Seventh Generation: The Years of Stagnation

[TheEdge]

Hello all,

As my fellow slave office workers would say "Happy Monday!"

The idea for this topic started when I first witnessed a video for Soul Calibur IV. Now, thanks to a review on Classic Game room on Virtual Fighter 5 I am almost completely convinced that the console market / games are in full blow stagnation. The only way I can describe it is if you ported all the Sixth Generation games on to the Seventh Generation consoles.

All I see is more expensive yet, better looking, yet less entertaining games.

Has making video games become standardized? Is it like something out of an assembly line. Very generic. Where is the revolutionary game play? Where is the raising of the standards?

I am sticking with my PC until I see some real changes and innovation.

[MrMatthews]

Well, what do you call "innovation?". In my opinion, not a whole lot has changed since the N64/PSX era other than improved graphics and 3D controls. Remember, not a whole lot changed between the 8-bit and 16-bit generations.

If you ask me, I think this generation has seen some real winners. Nintendo had super Mario Galaxy, Metroid Prime 3, and Twilight Princess. The multi-platform Grand Theft Auto 4 was one of the only games I can think of that received perfect scores from multiple publications. XBox has, of course, the Gears of War series.

Compare that to last generation. What stand-out games do you remmber? Everyone made a big deal out of the God of War series, and of course the GTA 3 games. Nintendo had a few amazing games on the gamecube and the xbox had halo.

I don't see too much of a difference.

[TheEdge]

I don't agree at all. You really don't need any of these current gen' consoles. The FPS are all on PC and they play better with Mouse and Keyboard.

If you want to narrow the argument and just bring attention to the " Wheres the Innovation" I will bite.

Dreamcast:
Samba De Amigo
Shenmue I-II
Jet Grind Radio
Skies of Arcadia
Soul Calibur

PS2:
Onimusha
Devil May Cry
Tekken
Soul Calibur 2
God of War

Gamecube:
RE4
RE1: Remake


^ All of these titles created whole new genres of gaming.

Where are the new and improved stuff in this generation?

I see Stagnation everywhere.

Most of the games you can just buy on PC and if you have a pretty good computer they will probably run better and you will have better controls as well.

I see no reason at all to drop the ridiculous amount of money if they aren't going to come out with anything memorable.

[MrMatthews]

I don't agree at all. You really don't need any of these current gen' consoles. The FPS are all on PC and they play better with Mouse and Keyboard.

If you want to narrow the argument and just bring attention to the " Wheres the Innovation" I will bite.

Dreamcast:
Samba De Amigo
Shenmue I-II
Jet Grind Radio
Skies of Arcadia
Soul Calibur

PS2:
Onimusha
Devil May Cry
Tekken
Soul Calibur 2
God of War

Gamecube:
RE4
RE1: Remake


^ All of these titles created whole new genres of gaming.

Where are the new and improved stuff in this generation?

I see Stagnation everywhere.

Most of the games you can just buy on PC and if you have a pretty good computer they will probably run better and you will have better controls as well.

I see no reason at all to drop the ridiculous amount of money if they aren't going to come out with anything memorable.


First of all, I'm not completely disagreeing with you. The stance I'm taking is not that this current generation is so terribly innovative, but that the last three generations have seen more "improvement" than "innovation."

The way I see it, the only real innovation (the way I think you're defining it, at any rate) comes only at the start of each technological watershed. Say, pac-man and space invaders. All future games more or less improved on the formulas set in those games until super Mario Bros, which truly changed the way we play games. Most games followed that same basic formula with only a few alterations until we went 3D. I think super Mario 64 ushered in that area, and for the most part all games have just been working off THAT game.


And most of the games you listed for last-gen can be scratched off, as all they really did was improve on existing formulas. God of War and Devil May Cry, for example, were essentially the same game (and both were really just pretty versions of Double Dragon with some RPG elements thrown in).

Resident evil 4 was revolutionary, sure - but the RE1 remake shouldn't count, as that was just a remake of a PS1 game that didn't really do anything new.

My point is that games only go through a gradual evolution with only a few real revolutionary leaps. It was this way throughout the 8-bit and 16-bit eras and that's the way things work now.

Every successful game you can name from last-gen was built off existing ideas.


Edit: I forgot to mention that I've always believed that sega produced some VERY innovative games for the dreamcast.

And one final thought: I don't expect every game I play to be a big life-changing event. Anyone who really expects this is just cheating themselves out of hundreds of games that, though not terribly different from their ancestors, are still great experiences in their own right.

[j_factor]

You criticise the lack of innovation, and then praise the RE remake? I'm sorry, I can't take you seriously.

[TheEdge]

First of all, I'm not completely disagreeing with you. The stance I'm taking is not that this current generation is so terribly innovative, but that the last three generations have seen more "improvement" than "innovation."

The way I see it, the only real innovation (the way I think you're defining it, at any rate) comes only at the start of each technological watershed. Say, pac-man and space invaders. All future games more or less improved on the formulas set in those games until super Mario Bros, which truly changed the way we play games. Most games followed that same basic formula with only a few alterations until we went 3D. I think super Mario 64 ushered in that area, and for the most part all games have just been working off THAT game.


And most of the games you listed for last-gen can be scratched off, as all they really did was improve on existing formulas. God of War and Devil May Cry, for example, were essentially the same game (and both were really just pretty versions of Double Dragon with some RPG elements thrown in).

Resident evil 4 was revolutionary, sure - but the RE1 remake shouldn't count, as that was just a remake of a PS1 game that didn't really do anything new.

My point is that games only go through a gradual evolution with only a few real revolutionary leaps. It was this way throughout the 8-bit and 16-bit eras and that's the way things work now.

Every successful game you can name from last-gen was built off existing ideas.


Edit: I forgot to mention that I've always believed that sega produced some VERY innovative games for the dreamcast.

And one final thought: I don't expect every game I play to be a big life-changing event. Anyone who really expects this is just cheating themselves out of hundreds of games that, though not terribly different from their ancestors, are still great experiences in their own right.

The problem with your argument is that your are saying that nothing has been ground breaking since the conception of the first video game ever produced.

Meaning nothing is more innovative than Pong (WHICH WAS NOT THE FIRST VIDEO GAME PRODUCED IT IS AN EXAMPLE). Also I didn't mean for this thread to circle around innovation. I am starting to see that people take one minute detail from the posts and blow them completely out of purportion. But anyway.

Look at the rehashed in the topic.

VF5 - Rehashed / Soul Calibur IV - Rehashed

Gears of War - RE4 with a different storyline.

Also the comparison to Double Dragon and Devil May Cry doesn't hold water. You can't possible compared them. Yes, they are a beat'em up game but they are completely different in almost every way other than fighting multiple enemies at once.

I know your a defender of these next gen' consoles but come on, you have to see the downward spiral from Sixth Gen' to Seventh.

Many, not all the games are really not worth it. I would wait until the Eighth Gen' and see if they can get their creative juices flowing.

[MrMatthews]

True. I loved the RE remake, don't get me wrong. But Smash Bros Melee was a better example of innovation.

[TheEdge]

Has making video games become standardized? Is it like something out of an assembly line. Very generic. Where is the revolutionary game play? Where is the raising of the standards?


^ THIS IS WHAT THE TOPIC QUESTION IS!!! (Tearing hair out)


Jesus christ! Mr . Matthews....should I delete the word "innovation" from the freakin thread. Its not just about innovation its about the whole console feel and entertainment value.

[MrMatthews]

The problem with your argument is that your are saying that nothing has been ground breaking since the conception of the first video game ever produced.

Meaning nothing is more innovative than Pong (WHICH WAS NOT THE FIRST VIDEO GAME PRODUCED IT IS AN EXAMPLE). Also I didn't mean for this thread to circle around innovation. I am starting to see that people take one minute detail from the posts and blow them completely out of purportion. But anyway.

Look at the rehashed in the topic.

VF5 - Rehashed / Soul Calibur IV - Rehashed

Gears of War - RE4 with a different storyline.

Also the comparison to Double Dragon and Devil May Cry doesn't hold water. You can't possible compared them. Yes, they are a beat'em up game but they are completely different in almost every way other than fighting multiple enemies at once.

I know your a defender of these next gen' consoles but come on, you have to see the downward spiral from Sixth Gen' to Seventh.

Many, not all the games are really not worth it. I would wait until the Eighth Gen' and see if they can get their creative juices flowing.


Come on, now - I agreed with you that this latest crop of games haven't done anything new. And Gears of War WAS RE4 with a few adjustments.

All I was saying was that last-gen was NO different.

And I wasnt saying that all games sprung from Pong. I was saying that there are only a handful of games that were genuinely revolutionary, and all other games were built off their foundations. I also said I was totally alright with that.

[TheEdge]

All I was saying was that last-gen was NO different

AHHHH! WHAT?!

Are you the Mayor of Crazy-town! (j/k)

The Sixth Generation was extremely ground breaking.

Sega
Nintendo
Sony
Microsoft

ALL had hits that revolutionized the gaming world. Are you disagreeing with me to attempt to drive me insane? It won't work! Dam you!

EDIT: The present generation is like an inbred son taking the throne from a intelligent and just ruler and making it into a Mad Max dystopia over night.

