Thank you for taking away points on any game that says "The cake is a lie". I'm fucking tired of this meme. I played Portal and never found that meme to be funny.
The Conduit
- Thread starter Yahtzee Croshaw
- Start date
If only they made another 2d style Metroid game. It would rock because the wii's IR sensor would be able to let you aim easier than in Zero Mission, Fusion, Super Metroid, etc.
It would be good if it was 2D and used vectors, or if it was 3d but worked on a 2d plane (no, not the vehicle ¬_¬).
It would be good if it was 2D and used vectors, or if it was 3d but worked on a 2d plane (no, not the vehicle ¬_¬).
You needed Yahtzee to point out games should be about substance and not graphics? I weep for this generation...NoMoreSanity said:
Wow..This was something of a U-turn.
I guess he only bashes the Wii in actual reviews, because it's funny.
I guess he only bashes the Wii in actual reviews, because it's funny.
I don't feel that I added anything significant when I posted previously, so here I go again.
A game can be successful 3D. Can be and has. The trouble is that developers feel obligated to keep everything 3D because it's the future. Reality, quality is what sells alongside big names, and most games aren't the next Batman or Valve title. Everyone who doesn't fall into the box office category needs to focus on how to make their game work, not make it look like it works. Looks can only get you so far in life, like into your neighborhood bicycle's pantaloons.
Of course, even following this rule doesn't guarantee either a good game or one people will buy, but if nothing else, people won't/will be less likely to blame mechanics for your flopper of a fish.
A game can be successful 3D. Can be and has. The trouble is that developers feel obligated to keep everything 3D because it's the future. Reality, quality is what sells alongside big names, and most games aren't the next Batman or Valve title. Everyone who doesn't fall into the box office category needs to focus on how to make their game work, not make it look like it works. Looks can only get you so far in life, like into your neighborhood bicycle's pantaloons.
Of course, even following this rule doesn't guarantee either a good game or one people will buy, but if nothing else, people won't/will be less likely to blame mechanics for your flopper of a fish.
I guess each generation sets its own "graphical bar" for games. For those of us born in the late 70s and early 80s, the graphics of games like Super Mario Bros 3 set the bar. All of the pretty graphics after that game were just icing on the cake. For younger gamers though, there comes a point when the poor graphics of the previous video game generations become distracting. I can play Goldeneye for the N64 for hours, but my 10 year old nephew can't because the pixel people are too distracting. Don't even get me started on Atari graphics and today's gamers.
I have allways wanted to say this:Yahtzee Croshaw said:
Yahtzee you sodding **** (te-he)
You have a point. Some what moot tho. Yes it was easier to make 2-d games, they are fun and enjoyable, and you dont have to fuck around so much with a physics engine.
But 2-d is a small avenue. You can only make so many games before they all start acting the same. I mean its like your hate for space marines. 2-d works with side scrollers and platformers. For anything else you need three d engines, or everything will look like doom 1. Yes 3-d is ever changing and graphics become old faster than a bloody tampon (gah, can't do Yahtzee humor), but it is evolution.
I don't look back at early cave men and think, damn those times where the shit, because we have evolved so much beyond that. (which is arguable). But cave men are probably thinking "oog, oog" since they have limited speech abilities. But if they could talk they would probably say something like "Those where the days, living in my cave, not having to worry about anything but survival. Not like these damn homosapians walking around in their business suits."
The point is if you miss a step in the evolution it will always be marred by your outlook from where you are standing. Face it, golden eye's graphics suck balls and any 10 year old now a days wouldn't be caught dead playing it, but i still enjoy it do to nostalgia.
Because memory has a way of adding a nice rosy tint to pure shit.
edit: ninja'd by the post above me.
Well, we now know Yahtzee knows about Nintendo's business strategy at current. Kinda saw this coming, actually, and I'm glad to hear him say it.
Nice to see some Metal Slug love, Yahtzee. Ever since I picked up the Anthology (not having a billion dollars to spend on an SNK machine or Neo-Geo), I knew Metal Slug was something amazing. It's aged remarkably well, and the first and second MS games are probably some of the most instantly playable and fun games in the genre.
Recent games like Braid and Odin Sphere have proven that we're far from reaching the limits of how beautiful 2D games can look. Obviously some genres just don't WORK in 2D, but still... I'm surprised how fast it was phased out once gamers caught their first glimpses of blocky polygons. Even 2D games nowadays typically feature 3D character models and environments.
Recent games like Braid and Odin Sphere have proven that we're far from reaching the limits of how beautiful 2D games can look. Obviously some genres just don't WORK in 2D, but still... I'm surprised how fast it was phased out once gamers caught their first glimpses of blocky polygons. Even 2D games nowadays typically feature 3D character models and environments.
