whether an arcade game will succeed or not. These days a lot of games do seem to hold your hand too much. And then when a dev wants to make a challenging game, they go about it in the wrong way. Ultimately, a challenging game is only fun if the underlying gameplay is fun. An example of a modern game that does this brilliantly is DKCR.
Yes, I thought it was obvious. I'm always feeling I pick on him too much, but he really distinguishes himself from everyone else.But if you insist that this is designed for anti-sony trolls and should be removed, then I'll have to insist on the removal of a certain Nintendo-hating troll (I don't actually consider either group trolls, but for comparison's sake...). I'd prefer if we just showed tolerance.
Out of curiosity, who are you referring to? Ian? I know I've had a lot of good to say about Nintendo this year.
I mostly disagree about it being mean spirited. This thread serves as a critical discussion of Sony's moves, and their results. Yes, the insights are mostly negative, but there have been posts highlighting some of Sony's recent achievements (for example the sales bumps after the slim and move were released). I would be fine with changing the title, but then I'd probably forget about this thread eventually.I like how he split the thread, and kept it going from the point when the thread was still good.
*shrugs* Things got out-of-hand with one poster, but I thought that the discussion overall was pretty good and most people kept things civil. Oh well.
To be honest, I'm just throwing this out there, but does this entire topic even need to exist? The whole thread was started to mock Sony for its sales failings with the PS3 and PSP. The thread seems designed for anti-Sony posters to troll those who do enjoy playing PS3/PSP games. If the thread stays, fine since most posters keep the discussion pretty civil. It's just that the thread has always seemed pretty mean-spirited.
Studying some exotic places as inspiration for the next Zelda would be a great improvement. Some people say they want a million dungeons or voice acting or more hawtness, but I just want to feel small and overwhelmed by the scope of the environments. After all isn't that what made the first one so great for its time?As long as it isn't empty of interesting things, nor filled with useless treasure chests containing "10 rupees!"
I don't want to see one giant field in the middle and I don't want to see any lava (there wasn't any during the time this series took place); that's OOT stuff and IMO needs to be put to rest. Discuss.
I'd like to see an article where Nintendo claims the game was a flop. As far as I know, they never expected it to sell anywhere near the amount of Wii Sports and Wii Fit. Miyamoto was quoted as saying the game wouldn't be an immediate hit, Nintendo recognized it'd be a hard game to sell, and Cammie Dunaway said they expected it to be an evergreen title that would go on to sell on par with the Brain Age game on the Wii (which sold 2.26 million). I think the game performed how they expected, and people just say it was a flop or failure because that's what they want it to be.I don't know what Nintendo's true expectations for the game were, but for sure it was a missed opportunity. It was the holiday title that fit the 'nontraditional game' category that was supposed to follow the trend of million-selling evergreen phenomena. If Nintendo only thought of it as a modest title, then it should have been replaced by a bigger title, and saved for use as filler during a slow period.
The answer is that you wouldn't, but that wasn't his question. He wants to know why if you wanted to maximize your profits, you wouldn't target the largest install base. In your scenario, all you want to do is make the game you want, so long as it turns a profit. Well if you want to make a lot of profit, often you're going to have to make a game that's not exactly your ideal. I imagine that most auto-engineers would prefer to work on Mercedes-type cars, but someone has to make the Camrys. And note that this doesn't preclude the Camry from being a good car, nor something the engineer can be proud of. I imagine this often becomes an issue between the developers and publishers.QuoteIt all depends on how much money you want to make. Yeah, its been profitable on the PSP, but do you want to make profit or do you want to make a lot of profit? I would think any company would want to make as much as possible, and the way to do that is target the larger install base.
And as far as "superior" hardware is concerned, the DS has a touchscreen so it is superior in that respect.
Let's say I'm a developer and I want to make a portable game. I want a certain graphic quality for the game and I don't give two shits about touchscreen controls. If I can make a profit making the game I want to make for the PSP, why would I bother with a DS release if I would have to scale down the graphics to do it? It's just that simple.
ish, aluminum cans are made extremely thin. Increase the thickness just a little bit and the properties are different. Oxidize the aluminum and it becomes super strong.My point isn't that you couldn't make a case out of aluminum. Pound for pound it's stronger than plastic, no question. Increase the thickness, and the properties do not change but the surface area increases, meaning the stress due to a unit load decreases. So make it thicker, and it can withstand larger forces. But the cost of bulk material, and manufacturing costs are way higher than for plastic.
this is made out of about a pound of aluminum. I made it in a sculpting class. It is really really hard, and wont bend like a can. 1 pound of aluminum costs about a dollar or at least did in 2006, id imagine they could use less than that and still have the strength(and then some) of plastic. I'v just seen some electronics as of lately that have had a nice aluminum outside. Also note that even on a soda can the top is really hard, as well as the pop tab or whatever its called
"Xbox" is clearly the brand name. I encounter tons of people who refer to their Xbox 360 as just their "Xbox". 360 was a really stupid name and is so cumbersome to say that that is probably why so many people just say "Xbox".Xbox DX sounds more like a special edition Xbox, than a next-gen system. Otherwise, I agree. They should aim to have Xbox as the company brand, with their new system having a distinct name. Something like "Xbox Master System", or "Xbox GameCube" (but obviously with original names). Ideally you'll know who makes it, and that it's the new next-gen one.
Next time, I don't think it matters too much what the name is as long as it still uses the Xbox brand. Yeah they probably called it the 360 so that their 2 didn't go against the Playstation's 3. It's dumb but seems pretty much dead on with how marketers think. But next gen they could call is the Xbox DX or something like that and it would be fine. With something like that, then maybe people will refer to the system by a unique name and not just call it an "Xbox" again. It's probably better for MS that each Xbox be referred to by it's own name.
I'm glad I'm not the only one who tries to preserve the original definitions of words. I'm not sure how "gimmick" became synonymous with "cheap gimmick," is it really so hard to add an adjective?Apparently so. But then this isn't that uncommon here. Take "casual" for instance (oh no, is he really starting this?):
Nintendo seems to have a habit of imitating Apple, so in what ways will they copy Apple with the Wii 2?Wii2 is a tablet, didn't you hear?
What innovative things has Ninendo done with their "real" games this gen? We just get the same old franchises in that department.You're mostly correct on games to date, but don't forget that Zelda SS is coming. If they nail it, this game could potentially have a profound impact on where the Wii goes in the next few years. Sadly, I don't think it will be a "mega-hit" - but only for reasons unrelated to motion control (i.e. the same reasons TP and WW failed to move any systems). However, and this relates to discussion in other threads, I don't think you can say the Wii is finished, until after this game has been released.
