Post by: ThePerm on December 24, 2005, 04:44:21 PM
what happened to the super second party?
All gone. I think thats what Nintendo needs. Rather, I think Retro and NST(which are actually first parties) should be beefed up to where they are producing a higher volume of games. NST should have its quality brought up by constant bitching from the parent company, and retro should make more than just metroid(hire more people)
sony and ms actually have way better second/first party support. With the likes of Bungie for ms, and naughtydogg and whoever makes all their pretty good platformers.
Nintendo needs to fill this gap.
Rare used to fill it with bk and 007/pd...but they are gone now
actually in a way its more of a lack in western titles thats the problem.
Post by: Sir_Stabbalot on December 24, 2005, 04:47:42 PM
Post by: ThePerm on December 24, 2005, 04:52:32 PM
Post by: odifiend on December 24, 2005, 06:08:58 PM
Post by: King of Twitch on December 24, 2005, 08:23:01 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on December 24, 2005, 10:09:41 PM
Post by: Terranigma Freak on December 25, 2005, 05:10:53 AM
Post by: Nosferat2 on December 25, 2005, 07:38:02 AM
Post by: Avinash_Tyagi on December 25, 2005, 07:38:18 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on December 25, 2005, 08:18:20 AM
Post by: Galford on December 25, 2005, 09:57:39 AM
Nintendo does what's good for Nintendo and no one else.
Post by: IceCold on December 25, 2005, 11:08:03 AM
QuoteWell, there's the Camelot RPG, which should be good. And I'm sure Nintendo is trying as hard as they can to get some RPG love from Square and Namco, among others. Possibly Dragon Quest?
Originally posted by: Nosferat2
We need to blow Retro's email box up( i already tried and the damn address goes to NOA aint that a biaatch) to get them to bring Raven Blade to the Revolution. I wish Nintendo didnt kill it. Though i'll slightly forgive them because they gave me both Metroid Primes. But still, there is no reason why a studio cant develop two titles at once. The Rev needs an RPG, and FFCC should definielty not be it. Raven Blade needs to be brought back to life.
EDIT: I just remembered...Japanese crap - gotcha.
Post by: Nosferat2 on December 25, 2005, 09:48:53 PM
I hope you guys can understand were in coming from. Take this for example. The only mature RPG i can think of is BAten Kiatos. Though i thought is was quite good over all, EVEN with the card battle system, it still irritated the hell out of me when the games hero yells out lame stuff like, "Say Cheeseburger". In fact all the characters had dumb stuff to say. And one had a boat ore as a weapon for christ sake. Sorry give me Excalibur or Muramasa (sp) blade Not a damn Ore, boomerang or any other stuff that appears in Japanese Rpgs.
Sorry for ranting, i just hope Nintendo does not fail me again. The GC was excellent save for the lack of RPGS. The only blemish of the GC lifecyle. I dont want to see a repeat on the Revolution.
Also, Im not bashing Anime rpgs. People love them and they should get to play them. I just dont want to be left out.
peace Nosferatu
Post by: Infernal Monkey on December 25, 2005, 10:08:07 PM
Post by: Mario on December 25, 2005, 10:10:02 PM
Rockstar Games (GTA)
Melbourne House (Realistic Racing)
Post by: Kairon on December 25, 2005, 10:45:29 PM
...Still, with Sony and MS salivating over Rockstar, I don't think it's at all possible for Nintendo to get any piece of that company, lol.
Anyways, I've been disappointed with a lot of second-party-ish material lately. I'm not impressed with either N-Space, nor Kuju; neither have given me a magic spark so to speak...
Hmm... I count myself lucky enough in recognizing DMA back when they did Body Harvest and Space Station Silicon Valley, and thinking that they had the ability to really make appealing game concepts. But I just can't think of any modern day parallel, perhaps I just haven't come across them as of yet.
So my personal and completely subjective best pick for any studio for Nintendo to pick up would be Grasshopper studios. Killer 7 wasn't just a mature game, it was a beautiful way of presenting a videogame's flow to the players. By applying rail movement mechanics to action-shooters, they dealt with games on a design level in such a way to create an artistic result. They didn't just throw some wacky camera angles at us, they tinkered with the very core of the game's underpinnings, demonstrating the game design depth of thought that is just one of the many ingredients that could possibly come together to form a truly great experience.