[gamevet]

While Fallout 3 may borrow heavily from games like Oblivion, Mass Effect and several other titles, it feels like a whole new experience. I really felt like I was exploring a desolite world and my character had to struggle to survive in a harsh, radiated land.

Little Big Planet would appear to be just another platformer, but it offers players a chance to design and share their levels with other players. Other players can rate the levels, as well as play them together online. It's not leaps and bounds above what we've played before, but it does bring a little more interacitivity to platformers.

LIVE and PSN make it possible for Indy developers to share their games via those services. PSN has games like Echochrome, while LIVE has games like Penny Arcade. We could see quite a bit of quirky, quick games that feature a lot of new concepts never thought of before in gaming.

It's way too early to judge this generation. Last gen didn't exactly start out with a bang either.

[TheEdge]

It's way too early to judge this generation. Last gen didn't exactly start out with a bang either.


This is true but from what I'm seeing at present, lets just say I don't have high hopes.

[MrMatthews]

AHHHH! WHAT?!

Are you the Mayor of Crazy-town! (j/k)

The Sixth Generation was extremely ground breaking.

Sega
Nintendo
Sony
Microsoft

ALL had hits that revolutionized the gaming world. Are you disagreeing with me to attempt to drive me insane? It won't work! Dam you!

EDIT: The present generation is like an inbred son taking the throne from a intelligent, handsome, and just ruler and making it into a fascist police state over night.



LOL

Enhance your calm. The underlying message in all of my posts has been "you're right, but..."

I mean no disrespect, but we can still debate, right?

And if you don't want to focus on "innovation," why did you use that word to wrap up your thoughts in your original post?

But continuing our good-natured (and I can't stress that enough) debate, let's take a look at some of last-gen's hits, okay?

Chu Chu Rocket
Crazy Taxi
Samba de Amigo
Space Channel 5
Jet Grind Radio

All excellent examples. The Dreamcast is hereby excused from this debate, since sega was responsible for some of the most innov- er..."creative" games of the generation.

God of War? Come on - the pacing and major elements of that game were identical to the brawler arcade titles of yore. The graphics and music were fantastic and the "level-up" elements were cool, but this game did nothing really new. All it did was take tired and dated gameplay and cover it up with an awesome presentation.

And the first thing I thought of when I played Devil May Cry is "this is just like God of War!". Since DMC came first, that is another strike against GoW.

the PS2 only had a few revolutionary titles: grand theft auto, Ico, and Shadow of the Colossus. The other games were just evolved games from the previous generation.

The XBox had, what? Halo? Doom3? Fable? Knights of the old republic? Were any of those revolutionary? Your answer will probably lead directly to my next example:

Metroid Prime. VERY revolutionary. Much more so than Halo.

With very few exceptions, most of the biggest games from last-gen were updates from the previous generation.

I'm going to end this post before I lose focus any more than I already have. The only reason I disagree with you is because you're saying that last-gen was so awesome compared to this one, when in my opinion they are no different in terms of creativity.

[Tanegashima]

Constant change and innovation was what screwed video games up in the first place. What happened to game play? The worst innovation in gaming history was the un-skippable cut scene.

[MrMatthews]

Me = devil's advocate.

The biggest revolutionary step for this generation is the online aspect. All three consoles offer a variety of games for download, which is great, and online multiplayer has become integral to most PS3 and 360 games.

Not saying I care about that last point too much, but it is a fact. That's really how this generation is "revolutionary." the games themselves are pretty much the last as the last.

And I'm not a huge supporter of current-gen games. I think each generation has had a lot of excellent software to offer, and I don't like seeing any of them unjustly criticized. I'd probably get drawn in to such a discussion is someone said knocked 16-bit games for not being as good as 8-bit games.

[j_factor]

Except there hasn't been an online revolution this gen, just an incremental increase over previous gens. If any system was "revolutionary" with online gameplay, it was Dreamcast. But even then, there was online console gaming before that. If downloading games is the new revolution, count me the fuck out.

Anyway, almost every game in the past 20 years builds upon something that came before it. Truly "new", completely different types of gameplay have been extremely few and far between (and for good reason). I doubt any game released anytime in the near future (or the recent past) is going to have anywhere remotely near the status of the first platformer, the first racing game, the first adventure game, etc.

On the other hand, now that I've typed that, I'm not even sure that that's a great thing to look at. The first racing game was an early arcade also-ran called Night Driver; the first adventure game was this text-based thing that ran on a PDP-10 that very few people have played; the first scrolling platformer was an obscure arcade game called Jump Bug that most people haven't heard of.

[AD2101]

The idea for this topic started when I first witnessed a video for Soul Calibur IV. Now, thanks to a review on Classic Game room on Virtual Fighter 5 I am almost completely convinced that the console market / games are in full blow stagnation. The only way I can describe it is if you ported all the Sixth Generation games on to the Seventh Generation consoles.

lol I would be screaming stagnation too if I had to judge an entire generation of gaming based on what I saw in a fighting game.

I really don't think this generation is off par with the innovation we've seen in past console generations. In fact, I think it might be more so with games like LittleBigPlanet (as much as I don't like it) with its level creation and its whole "sharing" mentality, COD4 for what it did for online play, games like Bioshock and MGS4 for what they did in storytelling and plot twists (which is what I'm all about), Mirror's Edge which is an idea which has never really been done before, Fallout 3 for reasons already mentioned, and I'll even give a toss out to Dead Space for creating an environment I didn't think was really possible yet.

Come to think of it, seeing as I totally neglected the Wii in my above rant, including the Wii into all of this makes this probably the MOST innovative generation I've seen maybe ever in my lifetime. You can disagree but that's my take on it all.

[MrMatthews]

Except there hasn't been an online revolution this gen, just an incremental increase over previous gens. If any system was "revolutionary" with online gameplay, it was Dreamcast. But even then, there was online console gaming before that. If downloading games is the new revolution, count me the fuck out.

Anyway, almost every game in the past 20 years builds upon something that came before it. Truly "new", completely different types of gameplay have been extremely few and far between (and for good reason). I doubt any game released anytime in the near future (or the recent past) is going to have anywhere remotely near the status of the first platformer, the first racing game, the first adventure game, etc.

On the other hand, now that I've typed that, I'm not even sure that that's a great thing to look at. The first racing game was an early arcade also-ran called Night Driver; the first adventure game was this text-based thing that ran on a PDP-10 that very few people have played; the first scrolling platformer was an obscure arcade game called Jump Bug that most people haven't heard of.


I agree with everything you said (and thanks for reminding me again about the dreamcast).

This generation is unique, however, in that at least two of its systems boast an all-encompassing "online experience" in terms of multiplayer and digital downloads. I personally get a lot more out of the latter than the former, but that's another argument entirely.

And "revolutionary" does not technically mean being the first to do something, I think. The first fighter was what ... Karate champs or something? But I think we can all agree that the first bona fide fighter hit was Street Fighter II. All it takes is one game in each genre to light the fire, and all the other developers are throwing in their own fuel (which in turn burn with varying strength and longevity).

Most of those titles were already on the market long before the last generation, so all developers could do was present those concepts in different ways that hopefully felt fresh and new.

[Zebbe]

Video game stagnation began when the Mega Drive was discontinued in Japan. It will never fully recover.

[TheEdge]

lol I would be screaming stagnation too if I had to judge an entire generation of gaming based on what I saw in a fighting game.

They were the first games that popped into my head. I'm sure I can name countless shooters on the new consoles that all can be used as examples of stagnation. All I see is same games with better graphics.

"Resistance: Fall of Man" is a clone of Call of Duty with an even more linear path. The only thing that makes it look vast is because the environments are huge but your actual path is narrow.

Also.....

GTA4 is another rehash of the last 3.

Stagnation! All around me. Change the Aquarium water for god sakes!

[AD2101]

I'm sure I can name countless shooters on the new consoles that all can be used as examples of stagnation. All I see is same games with better graphics.

GTA4 is another rehash of the last 3.


Again, I'd be screaming stagnation too if I were judging things based on shooters, fighters and Grand Theft Auto.

I think your playing the wrong games, honestly. Play some of the titles from my last post then let me know if the water is just as stagnant.

[j_factor]

And "revolutionary" does not technically mean being the first to do something, I think. The first fighter was what ... Karate champs or something? But I think we can all agree that the first bona fide fighter hit was Street Fighter II.

That's kind of my point. When Street Fighter II came out, one could've easily argued that it wasn't really revolutionary, it just did what Karate Champ (and IK+, Karateka, etc.) did, only better and more popularly. Almost all games build on games that came before it. Progress comes in steps; it's really hard to draw the line at what is and isn't new.

For example, someone said Gears of War was just RE4 with a different storyline. Well isn't RE4 just Resident Evil meets Tomb Raider? And Resident Evil is basically a clone of Alone in the Dark, and Tomb Raider is just Flashback in 3D and a different setting.

[MrMatthews]

That's kind of my point. When Street Fighter II came out, one could've easily argued that it wasn't really revolutionary, it just did what Karate Champ (and IK+, Karateka, etc.) did, only better and more popularly. Almost all games build on games that came before it. Progress comes in steps; it's really hard to draw the line at what is and isn't new.

For example, someone said Gears of War was just RE4 with a different storyline. Well isn't RE4 just Resident Evil meets Tomb Raider? And Resident Evil is basically a clone of Alone in the Dark, and Tomb Raider is just Flashback in 3D and a different setting.


