# They Don't Make Games I Wanna Play



## MadPlumber (Nov 11, 2007)

*What genre of video game do you miss the most?  What type or series of game would you snatch up in an instant if they made it?  If they build it, will you come?*

*Cooperative Brawler*  I miss the old beat-'em-up multiplayer games that my friends and I would play at the local Chuck E. Cheese equivalent.  Now, this genre of video game isn't done right all the time; my _Taito Legends_ games that I bought showcase a few wrong ways to make a brawler.  _Final Fight_ is also kind of boring to me as well.  Rather, I think Konami's brawlers were the more optimal design of the genre.  _X-Men_ was particularly my favorite, but I imagine _Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles_ would be the most popular of Konami's brawlers.  Other variations on the brawler included _Bucky O'Hare_ and _The Simpsons_, but I don't feel they stand up to the former two I mentioned.


----------



## Nidonemo (Nov 11, 2007)

I enjoyed those brawlers immensely. I remember great times at the arcade with The Simpsons arcade game, TMNT: (insert version title here), as well as that dual screen (Back when dual screen meant two tvs in one arcade unit) X-Men game. 

The question stands though, as popular as those titles were, why would they fade? I can't think of any reasons why the genre would fall from sight. Other than more popular titles taking the limelight, and then the Brawler genre being forgotten over the years. 

As games need teams to build them, they all must start from one source:

The Dreamer.

So maybe the problem doesn't lie in the major companies not producing them, but perhaps with the idea not being generated. We should probably try to create our own brawlers, maybe then the genre's popularity would revive itself.


----------



## Kajet (Nov 12, 2007)

you're forgetting series like golden axe, final fight, streets of rage, double dragon, battletoads... etc.

And yes co-op beat em ups seem to have died, sure there's single player ones like god hand but... not the same... 

I partially blame 3-d, everyone wants the camera to move every witch way possible that isn't feasible with more than one person...


----------



## Bokracroc (Nov 12, 2007)

*Adventure*

Not action/adventure, RPG/Adventure or whatever. Adventure's like the game in my sigpic.


----------



## ADF (Nov 12, 2007)

Please excuse the long, typically expected of me, vent. But it is the subject of the thread.

I miss role playing games; real ones, not what they try to pass off as RPGâ€™s today.

It doesnâ€™t take much intelligence to figure out that role playing games should contain role playing elements; such as exploring and adventuring in the world, talking with NPCâ€™s and learning about them, behaving accordingly with your class and alignment, character building, following and interacting with a storyline that may or may not have multiple paths, creating a believable world, making decisions that can impact the development of the game world, having your characters abilities as the physical representative while you are the decision maker and so on.

Todayâ€™s RPGâ€™s seem to want nothing to do with that; or they try to contain a little but end up diluting it, Oblivion for example is as diluted as you can get without cutting game elements. No, RPGâ€™s today have more in common with the Action and FPS genres than the roots of the RPG genre itself. When was the last time people saw a RPG advertised that didnâ€™t have storyline and role play as an afterthought to action? Iâ€™m forced to look back years to find anything that resembles what I remember what role playing gaming was originally about. 

Why did this happen? I have my ideas as to why; one of them is that gaming has just become so much more popular that it is no longer considered a pass time for kids and nerds. All the sudden that young adult you see going to the cinema to watch the latest blockbuster action film has become a significant target audience over the last 8 or so years; this audience simply hasnâ€™t the patients or attention span to play a old fashioned RPG so the sub categories of RPGâ€™s were created and soon took over, action RPG being the main one. 

Back in the day I remember when complexity and books of dialogue were sale points, now they are considered burdensome and boring. Turn based combat was considered the best representative for RPG combat since it relied entirely on character skill rather than that of the players, now people despise anything that uses it outside of strategy games. RPG's have become about killing and looting, NPC's only exist to dish out quests which are often to kill more things and the sub par storylines are only there to provide direction during the killing and looting.

I cannot find a single purebred RPG that isnâ€™t being made by some indie developer few have heard of like Spiderweb Software, companies that simply havenâ€™t got the funding and audience to make a RPG to the level of the good days when they had a strong footing in the market without being action orientated. The pure bred RPGâ€™s of today are actually lower quality than the ones out 6 or so years ago, isnâ€™t that crazy? The mindless Diablo clones actually do better in sales than games that try to do something that resembles depth. 

As the gaming market continues to expand I am less likely to see anything that caters to the level of RPG depth I had nearly a decade ago; hell if some articles are to be believed the Diablo and Oblivion players are now being considered the hardcore role playing generation, something I quite frankly find very disturbing. It is a notable point in gaming history were the endless vomit of copycat action RPGâ€™s became considered the representative standard of the genre, maybe if all the famous RPG companies like Black Isle Studios wasnâ€™t dead things would be different. 

In the meantime the upcoming RPG highlights are Dungeon Siege clone Space Siege (a clone of a Diablo clone) and the Oblivionized Fallout 3, it makes you want to weep. I hear The Witcher is the only decent action RPG out right now so Iâ€™ll have to try it; hopefully it is on pare with Bloodlines in terms of what action RPGâ€™s can offer.