Though Killer 7 was marred by the traditional Controller it was tied to, it seems ahead of its time in that the Rev controller would have been absolutely perfect for the game. BUT, Grasshopper Studios still has to deal with issues of interface, issues of game flow as pertaining to character cutscenes, AND they need to prove that Killer 7 was not just a game design fluke, and that they're not merely riding on the buzz of their edgy mature content.
Another possible up and coming studio could be NST (already under Nintendo's umbrella) , but we've yet to see what they can do independently of Nintendo's porting projects or franchises. They've definitely got chops: we're all anticipating Metroid Prime: Hunters... but do they have heart?
Or Nintendo could spin off an entire section of EAD devoted to non-gamer type games, such that Cooking, Conducting, Fishing and Painting games all come from one Internal Nintendo studio...
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Infernal Monkey on December 26, 2005, 12:57:28 AM
Post by: odifiend on December 26, 2005, 05:59:58 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Nosferat2
I hope you guys can understand were in coming from. Take this for example. The only mature RPG i can think of is BAten Kiatos. Though i thought is was quite good over all, EVEN with the card battle system, it still irritated the hell out of me when the games hero yells out lame stuff like, "Say Cheeseburger". In fact all the characters had dumb stuff to say. And one had a boat ore as a weapon for christ sake. Sorry give me Excalibur or Muramasa (sp) blade Not a damn Ore, boomerang or any other stuff that appears in Japanese Rpgs.
Also, Im not bashing Anime rpgs. People love them and they should get to play them. I just dont want to be left out.
peace Nosferatu
I don't understand where you are coming from at all. What constitutes mature to you? I'm assuming photorealistic graphics. Tales of Symphonia was both better storywise and gameplay wise and had a complex story to boot. Skies of Arcadia though a port even surpasses the cliched Baiten Kaitos in all departments. You also keep making jabs at Fire Emblem where 'kids' are forced into battle by circumstance. It is fine if you can't get into that but if you are so juvenile that you can't appreciate anything but photorealism, stop throwing the word mature around. It offends the rest of us.
Speaking of Skies of Arcadia, Overworks would be an awesome 2nd party as would Amusement Vision
Post by: Kairon on December 26, 2005, 08:17:38 AM
Just because you give lip service to world annihilation and racial tensions does NOT make you mature in my book. Quite the opposite actually. For this same reason, I don't buy into the Final Fantasy angst either, so I'm even beyond Nosferat2 in my distrust of today's RPGs.
Yet on the opposite end of the spectrum is the desolate aimlessness of Morrowind, an acclaimed western style RPG that I just can't get into either... Hmmm...
So I guess that even though I second Nosferat2's opinions, we may be in the minority of current day RPG players. Sales numbers for modern day RPGs are fine, and I guess that's all that matters to modern RPGMakers. Still, with the Revolution proclaiming the existence of gamers OUTSIDE the traditional field of today, I can't help but wonder if we might find an RPG that is its own soul and conception, that succeeds on its own storytelling virtues instead of reusing cliched "mature" themes, and that relies neither on the tired conventions of Anime or DnD storytelling.
Oh, and I bought Skies of Arcadia, and I just... I sorta made a vow afterwards to never buy a Sega game... well...almost never...
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: odifiend on December 26, 2005, 09:26:17 AM
"I was disappointed with the look of DQ8. I cant get into a cartoony looking RPG that has lil smiley faced slimes as enemies. Sorry im near 30 years old and i need something more mature to play. Not Mature rated but mature content."
Not having played DQ8, i can't comment on how mature it is but it seems like he disqualifies games as mature based on their art direction... real mature...
Post by: Kairon on December 26, 2005, 10:04:45 AM
Anime may contain all these themes, but they are trivilized and have become so canonized to have a desensitizing effect. And let's not even get started on when Animes or RPGs start to pseudo-philosophize.
And for some outtings, the art style rarely helps at all. I can't speak for the Dragon Quest series, (although I CAN say that I hate Akira Toriyama's style vociferously) but with soft art themes my opinion is that they only further trivilialize the gravity of the situation, they avoid confront the gritty realities of their implications, and they merely allow observers to say that they are "attentive" to such things, in so far as the glossing over of eyes can be called attentive.
As for ToS, I hardly see how its maturity was helped whenever one character would comment on the breast size of another. Such strictures of anime style, the slapstick humor, the sugar coated objectification/sexual obsession, the art style that keeps viewers at an emotional distance, the lip service to mature themes... I look at these things and WHILE I can enjoy an anime as much as the next Otaku, I cannot be persuaded to consider most RPGs of today truly "mature."