How about Prince of Persia in 3D? That's what influenced Out of This World and Flashback, I'm sure.


And thanks for pin-pointing RE4's origin - I was trying to think of what games might have inspired it, and I supposed Tomb Raider without the platforming is about as close as it gets.

[InternalPrimate]

Stagnation? When in the history of gaming have we seen such community building? Mainstream games like Little Big Planet and Rock Band promote getting together and creating content for all to share. That may have been somewhat common for PC gamers in years past, but not so for console gamers.

And I hate to bring up the Wii in this conversation, since most hardcore gamers hate the console at the moment, but the system is the antithesis of your argument. Sure there's a ton of shovelware, but you can't ignore imaginative games like World of Goo, Boom Blox, Super Mario Galaxy, and Wii Sports.

I'm really liking the current generation of games. In contrast, I was extremely bored during the previous two generations when I would wait for a few major releases. If anything, Xbox Live Arcade, PSN, and WiiWare has completely turned this around. When waiting for major releases, it's nice to have some innovative options for a low price.

[gamevet]

the PS2 only had a few revolutionary titles: grand theft auto, Ico, and Shadow of the Colossus. The other games were just evolved games from the previous generation.

Ahem...Guitar Hero?



The XBox had, what? Halo? Doom3? Fable? Knights of the old republic? Were any of those revolutionary? Your answer will probably lead directly to my next example:


Burnout 3: Takedown may have came out on the PS2 as well, but the Xbox version defined the way an online racing game should be. It wasn't just about racing; it was about laying carnage on the rest of the field and laughing all the way to the finish line.


That's kind of my point. When Street Fighter II came out, one could've easily argued that it wasn't really revolutionary, it just did what Karate Champ (and IK+, Karateka, etc.) did, only better and more popularly. Almost all games build on games that came before it. Progress comes in steps; it's really hard to draw the line at what is and isn't new.


That's not true at all. Those old fighters were pretty much button mashers. Try mashing the buttons with an experienced Street Fighter II player and you'd be picking up your tokens off the floor. Street Fighter II, and the series, was about combos and the parry system. Even Mortal Kombat didn't have as deep of a fighting system.

[MrMatthews]

Ahem...Guitar Hero?


Really? Was Guitar Hero the first rhythm game?

It may be huge, but I can't see how a game with such insipid gameplay can be considered revolutionary. I play the same game on my steering wheel when I listen to the radio every day. For free.

[gamevet]

Really? Was Guitar Hero the first rhythm game?

It may be huge, but I can't see how a game with such insipid gameplay can be considered revolutionary. I play the same game on my steering wheel when I listen to the radio every day. For free.

I didn't say Taiko Drum Master.

Going by that analogy, Super Mario Bros. isn't revolutionary at all, since I was playing live platformers in my back yard as a kid.

Technically, Guitar Hero is a revolution of the game Simon, created by the Grand Daddy of videogames, Ralph Baer. Of course, he stole the idea (ironic twist) from Nolan Bushnell's game called Touch me.

Guitar Freaks was first, but on the home market Guitar Hero was a revolution. Guitar Freeks is a clunky game in comparison.

How is Metroid Prime any more revolutionary?

[j_factor]

Guitar Hero is just Beatmania with a Guitar controller.

[MrMatthews]

I didn't say Taiko Drum Master.

Going by that analogy, Super Mario Bros. isn't revolutionary at all, since I was playing live platformers in my back yard as a kid.

Technically, Guitar Hero is a revolution of the game Simon, created by the Grand Daddy of videogames, Ralph Baer. Of course, he stole the idea (ironic twist) from Nolan Bushnell's game called Touch me.

Guitar Freaks was first, but on the home market Guitar Hero was a revolution. Guitar Freeks is a clunky game in comparison.

I almost gave Simon a shout out in that last post, but decided I would rather compare Guitar Hero to banging away on my steering wheel instead, since that's about all the gameplay amounts to.


How is Metroid Prime any more revolutionary?

Metroid Prime was a far more engaging experience; mixing equal parts shooting action, adventure & exploration, platforming, and puzzle elements. Halo was just an FPS; only a few polygons and a headset above Marathon.

[Tanegashima]

Metroid Prime is a lot like Power Slave (Saturn, PSX) with platforming and puzzle elements too...

[j_factor]

Metroid Prime is a lot like Power Slave (Saturn, PSX) with platforming and puzzle elements too...

Metroid Prime is a lot like Powerslave. I thought I was the only one who ever noticed this. It's far from an exact copy, but there's definitely a resemblance in gameplay.

[TmEE]

Exhumed(Powerslave) is awesome on Saturn. I need to finish the last 2 stages...

[MrMatthews]

Sounds like I need to check out this Powerslave.

Still, what elements in this game were similar to Metroid Prime? Remember that MP was almost entirely based on Metroid & Super Metroid, so could Powerslave have just pulled from those original games for its content?

[17daysolderthannes]

this is why I am so fond of the 90-95 (maybe 96/97) time period in video games. Companies finally decided video games were a profitable market and went nuts trying to find the next big trend in video games. Alot of shit came out of it, but alot of really unique games came too, games you have never and will never see anything like again. I mean, come on, Robocop vs. Terminator, Michael Jackson's Moonwalker, Kolibri, Lemmings, Worms, the list goes on. So many games were innovative in either gameplay or license (robocob vs. terminator) and it left us with alot of really cool potential experiences that I haven't really seen since. As far as I'm concerned, besides simulator-esque games (racing, flying, skateboarding, FPS, etc.) video games died in about 97. Almost my entire PS2 library is some sort of simulation game, except for a few gems like Sly Cooper. The problem with today isn't the hardware, its the fact that games are too detached and aren't made by a key designer working with a small team like they were back in the early days.

[gamevet]

Metroid Prime was a far more engaging experience; mixing equal parts shooting action, adventure & exploration, platforming, and puzzle elements. Halo was just an FPS; only a few polygons and a headset above Marathon.


Metroid Prime is an evolution of Super Metroid. It's basically Super Metroid in 3-D. If you believe that Guitar Hero wasn't that revolutionary, than I'd say MP and GTA3 weren't either, since all they were was an evolution of a previous game.

I'd love to know why you would think otherwise, just because the game involves rythym? Taiko Drum Master and Donkey Konga both involve rythym as well, but the gameplay wasn't anywhere near as fun. Anyone can make a rythym game, but making it fun is the real challenge.


As far as I'm concerned, besides simulator-esque games (racing, flying, skateboarding, FPS, etc.) video games died in about 97. Almost my entire PS2 library is some sort of simulation game, except for a few gems like Sly Cooper. The problem with today isn't the hardware, its the fact that games are too detached and aren't made by a key designer working with a small team like they were back in the early days.

PS2 has many unique games, if you take the time to look for them. Culdcept and REZ are 2 great Dreamcast ports to the PS2. Ring of Red is a somewhat unique strategy game from Konami. And don't forget Katamari Demacy, Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, Okami, Disaster Report, Mr. Misquito, Mad Maestro, Guitaroo-man, Fahrenheit and Frequency.

[MrMatthews]

Metroid Prime is an evolution of Super Metroid. It's basically Super Metroid in 3-D. If you believe that Guitar Hero wasn't that revolutionary, than I'd say MP and GTA3 weren't either, since all they were was an evolution of a previous game.

I'd love to know why you would think otherwise, just because the game involves rythym? Taiko Drum Master and Donkey Konga both involve rythym as well, but the gameplay wasn't anywhere near as fun. Anyone can make a rythym game, but making it fun is the real challenge.



PS2 has many unique games, if you take the time to look for them. Culdcept and REZ are 2 great Dreamcast ports to the PS2. Ring of Red is a somewhat unique strategy game from Konami. And don't forget Katamari Demacy, Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, Okami, Disaster Report, Mr. Misquito, Mad Maestro, Guitaroo-man, Fahrenheit and Frequency.


About Guitar Hero: I won't deny that GH has a huge following, so it must be fun. I only slammed it because I think ALL rhythm games are useless (patapon excluded)

About Metroid Prime: to me, MP qualifies as revolutionary BECAUSE it was an evolution of Super Metroid. Never before (or since, as far as I know) has a FPS so seemlessly integrated what was such a staple of the 2D games before it: platforming. Prime presented all the staples from the series in a first-person perspective (and jumping from platform to platform was a large part of the game) and it all worked perfectly. Few FPS games use "jumping puzzles" in the gameplay because, for the most part, it just doesn't work. MP pulled it off. There's a reason why it is often referred to as a "first-person adventure" rather than a simple shooter.

About Shadow of the Colossus and Ico: amazing games. It's hard to describe what made those games unique among their peers, but something about the realistic animation, atmosphere and minimalist approach to story-telling gelled into a truly remarkable experience.

[Gentlegamer]

Did someone say Powerslave?

UP THE IRONS!

[17daysolderthannes]

PS2 has many unique games, if you take the time to look for them. Culdcept and REZ are 2 great Dreamcast ports to the PS2. Ring of Red is a somewhat unique strategy game from Konami. And don't forget Katamari Demacy, Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, Okami, Disaster Report, Mr. Misquito, Mad Maestro, Guitaroo-man, Fahrenheit and Frequency.

