Zero Punctuation: Fifth Console Generation

[Saelune]

Crash is garbage.

Ever hear of subjective opinions? Personally, I find that SM64 is a game that not only looks terrible by N64 standards, but controls like greased puppy on an ice rink (and that's not even mentioning the camera). Crash, by contrast, controls pretty smoothly, looks...well, it looks as good as an early 3D game can, to put it nicely. It also doesn't have the problems with platforming that most other 3D platformers have (where the biggest challenge is trying to land on the fucking platform).

The N64 has ann amazing selection of games, tons of unappreciated gems too.

I'm not saying that there aren't great games on the N64. I'm saying that (comparatively speaking) there really aren't a lot of them. And every console (including the PSX) has a few "unappreciated gems".

And the games play fine,

Goldeneye and Perfect Dark certainly don't.

the controller just sucks though, wont pretend the N64 controller is one of the worst ever, but its not the games fault.

It is a pretty godawful controller (mind you, SEGA's NiGHTS controller wasn't any better). I'm not blaming the games for the problems that most everyone has with the N64 controller, I'm blaming the games for largely being slippery, imprecise and clunky, regardless of what controller you're using.

I think Crash is objectively garbage.

Crash wasnt trying to do anything amazing. It was trying to turn 2D platforming into 3D without actually advancing anything.

I dont think PS1 has a vast selection of amazing games. And they look worse than the N64. Cartoony games tend to last longer visually.

Ok, 2 games. (Though the xbox version of Perfect Dark was great, too bad we wont get to see Goldeneye get the same treatment) N64 had more than 2 games, as did the PS1, which I doubt had a flawless cast of games.

Havent played an N64 remake that wasnt awesome...well, except Majora's Mask, but it wasnt cause of how it played.

 

[Bindal]

I think Crash is objectively garbage.

Crash wasnt trying to do anything amazing. It was trying to turn 2D platforming into 3D without actually advancing anything.

Then you're objectively incredible wrong.

Yes, it didn't try to change anything from the 2D Platforming when moving it to 3D. But that's exactly why Crash WORKED - he kept the linear platforming, just added a bit of a Y axis at times (not even all the time) and that's why Crash was working while most of the 3D Platformers tried to keep the 2D Gameplay and just put it into a 3D Arena-eque level and that's why most of them failed. Mario 64 worked because it straight up went for a more 3D focused gameplay instead of just the usual platforming.

 

[Rangaman]

I think Crash is objectively garbage.

I think you're talking out of your furry arse. For something to be objectively bad it has to be something that, regardless of what you may feel, is bad (like a glitch, or terrible camera controls). There is nothing in Crash that can be considered objectively bad (well, except for those fucking chase levels). You might not like the linear 3D platforming, but that's subjective.

Crash wasnt trying to do anything amazing. It was trying to turn 2D platforming into 3D without actually advancing anything.

So? Did Banjo-Kazooie do something amazing and revolutionary? Or (by your own logic) is it not deserving of the classic status?

I dont think PS1 has a vast selection of amazing games.

It does, you're just fanboying the N64 (which doesn't have even half as many games as the PSX, by the way). I listed a few earlier. There's also Spyro (which hasn't held up as well as Crash, but it still decent) and Grandia.

And they look worse than the N64. Cartoony games tend to last longer visually.

Dude, all 5th Gen games looks terrible now, even the N64 ones. And the PSX isn't as powerful as the N64, why would you expect the games to look better?

Ok, 2 games. (Though the xbox version of Perfect Dark was great, too bad we wont get to see Goldeneye get the same treatment) N64 had more than 2 games, as did the PS1, which I doubt had a flawless cast of games.

Okay, add Super Mario 64, Star Fox 64, Jet Force Gemini and Conker to that list (and I have a few more that I can bash). And no, the PSX library wasn't flawless. But then again...

...neither was the N64's.

Havent played an N64 remake that wasnt awesome...well, except Majora's Mask, but it wasnt cause of how it played.

Super Mario 64 DS. Fuck that game and fuck anyone who likes it.

 

[Saelune]

I think Crash is objectively garbage.