----------



## Bokracroc (Nov 12, 2007)

Define RPG.


----------



## DavidN (Nov 12, 2007)

RPGs are very difficult to define. I settled on saying they were games in which your progress isn't determined by your own skill directly, but by a set of statistics that can be improved over time.


----------



## psion (Nov 12, 2007)

DavidN said:
			
		

> RPGs are very difficult to define. I settled on saying they were games in which your progress isn't determined by your own skill directly, but by a set of statistics that can be improved over time.



Let's not get into Role and Roll-play arguement please, I tend to get quite venomous in those.

ANYWAY, a genre I really felt got the short end of the stick despite going through as many attempted revivals as the Adventure game is the trading genre.  I'm talking pure trading like MULE or Gazillionare Delux, although the new Space Trader game I've seen floating around the Great Games Experiment is a refreshing step in the right direction.  It may be because the genre requires more memory and chart reading skills then most gamers are used to, but I found nothing quite as satisfying as ending a round of Space Trader with a rank of "Master Trader" or even "Inside Trader" (the uber elite rank you get when you end at double the level requirement.)


----------



## AlexX (Nov 12, 2007)

I see a couple people comparing JRPGs and WRPGs in this topic, but the problem with comparing japanese RPGs to western RPGs is that they are really entirely different genres. They're different styles of games with different target audiences, and yet people seem to act as if they're going for the same goal and one side just fails at it.

I'll admit that JRPGs tend to be a lot more linear, but video games are a fairly bad medium for western RPGs, anyway. For example, say a game lets you choose between good and evil. In the end, you're really just as restricted the programmers' will as with linear games since even if you pick evil, you're going down the specific path created for evil. There's in no way it can have as many potential choices as the classic D&D-style games and the like.


----------



## ADF (Nov 12, 2007)

RPG's are very difficult to define and are a topic of debate even to this day; in the broadest sense some people think every game in existence qualifies as a 'role playing' game, while some others judge it based on the core characteristics of RPG games. Both of which have problems because Doom 3 is obviously not a RPG and with the second method the meaning of the genre changes with each game.

I'm not going to attempt to define RPG, as I would just be expressing my personal point of view on it, but I think it is pretty safe to say RPG's are not [insert genre here] with a stats and inventory menu slapped on top. However with the state it is in today, I can see why many people are confused such as...



			
				DavidN said:
			
		

> RPGs are very difficult to define. *I settled on saying they were games in which your progress isn't determined by your own skill directly, but by a set of statistics that can be improved over time.*



for example... Stats, their progress and what aspects are player/character influenced are just part of what makes up a RPG.

RPG's are not simply about stat buffing and gathering loot, we can blame Diablo and its many clones for giving people that impression. Stats are only there as a statistically quantifiable method of expressing a characters advancement, many Action games slap on a stats menu and promote themselves as Action RPG's despite having none of the other elements that make up the genre. These games tend to be extremely bland and use tried and proven methods to create the game world, none of them attempt to break from the mould and do something unique like RPG's used to be famous for. 

Back in the day repetition was not a word used to describe role playing games, even those that share the same medieval fantasy theme, each one had its own twist to make it interesting. Take the old Lands of Lore series for example, typical medieval fantasy but with its own approach. Now you pick up any random game from the shelf; whether it be Dungeon Siege 2, Titan Quest, Silverfall or Sacred 2 and you are practically getting the same game in a different wrapper. They are a insult to the genre but their existence is justified through highly successful sales which continues the trend to stat driven action games labelled RPG's >.=.<

God forbid if anyone attempts to come up with a half decent storyline that isn't obvious from the beginning, immersion enhancing dialogue that doesn't necessarily exist to provide game play or quest information, or any actual depth that will enhance the believability of the game world rather than make it feel designed entirely around the player and their quest.


----------



## PyroVulpine (Nov 12, 2007)

AlexX said:
			
		

> ...but the problem with comparing japanese RPGs to western RPGs is that they are really entirely different genres. They're different styles of games with different target audiences...



Exactly. Anyone who has played all four Elder Scrolls games knows that Oblivion has pretty much stayed true to its roots. TES has always been about dungeon crawling, and always will. Ever play Arena? It almost doesn't even have a storyline, being nearly a pure dungeon crawler.

Back on topic now, I'd like to see more of the point-and-click adventure game types. The first Monkey Island was one of my favourite games back in the day. Yes, I'm aware of the new Sam and Max episodes, but I just don't see the genre coming back to its former popularity.


----------



## Bokracroc (Nov 13, 2007)

psion said:
			
		

> ANYWAY, a genre I really felt got the short end of the stick despite going through as many attempted revivals as the Adventure game is the trading genre.  I'm talking pure trading like MULE or *Gazillionare Delux,* although the new Space Trader game I've seen floating around the Great Games Experiment is a refreshing step in the right direction.


Haha. I remember my sister and I playing the demo for that. 
Good times.


----------



## psion (Nov 13, 2007)

Bokracroc said:
			
		

> psion said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah, never got the full version myself but maybe I'll break down and order it one of these days.  Another game in that series I'd like to try is Profitania.


