Voice

yeah...and when I look at the system requirements...I say to myself, "Does this game have better graphics than doom 2 does?"

if the answer is yes, then I can never play that game.

All I have to worry about when I buy a PS2 game is if the game is good or not good.

__________________
BOOYAHKASHA!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.bungie.net/Stats/PlayerStats.aspx?player=Turbonegro2012

Denstjiro

i think this is more about how the marktet is beeing aproached by the big company's, in the old days games where for geeks and hardcore gamers, and they where made by them as well. henche the magical "good old days" people keep refering to. that all died and indeed sony brought games to the masses with the PS1, thay changed everything.
u cant blame them realy, if they didnt do ot some1 else would ave.

so all of a sudden u have a huge userbase and company's start to c the potential offit (cash!) and thats what we are complaing about imo; big releases, endless sequels, copy's from other games and badly implemented licenses.

instead of fanboys creating our games we now have publishers going for cash and cash alone, hyping the masses still works u c , 80% of the gamers are NOT informed, they dont know what is a good game if it hit them and they buy sumthing cus it has "awesome" written on the back of the box.
and thats where the real money lies.

you can bring up all the lists you want but if u look at them most are sequels or genre-copy's from other successes, people playing games for a while are getting fed up with them.
i'de love to play GT4 but will it bring me the same pleasure and thrills as GT1 did, i dont think so. i will buy the game but allready i feel demotivated by the idea i have to do it all over again, start from scratch, do all the licenses, etc.

Arnold said we may be outgroing them, i think thats a part as well. people like me (mid 30's , allways been into games an any format) are getting slightly sick of everything happening all over again, i'm into on line fps games but if i c the games released nowadays, its all the same, ffs there are about 10 games based on vietnam and 20 about WW2 out there! all cus some1 made a big selling game in that theme

on the other hand, u guys are here for a reason (forums etc) u wanna b informed, want to get only the best and getting the right information helps allot doesnt it? so why complaint....
i buy about 70% less games then i used to but they are all the best in their genre

__________________

Arnold K. (Admin)

You know. With GT1 it took me a while to like the game. GT2 gave me an orgasm from the start. GT3 gave me like 10 orgasms. And based on what I played at E3, GT4 will give me another 20.

Sequels aren't anything. They've always been around and in the same vein. It's just now, there is more spot-light on them, because they have larger budgets, larger expectations and larger followings.

Mr. SunburnMan

Nothing really happened, except we're getting older and growing out of it. End of story.

Interceptor

The vast majority of those games listed are just rehashed versions of the exact same stuff we've seen for years.

Much has happened to videogames.

Voice

So what you are saying is you want all original ideas for games then?

tell you what, you get a bunch of people who think the same way as you do, sit down in a room and brainstorm for a couple days, see if you come up with something that would be a game that any game company would purchase and put out on the shelves. And then if you think you've got one, SHOP IT AROUND!!!!

the fact remains that the majority always speaks......and until people just STOP buying all these games, the companies won't start making anything else.

I myself am extremely happy with the huge amount of great games coming out before christmas. I am not outgrowing games, and I never will. I also don't think that sequels are a cop-out. If you notice all the sequels I listed are of GREAT GAMES.

And all the "re-hashed" games you talk about, are adding alot of new aspects to the genres that will further the development of their respective genres.

__________________
BOOYAHKASHA!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.bungie.net/Stats/PlayerStats.aspx?player=Turbonegro2012

Mr. SunburnMan

From your first sentence, you should've said otherwise. Irrationality get!

As far as revolutionary games, it's obvious there aren't as many as 15-20 years ago, for the simple fact that the industry was creating itself back then. It was the time to establish themselves, and think of different styles of gameplay. SNES/Genesis were an evolution, and reached pinnacle of the casual genres as known then. Then 3D games came, and while that did not necessarily revolutionized specific genres, it was style a huge leap ahead. And now the developpers are working to do what they did with 2D - perfecting the new style of games, and innovating within the bounds set 15 to 20 years ago.

Obviously there will be another revolution sooner or later, and the developpers will have to adapt to that revolution and release new games set in the new bounds. It's a normal technological loop.

Voice

And everything from Art, movies, music, and even the things that you do on a daily basis, are just rehashed versions of what people have been doing since the beggining of time.

It's called evolving.

The problem is when those things don't evolve.

Which happens in video games...those are the times when you have to look at the game and ask yourself if it is just a cheap copy of another game, or if it adds something new and unique to a tried and true formula.

For instance, the survival horror genre is one of my favorites, but there are quite a few games that just SUCK.....

One coming out though, is daring to be different and change the way the games are played......

It's called Siren....The story is told through the eyes of 10 characters, and the levels aren't in chronological order. It's sounding like Quentin Tarantino wrote a survival horror game. I am excited as hell about it.

__________________
BOOYAHKASHA!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.bungie.net/Stats/PlayerStats.aspx?player=Turbonegro2012

Mr. SunburnMan

Yes, but it's not like mediocrity and copy-cats appeared out of no-where when the PSX was unleashed on the market. While the NES/SNES are held by many as the best consoles in the market, the amount of trash on these platforms is just as disgusting as newer consoles. How many platformers were there on the NES/SNES to try to get some of Mario's success? Too many. How many games are now trying to emulate M64? Same answer.
The problem of quality not a new phenomenon, that magically appeared because "Sony was in it for the money" (some say that as though Nintendo and Sega weren't/aren't ).

While there are certain companies that are certainly declining (Squaresoft, Capcom are the first two that come to my mind), others are definitely rising (Sony, UbiSoft). It's all the same ever generation I've played. The only difference is that my tastes are evolving, just like the games.

Antonio

Bad licenses, endless sequels, games put out for quick cash and just straight crap games? These things have been around since Atari. ET anyone? How's that for shitty licensing? Mega Man, Castlevania, Mario and Kirby sequels, sports game iterations where I barely notice the updated content, and just crap games like, ET, Bad Street Brawler, Target: Renegade, Friday the 13th, etc are nothing new.

If anything Sony brought the mainstream into accepting games as mentioned above, but nothing they have done has deteriorated the state of the industry in any way. All the older consoles had great pioneering games, which spawned sequels -- sometimes franchise ruining sequels. This is a mainstay in gaming. New consoles have pioneering works also, which spawn sequels like Devil May Cry and Halo.

The only problem I see is with how some of us percieve how we've come to the current state of gaming. That is to say that nothing has really changed. Yes the companies are bigger and much more money-focused than ever, but this doesn't mutually exclude the people who actually enjoy creating games, in whatever capacity they happen to be in.

It's an evolutionary process. Gamers demand more and more from games. With that in mind, I realize that games cannot be handled as they once were with a solitary programmer who probably doubled as sound guy and or designer. Games of today demand better sound, graphics and innovative gameplay to keep it interesting. This is not to say that games have to have these attributes in the realistic sense, but rather a higher quality of such features, regardless of art direction, sound and music, etc.

Requirements like this will more than likely demand a specialists in these areas. A gifted programmer probably could produce adequate 3D sound effects to convey audible depth, however if someone who specializes in 3D audio were to produce the sound and music, it would probably be better, and vice versa.

The fiscal responsibility in hiring these pros, and scope of the project are all accounted for.

Anyway, didn't mean to go into a rant about the costs, but this is one of the main reasons the game has become so "corporate" and cold.

__________________

Now Playing:
Twisted Metal: Head-On
----
New York or bust! -- June, 2005