Messages

13576

TalkBack / RE: New Metroid Zero Info

« on: January 23, 2004, 10:54:13 AM »

My usual beef with Nintendo's GBA re-releases is that they always make slight changes to the game.  Now in the case of Zero Mission it's cool because it's a complete remake.  However the GBA versions of A Link to the Past and Yoshi's Island are not full-on remakes but Nintendo still adds all these irritating changes like voice samples.  As a result the GBA version is not a full on remake and is also NOT the same game that was released on the SNES.  Therefore in order to play those games as they were originally played you still have to either use emulation or own the SNES version.

It also bugs me that we're expected to pay $30 for each Mario game seperately when ten years ago we could get four Mario games on one SNES cartridge.  If it's an old game I shouldn't be expected to pay full price for it.  They should come in collections like Midway Arcade Treasures or Sonic Mega Collection.  Those re-releases are amazing because not only are the games in their original form but you also get a whole bunch of them for the price of one.

13577

Nintendo Gaming / RE: TRSTS NPD Sales Thread

« on: January 23, 2004, 09:22:43 AM »

"Is it? Or maybe its because a large portion of the public doesnt take video games very seriously and has no interest in playing a game that takes 50 hours to complete."

That has nothing to do with it.  Casual gamers don't look at a game on the shelf like BG&E and think "boy that game's too long" they think "I've never heard of that game so I'm not buying it."  Millions of people buy Final Fantasy games every year and those games are huge so I don't think it's the complexity or game length that is turning people off.  Other RPGs don't usually sell as well as Final Fantasy even if they're made by Square Enix.  The reason for that likely being that Final Fantasy is a very well known "brand" and Disgaea isn't.

Notice I didn't say Madden specifically is the reason other games bomb I said "endless sequel series" which includes series like Madden.  If you don't think that there's too much reliance on sequels in today's industry you're being rather ignorant.  As for why someone would be offended of a cookie cutter sequel series selling better than a new game it's because sales dictate what is made and what isn't in the game industry.  Thus Madden selling well encourages the creation of more cookie-cutter sequels.  BG&E not selling not only kills the potential for any future BG&E games but also discourages the creation of other new games.

13578

Nintendo Gaming / RE: TRSTS NPD Sales Thread

« on: January 23, 2004, 08:50:56 AM »

"people who hate on madden and sports games are usually little nintendo fangirls that are too weak to play sports in real life, so they dont appriciate the video games. so he just made the same assumption about you. dont take it personal.....unless you fit that description."

Does anyone else see the irony of this statement?  "If you don't like Madden you're a weak sissy but hey don't take it personally".  I'd wager that a good 70% of the people who play sports games match the "too weak to play sports in real life" description in that they don't play on any sort of real organized team.

I think the general disliking of annual sports release comes from that fact that those games sell better than games that arguably deserve to sell better which naturally would piss off someone who is passionate about videogames.  You can bring up all the differences between Madden 2003 and 2004 till you're blue in the face but that doesn't change the fact that you're not getting that much of a new experience by purchasing an annual update.  If that money was spent on a shooter or an RPG or a platformer instead then you at least would be spending it on something that provides a completely different experience.

It's like how I like racing games but I've never bought more than maybe three racing games for a console because ultimately, like with any genre including football, there's only so much that can be changed.  If you owned Gran Turismo 3, Mario Kart, F-Zero GX, SSX 3, and Burnout 2 do you really need to buy another racing game as opposed to something different?  Not really because there's only so many variations of the formula to make it worthwhile to spend money on what would be a redundant game.  It's ultimately the same with football.  Do you really NEED to buy Madden 2004 if you already have 2003?  Not really.  It's not like you'll be missing out on some new gaming experience if you don't.  Odds are any new features in 2004 that are actually worthwhile will still be in 2006 so why not wait until then and in the meantime broaden your horizons and support the creation of something new.  Or at the very least change things up by buying Madden one year and a different football game the next.

From a pure gameplay persceptive there is no real reason that a Madden game should be released every year.  If it weren't for roster updates no one would ever buy yearly updates because from a pure gameplay persceptive EA can take three years to really improve the gameplay.  What should happen in the future is a Madden game is released every two or three years and has annual downloadable rosters.  What's funny is I'll bet if that happened a lot of people wouldn't even buy the later version because they could just update the roster for their old game.