Jon Stewart got mad at his Crossfire hosts for their punditry, their spouting of the issues for sensationalistic and commercialistic benefit, with no real attempt to deal with and address them. If I am to consider todays RPGs mature, then they will have to deal with the exact same issues.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Ian Sane on December 26, 2005, 10:36:09 AM
Anyway getting back on-topic I agree that Nintendo needs some "super second parties" again. Though the real issue is that Nintendo needs more variety. That's what Rare gave them that they seriously lack now. Rare games had a comparible level of quality to Nintendo's first party titles but a different style and it gave the N64 a much broader lineup. Even something like Banjo-Kazooie which played very similarly to Super Mario 64 had a style and feel you didn't quite get in EAD titles. And Goldeneye would NEVER have been made by Nintendo themselves.
One thing I never really liked on the Cube is that the Nintendo-published lineup is incredibly homogenous. Almost everything feels like an EAD game even when it's designed by another developer. Now I like EAD's games but I don't want all my games to play and feel like that. Somewhere early in the Cube's life Nintendo went sequel crazy and they haven't recovered from that yet. They started believing that brand names were more important then the game's behind them. Look at what devs were working on for them:
Rare - told to shoehorn Star Fox into an entirely unrelated game.
SK- after one original game was assigned a remake of MGS. Nintendo wanted Metal Gear but made an incredibly lame deal because all they could see was the MGS name and didn't realize that when fans say "we want Metal Gear" they mean a NEW game, not a remake. Nintendo also squandered an important developer who is now making Too Human for a competitor. Waste of Metal Gear, waste of SK, waste of a third party deal.
Treasure - works on a Wario game that wasn't all that great. Complete waste of one of the most creative devs around.
Camelot - works on incredibly redundant Mario sports games. Nintendo needs an original RPG, these guys are experts at that, but instead they work on Mario games EAD could have made themselves.
Namco - works on Star Fox and Mario Baseball.
Sega - works on F-Zero.
What's the point of making deals with other developers if they're not going to contribute any of their unique expertise to the project? There's no point in getting a talented dev to make cliche Nintendo games. Third party support is supposed to provide VARIETY, not more of the same. Nintendo needs "super second parties" again but more importantly they have to remember how to use them correctly. They're far too sequel happy right now. They could have 100 games from 100 developers available for the Rev launch and it wouldn't sell consoles worth crap because they would just be 100 Mario games.
Right now I would say Nintendo's greatest assets are Intelligent Systems and Retro. Both are incredibly talented and provide a different feel from EAD. Plus they make, well, cooler games too. But they need to work on something new beyond Paper Mario and Metroid Prime. Both devs should contribute an entirely original game to the Rev launch period.
Post by: Kairon on December 26, 2005, 10:53:56 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Right now I would say Nintendo's greatest assets are Intelligent Systems and Retro. Both are incredibly talented and provide a different feel from EAD. Plus they make, well, cooler games too. But they need to work on something new beyond Paper Mario and Metroid Prime. Both devs should contribute an entirely original game to the Rev launch period.
Well, Intelligent Systems used to be part of EAD, so whenever we see advance wars or Fire Emblem that's their own unique properties.
But I wonder whether Retro is capable of working on more than one game at a time, so I don't know whether we'll be seeing anything from them aside from MP3 for launch.
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: King of Twitch on December 26, 2005, 11:00:42 AM
I remember that. "Franchise" was the key word at 02's E3, when the Mario-Metroid-Zelda triple-punch was supposed to propel them ahead of Xbox that fall, but of course they were later spaced out by 3-4 months apart.
Post by: animecyberrat on December 26, 2005, 04:45:43 PM
I personaly would love to see Sega give Nintendo more support but I also want them to spread theri games around as much as possible because I still want them making money and games in hopes that someday they will make a enw console and destroy Sony!
I do hope that Nintendo recognizes that Fighting games and shooting games are wroth investing in for the REV cuz theres so few on the GC and so many on teh competirots, not 1st person shooters either but games like Contra and Turrican and such. I wish Nintendo could get a Turrican game as an exclusive that would rock, especialy if Retro made it beause it would use same game engine as Metroid Prime, with different style of course to fit Turrican universe but THATS my dream game for Rev.
Post by: Dasmos on December 26, 2005, 05:14:28 PM
Post by: IceCold on December 26, 2005, 08:00:27 PM
Namco - works on Star Fox and Mario Baseball.