Yes know want to call up the costumer service line and tell them hollowing out the wii and filling it with beetles is a better game console, but I won't!
Ehhh this i disagree with tbh and normally Yahtzee is right on the money but... is he seriously suggesting 3D could get old? Unless your suggesting introducing the old 'fake idea of 4D' with smell or pain if you get shot (actualy i like that idea mwaha ultimate difficulty) then i highly doubt that anyones going to U-turn now.
And for what anyway? 2D games got boring too! The reason games get boring much faster nowadays is because games are released like a curry eating man with digestive issues so choice enables us to let games past in favour of 'new' so called 'better games'.
And for what anyway? 2D games got boring too! The reason games get boring much faster nowadays is because games are released like a curry eating man with digestive issues so choice enables us to let games past in favour of 'new' so called 'better games'.
Heh. Considering what I said about him last week, it's funny that I actually agree with him to a large extent here.
Sure, the video was as predictable as ever, but this article was not.
Then again, 2d, while less likely to look dated, imposes some serious restrictions that aren't easy to overcome.
For one thing, as Doom demonstrates, it's possible to make a 3d game using 2d sprites, but the work (and storage space) involved is insane.
You think creating, texturing and rigging a 10,000 polygon character model is hard? - Try having to draw it by hand instead. If it needs to interact in a 3d environment, you're going to have to draw thousands upon thousands of frames of animation.
But, this doesn't explain why 3d graphics these days means this obsession with realism.
There is a time and a place for realism, but most games don't actually benefit from it.
(aside from which, there's a huge lag between graphical realism, and gameplay realism. What was the last game any of you ever played where the degree of actual interaction you had with the environment even came close to what you can pull of inn reality?
What's the point of 'realistic' graphics, if the game still plays like you're a quadroplegic with a chaingun strapped to your chest?)
On the one hand, we need the continued push for 'realism' if we ever expect to get out of the other side of the uncanny valley, but on the other hand, we need controls, gameplay and all the other bits that go into a 'realistic' environment to catch up as well.
And that hasn't been happening.
Not to mention that this totally neglects a more fundamental thing about games; Are they any fun?
And the answer, sadly, in many cases, is no.
No they aren't.
As for the Conduit? Bleh. What a waste of time. Red Steel, flaws and all, had a more interesting story, and ironically, probably looked better too.
And that was a launch title.
(and notice where Red Steel 2 is headed graphically... At least some people seem to learn from their mistakes.)
I guess you can't fault Sega for it's willingness to experiment though - Contrast MadWorld with The Conduit.
One that stylises graphics to the point of unplayability, the other that tries to emulate PS3/360 style realism (and fails horribly.)
Unfortunately, what they both seem to have in common is a lack of attention paid to gameplay, but I can't fault them for trying...
Sure, the video was as predictable as ever, but this article was not.
Then again, 2d, while less likely to look dated, imposes some serious restrictions that aren't easy to overcome.
For one thing, as Doom demonstrates, it's possible to make a 3d game using 2d sprites, but the work (and storage space) involved is insane.
You think creating, texturing and rigging a 10,000 polygon character model is hard? - Try having to draw it by hand instead. If it needs to interact in a 3d environment, you're going to have to draw thousands upon thousands of frames of animation.
But, this doesn't explain why 3d graphics these days means this obsession with realism.
There is a time and a place for realism, but most games don't actually benefit from it.
(aside from which, there's a huge lag between graphical realism, and gameplay realism. What was the last game any of you ever played where the degree of actual interaction you had with the environment even came close to what you can pull of inn reality?
What's the point of 'realistic' graphics, if the game still plays like you're a quadroplegic with a chaingun strapped to your chest?)
On the one hand, we need the continued push for 'realism' if we ever expect to get out of the other side of the uncanny valley, but on the other hand, we need controls, gameplay and all the other bits that go into a 'realistic' environment to catch up as well.
And that hasn't been happening.
Not to mention that this totally neglects a more fundamental thing about games; Are they any fun?
And the answer, sadly, in many cases, is no.
No they aren't.
As for the Conduit? Bleh. What a waste of time. Red Steel, flaws and all, had a more interesting story, and ironically, probably looked better too.
And that was a launch title.
(and notice where Red Steel 2 is headed graphically... At least some people seem to learn from their mistakes.)
I guess you can't fault Sega for it's willingness to experiment though - Contrast MadWorld with The Conduit.
One that stylises graphics to the point of unplayability, the other that tries to emulate PS3/360 style realism (and fails horribly.)
Unfortunately, what they both seem to have in common is a lack of attention paid to gameplay, but I can't fault them for trying...