Crash wasnt trying to do anything amazing. It was trying to turn 2D platforming into 3D without actually advancing anything.

Then you're objectively incredible wrong.

Yes, it didn't try to change anything from the 2D Platforming when moving it to 3D. But that's exactly why Crash WORKED - he kept the linear platforming, just added a bit of a Y axis at times (not even all the time) and that's why Crash was working while most of the 3D Platformers tried to keep the 2D Gameplay and just put it into a 3D Arena-eque level and that's why most of them failed. Mario 64 worked because it straight up went for a more 3D focused gameplay instead of just the usual platforming.

Crash was bad cause it didnt even try. Sure, other 3D platformers that tried also failed, but they atleast tried and failed. Mario 64 tried and succeeded though, and that seems to be the main comparison here. The 2D parts of Crash were probably the only decent parts. Go figure.

I think Crash is objectively garbage.

I think you're talking out of your furry arse. For something to be objectively bad it has to be something that, regardless of what you may feel, is bad (like a glitch, or terrible camera controls). There is nothing in Crash that can be considered objectively bad (well, except for those fucking chase levels). You might not like the linear 3D platforming, but that's subjective.

Crash wasnt trying to do anything amazing. It was trying to turn 2D platforming into 3D without actually advancing anything.

So? Did Banjo-Kazooie do something amazing and revolutionary? Or (by your own logic) is it not deserving of the classic status?

I dont think PS1 has a vast selection of amazing games.

It does, you're just fanboying the N64 (which doesn't have even half as many games as the PSX, by the way). I listed a few earlier. There's also Spyro (which hasn't held up as well as Crash, but it still decent) and Grandia.

And they look worse than the N64. Cartoony games tend to last longer visually.

Dude, all 5th Gen games looks terrible now, even the N64 ones. And the PSX isn't as powerful as the N64, why would you expect the games to look better?

Ok, 2 games. (Though the xbox version of Perfect Dark was great, too bad we wont get to see Goldeneye get the same treatment) N64 had more than 2 games, as did the PS1, which I doubt had a flawless cast of games.

Okay, add Super Mario 64, Star Fox 64, Jet Force Gemini and Conker to that list (and I have a few more that I can bash). And no, the PSX library wasn't flawless. But then again...

...neither was the N64's.

Havent played an N64 remake that wasnt awesome...well, except Majora's Mask, but it wasnt cause of how it played.

Super Mario 64 DS. Fuck that game and fuck anyone who likes it.

"Furry arse"? Just trying to be flavorful or are you getting at something? You're defending a furry game character, remember that.

Banjo was like Mario trying to be a 3D platformer, not a 2D platformer, and it did it even better than Mario 64 did.

You're fanboying the PS1. Hi Pot, Im Kettle. Both had plenty of bad games, you're the one who was suggesting otherwise.

Since I brought up graphics and you didnt, I will drop it. I still disagree, but you werent the one who brought it up.

Super Mario 64 DS sucked for the same reason Majora's Mask did, cause they -changed- it. Other faults of it were DS specific.

 

[JenSeven]

Soooo.... wait...

In this episode...
What was the Lesson Nobody Learned?

This whole thing seems completely disjointed to me....

It seems like Yahtzee actually planned this out as an article that he wanted to write at some point and just decided to condense it into a video and somewhere along the line lost the whole plot.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

'Nostalgia blinded twats who probably eat children's breakfast cereal"

Is it me or Yahtzee is referring to Bob Chipman?

He might as well be.

 

[Bindal]

I think Crash is objectively garbage.

Crash wasnt trying to do anything amazing. It was trying to turn 2D platforming into 3D without actually advancing anything.

Then you're objectively incredible wrong.

Yes, it didn't try to change anything from the 2D Platforming when moving it to 3D. But that's exactly why Crash WORKED - he kept the linear platforming, just added a bit of a Y axis at times (not even all the time) and that's why Crash was working while most of the 3D Platformers tried to keep the 2D Gameplay and just put it into a 3D Arena-eque level and that's why most of them failed. Mario 64 worked because it straight up went for a more 3D focused gameplay instead of just the usual platforming.