Sega - works on F-Zero.
What's the point of making deals with other developers if they're not going to contribute any of their unique expertise to the project?
Slow down there, Ian... You're missing the key point - many of these developers wouldn't support the Cube at all if they weren't given Nintendo franchises. they were definitely wary of making their own games for the system, given the Cube's lack of success in sales with 3rd party titles. Nintendo's mascots would give them assured sales. And the reason Nintendo lent their characters to the 3rd parties was so that they could strengthen relationships with them, which would hopefully lead to more games on Nintendo systems, especially the Rev.
Also,
Camelot - making a Rev-exclusive RPG, presumably for launch
Namco - Gave us Tales and Baten Kaitos when no other dev would give the Cube RPGs
SEGA - Have repeatedly said they want to support the Rev, and that a Nintendo console is now Sonic's "spiritual home"
Post by: animecyberrat on December 27, 2005, 05:09:43 PM
Post by: Kairon on December 27, 2005, 05:21:06 PM
If he calls it an FPA, I will too.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Nosferat2 on December 30, 2005, 03:55:41 PM
To Odifiend:
To help illustrate what i was trying to say Compare the following:
Mature Vs Non mature
Baldures gate Final Fantasy Crystal Cronicles
Elder Scrolls Skies of Aracdia
L.O.T.R Third Age Tales of Symphonia
Look at these and ask yourself what the distinctions are. Its NOT about the photorealism, Themes, or art style. Its about presentation, well at least thats the word i think i want to use. RPG means role playing game. Your playing the part of the character. Tell me whats the fun in a 30 year old man trying to save the world as a child? Look at Skies one character has pony tails and a boomerrang as a weapon. Tales, one of the characters is apparently 7 years old and 8 hours into the game i cant tell whether its a boy or girl! What satisfaction do i have playing as these characters. I do not connect with them which in my opinion is critical to an RPG experience.
But characters is not the only ingredient. Baldurs gate was a more mature game but it sucked just about as much as FFCC. I hated both. Marrowind i heard wasnt great and i liked Skies. I have yet to play The Third Age and only completed 8 hours or Tales( havent played that in over a month), so i cant comment on how much i like the two. Point is I want QUALITY Rpgs aimed at an Older demographic this generation. At least two. The Anime stuff is cool for the guys and gals who like it but Nintendo needs to give me and others like me what we want too. Microsoft is trying to please their customers with Oblivion why is it out of the question for me to ask the same of Nintendo. It shouldnt be asking much especially if Nintendo wants to prevent people to jump over to the 360.
Anyway Odifiend, if you cant see my point with the comparison of the above games i know not what else to say.
Post by: The Omen on December 30, 2005, 06:58:20 PM
Quote
I don't understand where you are coming from at all. What constitutes mature to you? I'm assuming photorealistic graphics. Tales of Symphonia was both better storywise and gameplay wise and had a complex story to boot. Skies of Arcadia though a port even surpasses the cliched Baiten Kaitos in all departments. You also keep making jabs at Fire Emblem where 'kids' are forced into battle by circumstance. It is fine if you can't get into that but if you are so juvenile that you can't appreciate anything but photorealism, stop throwing the word mature around. It offends the rest of us.
I agree with Nosferat2 as well. I can't stand the spiky haired, big smiled characters. It just takes me out of it. I love Tales of Symphonia, but even it had some cringe worthy moments for adults, especially within the voice work and character design. I don't need blood and guts, but please, little happy children giggling with glee at the drop of a hat is quite annoying. I don't mean photo realistic graphics either-there's a difference between anime, smiley faced characters and normal sized head characters that don't yelp and whine. Give me a serious mood, with a deep and involved story aimed towards adults only.
Post by: jasonditz on December 30, 2005, 08:05:33 PM
Letting third parties cash in on a Nintendo franchise is a way of rewarding them for support and improving the relationship. Any idiot can throw money at Capcom to try to buy some support... but no one else can offer to let them make the next handheld Zelda.
The companies that are doing all these Nintendo franchise third party titles (Namco, Sega, Capcom, Hudson) are the same companies that provided virtually all of the meaningful original third party titles for the system.
Post by: odifiend on December 31, 2005, 05:51:37 AM
Elder Scrolls to me is more like an MMO. You customize your character and then you take them out to join guilds and do missions or whatever. I suppose that would be a true Role Playing Game because your character can be psycologically equated with the player. But I personally can't stand this kind of RPG. I still don't understand the logic you found your reasons in for what determines mature in nonmature, but I do understand our tastes differ.