----------



## Bokracroc (Nov 13, 2007)

Check out www.manifestogames.com/
They have a quite a few things to try out.


----------



## Foxstar (Nov 14, 2007)

Beat-em-ups as a whole are pretty much dead. Attempts to bring them back have been met with some loveably horrorfic titles or GTA hybrids, largely due in part to the fact that in the USA, Arcades are dead at large and what's left is what's at some amusement parks, Dave and Busters and whatnot. On a home format, beat-em-ups don't do well at all as they tend to be very short and can be blown out within a few days of so so play and they are a one time investment of $50 or less, compared to a Arcade where 4 to 8 players could pour money in the machines every single day and for years, netting a arcade $$$$, thus making the 500 to 2000 dollar or more investment in one machine worth it to a location.

There's also the issue that you need two things to make a beat em up worth making, a really well done set of levels, moves and foes and a engaging main character to play with. These days, making a new X-men would cost some serious money, as well as likely never recoup it's costs.


----------



## psion (Nov 14, 2007)

Bokracroc said:
			
		

> Check out www.manifestogames.com/
> They have a quite a few things to try out.



Thank you Bokracroc, now lets try to get back on track as I'm starting to sense a disturbance in the Topic Force...


----------



## Bokracroc (Nov 15, 2007)

Foxstar said:
			
		

> There's also the issue that you need two things to make a beat em up worth making, a really well done set of levels, moves and foes and a engaging main character to play with. *These days, making a new X-men would cost some serious money, as well as likely never recoup it's costs.*



And the kicker is that most publishers and the like want Absolutely Minimum Cost <-> Maximum Profit these days.
Screw time and effort, it's chew and spit now.


----------



## ADF (Nov 15, 2007)

PyroVulpine said:
			
		

> Exactly. Anyone who has played all four Elder Scrolls games knows that Oblivion has pretty much stayed true to its roots. TES has always been about dungeon crawling, and always will. Ever play Arena? It almost doesn't even have a storyline, being nearly a pure dungeon crawler.


The problem with TES IV isn't its play style consistency with the previous games, as far as I know that is. The problem is the game mechanics, everything about the game is designed around complete morons who couldn't follow a set of instructions if you wrote them down for them. 

The type of people who couldn't find a cube sat on a shelf one room from the entrance,  the type of people who get lost in the wilderness even though the directions are in their journal, the type who complain because they wandered into a high level area and got their ass handed to them at level one, the type that wants to do whatever they want without cause and effect, the type that complains about having to read more than a sentence, the type that even with a city to city fast travel system still complained about how boring it was to have to 'move' before getting anywhere.

The type of people that probably didn't like role playing games in the first place.

Oblivion catered to these ADD morons who would probably be happier playing a modern graphics Diablo clone than TES game, ruining it for anyone that actually values not being handled with kids gloves and having everything that requires effort already done for them.


----------



## Bokracroc (Nov 15, 2007)

Ha. I remember that Cube thing. Early Main Story quest right?
My mate was complaining it wasn't in there/he was in the wrong place.
I boot up his save, wander around and find it in 2 minutes. Found it on a shelf in plain view with other old (valuable) stuff. But then again, when I comes to RPG's, I'm a total looter/horder.
The problem is that they short-changed the Exploration for Neon-Signs.

Morrowind actually had Level Scaling like Oblivion does, but it was actually implemented and used effectively. Open up the TES Editor thing, load the Morrowind file and check in Creatures (or whatever it is).


----------



## psion (Nov 15, 2007)

Well, it appears we have a decent list to start with:
- Old school brawlers
- Complex trade and business simulations (which I admit are there but not in the way they could be)
- Old school RPGs (I'm not sure I even want to touch this one.)
- Adventure games (interactive fiction wasn't that popular last time I checked but then the indie community is having a field day with this genre.)

So MadPlumber, what do you intend to do with this information?  Just looking for a conversation starter?


----------



## Meliz (Nov 15, 2007)

i want me some REAL games again. you know. the 32 bit kind. SNES stuff.

they had REAL games. now everybody has their own game, and they all stink. i want some real rpgs again, not that cr*p like they're flinging at us with the "rpg" sticker on it. Rogue Galaxy isn't bad, i love it, but i wouldn't call it an rpg. it's adventure rpg. as a game, it's solid. but pure, it is not.

back in the day a game had to be good to be released. since 3D came to the stage, this rule was dumped. hence, superman 64. it beat Shaq Fu off its throne and kept bashing till shaq was a pile of liquid. S64 was just that bad.

doesn't stop there. the sequal cr*p comes with. Who here really wanted to see ****in' Chrono Cross?

just because something is good, doesn't mean we want to see it continued. the same world, the same characters, sure. but just keep going on about one thing - hell, that's a soap opera right there.

final fantasy. can't say i really loved any since 6. well, of course, the GBA remake of FF 1 and 2, and the DS remake of FF 3, and crystal chronicals wasn't THAT bad. FF IX had its charms, and i got sucked in the first disc of FFVII. VIII had an awesome overall plot but it was distributed too poorly. it was boring and very very hard to get. X2 almost made X worth the time you spent on it, but only if you can appreciate the totaly excuse they're making with "sorry FFX was such a piece of cr*p, here's some parody of it as a sequel, plz don't killz us?!"

halo 2. 3. lame. the first was decent.

sequels don't return the fans for more. remakes won't, either.