Crash was bad cause it didnt even try. Sure, other 3D platformers that tried also failed, but they atleast tried and failed. Mario 64 tried and succeeded though, and that seems to be the main comparison here. The 2D parts of Crash were probably the only decent parts. Go figure.

It didn't try because there was no need to try. They knew what would work for a 2D Platformer in 3D and did exactly that. Why experiment with something that most likely will fail when the thing that's actually blatantly obvious that it will work... should just be done and so far hasn't really be done?
What I gather that you hate Crash because it worked exactly as intended - which, let's be honest, seems more like you just want to hate Crash because everyone else likes it.
Seriously, what's the issue with "Do the thing that should be done for this kind of transition"? Especially when the approach of "let's try to keep the random platforms and put them into a semi-linear open world" everyone else tried just didn't work?

 

[Saelune]

I think Crash is objectively garbage.

Crash wasnt trying to do anything amazing. It was trying to turn 2D platforming into 3D without actually advancing anything.

Then you're objectively incredible wrong.

Yes, it didn't try to change anything from the 2D Platforming when moving it to 3D. But that's exactly why Crash WORKED - he kept the linear platforming, just added a bit of a Y axis at times (not even all the time) and that's why Crash was working while most of the 3D Platformers tried to keep the 2D Gameplay and just put it into a 3D Arena-eque level and that's why most of them failed. Mario 64 worked because it straight up went for a more 3D focused gameplay instead of just the usual platforming.

Crash was bad cause it didnt even try. Sure, other 3D platformers that tried also failed, but they atleast tried and failed. Mario 64 tried and succeeded though, and that seems to be the main comparison here. The 2D parts of Crash were probably the only decent parts. Go figure.

It didn't try because there was no need to try. They knew what would work for a 2D Platformer in 3D and did exactly that. Why experiment with something that most likely will fail when the thing that's actually blatantly obvious that it will work... should just be done and so far hasn't really be done?
What I gather that you hate Crash because it worked exactly as intended - which, let's be honest, seems more like you just want to hate Crash because everyone else likes it.
Seriously, what's the issue with "Do the thing that should be done for this kind of transition"? Especially when the approach of "let's try to keep the random platforms and put them into a semi-linear open world" everyone else tried just didn't work?

Maybe I do hate Crash for doing what it wanted to do. I dont see how that is a defense. If someone wanted to make me cry and succeeded, I would not be wrong for being upset at them.

I hate Crash cause I played it and felt it was garbage. I know alot of people like to bandwagon their opinions, but I dont do that. There are things I like that everyone likes, things I hate that everyone likes, and so on.

 

[marioandsonic]

"Nostalgia blinded twats who probably eat children's breakfast cereal"

What's wrong with children's breakfast cereal?

Well, besides the fact that it's like 90% sugar.

 

[Hawki]

N64>PS1>Saturn

Thread closed. ;p

The way I remember it, Nintendo stuck to cartridges for the N64 because the games in those were harder to copy than discs. Also, in this video, Yahtzee said the "age of the Mascot" ended in the 5th generation, but did he not review the rerelease of the first 3 Crash Bandicoot games last week? And remember who's mascot he is? In some ways, the Age of the Mascot never ended, since you can count Master Chief Petty Officer John 117 (yeah, that's his full name and rank, I am THAT big of a geek) as Microsoft's since the first HALO debuted with the first X-BOX.

That's stretching things. Consider the 16 bit era, where company mascots were all trying to be the next Sonic or Mario. Contrast that with the present. Mario is Nintendo's poster boy, sure, but Sega bowed out of the console race, so Sonic is Sega's mascot rather than a console one. Crash may have had a remake, but he's no longer associated with the PlayStation 4, or even the 3 in the same way he was in the days of the PS1. And calling John the mascot of the Xbox is a bit of a stretch. Yes, Halo is an Xbox-exclusive series (mostly), but John has never really been a mascot for the system in the same way other characters have. The series is called "Halo," not "Master Chief" (as opposed to mascot platformers usually having their series bear the name of the mascot itself.

Plus Microsoft also had Blinkx and Sony had both Ratchet and Clank and Jak and Daxter(There was also Ty the Tasmanian Tiger, Crash's Australian cousin)

People remember Blinx and Ty?

