Forum    News    Downloads    Saved Games


Sony and Nintendo.

<<

Kanadier

User avatar

Brewology Moderator
Brewology Moderator

Posts: 2190

Joined: July 20 2007

Location: British Columbia, Canada!

Thanks given: 2 times

Thanks received: 60 times

Post Sat Feb 05, 2011 7:12 am

Re: Sony and Nintendo.

irishdragon85 wrote: in my opinion the Wii is a success because it has brought more gamers into the fold than there was before.


Yeah, only for them to say "Why did I waste my money on this sh*t, I'm buying a PS3." :)
Image
<<

TheTyler0013

User avatar

Brewery Master
Brewery Master

Posts: 1105

Joined: October 23 2009

Location: I am a ninja, I pop in at certain times and locations.

Thanks given: 1

Thanks received: 9 times

Post Sat Feb 05, 2011 3:21 pm

Re: Sony and Nintendo.

Well for me Nintendo is fun cause i can relive my childhood a lot thru it. But for more hardcore I go with Xbox 360 and one in a blue moon PS3. Nintendo has the nostalgic hold on me that i love.
Image
Image
<<

Puncharger

Brew Guru
Brew Guru

Posts: 3966

Joined: February 03 2006

Location: Florida

Thanks given: 6 times

Thanks received: 10 times

Post Sun Feb 06, 2011 5:09 pm

Re: Sony and Nintendo.

I dont see why people say the Wii has bad graphics.

Bad Graphics is in my opinion a game, that tries to be detailed in terms of high polygon counts etc, and fails at it.( Prime Example )

While the Wii, never tried to be all that detailed anyway.

So it's not bad graphics the graphics are just "different"
Image
<<

Kanadier

User avatar

Brewology Moderator
Brewology Moderator

Posts: 2190

Joined: July 20 2007

Location: British Columbia, Canada!

Thanks given: 2 times

Thanks received: 60 times

Post Sun Feb 06, 2011 7:05 pm

Re: Sony and Nintendo.

So they get a free ride based on the law "If we try to make a sh*t console, we can't fail at making a console "?
Image
<<

crait

User avatar

Brewology Administrator
Brewology Administrator

Posts: 6488

Joined: August 11 2006

Location: Narnia!

Thanks given: 195 times

Thanks received: 46 times

Post Sun Feb 06, 2011 7:35 pm

Re: Sony and Nintendo.

Yeah, if a game is trying to look like it's very detailed but obviously can't be put onto a system to handle it, like Tony Hawk or Call of Duty on the DS, then they ruin the game with distracting graphical errors.
<<

gman

User avatar

Brewery Master
Brewery Master

Posts: 1132

Joined: May 24 2006

Location: alaska, its not cold

Thanks given: 0

Thanks received: 6 times

Post Sun Feb 06, 2011 9:09 pm

Re: Sony and Nintendo.

all games who put graphics 1st are way to ez, short, and not that fun
iv playd a lot of xbox games what have high graphic n they all was short and way to EZ and some was no fun at all
some of the Wii games iv play had less graphic then the Xbox n stuff but was a lot more fun, challenging and not as short
ʛᴟλאּ
Image
<<

patapon1499

User avatar

Brewer
Brewer

Posts: 65

Joined: February 03 2011

Location: Ivalice

Thanks given: 3 times

Thanks received: 2 times

Post Mon Feb 07, 2011 6:09 am

Re: Sony and Nintendo.

I have a wii but i dont ever play it
[img]http://C:\Documents%20and%20Settings\Administrator\My%20Documents\Downloads\poptartFINALTINY.gif[/img]

For this message the author patapon1499 has received thanks:
crait
<<

crait

User avatar

Brewology Administrator
Brewology Administrator

Posts: 6488

Joined: August 11 2006

Location: Narnia!

Thanks given: 195 times

Thanks received: 46 times

Post Mon Feb 07, 2011 10:11 am

Re: Sony and Nintendo.

gman, there is a difference between putting graphics first and realism first. Whenever a game tries to get realism into the mix with shotty, distracting graphics, that usually doesn't go over well.
<<

Kanadier

User avatar

Brewology Moderator
Brewology Moderator

Posts: 2190

Joined: July 20 2007

Location: British Columbia, Canada!