****. was there a rudora no hihou 2? NO!!!

the only really sequel that didn't blow chunks was Star Ocean, the second story. and that wasn't really a sequel, it was "something that happened afterwards, which is pretty cool and we think you might like it"

and yes, till the end of time (SO3) pushed my limits.

the 32 bit age was gold, either a game was super awesome, or you didn't buy it.

now, it needs good graphics, surround sound, HIGH DEFINITION WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

so long, gameplay, replay value, storyline, character development, FUN!!!

the more time passes by, the less games appear that can hold me for more than a minute. the recent exceptions were

twilight princess
rogue galaxy
tales of symphonia
pokÃ©mon coliseum (i am so ****ing sad i never got to buy gale of darkness, i played it at a friend's house and i loved it, then a week later his sis destroyed the disc)
timesplitters, future perfect
skies of arcadia
killzone
ephemeral phantasia (check it out, it's PS2 and it's wicked awesome.)

note how there's no xbox games in there.

so here's one for all the xbox f*gzorz... i mean fanboys:
DOAXtreme Beach Volleyball

bring back the golden age of the SNES.

d*mn. i wanted to reply in a few short sentences.


----------



## AlexX (Nov 15, 2007)

Meliz said:
			
		

> i want me some REAL games again. you know. the 32 bit kind. SNES stuff.


To be incredibly nitpicky, SNES games are 16-bit. GBA ones are 32-bit.


> sequels don't return the fans for more. remakes won't, either.


Sequals depend whether they are good games that make sense in the continuity, or were slapped together just to get people who liked the original to buy them. Remakes... Depends on how long since the game they're remaking was originally made and/or how badly they're in need of one. For example, they are currently remaking the first Fire Emblem game (the one with Marth) for the DS. Considering that the first FE game was an NES game, the fact there were a considerable amount of balance issues with the characters, and the fact so much about the series has changed since it was first made, this remake will be incredibly welcome.


----------



## Meliz (Nov 15, 2007)

AlexX said:
			
		

> Meliz said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



SNES was designed 16 bit, yes. 

i'm too lazy to retype, sorry, and i'm supposed to be studying now , so here is my buddy wikicopypaste:

The 32-bit era and beyond

While other companies were moving on to 32-bit systems, Rare and Nintendo proved that the Super NES was still a strong contender in the market. In November 1994, Rare released Donkey Kong Country, a platform game featuring 3D models and textures pre-rendered on SGI workstations. With its detailed graphics, careful game design and high-quality music, Donkey Kong Country rivaled the quality of games that were being released on newer 32-bit CD-based consoles. In the last 45 days of 1994, the game sold 6.1 million units, making it the fastest-selling video game in history to that date. This game sent a message that early 32-bit systems had little to offer over the Super NES, and helped make way for the more advanced consoles on the horizon.[

and it's sequEl. i think. pretty sure. lol.

if fire emblem ds remake bombs, i bet it won't be as welcome. just emulate the old one.


----------



## ADF (Nov 15, 2007)

Bokracroc said:
			
		

> Ha. I remember that Cube thing. Early Main Story quest right?
> My mate was complaining it wasn't in there/he was in the wrong place.
> I boot up his save, wander around and find it in 2 minutes. Found it on a shelf in plain view with other old (valuable) stuff. But then again, when I comes to RPG's, I'm a total looter/horder.
> The problem is that they short-changed the Exploration for Neon-Signs.


I understand some people may simply miss it by accident, you are not a complete idiot for making honest mistakes like that. But what sort of people are Bethesda catering to when they decided on the quest leash that points out every object of interest before you can even see them? >.=.<

It completely ruins the adventure and discovery aspects of the game, maybe for some quests since NPCs wander but everything? Absolutely every place of interest you could possibly discover to make extra sure you don't get a nice surprise by stumbling on it by yourself?

I'd turn the bloody thing off like quite a few mods allow; but the whole game is built on it, NPCs no longer give the crucial information they used to.



			
				Bokracroc said:
			
		

> Morrowind actually had Level Scaling like Oblivion does, but it was actually implemented and used effectively. Open up the TES Editor thing, load the Morrowind file and check in Creatures (or whatever it is).


I know, you couldn't encounter golden saints till around level 15-20 for instance. But like you said they implemented it intelligently, you could still find areas you couldn't do till higher levels and treasure that would generally surprise you. 

The way Oblivion does it punishes players for not being level 40 the moment you step out of your cell.


----------



## AlexX (Nov 15, 2007)

Meliz said:
			
		

> if fire emblem ds remake bombs, i bet it won't be as welcome. just emulate the old one.


You've clearly never played the original, because the original FE1 is incredibly unimpressive compared to the new ones. I'm not kidding when I say that it _needs_ a remake. I could go on about the reasons why that is... So I will.

