Grand Theft Auto IV. (2 Viewers)

[blakegman]

10/10 implies perfection.

I better not find a fault in this game.

 

[stazi]

it implies 'near perfection' according to a lot of ratings systems in video games. they say things like "it's as close to perfection as games are likely to come"

 

[blakegman]

i guess you could just view it as 9.99 rounded up.

its all semantics i guess.

 

[Supermodified]

As an owner of a Wii and a 360, I wholeheartedly agree with Stas.

The PS3 and 360 set the standard for the current generation in terms of features, power, online capabilities and, most importantly, gameplay advancements. In not catering to the normal gamer, and instead focusing on roping in the more casual gamers and families, the Wii inadvertently (or not, who knows what Nintendo planned) placed itself behind the other two consoles. Sure it had the innovative motion sensing controls, but the rest of the console was nothing special, and not considered that great a improvement over the GameCube.

The important thing to realise is that more power in a console doesn't just mean better visuals and effects, it allows developers to include features in their game that affect, and often improve, gameplay. Euphoria, which is featured in GTA IV, allows developers to program NPCs to react with the in-game world realistically, and without the need for the standard animation approach. Characters react to being pushed by stumbling and regaining their balance, as a real person would. If a character falls over a railing, it will try and grab on to save itself from plummeting to it's death. It's innovations like these that, while at first seem like purely cosmetic changes, actually affect gameplay. The thing is, implementing a middleware physics/animation system like this on a Wii game would be impossible, because of the amount of processing power it requires.

In the end, Wii is clinging on to it's initial Wiimote innovation, while the other consoles get access to brand new innovations that actually allow developers to create better gameplay, as opposed to stifling the developer's creativity with an unconventional control system. The whole point of breaking down games consoles into generations is to show where there was an improvement made by all of the big players, but ultimately, it just shows the time frame in which a set of consoles were released. If you look in the past, you'll see that not every console was up to the standard of other consoles in the same generation.

NES / Sega Master System

SNES / Sega MegaDrive / Other consoles that couldn't compete due to lack of games and failed gimmicks (CD-i)

N64 / Sega Saturn / Sony Playstation

GameCube / Sega Dreamcast / Sony Playstation 2 / Xbox

Wii / Sony Playstation 3 / Xbox 360


Also, bazookajoe, you said that you doesn't see the point in online leaderboards, yet at the same time you praise games like Donkey Kong and Pac-Man, games which can be memorised, and the whole point is to get the highest score. And when it comes to console exclusives, it doesn't really matter whether a console gets an exclusive game or not, it's just got to do with how many AAA titles a console has. And in the case of the Wii, it misses out on a lot of multi-platform games that are released on the 360 and the PS3.

I should probably go back to my assignment now.

 

[bazookajoe]

The problem is if some absolutely, unquestionably perfect game comes out in the near future. THEN WHAT

 

[blakegman]

Anyone know if a Tv which isn't HD but has a HDMI input, will my PS3 games play in High def ?

 

[bazookajoe]

While I agree with a lot of your post slava, I don't think Nintendo are clinging on to the wiimote. I think they were at first, but now games are coming out which doesn't rely on a supposed gimmick. I hardly consider it a gimmick in Twilight Princess either, I found it much better than playing Ocarina of Time or Windwaker. And then Smash Bros, which I think stas pointed out, had many of its developers not even wanting to include the wiimote as a control choice.

And like I've already pointed out with Donkey Kong and Pacman, it can't be memorised because even though the AI in both are so small, you can get a weird movement from a fireball or ghost and then you're fucked. And I obviously don't speak for everyone, but I just wanna finish the games, not risk it all my trying to achieve a perfect score.

Also I agree that we do miss some good multi-platform games, but the exclusives more than make up for it, and Nintendo is the best game developer of all time

 

[blakegman]

and Nintendo is the best game developer of all time

???!!?!?!??!?!?!?!?!

 

[bazookajoe]

Name one that's better?

 

[Azamakumar]

The best game since The Legend Of Zelda: Ocarina of Time.



omgomgogmogmogmogmogm

 

[Supermodified]

Acclaim

 

[bazookajoe]

Acclaim

lol

 

[blakegman]

EA sports.


























lol

 

[stazi]

Name one that's better?

Does recycling the same characters equate to a good developer? Well, in nintendo's case probably yes. However, also note that they didn't develop a lot of their good games they merely published them.

 

[stazi]

Anyone know if a Tv which isn't HD but has a HDMI input, will my PS3 games play in High def ?

lol wtf? How can a non-high def TV play in high-def? It's like saying "can my audio system which for some reason has a yellow video plug project videos"

The problem is if some absolutely, unquestionably perfect game comes out in the near future. THEN WHAT

Then you wait for the second perfect game. And pobody's nerfect

While I agree with a lot of your post slava, I don't think Nintendo are clinging on to the wiimote. I think they were at first, but now games are coming out which doesn't rely on a supposed gimmick. I hardly consider it a gimmick in Twilight Princess either, I found it much better than playing Ocarina of Time or Windwaker. And then Smash Bros, which I think stas pointed out, had many of its developers not even wanting to include the wiimote as a control choice.