Keyword: ports from Dreamcast to PS2

I own Shadow of the Colussus (best PS2 game BECAUSE it is unique), Katamari Damacy (gets boring quick for me though...), Fantavision (missed that one), but even still that is less than 1% of the PS2 lineup. Back in the 90-95, almost 50% if not more were completely unique games that did wildly different to gameplay. Imagine how cool a new Michael Jackson's moonwalker could be today!

[Mr Smith]

Had the Wii been implemented properly (properly is probably the worong word) then there was so much potential, however, it seems to be a console designed for casual gamers.

[havok666]

Did someone say Powerslave?

UP THE IRONS!

Powerslave, fuck yeah!

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y169/demon6666/POWERSLAVE.jpg

[j_factor]

About Metroid Prime: to me, MP qualifies as revolutionary BECAUSE it was an evolution of Super Metroid. Never before (or since, as far as I know) has a FPS so seemlessly integrated what was such a staple of the 2D games before it: platforming. Prime presented all the staples from the series in a first-person perspective (and jumping from platform to platform was a large part of the game) and it all worked perfectly. Few FPS games use "jumping puzzles" in the gameplay because, for the most part, it just doesn't work. MP pulled it off.

I love Metroid Prime, but I fail to see how that's a big deal. Jumping Flash! (while not an FPS) did the whole first-person platforming thing just fine... in 1995. Quake also featured quite a bit of jumping around.


There's a reason why it is often referred to as a "first-person adventure" rather than a simple shooter.

No, there's not. A first-person adventure would be something like Myst. Anyone who calls Metroid Prime a first-person adventure doesn't know what they're talking about. First-person action-adventure, maybe. But it wouldn't be the only game in that category.

[jesus.arnold]

If you want innovation you need to check out the DS.

I like how much people have been going on about how innovative Little Big Planet is recently when it's just a mario style platformer with Kickstart 2's editor thrown in :p

Nobody goes on about Kirby Power Paintbrush on the DS or even Viewtiful Joe from last gen and both are still much more innovative than Little Big Planet.

I'd like to say i actually really like Little Big Planet, thought it was a pretty good game, great fun in multiplayer, just not particularly innovative.

Also I think last gen may well of been my most hated gen of them all, how much does it suck that that generation was pretty much decided before anyone came out with anything? Sony had won last gen irrespective of anything anyone brought out.

[17daysolderthannes]

If you want innovation you need to check out the DS.

I like how much people have been going on about how innovative Little Big Planet is recently when it's just a mario style platformer with Kickstart 2's editor thrown in :p

Nobody goes on about Kirby Power Paintbrush on the DS or even Viewtiful Joe from last gen and both are still much more innovative than Little Big Planet.

I'd like to say i actually really like Little Big Planet, thought it was a pretty good game, great fun in multiplayer, just not particularly innovative.

Also I think last gen may well of been my most hated gen of them all, how much does it suck that that generation was pretty much decided before anyone came out with anything? Sony had won last gen irrespective of anything anyone brought out.

oh yeah, forgot about viewtiful joe, which is ironic seeing as I have both of them :?

[Metal_Sonic]

Ah nostalgia, this thread is full of it.

[MrMatthews]

It's a dangerous thing, isn't it?

[sega fan]

Well, the sixth generation brought us new series like Ratchet and Clank, and Devil May Cry, and a few others. This generation is just them getting prettier and being whored out.

Guitar Hero, Devil May Cry, any thing from Nintendo and Sony, are being whored to death.

There are a few Diamonds in the rough, Crackdown, LittleBig Planet, Dead Rising, Fallout 3, Far Cry 2, Dead Space are all good examples.

[MrMatthews]

Well, the sixth generation brought us new series like Ratchet and Clank, and Devil May Cry, and a few others. This generation is just them getting prettier and being whored out.

Guitar Hero, Devil May Cry, any thing from Nintendo and Sony, are being whored to death.

There are a few Diamonds in the rough, Crackdown, LittleBig Planet, Dead Rising, Fallout 3, Far Cry 2, Dead Space are all good examples.


Nothing new here. It's a trend that started with the dawn of business: if something is successful once, it will be run through the gamut again and again until it no longer is a viable commodity.

Frankly, I wish Nintendo would whore their franchises out more. I'm ready for a StarFox game on the Wii, as well as new Mario & Metroid games.

Oh, and Dead Rising won't seem so special in a few years, once you're done with Dead Rising 3. Capcom is the biggest game pimp there is.

[gamevet]

About Guitar Hero: I won't deny that GH has a huge following, so it must be fun. I only slammed it because I think ALL rhythm games are useless (patapon excluded)


I can't stand DDR games, but I can see why it became what it did; It is a relevant part of arcade and console game history.

It's quite possible that the accessibility of games like DDR and Guitar Hero, were influential towards Nintendo's decision on the design of the Wii.

[MrMatthews]

I totally agree.

[Tanegashima]

Speaking of Capcom I don't think there have been enough Street Fighter II games. They had the whole rest of the greek alphabet to go before they went to three. Bastards.

[tomaitheous]

Well, what do you call "innovation?"

When you play a DS game and it doesn't use the touch screen. At all. Now that's innovation ;)

[MrMatthews]

When you play a DS game and it doesn't use the touch screen. At all. Now that's innovation ;)
Ironically, the only games in my DS collection that don't overuse the touch-screen are first-party games . . .

[TheEdge]

I know people hate this guy but hes right.


Bernie Stolar
Q: From the time when you started in the game industry, what do you think is the biggest change that has taken place?

A: Thank you for indicating that I am the oldest person in the room. I appreciate that. I’m not going to have a filter for anything I say. I see too many games. Most of the games that I see, there’s a word for them. It’s called crap. I just don’t understand why people make product that’s not fun. That’s the only thing that anybody wants. Why build a store? Why go online and play games that you just don’t have any fun with. You want people to go back and keep playing games that are fun.

http://venturebeat.com/2008/12/07/game-industry-maverick-bernie-stolar-unplugged-and-worried-about-crappy-games/

[GameUser-16-32-128]

That was about the only thing he was ever right about and totally agree with him on.

[Ace]

I couldn't agree more with Bernie(even though he was a dumb*** when he was with Sega). All I see nowadays for modern game consoles is crap; absolutely nothing that I would want to play. I'm pretty much stuck in the 16-bit/32-bit eras because of the junk on the current 128-bit consoles.

[16-bit]

I think a lot of the problem with this generation isn't necessarily the lack of innovation, I think a lot of it is "deinovation". The main example of this that I am thinking of right now is Bioshock. Bioshock was a pretty ok game, it had an amazing story (at least for a shooter), great graphics.

A few weeks before the game came out I bought System Shock 2, just to see what I was going to be getting when Bioshock came out.
I played it and I loved it, System Shock 2 is an amazing game, it had a great blend of RPG and FPS elements, and it was very challenging, but not to the point where I wanted to throw my keyboard out the window.

I was very disappointed with Bioshock, mainly because I thought it would be more like System Shock 2, I thought it would have the same great blend of RPG and FPS elements that System Shock 2 had.

But what I got was a game with glitches galore (every time I got a plasmid my Xbox would freeze) and a watered down version of System Shock 2, missing a lot of the RPG elements that made System Shock 2 so great.

[16-bit]

The other thing I noticed in this generation is that the hardware itself is pretty crap. The 360 has some of the worst durability that I have ever seen in a video game console, and I'm not just talking about the RROD. Every single time I've had to send my 360 back it's been problems other than the RROD, I've had the thing freeze on me, and I've had the thing scratch up my discs.

The Wii and PS3 are a lot better as far as durability is concerned, but I have still had problems with both machines freezing while playing certain games and browsing the internet.

I don't know if this is the problem or not, but game consoles now do a lot of really cool things that are not gaming related. I think if the console makers were going to put all of these extra features like: streaming movies, downloadable content and playing BluRay movies they should at least make sure that they work without bugs, and that the ability to play games remains the primary function of the console.

[johnnyb]

I`m only interested in a console that`s dedicated to gaming, I have no interest in a console that plays movies, music, stores pictures, browses the internet, or makes a cup of coffee. I have a hard time getting into playing online as well, yea it`s pretty cool to be playing with others from completely different locations but I would sooner have people there with you. And as for having a hundred different button inputs to play a game keeps the likes of my mrs and other friends who are not big into gaming from playing the newer stuff. They prefer 3 buttons or six at the most anytime, you don`t have to sit down and read a manual for half an hour first!

[Ace]

Another point: piss-poor reliability of the hardware. For 2 years, I told myself that I would NEVER buy an Xbox 360 because of the Red Ring. It was all a question of Microsoft being cheap. I heard somewhere that the reason why the Xbox 360 is unreliable and consistently malfunctioning is because Microsoft didn't want to go to an ASIC developer and spend the money to develop the GPU into an ASIC. Instead they made the GPU themselves, and what did we get? A pile of steaming crap that breaks down consistently. What a ton of BS.
Back to my point of modern-day games being mostly crap: I own a Wii, which has been collecting dust for 4 months because of the damn software being released on the Wii being complete trash, save for Sonic Unleashed, but I'm hesitant to get that, as I have the Homebrew Channel on the Wii, and don't want a System Update erasing it.
Another thing I hate: REGION CODES! God damn it, I had to to use the Homebrew Channel to get Gradius Rebirth for WiiWare, Gradius for the PC Engine, Gradius II for the PC Engine Super CD-ROM, and Salamander for the PC Engine for the following reasons:

1) Gradius Rebirth was taking too long to be released in North America.
2) Gradius, Salamander and Gradius II were NEVER released in North America. Well, Gradius II got a North American release, but it was too little too late.