A big problem in the industry right now is that companies are afraid to try new things because there are a lot of blind sheep that won't buy anything if it's not from an established franchise.  As a result the market is full of endless sequels.  With annual releases sports games are the absolute worst offender for encouraging this sequel-driven attitude.  Therefore any serious gamer who supports the creation of new content and originality isn't going to be too keen on sports games.  It's because of endless sequel series like Madden that original games like Eternal Darkness, ICO, and Beyond Good & Evil bomb.

13579

TalkBack / RE: New Metroid Zero Info

« on: January 23, 2004, 07:34:49 AM »

Despite the fact that I own every Metroid game but the first one (I don't have an NES but I have played it via another method that I won't get into ) I have never beaten any of them because, well, I suck at beating the bosses.  I love the exploring gameplay style but I've always been bad with game bosses and sure enough there's always one that schools me everytime.

My big gripe with the original Metroid is the same gripe I have with a lot of NES games: the technical limitations make the game unnecessarily difficult.  Just like how it irritates the f*ck out of me that Link's sword has no range in The Legend of Zelda I can't stand how Samus is unable to shoot diagonally in Metroid.  That just makes the game brutally difficult because some of flying enemies come at you at an angle thus making it nearly impossible to shoot them.  With that technical limitation gone and with a map (another missing element that makes the original too hard) Zero Mission should make for a much more playable Metroid game.  I can't wait even though I'll likely get smoked by some boss I can't beat like always.

While I typically don't care for re-releases and remakes I think remakes of some of the best NES games for the GBA would be great.  Aside from Metroid I'd like to see remakes of Kid Icarus, both Zelda games, and maybe some more obscure stuff like Star Tropics.  Unlike SNES ports these games actually could use a redoing.  It would be nice if they included the originals too for comparison.  

13580

TalkBack / RE: Nintendo DS Interview

« on: January 23, 2004, 06:14:12 AM »

That's a pretty cool mockup Outlaw.  Though I'm wondering why you included a memory card slot.  This is a cartridge based system so really there's no need for it.

An analog stick is definitely something that would be hard to pull off on a portable and I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo didn't include one.  We're not even really sure if this thing can do 3D anyway.  I suppose they could make a removable analog stick that you screw in but that's probably asking for trouble.

And I agree that this thing needs a headphone jack.  If an adapter is needed to make it fit that's fine as long as it comes with the damn system.

13581

General Chat / RE: A Trilogy of trilogies: StarWars: EPISODE 7, 8 & 9.

« on: January 22, 2004, 01:46:13 PM »

"Seriously, though, how is Indy believable at all beyond "god did it", and how is it MORE believable than Jurassic Park, which gives a very detailed scientific explanation of exactly how the dinosaurs were cloned."

Well you're letting your atheistic view get in the way of accepting the movie from the reality presented.  If the film assumes God exists (oh and "God" is the name of the Judeo/Christian god and thus is in caps or if that's not good enough he's a character in a book called the Bible and thus is a proper noun) you can't say "well I don't buy it" and then think it's unbelievable.  I mean I don't believe the Matrix or the Force really exist but I don't therefore decide that everything that happens in those movies doesn' t make any sense because of it.

And I never said that JP is less believable.  I just said that if you want to get really technical neither film is.  I think both films (aside from Temple of Doom) are believable enough for me to accept them as the films they are and not think "that doesn't make any f*cking sense".

13582

General Chat / RE: A Trilogy of trilogies: StarWars: EPISODE 7, 8 & 9.

« on: January 22, 2004, 01:16:31 PM »

"Hell, if you REALLY want to get picky, you can say god, should he exist, as the movies assume, never acts directly, either, meaning you can't gloss over the story with the excuse 'god did it'."

Why don't people use caps for God.  It's a name.  Anyway according to the Bible, which would be the ideal source for any God-related stuff in movies, God has directly interfered with the world of man.  Parting the Red Sea for example.  Is Ten Commandment an unbelievable film because of that?

13583

General Chat / RE: A Trilogy of trilogies: StarWars: EPISODE 7, 8 & 9.

« on: January 22, 2004, 01:01:02 PM »

"Jurassic Park was believable, none of the Indy movies are."

Sure it's more scientific but it still doesn't really make that much sense (the Raptors aren't even the right size).  JP is more believable but I wouldn't say it is and Indy isn't.  I guess the only thing everyone can agree on is that movies in general are pretty unrealistic.