-Only a handful of the 40+ playable charactere were good
Compare that to Path of Radience or Radient Dawn, where you can use anyone you want and their statistical averages won't let you down.
-Of the handful of good units, only a small portion of that could promote
When units promote in Fire Emblem, they get stat boosts and their level is reset so that they can continue getting stronger. Not being able to promote was a handicap for many characters that otherwise would have been good.
-Everyone looked the same
Nowadays your allies always have at least custom outfit colors so that they do not look generic. The first game did not have this luxury.
-No weapon triangle
This makes axes more or less a useless weapon to have
-Use of the storage costs money to deposit or withdraw items
This *REALLY* adds up in a game where you'll use it often, and weapons and items aren't cheap (and you only gain money through chests, which is a pretty rare occurance)
-EXP gain is at a fixed rate
You gained up to 10 EXP for attacking an enemy and 35 for killing them in the original, regardless of how strong or how weak your character is. Current games fix this by allowing weaker allies to gain levels faster while stronger ones gain them slower (though in all games 100 EXP is always needed for units to level up).
-No variety in classes
Newer ones have a large array to choose from, but FE1 only had a half dozen or so classes and the ones that they promote into.
-Final boss is not harmable by anyone not named Marth
Marth cannot promote, nor does he have anything special in terms of stat growths, but he's the only one who can harm the final boss since he's the only one who can use the Falchion, making it a total bitch to win. Even worse is that you can actually MISS getting the Falchion, locking yourself at the point where winning is completely impossible.


----------



## Meliz (Nov 15, 2007)

AlexX said:
			
		

> You've clearly never played the original, because the original FE1 is incredibly unimpressive compared to the new ones. I'm not kidding when I say that it _needs_ a remake. I could go on about the reasons why that is... So I will.
> 
> -Only a handful of the 40+ playable charactere were good
> Compare that to Path of Radience or Radient Dawn, where you can use anyone you want and their statistical averages won't let you down.
> ...



besides me not liking anything of the fire emblem sort, it had nothing to do with things.

anything that boms is no longer invited. just logic, perhaps misinterpreted.

you don't have to advertise fire emblem to me, i'm not gonna play it.

the only one of those games i played was bahamut lagoon, and that was just an hour long. i hate those games. not enough action, too much like chess.

and to the tards that go "OOO joo just l4m3 cuz U cnt w1n u suxxor" and that stuff... cuz i can hear them rumbling at me as we speak,

in real life, strategic decisions are made like in those games. but in real life, there are no turns. you do as much you can as soon as you can, and you don't WAIT for the enemy to finish up whatever he was doing.

RTS blowz.

but, if you like fire emblem, i hope the ds remake will be teh shizzle (in a good way). hope you enjoy playing it and if i ever meet you, we could be like, "hey you're the dude that doesn't like RTS!" and i'd be like "hey yeah that sounds like something i'd say! let's go and have a beer!" and we'd be like, all drunk and stuff and we have to hold on to the floor or else we'd fall off, and stuff. that would be cool. ^^

gaming is the only culture that doesn't promote violence, hate, or a belief of selfsuperiority.

teh yayz.

oh and i DID play the original. i heard good things about it; then i found out it was RTS while i was playing it.

i turned it off and walked away. no offense. just not my bag.


----------



## AlexX (Nov 15, 2007)

My point was that it's going to be pretty hard to make the game bomb when it's already pretty inferior to the rest of the series. Screenshots have already shown it fixes many of the problems I mentioned, so that makes it even less likely to do so.

Also... Fire Emblem is a strategy RPG, not a real-time strategy. Of course, I can still understand if one were to dislike it, though. It's not for everyone.


----------



## Meliz (Nov 15, 2007)

i call "chess" an "rts" game. meh.


----------



## Bokracroc (Nov 15, 2007)

Chess would be a TBS.



			
				Meliz said:
			
		

> the more time passes by, the less games appear that can hold me for more than a minute. the recent exceptions were
> 
> twilight princess
> rogue galaxy
> ...


lawl Objection.

Future Perfect has a Xbox release which rated the same as the PS2 and GC versions
I have the manual for it right on my desk for some reason to boot.


----------



## Digitalpotato (Nov 15, 2007)

Meliz said:
			
		

> back in the day a game had to be good to be released.



Nope. The SNES library was choc full of crap-games. 


and who wanted to see Chrono Cross? Well a lot of people did - About as much people as who wanted to see a "Mother 3"/"Earthbound 2", and the rest of the Loom Games. Why? 

There were still loose ends at the end of the stories - What happened to Schala? Who was that entity who was making the time portals?



> gaming is the only culture that doesn't promote violence, hate, or a belief of selfsuperiority.



I don't know if I should be happy for you or sad that you've never gone onto Xbox Live or World of Warcraft....


----------



## psion (Nov 15, 2007)

Meliz said:
			
		

> back in the day a game had to be good to be released.


Dude, try saying that after watching even ONE episode of the Angry Video Game Nerd (no, he's not related to the Angry German Kid.)  The SNES and it's rivals had plenty of crap games in their time, apparently enough to inspire one guy to make a web show about them.