And what pisses me off even more is Nintendo's enforcement of these region codes through System Updates. I got so pissed off I told myself the last 2 Wii games I'll ever buy are HeatSeeker and Sonic Unleashed and disconnected my Wii from the Internet in protest. I mean, this is seriously retarded. This is also not the Nintendo I know. Sorry, but I'm gonna be ditching them soon if they don't smarten up.

[TheEdge]

Well, the sixth generation brought us new series like Ratchet and Clank, and Devil May Cry, and a few others. This generation is just them getting prettier and being whored out.

Guitar Hero, Devil May Cry, any thing from Nintendo and Sony, are being whored to death.

There are a few Diamonds in the rough, Crackdown, LittleBig Planet, Dead Rising, Fallout 3, Far Cry 2, Dead Space are all good examples.

Prettier and whored out is a perfect way to say it.

Also Dead Space was a wonderful game.

Fallout 3 on the other hand, well lets just say I and every other Fallout Series fan is personally insulted by it. Beautiful game but this is not Fallout.

[NeoVamp]

Another thing I hate: REGION CODES!


You know what sucks more? living in a PAL country and getting a VC rom that plays at 50hz.

Fucking Nintendo doesn't know how much it hurts to play a PAL rom after getting a 60hz switch on all my consoles,
but then again.. I had this friend once who got all pissy when i spoke to him about 50/60hz switches,
he was all like "pfff i'll play the game as it was intended to run!"
so i told him how the game is supposed to be played at 60hz and he brushed it off with some lame excuse.

I guess thats the people who Nintendo is aiming at, the ones without a brain.

I should really mess around with my Wii sometime, get the homebrew channel and shit,
because right now its (like yours) also collecting dust.

though that might be more because i just don't care about gaming anymore,
even my Megadrive seems to be about collecting these days.

Remember.. remember when we used to love games? :(

[chrisbid]

video games have suffered from several bouts of stagnation over the years. its amazing that this industry that requires constant innovation to stay in business has been able to grow as much as it has for the past three decades. motion sensing control schemes seem to be the new innovation of this generation, but there doesnt seem to be enough refinement to make any of the motion sensing games feel like anything beyond a gimmick. WiiSports was amazing, but two years later, nothing seems to have built on its momentum.

[TheEdge]

I have really noticed a backlash from fans. I sense a whole form of video game nihilism out there. I think thats why sites like this and some old consoles have had life pumped back into them. Old School gamers want nothing to do with this generation.

[richardavies]

If im honest with myself, I think I just have a rose tinted view on retro games as the master system/mega drive era are the happiest parts of my child hood. Really though looking back now a large portion of the games have aged horribly and they had as much depth as a kiddie pool. Storys were non existant. Perhaps due to hardware restraints but Games either consisted of a mammal of some sort jumping on things heads or an identikit schmup, which frankly compared to worlds i've seen and experienced and characters and ideas i've seen on newer games frankly blow. Games last longer due to multiplayer modes and as such you get alot more for your money. (especially since I can remember paying more than todays games for some big mega drive releases).Games with the sort of originality like world of goo or Vib ribbon or Shadow of the colossus were non-existant back in the day.
I think the reason why I spend as much time as I do looking back at games is a simple reason really. I've been playing them for over 20 yrs now and tried thousands upon thousands of games. Probably the same as most of you guys. I just don't personally see anymore how after seein so many different games and genre's how im supposed to get exicted with new games really. I mean how many more ideas can there be?

[chrisbid]

i think the growth of importance of storylines have been a negative to gaming. a game should be a game, a test of skill and strategy, not an interactive story. the absolute best gaming stories feel about as good as the cheese known as star wars

[Christuserloeser]

And thanks for pin-pointing RE4's origin - I was trying to think of what games might have inspired it, and I supposed Tomb Raider without the platforming is about as close as it gets.

I think it's basically a Zelda: OoT clone, but most games are, actually.

[Ace]

You know what sucks more? living in a PAL country and getting a VC rom that plays at 50hz.

Aye, I've experimented to see just how bad games play in 50Hz, and let me tell you, it's NOT PLEASANT. What would it have taken Nintendo to recode the games for 50Hz? Please explain.


but then again.. I had this friend once who got all pissy when i spoke to him about 50/60hz switches,
he was all like "pfff i'll play the game as it was intended to run!"
so i told him how the game is supposed to be played at 60hz and he brushed it off with some lame excuse.

It's like my father said when I was 16, he kept telling me to leave everything the way it was meant to be. That's lame. And that guy is just a total dumb@#^, I'm sorry to say(not my father, your friend). What crap.


I should really mess around with my Wii sometime, get the homebrew channel and shit,
because right now its (like yours) also collecting dust.

Please do. You'll have a much better experience.


Remember.. remember when we used to love games? :(

Oh, damn, during the 5th and 6th generations, that when I was craziest for video games(and a little into the 7th generation, though I've backtracked all the way to the 2nd generation after I've started to build up a console collection). Though now, I seem to be stuck in the 4th generation because that's when I believe video games were at their best.

[MrMatthews]

Although I don't agree with many of the points made in this thread (I think some people have some unfair expectations of current-gen and/or an unrealistic perception of how things operated during past generations), I have my own criticisms of the Seventh Generation of Gaming.

I think the leap from Gen 6 to Gen 7 was made with the smallest amount of advancement than any other evolution, from a visual AND gameplay standpoint.

Remember how amazed we all were when, after spending so much time with our NESs and SMSs, the first screen shots of the 16-bit systems were unveiled?

In my own mind, I compare the 32-bit age to the old Atari/Intellivision era. Yes, it looked like ass, but it was technically amazing. Despite the fact that the graphics and control of many of those early 3D games are almost unbearably primitive by today's standards, no one can deny the incredible evolution of the industry.

The 6th generation also marked a significant step forward. Developers took what they learned from the previous generation and began to "nail it" more and more consistently. With most of the kinks of working with a brand-new medium more or less ironed out, more and more focus was put on refining the gameplay. And the games looked amazing.

The visual difference between this latest crop of games and the last is much more subtle, however. When I first saw the games being played, I didn't think they looked any better than what I was used to on the GameCube or the PS2.

There weren't any major hiccups in the 6th generation, so there weren't too many improvements to be made in the 7th. The 360 and PS3 can't really do much that their immediate predecessors couldn't do. The most notable advancements to the hardware seem to be mostly peripheral, not having a whole lot to do with games directly.

As was said earlier, there are really only so many ideas (the same idea applies to books and movies, as well). It seems that developers used up a lot of the REALLY good concepts in previous generations, so with few exceptions, all there is left to do is build on existing concepts.

But I like to think that if a game was great once, it's worth playing again. Really innovative, fresh ideas are becoming more and more scarce, but I think it's unfair to say (or imply) that the games themselves aren't fun anymore.

Unless there is some huge shift in the industry in the next couple years, I think the 8th generation will be even less impressive. Like I said, the truly original ideas are all but completely used up. I think the next logical step is to increase the level of immersion for the gamer (a step that I would say has been spearheaded by Nintendo).

[TheEdge]

Today, hardware cycles and the video game industry itself are becoming too commercialized for some of the more hardcore gamers. Some believe that the industry has sold out and the idea of fun gameplay has been replaced with fast profits. It's tough to argue with that logic given the state of affairs in 2008.


http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-10037723-17.html

[MrMatthews]

Well, the quick cash-grabs and shovelware was always there, but I think it's safe to say that the industry is more profitable now than ever, and as a result we have seen a marked increase in lazy developers who make a game purely based on the fact that they know it will sell well regardless of its quality. But that trend started long ago.

[chrisbid]

i believe there is a very real possibiliity there will not be an 8th generation game console

with the economy the way it is, and sony and ms losing money on their game divisions, it is difficult to envision either company investing the money needed in R&D to develop yet another gaming platform with even fewer returns as the jump from gen 6 to gen 7 (tangent: games presented in HD as a standard is probably the most significant addition this generation)

with downloadable content looming on the horizon, and wireless controllers the norm, i can see future televisions shipping with a game machine preinstalled. sony or microsoft may want to license their current platforms for such an endeavor rather than take any more risks with faulty or expensive hardware

i can also see MS or Sony selling or spinning off their game divisions into independant game companies

either way, i think the current 5 year cycles for video games are all but dead
(tangent 2, i do see a wii hd though)

[chrisbid]

Well, the quick cash-grabs and shovelware was always there, but I think it's safe to say that the industry is more profitable now than ever, and as a result we have seen a marked increase in lazy developers who make a game purely based on the fact that they know it will sell well regardless of its quality. But that trend started long ago.


i would call that a pillar of the gaming industry

pac-man for the 2600 anyone?

[TheEdge]

The gaming industry has taken a nose dive. I wouldnt be surprised in this volatile economic setting if we see a new "Video Game Crash of 2009" because of the horrendous and mostly boring titles brought out. I mean I saw a video on the web (which I can't freakin remember what the hell its called and its bothing the hell out of me but anyway) where one of these analysts say that video games are getting so expensive to produce that you have to choose between if you want to spend your budget on graphics, storyline, or fun / replayable factor. I mean it seems like its more affected by the bottom line then ever before. I think that jerk Bernie Stolar said it the best in my quote above.
I just don’t understand why people make product that’s not fun. That’s the only thing that anybody wants. Why build a store?