Also, Blinx was apparently meant to be the face of Xbox in Japan, and didn't turn out well, so...

Never got Knights into Dreams, but heard good things about it.

It's spelt "Nights" you silly thing!

Anyway, played a demo of Nights on my friend's Saturn back in the day (who was the only kid I knew who had a Saturn). To be honest, I've never got why it's considered a cult classic. Honestly, of the few games he had on the device, I liked Clockwork Knights the most. Enjoyed Sonic 3D Blast too, but having played it in re-releases...yeah. Not Sonic's most stellar outing.

I was perfectly happy to just play stuff on my Genesis until I got a Dreamcast for Sonic Adventure, I honestly just wasn't that blown away by 3-D gaming when it first happened. My age has a lot to do with it as I was born in 1990. My Dreamcast didn't last that long either, I was in the process of trying to get all 180 emblems in Sonic Adventure 2(only ones I had left were those goddamned Chao Races), then I got a Gamecube and got SA2 Battle and tried again to get all the emblems but I eventually ran out of patience trying in vain to win the damned Chao Races(never did care much for the Chao aspect of those games)

As someone who spent hours upon hours trying to get all the emblems of Sonic Adventure DX (so I could unlock the retro games - this was before the likes of Sonic Mega Collection was released), I feel your pain.

Listen Sega. I can do time trials. I can hunt for treasure. I can even stomach getting fish for an obese cat if it means I get goodies for it. But you are not going to force me to take part in your Tamagotchi wanabee!

Whenever I used that controller as a friends house as a kid I didn't mind, but i'd never even think of using that piece of crap nowadays.

I actually replayed GoldenEye this year. Speaking personally, it took a bit of getting used to the controller again, because it feels so alien to hold when compared to modern day controllers. But, I got used to it. Had a lot of fun with the game - it's aged in some areas, but it still has a lot of charm.

Maybe I do hate Crash for doing what it wanted to do. I dont see how that is a defense. If someone wanted to make me cry and succeeded, I would not be wrong for being upset at them.

I hate Crash cause I played it and felt it was garbage. I know alot of people like to bandwagon their opinions, but I dont do that. There are things I like that everyone likes, things I hate that everyone likes, and so on.

Crash isn't trying to make you cry though.

Now, I do hold Super Mario 64 and Banjo Kazooie above Crash personally, but as far as entering 3D goes, it did a better job than Sonic 3D Blast (and not that I've played it, but Bubsy 3D is an example of "what can (possibly) go wrong" in transition. I'd rather a piece of media do something well rather than attempt something new and fail. Sure, it can get props for trying, but execution usually trumps conception.

Anyway, the original Crash Bandicoot is overshadowed by its successors (Cortex Strikes Back, Warped), so there's bigger fish to fry in the Crash vs. Mario debate anyway.

 

[Rangaman]

Banjo was like Mario trying to be a 3D platformer, not a 2D platformer, and it did it even better than Mario 64 did.

Crash was trying to be a 3D platformer too. It wasn't a platformer in the same sense as those two, but that doesn't make it "objectively crap".

You're fanboying the PS1. Hi Pot, Im Kettle. Both had plenty of bad games, you're the one who was suggesting otherwise.

I did start this, fair enough. But I didn't go out of my way to say "Super Mario 64 was crap" when I wrote that initial response. And I'm not suggesting either system had a flawless library, in fact I never said that.

Super Mario 64 DS sucked for the same reason Majora's Mask did, cause they -changed- it. Other faults of it were DS specific.

It sucked because the controls were garbage, that's really all there is to it.

 

[gorfias]

I picked up Rogue Squadron 3D (64) on Steam for a negligible price (Less than $3) just to play my favorite N64 game. The graphics aren't Earth Shattering, and are definitely dated, but they are still easily playable, and with my XBox 360 controller, great fun, despite a bug that wasn't present in the PC version.

Still, PS2 is absolutely the best console of all time, with almost all of my fondness and memories of them being much better story and more fun gameplay than most games now have. I picked up Ace Combat 5 a while back, and it was still truly amazing, and that wasn't even my favorite Ace Combat, and Battlefront II is still the best Star Wars game ever made.