And the explanation for the Ark stuff is pretty sound if God exists and the Indy movies assume he does.

Edit: Here's something else I just thought of in JP that is a HUGE assumption and that's that dinosaurs are warm-blooded.  They have to be for the movie to be realistic because mosquitos don't suck the blood of cold-blooded animals.  If dinos were like reptiles there's no amber entrapped skeeters with dino DNA.

I figure you have to base the believable factor of a movie on the reality presented.  Otherwise you'll be all like "Hey toons don't really walk around.  This Roger Rabbit stuff is all phooey!"  The way I see it in the reality presented in the Indy films almost everything makes sense except the heart being torn out thing.  I have to turn my brain off for Temple of Doom in order to get past that.  I don't so much for the other Indy films.

13584

General Chat / RE: A Trilogy of trilogies: StarWars: EPISODE 7, 8 & 9.

« on: January 22, 2004, 12:46:29 PM »

"Heh, and the other two movies ARE believable?"

Well sort of.  I mean it's at least kind of explained why ghosts come out of the Ark and kill everyone.  The assumption is that God is unhappy with Nazis trying to use his sacred stuff and thus smites them something fierce.

13585

General Chat / RE: A Trilogy of trilogies: StarWars: EPISODE 7, 8 & 9.

« on: January 22, 2004, 12:27:04 PM »

"I really liked Temple of Doom - it's just that Raiders and Last Crusade both had Nazis, both the main treasures are mythical Christian artifacts, and both have a more 'grand, world-threat' feel to them, and they went to more places."

Technically the Ark of the Covenant could also be considered a Jewish artifact.  One thing that I find really weird is that in order for any of the supernatural stuff in the Indy movies to happen then both the Christian and Hindu religions are correct which seems like kind of a conflict since most religions believe that only their god exists.  In the Indy world the Judeo/Christian God and the Hindu gods must both exist.  Of course they're just movies so I should probably stop thinking so hard.

Temple of Doom was a great movie it just wasn't as good or believable as the other two.  I still don't get how that guy pulls the other dude's heart out without him dying.  It's never really explained.

13586

TalkBack / RE: Nintendo DS Interview

« on: January 22, 2004, 10:07:32 AM »

"if a game released for the ds is also able to be played on the gba, then the addition of a second screen would seem more of a gimmick than anything else."

I said SOME DS games would be playable on the GBA not all.  The truly innovative ones would require the second screen but the simpler ones that use the second screen for a map or a rear-view in a racing game would work on the GBA in a scaled down mode.  If you want to play the real game you still need the DS.  It's like how Link's Awakening DX and Pokemon Gold are playable on an old Gameboy but if you're playing like that you're not playing as it was meant to be played.

The idea is that a console that plays only two screen games likely isn't going to take off without the inclusion of one screen games.  If the DS has one screen games it replaces the GBA because third parties can make better one screen games on the DS hardware.  If the DS is backwards compatible it replaces the GBA for obvious reasons.  My suggestion/speculation is a stop-gap approach where Nintendo is to some extent able to keep the two portables alive and promoted as serperate products.

One thing I've been thinking about is the size of this thing.  Is it being designed as a portable that you can carry around everywhere or is it more like the Virtual Boy in that it has it's own screen but is meant for home use?

13587

TalkBack / RE: Nintendo DS Interview

« on: January 22, 2004, 07:49:09 AM »

"Uh, PSP plays PS1 games, right?"

Nope.  It uses it's own unique medium.  PS1 discs won't even fit in it.

The problem with making the DS support all those formats is that it would make the system huge to accomadate the various non compatible cartridge slots.  The GBA can play old Gameboy games because the cartridge inputs are identical thus requiring only one slot.

I'm beginning to think that this will play GBA games but it will be more like the GBC than the GBA.  The GBA is a completely new format but the GBC was more like an upgrade.  Some games were GBC only but a lot of them could also be played on the old GB.  Maybe the DS will be more like that where most games are playable on the GBA as well but special dual screen games work on the DS only and some GBA games are enhanced on the DS.  Therefore it's not really regarded as a total replacement because a lot of games released will still work on the old GBA.