Thanks given: 2 times

Thanks received: 60 times

Post Mon Feb 07, 2011 2:53 pm

Re: Sony and Nintendo.

gotta agree with crait on this one.
Image
<<

gman

User avatar

Brewery Master
Brewery Master

Posts: 1132

Joined: May 24 2006

Location: alaska, its not cold

Thanks given: 0

Thanks received: 6 times

Post Mon Feb 07, 2011 9:19 pm

Re: Sony and Nintendo.

i know that but almost every game iv playd who have really good graphics really EZ(in my opinion)
ʛᴟλאּ
Image
<<

irishdragon85

User avatar

Experienced Brewer
Experienced Brewer

Posts: 397

Joined: November 13 2010

Location: Alabama

Thanks given: 16 times

Thanks received: 7 times

Post Mon Feb 07, 2011 11:13 pm

Re: Sony and Nintendo.

gman wrote:i know that but almost every game iv playd who have really good graphics really EZ(in my opinion)

you played Demon's Souls yet? that game has good graphics and is hard as hell i have problems with it and i'm playing the Noob class on there :P
Image
<<

gman

User avatar

Brewery Master
Brewery Master

Posts: 1132

Joined: May 24 2006

Location: alaska, its not cold

Thanks given: 0

Thanks received: 6 times

Post Tue Feb 08, 2011 12:51 am

Re: Sony and Nintendo.

irishdragon85 wrote:
gman wrote:i know that but almost every game iv playd who have really good graphics really EZ(in my opinion)

you played Demon's Souls yet? that game has good graphics and is hard as hell i have problems with it and i'm playing the Noob class on there :P

never heard of it
ʛᴟλאּ
Image
<<

DarkPacMan77

User avatar

Brewology Moderator
Brewology Moderator

Posts: 6201

Joined: January 10 2007

Location: Pac Land

Thanks given: 13 times

Thanks received: 17 times

Post Tue Feb 08, 2011 12:54 am

Re: Sony and Nintendo.

Gman is right. Look at the games with good graphics that exist today. I'll run through a few examples.

Gears of War 1 & 2: Short/ sometimes challenging.
Assassin's Creed series: Mostly repetitive, puzzle solving (getting places) is where the focus is.
Halo: Story has been weak since the first one. Easy. Now it's mostly multiplayer only.
Call of Duty: Same as Halo only it NEVER had a good story. cinematic, but not a good story.
Red Dead Redemption: Slower-paced Grand Theft Auto with all the faults of the GTA series.
Super Street Fighter 4: I absolutely LOVE Street Fighter games, even bad ones, but the newest two games, while being good fighting games, are more "Tekken" without 3d movement.
Final Fantasy 13: What a joke. Hit the X or A button through the whole game. That's it. Beautiful game... but you only use one button unless in a rare occasion where you have to change classes or what-not mid-battle, which is just kind of frustrating.

Now if you look at some of the games that dumbed down the graphics a bit to focus on gameplay... you see a little bit better of a quality of overall gaming experience, in my opinion.

Darksiders: Well-thought out. Well executed. Varied difficulty. Good character development.
Fallout 3/ New Vegas: Good, wholesome experience all around. A little weak on animations. There's some bad clipping here and there but it's thoroughly ignorable.
Devil May Cry: Difficult fights. Somewhat longer than most games.
Battlefield Bad Company 2: On consoles, the graphics aren't top quality, so I put it here. It's a solid game all-around even though some firefights in the campaign involve more of your teammates than you, the player.


Now, there's plenty of examples in each category, but there's few games that have had the graphics and the gameplay that I'd expect from this "next generation" of video gaming. I would say these games are a great combination of the two.

Metal Gear Solid 4: Amazing story. Amazing character-development. Fully featured with over 60 guns. Octocamo gives you tons of options for stealth. Enemy AI is great. Graphics are excellent.