Kairon, since we're back on the subject, what RPGs do you like? It sounds like everything out there you wouldn't like...
Post by: jasonditz on December 31, 2005, 06:27:03 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: MJRx9000
Somewhere early in the Cube's life Nintendo went sequel crazy and they haven't recovered from that yet. They started believing that brand names were more important then the game's behind them.
I think it was about the time that Eternal Darkness came out to rave reviews and almost nobody bought it.
Post by: Kairon on December 31, 2005, 07:37:43 AM
Well, I think you're a bit right Odifiend. I mean, I didn't like Skies of Arcadia, I didn't like Tales of Symphonia... but at the same time I didn't like Neverwinter Nights nor did I like Morrowind. Actually, I guess Morrowind is okay, I just can't survive in that game because it feels like a MUD in that it is really, really, not newbie friendly. But anyways, I'm not pining for Oblivion, if Morrowind is what an Elder Scrolls game is then I'm not concerned about missing anything.
In some ways I'm an old-school RPGer, but I refuse to leave it at that. I like RPGs that are focused on doing a few things well and on doing just that, without pretensions to anything else. I liked Earthbound's pure dependency on atmosphere and humor. I liked how FF6 handled it's story without the melodramatic pseudo-philosophistic clutter of anime-style cinematics and storylines and excesses. I liked how Secret of Mana wasn't really at all about story, it was about satisfying, simple action gameplay and adventure, which was only enhanced by multiplayer. I liked the original Paper Mario and Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga because of their dependency on fun, innovative, viscereal gameplay as opposed to the time-eating story conventions of more complex RPGs.
In contrast, Skies of Arcadia promised a 3D sky adventure, but Wind Waker had more exciting minor Islands than that game, Overworks completely failed to capitalize on the possibilities of a 3D overworld. Tales of Symphonia waned us to believe in all the extras of the party, but the sometimes-long talking heads pseudo cut-scenes that were supposed to be extras just feature ripped-out-of-anime and cliche dialog. I was also eager to try to get into the cooking game, but not only did the game give me little direction to encourage me along said path, but it also didn't seem to integrate this aspect into the greater fabric of the title. And of course, the Story was predictably anime-ish from 10 seconds in onwards. Oh, and although I suspect that Nosferat2 will hate me for this, I hated Neverwinter Nights too. They should stop making games based on DnD rulesets and just MAKE GAMES! The ruleset and the playstyle of DnD bring too many artifactions into the game that just... may have as many negatives as positives. Not to mention I found the story uninspiring as well.
Incidentally, I haven't played Baiten Kaitos yet, hehe. I gotta grab that game before the sequel comes out.
Wow...see all that complaining above? Actually, I got a better explanation for why I don't like so many RPGs. I'm not really a regular RPGamer. I'm a Nintendo gamer whose favorite genre aside from Miyamoto games is RPGs. As thus, I expect my RPGs to be as polished as Nintendo games. They need to control as smoothly as a Nintendo game, they need to be as fully integrated as a Nintendo game(meaning story, gameplay, settings and features should all feel like natural pieces of the game, instead of seperate modules being tacked together), and they need to do something magical if at all possible.
So after such a critical rant, I have no question that I'm in the minority of modern RPGamers. I love the genre, I think it's the genre that I'd work best in, but I hate most of its titles. Heh. Go figure. Thats why the Revolution, even if it isn't the second coming, gives me hope. It tells me that maybe sometime, these genres will break out of their current molds and evolve into games that... perhaps, may feel more "complete" to me.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Kairon on December 31, 2005, 07:39:20 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: jasonditzQuote
Originally posted by: MJRx9000
Somewhere early in the Cube's life Nintendo went sequel crazy and they haven't recovered from that yet. They started believing that brand names were more important then the game's behind them.
I think it was about the time that Eternal Darkness came out to rave reviews and almost nobody bought it.
Even considering that the game wasn't nearly as good as the reviewers and fans and hype made it out to be, it didn't even sell well taking all those into account.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Kairon on December 31, 2005, 07:41:53 AM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: kirby_killer_dedede on December 31, 2005, 07:43:05 AM
Post by: Kairon on December 31, 2005, 07:49:44 AM
...I happen to like meatloaf...