			
				Digitalpotato said:
			
		

> Meliz said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Indeed, you clearly haven't played Half-Life 2 on deathmatch have you Meliz?


----------



## Xidus (Nov 15, 2007)

I've noticed that most of the games talked about here are RPGs...

Back on topic, they need to make more claustrophobic 6DOF shooters. In other words, a good Descent-style game. Hardly any story, very repetitive, but still fun because it was nothing but blasting everything that moved, and although I sadly haven't experienced it, multiplayer is probably insanely fun. Where else can you hide on the ceiling, watching your opponent race past under you, and then you drop down to cram an Earthshaker up his thrusters?


----------



## Bokracroc (Nov 16, 2007)

A Decent-like game is an extremely niche market, more so Mil-Sims.


----------



## Zero_Point (Nov 16, 2007)

Meliz said:
			
		

> twilight princess
> rogue galaxy
> tales of symphonia
> pokÃ©mon coliseum (i am so ****ing sad i never got to buy gale of darkness, i played it at a friend's house and i loved it, then a week later his sis destroyed the disc)
> ...



Uh... Didn't Killzone suck overall?


----------



## Meliz (Nov 16, 2007)

killzone ruled... to me.

it's all my opinion and to kill off any arguement they tossed at me, like xbox live (i hate xbox and what they stand for. you are free to like them, i don't care.)

he're my counterstatement.

i'm a hypocrite.

and yes, TSFP had an xbox release. but i'm talking about the PS2 release.


----------



## MadPlumber (Nov 18, 2007)

psion said:
			
		

> So MadPlumber, what do you intend to do with this information?  Just looking for a conversation starter?


Well, it is slightly a conversation starter, but it is also of personal interest that I know what kind of games others like to play and if the cohere with what interests me.

Anyway, this topic looks to have jumped track, so let me try to get it aligned again.

*Star Wars Flight Simulators*  Yeah, it's a pretty narrowed field, but I have to admit that of all the licensed property simulators available, Star Wars ones hold my top interest.  _(And when I say "Star Wars", I mean the original trilogy, not this prequel crap.)_

A critical element that I feel that all Star Wars flight simulators should be mandatorily designed around is the first person cockpit view perspective.  My love for cockpit view games stems from me playing the Ray Tobey action game _Skyfox_ on my Apple IIe.  That game was the closest to emulating the feeling of piloting an X-Wing from first person.  Star Wars console games of late seem to eradicate the element of cockpit view in favor of behind-the-ship view.  I should also note that some of the console games I played _(prequel games, I admit)_ felt, as also a game critic put it, like I was piloting a floating turret.

The last descent Star Wars flight simulator I played was _X-Wing Alliance_.  Those _Rogue Squadron_ games had their novelty, but they don't really fit the bill of flight simulator.  Also, much to my chagrin, I never had the opportunity to test my game proficiency with or against other human players.  I would imagine if my sister is able to play what look to be fairly high FPS sessions of World of Warcraft, that it would be possible to play hosted sessions of smaller group melees.


----------



## Foxstar (Nov 18, 2007)

AlexX said:
			
		

> Meliz said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Remakes kick serious ass if done right. And squeals are fantastic too. Earthbound is a sequal but you never hear anyone talking about Mother1, do you? The rest of Meliz's post i'll skip till someone can translate and present it in a more readable format.


----------



## Meliz (Nov 18, 2007)

dude when done right ANYTHING is cool. but name sequels from the last few years that really rocked. and if you want it in a readable format, edit it in wordpad, add some punctuation, stuff like that.

but don't matter anyway, it's my opinion, you don't need to agree to it, and i don't want you to be offended by it. basically, the only reason why i wrote that post, is because i wanted it to be out there.

and there's a couple things that i just take for granted, like, anything that is done GOOD rocks. but the crude generalisation i made,

""""sequels don't return the fans for more. remakes won't, either""""

in full it would look like

""""the last few years, almost every game that continues off another game or is a remake of an older game has proven, to me, to be below standard and as such i have almost none to none enjoyment gained from them. i do not believe these tactics, of remaking or continuing games for cashing in on the fans of the original games, to hold any ground and should not be tolerated.""""

also, www.donttakemeseriouslyimahypocrite.com

i'm a founding member. lol.


----------



## Bokracroc (Nov 20, 2007)

Meliz said:
			
		

> it's all my opinion and to kill off any arguement they tossed at me, like xbox live *(i hate xbox and what they stand for.* you are free to like them, i don't care.)


lul wat?

Explain.


----------



## Meliz (Nov 20, 2007)

I don't like World of Warcraft, nor Guild Wars, nor MMORPG's for that matter.

Xbox live doesn't do anything for me. why would i want to play on a console with people all around the world?

and xbox = microsoft plan to rool teh woyld. it r teh devilz magik.

but, hey, if you like that stuff, like, i hope you have fun with it ^^ and lots of years of fun to come!

just don't expect to run into me in WoW or on xbox Live or whatever. won't be there. not gonna happen.

microsoft had no business on the gaming market - and for the record, halflife 2, what i played of it, blew chunks.

on the remake thingies, if they only improve the graphics and the quality of the sound, then they should remake Halflife, opposing force and blue shift. but don't mess with the game, don't "improve" or "add" to it. just up the sound quality, visual quality, and release it as HalfLife : The Black Mesa Incident or something.

cuz all three games happen at the same time? it's one incident. and stuff. lol

but like, you don't HAVE to agree with my opinion.

and Bokracroc, in my native language, Dutch, you said "Penis what?"

lul is cock. i thought joos wuz callin' me namez. carry on.