13588

TalkBack / RE: Nintendo DS Interview

« on: January 22, 2004, 06:44:06 AM »

"Ian Sane, did you just rip off my idea from the other thread, you shameless plagiarist?"

Did I?  I thought your idea was to have the inventory on the other screen permanently.  If I did rip off your idea it was unintentional.

Edit: Further research has revealed that in fact our ideas are exactly the same.  I guess I either stole it sub-consciously or it's a coincedence.

13589

TalkBack / RE: Nintendo DS Interview

« on: January 22, 2004, 06:29:04 AM »

Idiot's mockup is pretty cool.  The ergonomics don't look too great but the horizontal design with the clam shell second screen seems pretty ideal.  The second mockup that Retroyoshi posted seems to use the second screen as a button interface.  That's a neat idea (I assume it's for custom controls for each game) but I don't think that's what Nintendo is doing.

I recently thought of a great game idea for this dual screen design.  It's a 2D overhead view dungeon crawler (hell make it a Zelda game) with parallel worlds like in A Link to the Past.  Each world appears in one of the screens and dungeons require you to teleport between the two worlds to solve puzzles.  You control the character in only one of the screens at a time while the other shows the equivalent point in the other world.

13590

TalkBack / RE: Nintendo DS Interview

« on: January 21, 2004, 06:01:04 PM »

"damn if they were horizontal it would be soooo nice. if they are being used as one screen, it would be weird to look at them vertically. horizontal makes more sense in almost every single way."

I think the screens will be horizontal rectangles and then arranged on top of each other so the result is like a big square.  That's not too weird to look at.  In terms of space that (or two vertical screens arranged horizontally) makes the most sense.  Something that's totally horizontal would be too wide for a portable.  It would rock for Darius though.

13591

TalkBack / RE: Nintendo DS Interview

« on: January 21, 2004, 05:36:02 PM »

"Billy: Will the unit be backwards compatible with the Game Boy Advance or the Game Boy?

Beth: We haven’t announced anything about that, yet."

Now that's interesting.  If this is supposed to be something completely different then surely the answer would be "of course not.  This is a third pillar and will introduce new concepts, etc etc."  The fact that they "haven't announced anything yet" suggests there's something to announce.  I think the DS will play GBA games and will be for all intents and purposes the successor to the GBA.  It makes sense since a dual screen portable can do everything a single screen one can thus making the single screen one redundant.  Nintendo will maintain GBA support but it will be like how Sony technically still supports the PS1.  They'll release the occasional budget GBA title which can also be played on the DS.

And if they're not planning on making it play GBA games they're likely keeping the option open and thus aren't saying anything just in case.

I don't like how she didn't confirm if there is any space between the screens or not.  That's important.  Sure she said you could use them as one big screen but you can still do that with or without a seperation.  I also wish Billy had asked her if this is a 2D or 3D console.  A lot of people are making assumptions about that and really we haven't been given a clear picture of what types of graphics this thing can bust out.  If it can do 3D they have a competitor for the PSP.  Sure they'll say otherwise but they said the Cube wasn't in competition with the PS2 so what they say doesn't always mean anything.

13592

TalkBack / RE: Nintendo Reveals "Third Pillar"!

« on: January 21, 2004, 10:35:24 AM »

A cap on discussion seems a little hasty.  I mean this hasn't been known about for even 24 hours yet.  And we do have actual information.  We've got some specs and we now actually know what the third pillar is.

13593

General Gaming / RE: What games should I get? - SNES

« on: January 21, 2004, 10:21:58 AM »

The batteries have nothing to do with the console they have to do with the games.  I have found that most of my games has save batteries that still work.  Unless it's been mistreated Nintendo's first party games usually have pretty long lasting save batteries.  However I've found that a lot third party games that use the battery only to keep high scores don't last as long.  Konami game saves in particular have crapped out on me.

When buying a used game ensure with the seller that the save battery still works.  If a battery does bite the dust it is possible to replace it.  You have to crack open the game of course to do it.  I think they just use a standard watch battery.

13594

General Chat / RE: A Trilogy of trilogies: StarWars: EPISODE 7, 8 & 9.

« on: January 21, 2004, 09:06:14 AM »

"Steven Spielberg should definitely NOT direct any of these films. He's too damn sappy. Look what happened when he directed the 2nd Indiana Jones film. Total piece of crap. He just had to throw a kid in and a stupid woman who screamed and cried through most of it."