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: odifiend on December 31, 2005, 08:03:25 AM
Re K's RPG: Alright, I was just curious.
I only have issue with this which I guess you could say is grounded in opinion as well:"In contrast, Skies of Arcadia promised a 3D sky adventure, but Wind Waker had more exciting minor Islands than that game, Overworks completely failed to capitalize on the possibilities of a 3D overworld."
You've got to be joking... The comparison really isn't even fair, considering WW was released afterwards on improved hardware, but I found the hunt for discoveries was more enjoyable than sailing in WW's empty ocean.
Post by: Kairon on December 31, 2005, 08:55:20 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: odifiend
Re K's RPG: Alright, I was just curious.
"In contrast, Skies of Arcadia promised a 3D sky adventure, but Wind Waker had more exciting minor Islands than that game, Overworks completely failed to capitalize on the possibilities of a 3D overworld."
You've got to be joking... The comparison really isn't even fair, considering WW was released afterwards on improved hardware, but I found the hunt for discoveries was more enjoyable than sailing in WW's empty ocean.
Lol, okay.
But this is what I mean by completely failing to take advantage of a 3D overworld. This is what I mean about games having pretensions. Skies of Arcadia had us sailing in the sky, yet it didn't do a quarter of the things of the things that Hayao Miyazaki's masterpiece "Laputa: Castle in the sky" suggested could be done with a sky world. At least Wind Waker kept it all to a 2D plane, and still provided with actual islands that offered more interaction than a simple text box.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Nosferat2 on December 31, 2005, 11:14:58 AM
Na i dont hate you for that. Havent Played Neverwinter nights. For some reason it never interested me. I would only hate you if you said you hated Wizardry 8 and certaintly for the Greatest RPG ever Wizardry 7 (both PC). If you havent played Wiz 8 i suggest you check it out. its about 5 years old now so hopefully you can find it somewhere.
I just miss the old Might and Magic and Wizardy days of old. The sad thing is that traditional rpgs are dieing out if not extinct.
Post by: denjet78 on December 31, 2005, 08:42:21 PM
I'm just wondering what market Rare is going to get forced into. Could be another FPS house like Bungie or they could make adventure games or... well, they've only released 3 games in the past 4-5 years and so far none of them have really been a success. Don't worry though, as soon as they put out anything with any real level of promise MS will lock them into it.
Sony started that whole mind set. Look what happened to the developer behind Grand Turismo when Sony got ahold of them. Same with the developers of Ratchet and Jax. Have any of them made anything different in years? And that's been passed on to 3rd parties. Square=Final Fantasy, Konami=Metal Gear, Capcom=Resident Evil, Rock Star=GTA. No one seems to be able to rise above it, except Nintendo, and even they've been falling into it lately as well. Retro=Metroid anyone?
I don't care about second parties, I don't care about 3rd parties. No one wants to be second party anymore anyway. They either want a hit franchise they can milk themselves or they want to be snatched up lock stock and barell by a larger developer.
I want new. I want fun. I want original. Those types of games can and HAVE been made internally by Nintendo for generations. I know a lot of people want Metal Fantasy Evil XXVIVIX but my god, do you reallly believe that that's all there is out there?
Come on people... you've got to have more imagination than that, or has homoganization sapped it all?
Post by: animecyberrat on January 01, 2006, 05:21:38 AM
EDIT, these companies all are eitehr 1st or 2nd party companies to some degree, sony even has money in Square Enix.
Post by: denjet78 on January 01, 2006, 06:42:55 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: animecyberrat
Sony has Psygnosis and they have 989 Studios, Insomniac, Polyphony, Square-Enix, Naughty Dog, just to name the most popular ones.
Psygnosis is responsible for Wipepout and Colony Wars among other titles, Insomnican is Ratchet and Clank, Sqaure-Enix is DUH thier biggest 2nd party developer, Naughty Dog does Crash Bandicoot and Jax and Dexter, Polyphony does Gran Turismo.
Dude... CALM down. First off, you have no idea what the difference is between first, second and third party. Sony has no second parties. Every developer you mentioned there is first party, now that I have a few names and remember a little, other than Square-Enix who happen to be THIRD PARTY, or are you living in a cave? They've always been third party. They were never even a Nintendo second party back when they were still aligned.
Then everyone else you list is mediocer at best and not only that, they were BOUGHT by Sony and not built up internally. Again, they saw a good developer and BOUGHT them out, and now they all really only make one game. This is FAR too much specialization and is dragging the industry down the wrong path.