While the N64 bashing was over the top, he really didn't explain much of what ANY console did right that generation, and we all have not forgotten that Halo 1 gave XBox their mascot that to this day sells consoles (I got the XBOne simply because I wanted my first XBox to play my first ever own copy of Halo on).

Of course, PS3 and 4 have inFamous, a game I would put up as one of the best I have played on the PS3's generation.

A buddy beat and unlocked all of the Rogue Squadron levels for the Gamecube. Then he gave me the memory card. I play it on a Wii in my basement from time to time. Really great older game.

 

[rembrandtqeinstein]

Goldeneye had its flaws but it proved decisively that FPS could work on consoles. The sequel-in-all-but-name Perfect Dark refined the formula and paved the way for Halo.

IMO Sony's biggest innovation was the controller with 4 shoulder buttons. Then the Dual Shock came along and blew everything else out of the water and TO THIS DAY it is still the very best controller design. The first gen didn't really take advantage of the dual analog but PS2 really made it work.

I had a PS1 but always had fun playing Saturn and N64 games at a friend's house. The transition to 3D was somewhat painful but you could see the promise in Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time. And Mega Man Legends was a pretty good translation of the Mega Man formula to 3D with yummy RPG elements thrown in (though being a japanese game you could win everything by grinding a lot).

 

[Bindal]

I think Crash is objectively garbage.

Crash wasnt trying to do anything amazing. It was trying to turn 2D platforming into 3D without actually advancing anything.

Then you're objectively incredible wrong.

Yes, it didn't try to change anything from the 2D Platforming when moving it to 3D. But that's exactly why Crash WORKED - he kept the linear platforming, just added a bit of a Y axis at times (not even all the time) and that's why Crash was working while most of the 3D Platformers tried to keep the 2D Gameplay and just put it into a 3D Arena-eque level and that's why most of them failed. Mario 64 worked because it straight up went for a more 3D focused gameplay instead of just the usual platforming.

Crash was bad cause it didnt even try. Sure, other 3D platformers that tried also failed, but they atleast tried and failed. Mario 64 tried and succeeded though, and that seems to be the main comparison here. The 2D parts of Crash were probably the only decent parts. Go figure.

It didn't try because there was no need to try. They knew what would work for a 2D Platformer in 3D and did exactly that. Why experiment with something that most likely will fail when the thing that's actually blatantly obvious that it will work... should just be done and so far hasn't really be done?
What I gather that you hate Crash because it worked exactly as intended - which, let's be honest, seems more like you just want to hate Crash because everyone else likes it.
Seriously, what's the issue with "Do the thing that should be done for this kind of transition"? Especially when the approach of "let's try to keep the random platforms and put them into a semi-linear open world" everyone else tried just didn't work?

Maybe I do hate Crash for doing what it wanted to do. I dont see how that is a defense. If someone wanted to make me cry and succeeded, I would not be wrong for being upset at them.

I hate Crash cause I played it and felt it was garbage. I know alot of people like to bandwagon their opinions, but I dont do that. There are things I like that everyone likes, things I hate that everyone likes, and so on.

So, you basically confirm that the reason you hate Crash is because other people think that it's a good game because, objectively speaking, it IS a well-made game that did exactly what it was planning to do: Be a 2D Platformer in 3D. I seriously don't see what's wrong with that. They had a goal, they saw what other people did wrong and decided "Nope, not trying that, let's go with what most likely works" and it did work.

 

[darkrage6]

Goldeneye had its flaws but it proved decisively that FPS could work on consoles. The sequel-in-all-but-name Perfect Dark refined the formula and paved the way for Halo.

IMO Sony's biggest innovation was the controller with 4 shoulder buttons. Then the Dual Shock came along and blew everything else out of the water and TO THIS DAY it is still the very best controller design. The first gen didn't really take advantage of the dual analog but PS2 really made it work.

I had a PS1 but always had fun playing Saturn and N64 games at a friend's house. The transition to 3D was somewhat painful but you could see the promise in Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time. And Mega Man Legends was a pretty good translation of the Mega Man formula to 3D with yummy RPG elements thrown in (though being a japanese game you could win everything by grinding a lot).