Killzone 2: Somewhat weak on character-development, but the graphics are the best of any PS3 title (although Killzone 3 is upon us). Animations are TOP-NOTCH, as in, hitting a guy in the shin causes the proper flinch/ fall.

Anywho, I'll stop now. This is a long post. The main idea is that Gman is correct. Games that focus too heavily on graphics are usually short as can be, underdeveloped, glitchy, and not worthwhile for extended playing or replay value.

-DarkPacMan77-
Image
D3ViLsAdvocate wrote:Try shaking the salt harder onto your tongue.
<<

irishdragon85

User avatar

Experienced Brewer
Experienced Brewer

Posts: 397

Joined: November 13 2010

Location: Alabama

Thanks given: 16 times

Thanks received: 7 times

Post Tue Feb 08, 2011 1:06 am

Re: Sony and Nintendo.

PS3 exclusive JRPG gman even the head developer said that he had problems with the game and he designed the thing :P it's awesome i love it even though i have kinda put it back on the shelf for right now :P
Image
<<

gman

User avatar

Brewery Master
Brewery Master

Posts: 1132

Joined: May 24 2006

Location: alaska, its not cold

Thanks given: 0

Thanks received: 6 times

Post Tue Feb 08, 2011 1:34 am

Re: Sony and Nintendo.

DarkPacMan77 wrote:Gman is right. Look at the games with good graphics that exist today. I'll run through a few examples.

Gears of War 1 & 2: Short/ sometimes challenging.
Assassin's Creed series: Mostly repetitive, puzzle solving (getting places) is where the focus is.
Halo: Story has been weak since the first one. Easy. Now it's mostly multiplayer only.
Call of Duty: Same as Halo only it NEVER had a good story. cinematic, but not a good story.
Red Dead Redemption: Slower-paced Grand Theft Auto with all the faults of the GTA series.
Super Street Fighter 4: I absolutely LOVE Street Fighter games, even bad ones, but the newest two games, while being good fighting games, are more "Tekken" without 3d movement.
Final Fantasy 13: What a joke. Hit the X or A button through the whole game. That's it. Beautiful game... but you only use one button unless in a rare occasion where you have to change classes or what-not mid-battle, which is just kind of frustrating.

Now if you look at some of the games that dumbed down the graphics a bit to focus on gameplay... you see a little bit better of a quality of overall gaming experience, in my opinion.

Darksiders: Well-thought out. Well executed. Varied difficulty. Good character development.
Fallout 3/ New Vegas: Good, wholesome experience all around. A little weak on animations. There's some bad clipping here and there but it's thoroughly ignorable.
Devil May Cry: Difficult fights. Somewhat longer than most games.
Battlefield Bad Company 2: On consoles, the graphics aren't top quality, so I put it here. It's a solid game all-around even though some firefights in the campaign involve more of your teammates than you, the player.


Now, there's plenty of examples in each category, but there's few games that have had the graphics and the gameplay that I'd expect from this "next generation" of video gaming. I would say these games are a great combination of the two.

Metal Gear Solid 4: Amazing story. Amazing character-development. Fully featured with over 60 guns. Octocamo gives you tons of options for stealth. Enemy AI is great. Graphics are excellent.

Killzone 2: Somewhat weak on character-development, but the graphics are the best of any PS3 title (although Killzone 3 is upon us). Animations are TOP-NOTCH, as in, hitting a guy in the shin causes the proper flinch/ fall.

Anywho, I'll stop now. This is a long post. The main idea is that Gman is correct. Games that focus too heavily on graphics are usually short as can be, underdeveloped, glitchy, and not worthwhile for extended playing or replay value.

-DarkPacMan77-

:shock: :shock: :shock:
this is the 1st time *as far as i can remember* u say i was right abt somthing DPM
btw i love street fighter games to but SF4 was a joke and they should have stop halo at the 2nd game
and im a PC gamer now n days lol but i think Nintendo have some of the best games out there
ʛᴟλאּ
Image
PreviousNext

Return to General Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests

Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by ST Software for blacklist.org.