And I would say that it's laughable that you'd even mention most any of their names in the same sentence as Nintendo. They bring only slightly more variety than Nintendo themselves anyway. There's Grand Turismo and some sports titles. As you can see, Sony did NOT "came out and matched everythign Nintendo had and then some". That is mearly your perception of the surface. I don't see one Nintendo franchise killer here. Sure, a lot of them have been hyped to the extreme but have any one of them delivered?
Or would you prefer a larger library of mediocer games to a smaller library of incredible ones?
Beyond that, everything Nintendo has they developed themselves from the ground up. Sony BOUGHT all of their support. If they want a new game, they buy a new developer for it. They really have no idea how to develop anything themselves. Microsoft is the same way, and it hurts gaming.
Until I see MS and/or Sony actually TRYING to make games themselves and not simply pandering to other developers or fanboys by throwing out "me too" games or buying developers once they already have a hit on their hands, that's the day that I'll actually accept them as part of the video games industry. Until then, they're just hardware developers and hardware developers have no soul. Afterall, how could they if they don't even make what this industry is built on:
VIDEO GAMES
Post by: Ceric on January 01, 2006, 08:23:39 AM
1. I own both a PS2 and all Nintendo Systems.(Literally I think now the only thing lacking are some Pre-NES stuff though I just got an SNES for the first time.) I tend to avoid getting games for my PS2 for two reasons: I find the GCN versions better and there is too much junk to wade through. When I buy a game for my Nintendo System for the most part I'm getting some quality gaming. They all have there bad games but I find it easier to avoid them on Nintendo products. Also Monster Rancher and KoH. Yeah Love Monster Rancher. I hope they make one for the Rev it would be glorious. Especially if they could take the tournaments online. But I digress...
2. I wish I could link that article but it's been a while. They discussed what was a second party game maker anyway. In the end it is so lously defined that it doesn't actually exist. Your either third party or first and thats about it.
3. I do have to agree that RPGS are the same old same old. I mostly play for the battle system. Which I really like in Baten Kaitos. It was well thought through and not sparkling innovationy, In fact it's the only use of cards in a non-card game that the creators shouldn't be mamed for. (Though the FF that used them did a good job they should just be disfigured but the people who did KoH: Chains of Memory should be horribly deformed and there arms removed to prevent future coding debauchery. I hate to see how Square would explain that. Wait I know... "This is what you get for taking the best part of a game and butchering it.")
4. I like more variety myself. Even though all "Jock" genre, sports 1st person shooter Fighters etc., that are missing on the GCN I really don't play except for some variations new ideas are always welcomed... Like Monster Rancher.
5. IF the Camelot RPG is how Golden Sun was for the GBA I will go hunting and buy it at launch. It will have graphics that will make you swear that your looking out the window, even if they go cartoon style. It will have a clever system to deliver emotions. The voice acting will either be not present or used only when appropriate and be unarguably excellent. Your character will be transferrable to the next one, like in Hero Quest (I think it got rename to Quest for Glory, yeah I'm old school like that yo).
6. Mentioning Hero Quest. Dr. Brain for Revolution. Excellent game back in the day. Great puzzles made you think. The original is the best though, besides Brain Drain game and a select few from some of the others.
These are my thoughts I know that some of them should probably be posted in other threads too but I'm to lazy for that right now.
Post by: animecyberrat on January 01, 2006, 12:56:39 PM
Post by: BlkPaladin on January 01, 2006, 04:56:00 PM
The interest Sony had (oh interest is share ownership) in Square was much like the interest Nintendo has in Bandai and Bandai is no where even considered a Nintendo second party.
A working definition of a second party is were the console manufacture has a majority interest in the company but not total ownership, or there is a contractual arrangement that prevents the entire company from making games for anyone else.
Examples of this are:
Silicon Knights - My guess is they were only contractually bound to Nintendo because of a "loan" that Nintendo made them, once something better came up Silicon Knights disolved the contract.
Game Designers Studio - This was a second party that was desolved after the Square-Enix merger. I was created by Square and Nintendo to circumvent any problems Sony might of caused when the Developer needed to not be exclusive to one company. Since the merger negated any weight Sony carried, the studio was no longer needed.
EDIT: Sorry my mistake.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on January 01, 2006, 04:58:46 PM
Post by: animecyberrat on January 01, 2006, 06:22:48 PM