I prefer the Xbox controllers to the Dualshock myself, as they have just the right amount of heft to them, whereas the DS controllers always felt a bit too light for my tastes.

 

[darkrage6]

N64>PS1>Saturn

Thread closed. ;p

The way I remember it, Nintendo stuck to cartridges for the N64 because the games in those were harder to copy than discs. Also, in this video, Yahtzee said the "age of the Mascot" ended in the 5th generation, but did he not review the rerelease of the first 3 Crash Bandicoot games last week? And remember who's mascot he is? In some ways, the Age of the Mascot never ended, since you can count Master Chief Petty Officer John 117 (yeah, that's his full name and rank, I am THAT big of a geek) as Microsoft's since the first HALO debuted with the first X-BOX.

That's stretching things. Consider the 16 bit era, where company mascots were all trying to be the next Sonic or Mario. Contrast that with the present. Mario is Nintendo's poster boy, sure, but Sega bowed out of the console race, so Sonic is Sega's mascot rather than a console one. Crash may have had a remake, but he's no longer associated with the PlayStation 4, or even the 3 in the same way he was in the days of the PS1. And calling John the mascot of the Xbox is a bit of a stretch. Yes, Halo is an Xbox-exclusive series (mostly), but John has never really been a mascot for the system in the same way other characters have. The series is called "Halo," not "Master Chief" (as opposed to mascot platformers usually having their series bear the name of the mascot itself.

Plus Microsoft also had Blinkx and Sony had both Ratchet and Clank and Jak and Daxter(There was also Ty the Tasmanian Tiger, Crash's Australian cousin)

People remember Blinx and Ty?

Also, Blinx was apparently meant to be the face of Xbox in Japan, and didn't turn out well, so...

Never got Knights into Dreams, but heard good things about it.

It's spelt "Nights" you silly thing!

Anyway, played a demo of Nights on my friend's Saturn back in the day (who was the only kid I knew who had a Saturn). To be honest, I've never got why it's considered a cult classic. Honestly, of the few games he had on the device, I liked Clockwork Knights the most. Enjoyed Sonic 3D Blast too, but having played it in re-releases...yeah. Not Sonic's most stellar outing.

I was perfectly happy to just play stuff on my Genesis until I got a Dreamcast for Sonic Adventure, I honestly just wasn't that blown away by 3-D gaming when it first happened. My age has a lot to do with it as I was born in 1990. My Dreamcast didn't last that long either, I was in the process of trying to get all 180 emblems in Sonic Adventure 2(only ones I had left were those goddamned Chao Races), then I got a Gamecube and got SA2 Battle and tried again to get all the emblems but I eventually ran out of patience trying in vain to win the damned Chao Races(never did care much for the Chao aspect of those games)

As someone who spent hours upon hours trying to get all the emblems of Sonic Adventure DX (so I could unlock the retro games - this was before the likes of Sonic Mega Collection was released), I feel your pain.

Listen Sega. I can do time trials. I can hunt for treasure. I can even stomach getting fish for an obese cat if it means I get goodies for it. But you are not going to force me to take part in your Tamagotchi wanabee!

Whenever I used that controller as a friends house as a kid I didn't mind, but i'd never even think of using that piece of crap nowadays.

I actually replayed GoldenEye this year. Speaking personally, it took a bit of getting used to the controller again, because it feels so alien to hold when compared to modern day controllers. But, I got used to it. Had a lot of fun with the game - it's aged in some areas, but it still has a lot of charm.

Maybe I do hate Crash for doing what it wanted to do. I dont see how that is a defense. If someone wanted to make me cry and succeeded, I would not be wrong for being upset at them.

I hate Crash cause I played it and felt it was garbage. I know alot of people like to bandwagon their opinions, but I dont do that. There are things I like that everyone likes, things I hate that everyone likes, and so on.

Crash isn't trying to make you cry though.

Now, I do hold Super Mario 64 and Banjo Kazooie above Crash personally, but as far as entering 3D goes, it did a better job than Sonic 3D Blast (and not that I've played it, but Bubsy 3D is an example of "what can (possibly) go wrong" in transition. I'd rather a piece of media do something well rather than attempt something new and fail. Sure, it can get props for trying, but execution usually trumps conception.