----------



## ShÃ nwÃ ng (Nov 20, 2007)

I prefer not to get trapped in one generation of gaming otherwise I fear I might miss out on some really good stuff.


----------



## Bokracroc (Nov 22, 2007)

Meliz said:
			
		

> Xbox live doesn't do anything for me. *why would i want to play on a console with people all around the world?*


I don't know, I'm not you. Tell us.



			
				Meliz said:
			
		

> and xbox = microsoft plan to rool teh woyld. it r teh devilz magik.
> 
> microsoft had no business on the gaming market -


Why doesn't have Microsoft have any business in the gaming market for?
If you didn't have the 360, the Wii wouldn't have to innovate and the PS3 could be charging whatever the hell it wanted and getting away with it.



			
				Meliz said:
			
		

> and Bokracroc,* in my native language, Dutch, you said "Penis what?"
> *
> *lul is cock*. i thought joos wuz callin' me namez. carry on.


You really do learn things everyday.


----------



## Meliz (Nov 23, 2007)

Bokracroc said:
			
		

> Meliz said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



i just don't like xbox. i don't like the controls, i don't like the machine, i don't like the idea, nor the fancrowd.

but i DO like dead or alive extreme beach volleyball

i don't have a 360. get your shit straight ^^

and the PS3 IS charging what they want AND getting away with it. to make it, it only costs half of what you pay for it.

and yeah. lulz are cool. i have six myself ^^


----------



## Bokracroc (Nov 24, 2007)

Meliz said:
			
		

> i just don't like xbox. i don't like the controls, i don't like the machine, i don't like the idea, nor the fancrowd.


So because you don't like the hardware "microsoft had no business on the gaming market"?



			
				Meliz said:
			
		

> and the PS3 IS charging what they want AND getting away with it. to make it, it only costs half of what you pay for it.


Actually the PS3 is selling at a loss (last time I checked anyway), it's the games that make the profit.


----------



## Meliz (Nov 24, 2007)

Bokracroc said:
			
		

> Meliz said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



dude i'm NOT going to keep this thread alive with you and me just bitching up against each other.

again, you don't have to agree with me, but i don't want to make you feel like i'm ignoring you, i hate it when people ignore others.

and you're wrong. i don't like xbox for a variety of reasons, which are not always as easy to explain as others. i'll admit, there's some bias to it, but a lot of games for xbox just sucked to me. however, sudeki wasn't bad either. but i heard it's better on pc.

and, ps3 machines cost only half to make what they cost to buy. sony is full of it. they're going for the emo approach, so you'd feel sorry for them and buy their stuff because they want you to have a ps3 so bad they'd lose money off of it.

no company would ever do that, either. doesn't matter how much the games make them.

unrelated completely : xkcd

also, i will no longer reply to this thread. it's closed to me from now on.


----------



## Bokracroc (Nov 24, 2007)

So you don't like Multiplayer, whoop-de-do. I'm just waiting for a justified response to why you hate the Xbox.
-Sony and Nintendo have the same idea as the Xbox (unless it's some esle than Make games, Make money).
-The PS2/3 controller is pretty horrible itself. Pfft, screw ergonomics.
Yes, the old Xbox brick controller sucks nuts, but the one that took it's place is fine unless you have tiny baby hands.
-You still haven't said why Microsoft doesn't belong in the Gaming Market, which they've been in from at least 1995-1996.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_3#Sales_and_production_costs


> The PlayStation 3's initial production cost is estimated to have been US$805.85 for the 20 GB model and US$840.35 for the 60 GB model;[55] however, they were priced at US$499 and US$599, respectively.[56] The high manufacturing costs meant that every unit was sold at a loss of approximately $250,



Sudeki had a PC release? I'd hardly see it being better than the Xbox version. Hardly suited for the PC. Was still kinda cool though (I always used that Elco guy when I could).


As for not making I want to play:
World In Flames comes out next year
Most of the games I currently want are have multi platform releases.
Pro Evo 8 for DS comes out tomorrow.
and I'm quite happy playing all my older games.


----------



## Meliz (Nov 24, 2007)

Bokracroc said:
			
		

> So you don't like Multiplayer, whoop-de-do. I'm just waiting for a justified response to why you hate the Xbox.
> -Sony and Nintendo have the same idea as the Xbox (unless it's some esle than Make games, Make money).
> -The PS2/3 controller is pretty horrible itself. Pfft, screw ergonomics.
> Yes, the old Xbox brick controller sucks nuts, but the one that took it's place is fine unless you have tiny baby hands.
> ...