Edit: Also one of these guys said that PS3 / XBOX360 want to be more a multimedia platform then a gaming console. Meaning that they want their users to watch movies, surfing the web, and things of that effect on them. He said that this is a very bad idea that may blow up in the console developers faces. I mean why the hell do people want to do this if almost everyones house has 2-3 computers already with cable modems ready to go? Why would I want to surf the internet with my console if I have a computer sitting next to me?

[MrMatthews]

Exactly, Chris.

The sad fact that many people need to face is that, regardless of how wholesome and pure your memories are of playing those older games, the ONLY reason for their existence was to MAKE MONEY.

I'm pretty sure that the underlining goal for just about every developer/producer is to spend only as much money as it will take to draw consumer attention. Obviously, licensed games already have the benefit of name-recognition, so developers don't need to work as hard as a atido creating something new.

Take Miyamoto. I doubt very seriously that he designs games with the profit in mind. But the folks writing his check most CERTAINLY do.

For every pure idea out there, every wide-eyed rookie that cares only about getting his/her game made without regard to the money spent or earned, there is a corporate entity that ultimately decides whether or not such a project is marketable.

[TheEdge]

Exactly, Chris.

The sad fact that many people need to face is that, regardless of how wholesome and pure your memories are of playing those older games, the ONLY reason for their existence was to MAKE MONEY.

I'm pretty sure that the underlining goal for just about every developer/producer is to spend only as much money as it will take to draw consumer attention. Obviously, licensed games already have the benefit of name-recognition, so developers don't need to work as hard as a atido creating something new.

Take Miyamoto. I doubt very seriously that he designs games with the profit in mind. But the folks writing his check most CERTAINLY do.

For every pure idea out there, every wide-eyed rookie that cares only about getting his/her game made without regard to the money spent or earned, there is a corporate entity that ultimately decides whether or not such a project is marketable.

I really don't think that it has anything to do with our "fond memories" what it has to do is with price, entertainment value, and quality. I chose not to buy any current gen' systems not because I am living in the past clutching my Dreamcast and Genesis. I didn't buy them because I could spend the money on something much better, which I did. Instead of running out and buying PS3 / Xbox360 / Wii I bought a new computer.

I am really starting to believe that many people that bought these systems are just rationalizing their purchase or should I say waste of money.

[MrMatthews]

The gaming industry has taken a nose dive. I wouldnt be surprised in this volatile economic setting if we see a new "Video Game Crash of 2009" because of the horrendous and mostly boring titles brought out. I mean I saw a video on the web (which I can't freakin remember what the hell its called and its bothing the hell out of me but anyway) where one of these analysts say that video games are getting so expensive to produce that you have to choose between if you want to spend your budget on graphics, storyline, or fun / replayable factor

That's a valid point, but I doubt we'll see another crash like in the 80's. For one thing, things were a lot different then. Atari had a lot of very poor business practices that simply aren't in place today.

And whether or not the majority of today's games are "boring," the fact is that quality games are still being produced, and people are buying them regardless.

I agree with what you said about development costs, though. They can only go so high before a profit is impossible, which will no doubt start some kind of domino effect.

But even if some people crash and burn, there will always be a couple others that will turn a work the failure of others to their advantage.

[NeoVamp]

Imagine if they all decided to just stay on the xbox360/ps3/wii for 10 years,
hell nobody would have to buy new consoles and they could really learn how
to make the games look excellent without having to rely on better cpu/gpu's all the time.

Remember Donkey Kong Country? hell that game looked unreal on the Snes at the time,
but they did it!

same with the Genesis, i recently purchased Jurassic Park The Lost World from ebay,
and daaaaaaaaamn thats some nice color use, same with Ristar and other games from that time.

dear vg companies, stop focusing on the latest tech and bring out good games.

imagine if they just stopped making new consoles, and we'd get classic games like Megaman 9 via download,
and new games in the store.

then in 10 years we'll just make the "next gen" leap and it will amaze us,
because right now we're just going like.. oh yeah.. looks like ps2.. but.. sharper.. oh yeah amazing really :|

[Elusive]

Imagine if they all decided to just stay on the xbox360/ps3/wii for 10 years,
hell nobody would have to buy new consoles and they could really learn how
to make the games look excellent without having to rely on better cpu/gpu's all the time.

Remember Donkey Kong Country? hell that game looked unreal on the Snes at the time,
but they did it!

same with the Genesis, i recently purchased Jurassic Park The Lost World from ebay,
and daaaaaaaaamn thats some nice color use, same with Ristar and other games from that time.

dear vg companies, stop focusing on the latest tech and bring out good games.

imagine if they just stopped making new consoles, and we'd get classic games like Megaman 9 via download,
and new games in the store.

then in 10 years we'll just make the "next gen" leap and it will amaze us,
because right now we're just going like.. oh yeah.. looks like ps2.. but.. sharper.. oh yeah amazing really :|

That's not really a fair comparison. Mega Drive games got bigger and bigger as the console aged - I think Ristar is almost four times the MEGA POWER of Sonic the Hedgehog, for example. It doesn't alter the capability of the machine, of course (besides games like Virtua Racing and Star Fox on the Super NES), but bigger, cheaper ROM space = more games.

Funnily enough, some modern retail games can interact with downloadable additional content (think how Banjo-Kazooie Nuts & Bolts for the 360 interacts with the original Banjo-Kazooie XBLA downloadable game, for example). So we're only just now revisiting the idea that you can expand and increase the possibility of a game beyond that on the disc, which I think is brilliant. Entirely new storyline for GTA IV this year!

[NeoVamp]

That's not really a fair comparison. Mega Drive games got bigger and bigger as the console aged

No thats not what i meant, i meant to say to the longer a console lives the more programmers get familiar with it,
thus resulting in better looking games that also play better.

every damn console generation you hear the same crap "its difficult to program for, its architecture is different, we don't like how this works" etc etc.

but if they for once stop focusing on the future and try to get everything out of a console..

I don't know about the rest of you but i would have prefered some more
Donkey Kong Country like games instead of those crappy N64 launch games.

Same with the 32X, it was so new that the first thing we got was crappy launch shit,
imagine what could have been done had they actually bothered to develop for it.

but oh nooooo can't have that now can we, lets just jump ship to a faster console
so "current fps game" runs in a higher res.

Ted! is that game ready yet? we're about to jump ship to the PS4 and we gotta get this game out of the door!

Ted : but I'm still working on it! ;_;

hurry up Ted, we don't wanna be the last company developing for a dead console, think of what people would say!

http://www.sega-16.com/forum/images/icons/yuck.gif

[MrMatthews]

That's exactly what they're thinking, I bet. The majority of current-gen gamers are dying to get their hands on the next console, and everyone is racing to give it to them.

That, and quite possibly a belief that not having new hardware on the market on a regular basis will lead to another crash, perhaps?

Bottom line: the stereotypical modern gamer is a moron.

In my eyes, at least.

I can't help but envision every one of them as that idiot that Tanegashima posted a while back. That "PS Triple" guy.

[TheEdge]

Times of London reports that the PlayStation maker will unveil "sacred-cow-slaying" changes after this week's Las Vegas electronics convention.


The 2009 Consumer Electronics Show is just around the corner, with proceedings kicking off with Wednesday evening's keynote by Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer. The following morning, Sony CEO Sir Howard Stringer will take the stage to announce his plans for the coming year--plans that, according to the Times of London, may be drastic indeed.



Citing "company sources," the Times says that "sweeping" and "sacred-cow-slaying" changes may be in the offing at Sony. Specifically, the venerable British newspaper says that Stringer will likely expand on the 16,000 job cuts that the company announced in December, and may announce changes that heavily impact its Japanese operations as well.
Indeed, sources close to the Welsh-born CEO, the first Westerner to head Tokyo-based Sony, say that he has been clashing with the company's "entrenched management" in Japan since he took over the company in 2005. One of the first casualties of that internecine battle was Ken Kutaragi, the so-called "Father of the PlayStation."
In late 2006, the company announced that the often-outspoken head of Sony Computer Entertainment would be replaced by Kaz Hirai, CEO of Sony Computer Entertainment America. Though the move was portrayed as voluntary, later reports pointed to Stringer's clashes with an "uncommunicative" Kutaragi as a factor, as were the multibillion-dollar losses incurred in launching the PlayStation 3. Kutaragi would leave the company entirely seven months later.
The Times report does not mention SCE or the PlayStation brand, despite recent reports that Sony may break even on PS3 production costs this year. GameSpot will have more on Sony and Stringer's keynote from CES 2009 later this week.

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6202693.html?tag=latestheadlines;title;1

Further vindication, A company can't lose 2 billion without throwing some people overboard.

[MrMatthews]

If Sony drops out of the console business, will that signify the end of days?

Nope. Nintendo and Microsoft will be there to bathe in the spoils. They might even come up on some previously PS exclusives, as well!

I hope this happens!

[TheEdge]

Sony must fall so humanity can be free.

I never cared too much for Microsoft either.

[MrMatthews]

Same here. I resented the PS2 and the XBox for being so excruciatingly trendy.