Anyway, the original Crash Bandicoot is overshadowed by its successors (Cortex Strikes Back, Warped), so there's bigger fish to fry in the Crash vs. Mario debate anyway.

After having played the great Goldeneye Reloaded, there's no way I could ever go back to the original game, IMO it's just far too outdated now(the biggest problem with it is that's VERY heavily based on luck rather then actual skill thanks to all the damned respawning enemies. In general I don't think 90s FPS games were very good(though that's probably cause I never really played them much growing up, so I have no real nostalgia for them).

 

[Squilookle]

Soooo.... wait...

In this episode...
What was the Lesson Nobody Learned?

This whole thing seems completely disjointed to me....

It seems like Yahtzee actually planned this out as an article that he wanted to write at some point and just decided to condense it into a video and somewhere along the line lost the whole plot.

He was demonstrating that the lesson that wasn't learned was his own- that several 5th gen games from all consoles are stone cold classics and every bit as timeless as games from other generations, and that he's as likely of learning that lesson as he is of waking up to the fact that 1st person platforming can -and has, many times- been done just fine. All this just.... isn't for him. And there's nothing wrong with that, but when he plays games for a week and never touches them again because game releases always march on, I can see why he'd reach a point were he's utterly unable to meet an old game on its own terms.

After having played the great Goldeneye Reloaded, there's no way I could ever go back to the original game, IMO it's just far too outdated now(the biggest problem with it is that's VERY heavily based on luck rather then actual skill thanks to all the damned respawning enemies. In general I don't think 90s FPS games were very good(though that's probably cause I never really played them much growing up, so I have no real nostalgia for them).

Eugh- think I almost threw up reading that. That's like saying after playing Invisible War you could never go back to Deus Ex. I never really stopped playing the original Goldeneye, even 20 years later, so nostalgia goggles haven't even set in. I see it warts and all every time I play, alongside current shooters I also play, and yet Goldeneye is still fun as hell. I do remember back as a kid starting to despair about endless waves of enemies but then I realised something:

It was at the end of the grueling Jungle level where you had to rush down a cave tunnel to the final lift to end the level, but after wiping out the 5 guards behind crates at the mouth of this tunnel, after a given amount of time the next wave would come and take up the same positions, again and again until eternity. It seemed impossible as I kept clearing them out, my ammo running low, only to see the next bunch run in on cue. That's when it hit me. This final gauntlet had to be done on the fly, during or just before the next wave. It was a nail biting dash to safety but once performed, gave me the biggest rush of achievement.

These days, of course, the infinite enemies are a godsend for replayability. Who owned the game and didn't flick on invincibility and tear ass around the Runway running troops over with the tank for hours? Who didn't sneak a gold PP7 into the Facility to murder Ourumov when the alarm went off and hold their ground with a (not yet turned) 006 against the endless hordes of the Russian Army? Who didn't find glee in the fact that guard patrol route start points are entirely randomised, meaning even 20 years later you can still be surprised by the bastards as you try to sneak out of the jails of Bunker 2 with nothing but your handy throwing knives?

Goldeneye based on luck? Give me a break.

 

[geldonyetich]

I don't think those games stand the test of time at all, especially not Ocarina of Time.

That's your opinion and you're welcome to it. As for me, I only have to look over at the Metacritic page for re-release of Ocarina of Time [http://www.metacritic.com/game/3ds/the-legend-of-zelda-ocarina-of-time-3d] for the 3DS and see about 1000 opinions to the contrary and a big fat 94% average between over 80 professional reviewers, so I'm not feeling particularly obligated to defend my position considering I seem to be one molecule in a tidal wave of similar sentiment. And if you want to make a point they're not the same game, I'm not going to believe you, because I played them both and they are similar enough in all ways that would seem to matter to me.

So, the fact that you have an unusual opinion about Ocarina of Time having been stated, my opinion remains that Yahtzee overshot a bit by devaluing the contributions of the 5th generation of consoles in his quite possibly tongue-in-cheek assessment of them. I don't suspect it's as unusual of an opinion, but then, it's not like I have a Metacritic entry for that.