Um, Spielberg directed the entire Indy trilogy.  I think he was allowed to goof one of them up when Raiders and Last Crusade were so swank.

Unless they're adaptations of some of the Star Wars novels I have no desire to see another trilogy be made.  Lucas has shown with prequels that he just doesn't have it anymore.  Perhaps he never really had it and just fluked out with A New Hope, which is the only original trilogy film he actual directed and wrote himself.  Lucas will be far too old to make a new trilogy anyway unless he starts them right after Episode III.  I say just leave Star Wars alone.

13595

TalkBack / RE: EA Snags Timesplitters 3

« on: January 21, 2004, 08:39:51 AM »

Seems weird for EA to publish this game since it competes with their own Bond titles.  Maybe they're just hoping that people will buy both or this is just to test Free Radical to see if they want to give them the Bond franchise.

Anyway it's now official that no one cares that Edios and Acclaim are not making Cube games.

13596

TalkBack / RE: Nintendo Reveals "Third Pillar"!

« on: January 21, 2004, 07:04:56 AM »

"1. Two screens is just one of the features of this thing.
2. Two screens can do whatever one screen can do.
3. One screen cannot do whatever two screens can do."

Exactly.  That's one of the problems with this thing.  A dual screen portable makes the one screen GBA redundant.  Now if this was merely the next Gameboy designed to replace the GBA then there's no problem.  But as a "third pillar" designed to co-exist with the GBA and Gamecube it's ensuring the failure of a Nintendo device.  If it plays only two screen games then it likely won't take off because I can't see a console designed solely for that purpose being successful or even having many games.  If it also plays one screen games then it will essentially kill the GBA, right in time for the PSP (ie: the worst time ever to kill off the GBA), because there's no need for two Nintendo portables that can play the same types of games.

I'm wondering if in fact this IS supposed to be the GBA successor but Nintendo just is pretending that it's something new so as to not discourage GBA sales right when the PSP launches.

13597

TalkBack / RE: Nintendo Reveals "Third Pillar"!

« on: January 20, 2004, 08:22:04 PM »

"Does Nintendo have to do this EVERY YEAR? Last year they announced the SP right after Christmas, this year the DS."

Come to think of it they have been doing this "new hardware" thing a lot.  Aside from the GBA SP there's also the e-Reader.  This glut of hardware reminds me of the practices of a certain other console powerhouse that was a little too creative for it's own good and is now a third party.

13598

TalkBack / RE: Nintendo Reveals "Third Pillar"!

« on: January 20, 2004, 08:00:10 PM »

"Okay, can someone tell me this. What can you do with two separate screens that you cant do with one really long screen?"

If they're able to be moved (like two TVs) you can play a FPS death match on one machine without the other player seeing where you are.  However I doubt a portable will allow for removable screens.

13599

TalkBack / RE: Nintendo Reveals "Third Pillar"!

« on: January 20, 2004, 07:49:35 PM »

Well I'll admit this is kind of neat and it's creative but it also sounds pretty dumb.  I actually can think of some pretty cool uses for having two screens.  Like Ty mentioned X-Men was two screens so this could work great for widescreen style games like X-Men or Darius.  I also have always thought it would be cool to make some sort of racing/shooting game where one screen shows in front of you and the other shows the side so you can do drive by shootings.  This also works well for multiplayer games (though that probably wouldn't work too well on a portable).

However while these ideas are neat and cool they DO NOT need their own hardware to be made possible.  If they really wanted to make games like this they could have just made the N5 able to hook up to two TVs at once.  As it's own hardware this is gimmicky at best.  It would work okay as a successor to the GBA which has two screens and thus allows designers to use either only one if they want but as a "third pillar" this doesn't make sense.

I REALLY don't want to see Nintendo crash and burn but this really doesn't sound like something people are going to go nuts over.  If they're depending a lot on this thing to carry them into the future they may be in big trouble.

13600

TalkBack / RE: Burnout 3 Coming from EA

« on: January 20, 2004, 05:27:50 PM »

So they traded Acclaim for EA?  That's like escaping from Nazi Germany to the USSR.

Anyway Burnout 2 is a pretty swank game and it's nice to see that we'll continue to get the series on the Gamecube.  However I'm afraid we're never going to get anything but from Criterion.  After Burnout 3 I want to see them work on something else.