[TheEdge]

I hated them because they had no arcade / video game roots to them. They were just monopolies who just wanted the peice of the pie at the expense of quality.

[MrMatthews]

Same for Sony? I think if it weren't for Nintendo, they wouldn't be in the game business at all.

[TheEdge]

Why is that?

[MrMatthews]

Sony had worked with Nintendo during the SNES years (I think Sony made the sound chip???).

From that relationship, they worked together to create a CD add-on for the SNES called the "Play Station."

After Nintendo bailed on Sony and went with Philips, Sony took the logical step: they released the Playstation themselves.

[TheEdge]

Ohhhh

Thats interesting. Well I guess Nintendo burning people left and right finally created a monster.

[chrisbid]

If Sony drops out of the console business, will that signify the end of days?

Nope. Nintendo and Microsoft will be there to bathe in the spoils. They might even come up on some previously PS exclusives, as well!

I hope this happens!


the playstation brand is too valuable to be dropped completely

[TheEdge]

the playstation brand is too valuable to be dropped completely

Throw it off a bridge.

[MrMatthews]

Too bad a Playstation-sized hole in the market share wouldn't bring anyone back.

I'd love to see Nintendo and Sega going head to head again.

[TheEdge]

Yea, a lot of people are going to be disappointed on 9/9/09.

Sega wouldn't even know where to start trying to getting back into hardware nor do they have the cash.

[Melf]

I have both an Xbox 360 and a PS3. I LOVE my 360 to death (true story, it's died 2 times already!), and I play it daily. Best purchase in a long time game-wise. The PS3 is really slow in getting games that interest me, but there's enough to play right now, and it's a decent little secondary system. The Wii just doesn't interest me at all, and I sold mine after about a year. I don't miss it.

This generation has had some truly excellent games, and anyone who thinks otherwise has missed out on some great times. I can understand the shift in the market turning some people off, but to say that there's nothing worth playing or innovative this generation is just nuts.

[chrisbid]

Throw it off a bridge.


sell it to microsoft, spin it off

[TheEdge]

I have both an Xbox 360 and a PS3. I LOVE my 360 to death (true story, it's died 2 times already!), and I play it daily. Best purchase in a long time game-wise. The PS3 is really slow in getting games that interest me, but there's enough to play right now, and it's a decent little secondary system. The Wii just doesn't interest me at all, and I sold mine after about a year. I don't miss it.

This generation has had some truly excellent games, and anyone who thinks otherwise has missed out on some great times. I can understand the shift in the market turning some people off, but to say that there's nothing worth playing or innovative this generation is just nuts.

There is that "nut" word again.

I like my new Dell Inspiron 530s much better, thank you.

Not only can I play new PC titles on it but I can play old PC titles as well. Also I can serf the web, play roms, talk on ventrilo, print, type, and do all the things that the current gen can do and more. Also it hasn't broke 2 times. So I guess thats a plus.
:cool:

[j_factor]

I have a Wii and a PS3, and I enjoy both systems. I have little interest in a 360, due to the failure rate, and the fact that only a few 360 exclusives tickle my fancy.

[MrMatthews]

Actually, I think some of the most innovative software went to the Wii. I'm playing Zack & Wiki right now, and loving it!

Too bad you have to sift through shoddy PS2 ports with clumsy motion controls and a barrage of lame Grandma-friendly games to get to the good stuff, though.

Hopefully Nintendo makes the most of the next three years to keep me buying Wii games.

[TheEdge]

I heard you can plug in the Gamecube controller into the Wii. Is that true?

[MrMatthews]

Yep. The Wii does everything that the GameCube did, other than connect to the GBA player

[TheEdge]

Thats good, I think the one reason I would rent a Wii is to play Umbrella Chronicles.

[MrMatthews]

Funny. I was almost expecting you to ask what good games were available for the Wii, and I would have recommended that one to you.

Resident Evil + House of the Dead = 8 fun hours!

[TheEdge]

It definitely looks like a great game.

[MrMatthews]

Ehhh ...

I'd give it a solid B.

The best part of the game is playing through the original Resident Evil section, and seeing the mansion EXACTLY as you remember it, only in full 3D.

And there are bonus missions that you unlock, so you get to play as Wesker escaping from the mansion and Ada escaping from Raccoon City.

but it's all over pretty quickly. A perfect rental.

[TheEdge]

How did Wesker escape from the Mansion?


Also

Sony's Ps3 Disappointment Timeline Continued

http://www.astahost.com/info.php/sonys-ps3-disappointment-timeline-continued_t14884.html

[MrMatthews]

Well, the scenario just takes you backwards through the mansion. All the while, Wesker is talking about how powerful he feels after injecting himself with the T-virus. Oh, and Lisa Trevor is chasing him all the way to the front door.

Speaking of Resident Evil, how does the control scheme work for the PC build of RE4? Do you control Leon's targeting reticule with the mouse?

[TheEdge]

I have a PC controller thats looks like a knock-off Playstation one with no analogs. I picked it up at Target for $9.99

It works great, I use the D-Pad and the other buttons and triggers to aim and fire. RE:4 does have a mouse aim option but I haven't tried it. I also have RE 1, 2, and 3 on PC. They all play just like the console games with the PC controller.

[TheEdge]

The 16-bit era is when I really became a gamer (I was already an adult by then) so I have a great deal of affection for that era of games, but I'd say I'm most attached to my PS2 era games. The level of story telling and the level of graphics power that could really draw you in hook, line and sinker really blossommed at that point, at least for the types of games I play and enjoy the most. It really ramped up during the Saturn and PS1 era, but hit the big time with the PS2 in my opinion. Funny thing is, I don't really see where it has advanced any with the newer generation of systems, in fact,

I'd say the PS3/360/Wii era has taken a step backward in both story telling and gotta-play-that-game-so-bad-it-will-make-me-buy-a-new-console impact. Which probably why my PS2 is the most modern system I own.

^ AH-HA!

[MrMatthews]

"Ah-hah" what? I don't know if anyone actually completely disagreed with you. Even I agreed to some degree.

But haven't you seen sega's latest games on the Wii? Madworld seems pretty original(ish)

[TheEdge]

I was just soaking in how my thesis is ringing true throughout threads.

But yes, Madworld is a good step forward even though I could criticize it for being a wanna be Smash-TV with Sin City overtones but thats OK.

Sega has really impressed me with their recent game line up and I hope they continue with these edgy ideas because that reminds people of the old Sega we all grew up with.

[MrMatthews]

Well, you are finding people who agree with you, so I guess that's something. But my perception is that there are less people unsatisfied with this generation than the other way around.

Why don't you just write up a quick poll, asking that very question ("are you satisfied with your 360/PS3/Wii purchase?")

I'd be very interested to see the results and discussing them.

[TheEdge]

I guess I can say I have first person experience in being disappointed now that my sister got a Wii a little while ago. So I'm not just blowing smoke anymore, I truly have "hands-on dissatisfaction!"

:)

But that Poll thing is a good idea. You should make one cause I have no clue how to.

[MrMatthews]

LOL - yes, you do. But i'll see if I can write one up. But IMO it needs to address only the people who have actually bought a current-gen system.

And what games did you play? i think the Wii is the most innovative console available right now, both in it's design and it's available software.

[Metal_Sonic]

i think the Wii is the most innovative console available right now, both in it's design and it's available software.

I'm surprised you didnt say it was the DS.

[Nicpezer]

Sega has really impressed me with their recent game line up and I hope they continue with these edgy ideas because that reminds people of the old Sega we all grew up with.
Sega didn't develop that game, Platinum games did, which has many former employees from clover studios, the folks that made games like God Hand, Veiwtiful Joe, and Okami.

I agree this generation does have that rehashed feeling. Some games just don't improve on old flaws or if they do it's not significant enough to stand out. I have played some great titles but that was only last year, the previous years I experienced some games with good concepts but as a whole it never felt as fun as the least gen stuff.

Nowadays the developers seem to focus on multiplayer, FPS games, or the shovelware that keeps coming out on the Wii. Sure the Wii is innovative but so few games actually feel that way. Wii Fit, Wii Music, no thanks, too shallow, I've seen games like Donkey Kong and Pitfall that have more depth than those titles. There are only a handful of good titles on most of the consoles depending on preference.

I think the reason why I feel that everything is rehashed nowadays is b/c I've been playing games for 20 years so I'll never see anything that really surprises me anymore. That still doesn't mean I can't have fun though.

[TheEdge]

Sega didn't develop that game, Platinum games did, which has many former employees from clover studios, the folks that made games like God Hand, Veiwtiful Joe, and Okami.

I agree this generation does have that rehashed feeling. Some games just don't improve on old flaws or if they do it's not significant enough to stand out. I have played some great titles but that was only last year, the previous years I experienced some games with good concepts but as a whole it never felt as fun as the least gen stuff.

Nowadays the developers seem to focus on multiplayer, FPS games, or the shovelware that keeps coming out on the Wii. Sure the Wii is innovative but so few games actually feel that way. Wii Fit, Wii Music, no thanks, too shallow, I've seen games like Donkey Kong and Pitfall that have more depth than those titles. There are only a handful of good titles on most of the consoles depending on preference.

I think the reason why I feel that everything is rehashed nowadays is b/c I've been playing games for 20 years so I'll never see anything that really surprises me anymore. That still doesn't mean I can't have fun though.