-i don't like the people on xbox live. it's not just bias.
-xbox isn't about "make games, make money". they're all about "make crap, trick people into spending money on them. often."
-i didn't say the ps3 controller didn't suck. for the record, it does.
-both xbox controllers suck. crap response.
-xbox hasn't been around since then. and microsoft provided the PLATFROM on which games were played. they didn't start making games until the Halo days.

ANYYYYY-WAAAAAAAY.... stop quoting me.


----------



## Bokracroc (Nov 24, 2007)

-The PS3 and PC's play-base is just as awful as the Xbox (CSS anyone?)
-Sure... because the PS2 totally didn't have any crap games at all (not to mention, most crap games were multi-platform anyway)
-And how do you suck. What exactly is 'crap response' meant to mean and how does it effect the Xbox?
I've never had a 'response' problem with the controllers. Certain games may have sluggish controls but the controller itself?
-Microsoft Games?
Close Combat? Flight Simulator? Monster Truck Madness? Motocross Madness? Midtown Madness? Age Of Empires?
Microsoft Game Studios (Or Microsoft Games as it used to be call) is a publisher.
They are the same as Rockstar Games or 2k Games.


----------



## Monster Tamer (Nov 28, 2007)

Mostly railshooters with light guns... HOUSE OF THE DEAD 2! You could even play with TWO pistols! I'd kill to play it again...

Oh, and aircraft shooters. Gradius, Ikaruga, anyone?


----------



## Bokracroc (Nov 29, 2007)

Ghost Squad is pretty damn kick-arse (and coming to the Wii).
And I'm pretty sure they still make Virtua Cop and Time Crisis alone with misc. ones.


----------



## MadPlumber (Nov 29, 2007)

Monster Tamer said:
			
		

> Mostly railshooters with light guns ... and aircraft shooters ...


Ah!  Very good!  I think I remember Terminator 2 being one of those railshooters that you described.  I even remember a game where one player drove the car and the other player controlled the gun.  They never made many home games of the shooting gallery genre.

And when you mentioned Gradius, you reminded me that there were some similar aircraft shooter games equiped in the compilation disc "Taito Legends 2"; "Gekirindan", "Grid Seeker", and "Darius Gaiden" are some of the examples.  Still, I too would enjoy seeing that genre return.

*Yours is a very welcome input.  Thanks for sharing it!*


----------



## Monster Tamer (Nov 29, 2007)

MadPlumber said:
			
		

> Ah!  Very good!  I think I remember Terminator 2 being one of those railshooters that you described.  I even remember a game where one player drove the car and the other player controlled the gun.  They never made many home games of the shooting gallery genre.
> 
> And when you mentioned Gradius, you reminded me that there were some similar aircraft shooter games equiped in the compilation disc "Taito Legends 2"; "Gekirindan", "Grid Seeker", and "Darius Gaiden" are some of the examples.  Still, I too would enjoy seeing that genre return.
> 
> *Yours is a very welcome input.  Thanks for sharing it!*


Yeah, I'm all about digging old arcades just to play those nowadays. Hope that the Wii bring the railshooter genre back!

And you want to see something funny? Give to a player under 15 years a copy of Gradius, and look at their reaction. XD They give up on the first stage. Ah, good times where the Madness difficult level was so common...


----------



## psion (Nov 30, 2007)

I personally could never get into rail shooters even though some had their moments, maybe the Wii Zapper will change that... Bring back the genre that is.


----------



## Bokracroc (Dec 1, 2007)

I can hardly see Rail Shooters making a Console comeback.
It's the total opposite of what everyone is making and apparently everyone loves (Read: Sandbox).


----------



## psion (Dec 2, 2007)

Bokracroc said:
			
		

> I can hardly see Rail Shooters making a Console comeback.
> It's the total opposite of what everyone is making and apparently everyone loves (Read: Sandbox).



A good story will sell anything, indie developers will try anything, people are weird?  Take your pick, one of those is probably a good reason.


----------



## Meliz (Dec 6, 2007)

Bokracroc said:
			
		

> -The PS3 and PC's play-base is just as awful as the Xbox (CSS anyone?)
> -Sure... because the PS2 totally didn't have any crap games at all (not to mention, most crap games were multi-platform anyway)
> -And how do you suck. What exactly is 'crap response' meant to mean and how does it effect the Xbox?
> I've never had a 'response' problem with the controllers. Certain games may have sluggish controls but the controller itself?
> ...



-pc gaming is saved with emulation and dos games. and prey. and lok: defiance. and chaos legion. and evil dead: regeneration. and farcry (the pc version. the xbox version ftw.
-ps2 has plenty of shit games. but the ration of "crap to decent games" on any platform, xbox takes the cake. the shit cake. for every decent game, there are 30 stinkers. ps2, that's one to fifteen. pc, too many super cool freeware games to even notice the stinkers. unless you watch tv and read gaming magazines.
-you call flight simulator a game? there's something wrong with you.
-all controllers since the SNES controller were shit. the only halfway decent ones since then are the Logitech Precision and the Logitech Rumble Pad 2.
-i don't suck.
-and for the record, point and click games. they should bring back lucasgames. and ron gilbert. hell yeah.


----------



## Kerta-Losataure (Dec 17, 2007)

Double Dragon, I miss thee...


----------