And like I've already pointed out with Donkey Kong and Pacman, it can't be memorised because even though the AI in both are so small, you can get a weird movement from a fireball or ghost and then you're fucked. And I obviously don't speak for everyone, but I just wanna finish the games, not risk it all my trying to achieve a perfect score.

Also I agree that we do miss some good multi-platform games, but the exclusives more than make up for it, and Nintendo is the best game developer of all time

Ultimately, what's the difference between the gamecube and the wii apart from its controls? Nothing much. The wii allows you to download old school games, but that's about it. From memory you could play online via the GC too.

You can't seriously claim that those occasional random elements and in incredibly hard game makes Donkey Scholng an incredibly deep game full of rich gameplay? The guy jumps up and down and avoids barrels. That is all. I also recall reading (i think on kotaku) that every pacman level has a move you can make to avoid getting killed. It's not an easy move to pull off, but with enough training and memorisation, that's how the top players finish pacman.

What's better to have a very small number of outstanding developers on a console making a small number of games or having a number of games, or having a large number of good developers making a mix of outstanding to crap games?

 

[stazi]

fucking orsum: http://i27.tinypic.com/mv43h0.gif

http://i32.tinypic.com/2jd000x.gif

http://i31.tinypic.com/25fq2dg.gif

 

[bazookajoe]

Does recycling the same characters equate to a good developer? Well, in nintendo's case probably yes. However, also note that they didn't develop a lot of their good games they merely published them.

In Nintendo's case for sure, and they still developed a large portion of their awesome games.

Ultimately, what's the difference between the gamecube and the wii apart from its controls? Nothing much. The wii allows you to download old school games, but that's about it. From memory you could play online via the GC too.

You can't seriously claim that those occasional random elements and in incredibly hard game makes Donkey Scholng an incredibly deep game full of rich gameplay? The guy jumps up and down and avoids barrels. That is all. I also recall reading (i think on kotaku) that every pacman level has a move you can make to avoid getting killed. It's not an easy move to pull off, but with enough training and memorisation, that's how the top players finish pacman.

What's better to have a very small number of outstanding developers on a console making a small number of games or having a number of games, or having a large number of good developers making a mix of outstanding to crap games?

You can't really compare Gamecube online to Wii's online capabilities, from memory the GC had three games with online play (from same series), and one or two others like Animal Crossing which gave you objects etc. We can't have this same argument about why Wii is so advanced over GC in some respect but not others. The fact it is that yes it is more powerful and yes it has better graphics. There hasn't been a dramatic shift since SNES/Mega Drive > N64/PSX/Saturn, and I really can't imagine there being another huge change like that in the near future.
As for Donkey Kong/Pacman I'm kind of over this argument but I don't think there's a game I've played longer than these two except maybe Smash Bros Melee. The simplicity of the gameplay makes it so addicting, if a game has incredibly rich gameplay but you can finish it in two hours then who cares?
The Wii has a large number of good developers making a mix of outstanding to crap games, and since you can incorporate the first example into the second and not vice versa I'd obviously prefer the second option, although it won't really matter because I'm not going to buy the crap games anyway.

 

[stazi]

How much more powerful though? Not much.

Which games can you finish in two hours with incredibly rich gameplay? Gears of War, for example, takes about 12 to finish but then you go online and it's also very deep. Then again, Portal is only a few hours long, but it's incredibly awesome.

Which other awesome developers does the Wii have that have already made fantastic games?

 

[bazookajoe]

How much more powerful though? Not much.

Which games can you finish in two hours with incredibly rich gameplay? Gears of War, for example, takes about 12 to finish but then you go online and it's also very deep. Then again, Portal is only a few hours long, but it's incredibly awesome.

Which other awesome developers does the Wii have that have already made fantastic games?

Well where do you draw the line?

I can't think of an example, it's just a hypothetical. I'm sure I'll think of one though.

Grasshopper, Retro, Atlus, Capcom have all created awesome Wii exclusive games

 

[stazi]

And most of those create games for the 360 and the ps3

Suda is creating a game for the 360 called Heroes (lol i wonder if it has anything to do with his recent Wii project)

Capcum release heaps of good games for the 360/ps3, a lot of which couldnt come out for the wii because of the control scheme + technical limitations. Most of their wii games have been ports of ps2 games though apart from Zack & Wiki.

Retro release less than one game/year. I mean they basically only work with the metroid franchise. If they ever release another title on the wii it'll prob be another metroid, but even that hasn't been announced yet.

Atlus only have made trauma centre for the wii which imo was pooey compared to the ds version. Their other game, baroque, was a ps2 port and got horrible reviews. Their best games are persona, but I haven't heard of any plans to bring those to Wii from the ps2.

I should clarify that I'm not saying that the Wii doesn't have any good games, I'm just saying that the catalogue of titles is worse, and it's unlikely that it will feature a large amount of excellent titles in the future.

I'd be upset if I only owned a Wii considering games like Call of Duty 4, GTA IV, MGS4, Gran Turismo 5, Fallout 3 (!) and Final Fantasy XII are coming out.

Think about what the GTA IV developers have said: they want to make leaps, and not baby steps in gaming history. The same thing was said by the Gears of War devs: they would not be happy unless their vision of being in a chainsaw fight with 100 aliens around you wouldn't be realised.

Do you play sports games, btw?