I know that. We all know they are not developed by Sega but they are going to have the Sega logo on it. So it's part of "Sega's Lineup" :daze:


I agree with your other statements though. Somethings missing.

[MrMatthews]

I think what it is is that the industry (among the consoles, at least) is in a comfort zone. I think 3D technology peaked (to some degree) last generation, so that's when developers went nuts with finally bringing refined 3D play mechanics and artistic expression together. After the growing pains of the PSX/N64 generation, games now looked and played fantastic.

This generation is just a minor evolution of the last. Games look even better, but they play the same, because there hasn't really been a need to make any improvements.

However, I think as we get deeper into this economic slump (with more and more developers going bankrupt), I think we'll see more of them trying to push the envelope and really bring their "A" games to make some bonafide hits. Developers like EA really seem to be trying lately. So I predict that this generation will end better than it began.

[jerry coeurl]

I agree. There is nothing that interests me out on any of the current consoles, save for some stuff you can get off of Xbox Live Arcade (Rez HD, SotN, etc.), which are all just older games anyway.

The last "new" game I played was NiGHTS: Journey of Dreams if I had any faith left in SEGA's ability to make a decent game it was flushed down the pipes along with the rest of that massive turd.

Am I the only one who feels like the Wii is a complete scam? I guess it's cool that Nintendo's back on top, but they made it there with the most gimmicky console this side of the Virtual Boy. Am I wrong in saying it's essentially the same as a GameCube, just with added motion sensor controls (whoop-de-freakin' crap!)? I guess the "innovation" is there, but they don't seem to be doing anything interesting.

The only system out now that I think is worthy of a purchase is the DS, and even I sold mine a few months ago because I hadn't bought any new games for it in over a year and a half. I think maybe I just have a mental block against anything released post-DC. :?

[MrMatthews]

The DS is in my opinion the best system of this generation.

[Elusive]

This generation is just a minor evolution of the last. Games look even better, but they play the same, because there hasn't really been a need to make any improvements.

Disagree (I think). Yes, we're still slaying fantasy creatures and shooting vaguely brown people - but with technology increases also comes the ability to do completely new things. Like the brilliant Spooky gunship mission in Call of Duty 4, for example.

Instead, I think we've moved beyond 'bolting on another graphics chip' console design, and more towards 'better the gaming experience overall'. For example, now that we've got consoles that can be attached to the Internet 24/7, we can patch games! we can download new content for our existing games! we can download entirely new games altogether! we can play against other people and call them faggots from our sofas without them being in the same country!

[Chilly Willy]

The idea of the thread is nonsense. You're looking at the end result of more than a decade of games and decrying new consoles because they haven't surpassed it in approximately one year. MORONS!! :bang:

Post this kind of thread after the latest generation is AT LEAST five years old. See, you've forgotten the most basic rule of all: 99% of everything is GARBAGE. After five years, you get a handful of titles that are truly innovative, as some of the titles on lists posted in the thread show. But since 99% of everything is garbage, it takes time for them to build up. It's been NINE YEARS since the release of the PS2 in Japan. Compare the "innovative" titles for the PS3 after the same amount of time has elapsed or you're just being retarded. :shame:

Ditto for XBox/360 and NGC/Wii.

[InternalPrimate]

I think what it is is that the industry (among the consoles, at least) is in a comfort zone. I think 3D technology peaked (to some degree) last generation, so that's when developers went nuts with finally bringing refined 3D play mechanics and artistic expression together. After the growing pains of the PSX/N64 generation, games now looked and played fantastic.

This generation is just a minor evolution of the last. Games look even better, but they play the same, because there hasn't really been a need to make any improvements.

However, I think as we get deeper into this economic slump (with more and more developers going bankrupt), I think we'll see more of them trying to push the envelope and really bring their "A" games to make some bonafide hits. Developers like EA really seem to be trying lately. So I predict that this generation will end better than it began.

I think this theory is partly why the Wii has been so successful. Such a major leap in graphics was made in the transition from PS1/N64 to PS2/GC/Xbox that the latest leap feels smaller by comparison. And because it feels smaller, people have seemingly excused the Wii for being "a Gamecube with motion controls".

That being said, I also agree with Elusive in that the advancement in technology has allowed for better - more polished - gameplay. It'll be exciting to see where the industry goes from here. I'm predicting more motion controls though :)

[MrMatthews]

Disagree (I think).


Of course you do. :roll:

Let me harken back to something I said originally in this thread: I don't need game systems to re-invent the wheel each generation. What some people call "stagnation," I call "re-using what we got right the last time around." If something isn't broken, it doesn't necessarily need to be fixed. Game mechanics shared by several hundred games can still be fun.

[Metal_Sonic]

The idea of the thread is nonsense. You're looking at the end result of more than a decade of games and decrying new consoles because they haven't surpassed it in approximately one year. MORONS!! :bang:

Post this kind of thread after the latest generation is AT LEAST five years old. See, you've forgotten the most basic rule of all: 99% of everything is GARBAGE. After five years, you get a handful of titles that are truly innovative, as some of the titles on lists posted in the thread show. But since 99% of everything is garbage, it takes time for them to build up. It's been NINE YEARS since the release of the PS2 in Japan. Compare the "innovative" titles for the PS3 after the same amount of time has elapsed or you're just being retarded. :shame:

Ditto for XBox/360 and NGC/Wii.

+1

[jerry coeurl]

And because it feels smaller, people have seemingly excused the Wii for being "a Gamecube with motion controls".


That's what it seems like to me, though. I mean the console itself really isn't that much more powerful, is it?

Anyway, I excused the Wii because it hasn't (as of yet) released any titles of interest to me. Same for 360 and PS3. I could care less about amazing graphics; my biggest issue with the Wii (aside from a lack of games that I care to play) is that it's touted "revolutionary" control scheme hasn't really been implemented in any way that is really that impressive. So what you're left with (imo) is an overclocked GC with gimmicky controls. It seems like the whole basis of its design is for something that I could really care less about.

[InternalPrimate]

That's what it seems like to me, though. I mean the console itself really isn't that much more powerful, is it?

Anyway, I excused the Wii because it hasn't (as of yet) released any titles of interest to me. Same for 360 and PS3. I could care less about amazing graphics; my biggest issue with the Wii (aside from a lack of games that I care to play) is that it's touted "revolutionary" control scheme hasn't really been implemented in any way that is really that impressive. So what you're left with (imo) is an overclocked GC with gimmicky controls. It seems like the whole basis of its design is for something that I could really care less about.


I'd agree that the mass majority of games are gimmicky, but there are a few that I do consider "revolutionary". I really prefer pointer controls to analog control, not just in FPS, but in 3rd person games as well. Perfect example being RE4. I love how RE5 plays, but isn't even close to being optimal, which I thought RE4 was for the Wii.

So I guess you could say, when done right, I think IR control is revolutionary. Motion control though, moving the controller to replicate a button press, is gimmicky. At best, the Wii can achieve a sort of arcade-like experience (ExciteTruck, Beat. Trip Beat, Marble Saga, Madworld), at worst it can fail on every level (Marvel Ultimate Alliance).

[TheEdge]

Instead, I think we've moved beyond 'bolting on another graphics chip' console design, and more towards 'better the gaming experience overall'. For example, now that we've got consoles that can be attached to the Internet 24/7, we can patch games! we can download new content for our existing games!

Very true, I didn't even think of that.

Since many new games are pretty much PC game shoveled on to consoles we see that more and more of them have glitches and bugs. Now we can use the finally fine tuned console internet connection to fix and expand on the games we already have.

Good Point.

[Nicpezer]

Instead, I think we've moved beyond 'bolting on another graphics chip' console design, and more towards 'better the gaming experience overall'. For example, now that we've got consoles that can be attached to the Internet 24/7, we can patch games! we can download new content for our existing games! we can download entirely new games altogether! we can play against other people and call them faggots from our sofas without them being in the same country!
Something I never realized until a few days ago was the nice addition of DLC. PCs have always had mods and expansions released for their games but consoles never really got that privilege. Now you have a whole new narrative like The Lost and Damned added to GTA4 with a narrative that I thought was better than the original game. Then you have additions made for Fallout 3, which lengthen the game a little bit. On the PS3 you have Little Big Planet where people are getting really creative with the tools they can use to make levels of their own, and at times pay an homage to some classics. The arcade, PSN, and Wii ware/VC are also great additions as well.


Post this kind of thread after the latest generation is AT LEAST five years old. See, you've forgotten the most basic rule of all: 99% of everything is GARBAGE. After five years, you get a handful of titles that are truly innovative, as some of the titles on lists posted in the thread show. But since 99% of everything is garbage, it takes time for them to build up. It's been NINE YEARS since the release of the PS2 in Japan. Compare the "innovative" titles for the PS3 after the same amount of time has elapsed or you're just being retarded.
I wouldn't exactly call some of the games released on the PS2 from 07 to the present innovative, some of the stuff is just the same shovelware on the Wii, some are on consoles of this generation, and the last bit are just JRPGs.

Sure by the end of the generation we might see some innovative titles, but I just compare some of the titles that came out during the first two years of the Game Cube, and PS2, to titles on the PS3 and the Wii in that same time span. There is only two titles that stand out on the PS3 and one on the Wii, and it's a stretch.