 

[darkrage6]

Soooo.... wait...

In this episode...
What was the Lesson Nobody Learned?

This whole thing seems completely disjointed to me....

It seems like Yahtzee actually planned this out as an article that he wanted to write at some point and just decided to condense it into a video and somewhere along the line lost the whole plot.

He was demonstrating that the lesson that wasn't learned was his own- that several 5th gen games from all consoles are stone cold classics and every bit as timeless as games from other generations, and that he's as likely of learning that lesson as he is of waking up to the fact that 1st person platforming can -and has, many times- been done just fine. All this just.... isn't for him. And there's nothing wrong with that, but when he plays games for a week and never touches them again because game releases always march on, I can see why he'd reach a point were he's utterly unable to meet an old game on its own terms.

After having played the great Goldeneye Reloaded, there's no way I could ever go back to the original game, IMO it's just far too outdated now(the biggest problem with it is that's VERY heavily based on luck rather then actual skill thanks to all the damned respawning enemies. In general I don't think 90s FPS games were very good(though that's probably cause I never really played them much growing up, so I have no real nostalgia for them).

Eugh- think I almost threw up reading that. That's like saying after playing Invisible War you could never go back to Deus Ex. I never really stopped playing the original Goldeneye, even 20 years later, so nostalgia goggles haven't even set in. I see it warts and all every time I play, alongside current shooters I also play, and yet Goldeneye is still fun as hell. I do remember back as a kid starting to despair about endless waves of enemies but then I realised something:

It was at the end of the grueling Jungle level where you had to rush down a cave tunnel to the final lift to end the level, but after wiping out the 5 guards behind crates at the mouth of this tunnel, after a given amount of time the next wave would come and take up the same positions, again and again until eternity. It seemed impossible as I kept clearing them out, my ammo running low, only to see the next bunch run in on cue. That's when it hit me. This final gauntlet had to be done on the fly, during or just before the next wave. It was a nail biting dash to safety but once performed, gave me the biggest rush of achievement.

These days, of course, the infinite enemies are a godsend for replayability. Who owned the game and didn't flick on invincibility and tear ass around the Runway running troops over with the tank for hours? Who didn't sneak a gold PP7 into the Facility to murder Ourumov when the alarm went off and hold their ground with a (not yet turned) 006 against the endless hordes of the Russian Army? Who didn't find glee in the fact that guard patrol route start points are entirely randomised, meaning even 20 years later you can still be surprised by the bastards as you try to sneak out of the jails of Bunker 2 with nothing but your handy throwing knives?

Goldeneye based on luck? Give me a break.

Invisible War was actually the first Deus Ex game I ever played, and I honestly did enjoy it, so I can't really agree with you on that at all.

I'm sorry but the original Goldenye has IMO aged very badly, as did a lot of games with human characters from the fifth generation of consoles.

I personally never cared that much about cheat codes, Goldeneye was largely based on luck, especially that secret level.

 

[darkrage6]

I don't think those games stand the test of time at all, especially not Ocarina of Time.

That's your opinion and you're welcome to it. As for me, I only have to look over at the Metacritic page for re-release of Ocarina of Time [http://www.metacritic.com/game/3ds/the-legend-of-zelda-ocarina-of-time-3d] for the 3DS and see about 1000 opinions to the contrary and a big fat 94% average between over 80 professional reviewers, so I'm not feeling particularly obligated to defend my position considering I seem to be one molecule in a tidal wave of similar sentiment. And if you want to make a point they're not the same game, I'm not going to believe you, because I played them both and they are similar enough in all ways that would seem to matter to me.

So, the fact that you have an unusual opinion about Ocarina of Time having been stated, my opinion remains that Yahtzee overshot a bit by devaluing the contributions of the 5th generation of consoles in his quite possibly tongue-in-cheek assessment of them. I don't suspect it's as unusual of an opinion, but then, it's not like I have a Metacritic entry for that.

That's the remake though, not the original version. The reason people loved the remake of OOT is because it fixed a lot of the bad shit that was in the original game(having to constantly pause to switch items, the awkward as hell controls, etc)