|
Post by DOOFY on May 28, 2003 19:17:28 GMT -5
well i'm sure thats true, but it just doesn't work for me, i need to here it from some one in person.
|
|
|
Post by Cobra5 on May 28, 2003 19:19:40 GMT -5
I agree. Hearing it from someone in person is better then seeing it on TV for some reason. That and magazine reviews. I like those a lot, too.
|
|
|
Post by DOOFY on May 28, 2003 19:22:22 GMT -5
yeah i go by magazine review a little, but mostly from experience and from what i here, but me being the biggest gamer in my school i do'nt here much from other people, they usualy ask me stuff about games.
|
|
|
Post by copyKatt on May 28, 2003 19:29:50 GMT -5
lol, you the wise man on the mountin when it comes to games huh?
|
|
|
Post by DOOFY on May 28, 2003 19:32:10 GMT -5
mainly GTA3 and Vice City, people i don't know ask me stuff about those games, its wierd i'll just be sitting there and someone will come up and just ask me something about GTA, its crazy.
|
|
Χρνος
Forum Regular
God of Time
Posts: 785
|
Post by Χρνος on May 28, 2003 21:15:15 GMT -5
I hate G4, because it only appeals to NEW games.
I looked at it for like 10 minutes, and NOWHERE could I find anything that WASNT on a next-gen console. WTF happened to the SNES? I HIGHLY doubt that just because new games look prettier doesnt make them better games. A good game is NOT defined by how pretty it looks. Its how good the game IS.
The new games, like GTA3/Vice City REVOLVE around the new graphics, thats what the game IS... its graphics. Thats how they made the game, and thats how they wanted it. That makes it a good game, because it sticks to what it is. Now, if you take pretty much ANY rpg after the SNES, its total crap...compared to the SNES. Why? Because those games wanted to have good graphics AND a good game. This, rarely ever happens. The only new RPG that was any good in my oppinion, is Skies of Arcadia.
ok, im gonna stop there. if you dont understand my point by now, then you didnt start playing games at a young/early enough time.
|
|
|
Post by BugHunter on May 28, 2003 22:58:09 GMT -5
I just love how all of you guys' opinions are biased and ill-informed... ok...take out your flame-retardent armor cus here I goes: - I wouldn't base my judgement on anything when my experience was only 10 minutes with it (unless it was the atari E.T.) - G4 does look into the history of gaming. The only reason they're looking at all the new stuff is because E3 just took place a couple of weeks ago. Hell, they're even showing the very first show ever created just for gaming - "Starcade" (1985-ish). They have a show called "Icons" which dwelves in the most important parts of the history, past, gaming, and people of the gaming industry. - I've been playing games since I was 4, buddy - I'm sure ford would also defend that GTA III/Vice City are not just graphically superior games. If you only think that, then you definitely dont know that game. This is the game introduced the full open-ended gameplay to the mass public. Not to mention all the protests its created because of its content makes it worth its weight in gold alone. - G4 also deals with the up-to-date news on the gaming industry. And if you haven't noticed, there have been several releases of game titles that actually rank high on gameplay and graphics. And dont think that all the terrible overrated games are only from today. The past is riddled with several titles that suck but boast "great graphics". - A lot of the staff at G4 and those that work with them are highly revered gaming experts. Hell, a lot have actually had their hands in creating games. I would think that their opinions have some weight. - I myself agree that gameplay is more important than graphics. If there is no "gameplay" then how can you "play" the "game"? (no pun intented hehehe) A lot of the people that work at G4 understand this. And if you would watch the channel for awhile, you would actually see them sometimes debating over this and gameplay would win. - Sorry ford, but you and your friends only seem to deal with racing games, driving games, some shooters, and GTA... Thats not what you would call a very broad understanding of the world of gaming. The world of gaming is very, VERY expansive, and only knowing driving games is not saying much. - But hey, if you like it, stick with it - G4 is not a biased channel. They deal with everything, and i mean EVERYTHING. Hell, they even have a show for sports games called Sweat. I'm not much of a fan of it, but hey, its there. phew...Well thats what i have to say. I hope i didn't forget anything hehe. But please understand that I'm only trying to let you see the light that G4 is a great channel. And just considering that it is the first EVER 24/7 gaming channel makes it very significant.
|
|
Χρνος
Forum Regular
God of Time
Posts: 785
|
Post by Χρνος on May 28, 2003 23:59:12 GMT -5
Well, I've NEVER seen them go on about a game before the most recent.
And also, GTA3 kicks ass. The graphics WAS the gameplay, which worked out all fine in the end.
This is mostly a debate of owldskool vz newskool. I can firmly believe in both, because oldskewl games had no graphics, so they all had the gameplay (in general). It's the reverse (in general, again) for nooskool.
For example, 4 player Bomberman (SNES) kicks as much ass as 4 player Halo/SSBM does. Thats what i think.
|
|
|
Post by copyKatt on May 29, 2003 18:24:32 GMT -5
ive watched G4 a couple times, and it didnt seem to me like it was based souly on the new games. they had a little bit of both, im pretty sure. but i will have to agree about snes games. ive been playing nintendo games all my life, and now i still play snes more then the playstation sometimes . i think that super mario world for the snes is alot better then mario 64. you just cant beat the originals ;D
|
|
|
Post by DOOFY on May 29, 2003 19:34:00 GMT -5
i agree with bughunter and chronos GTA3 and Vice City are great games, not just for their graphics, their gameplay is great, and it was the first game were you could do anything you wanted.
second i'm the one that plays racing and shooting and GTA, but my friends play everything, rpgs and all the othe ones, so i hear stuff about other games besides the ones i play.
third i fully agree that graphics don't make a game great, graphics could be great and the games sucks for ex. PS 1 had a game called spec ops, good grashics bad gameplay, i love to play classics like Duck hunt for nitendo and the original super mario, also games like golden eye and perfect dark, graphics were good but not the best, however they made up for it in their gameplay.
we'll now i'm done.
|
|
Χρνος
Forum Regular
God of Time
Posts: 785
|
Post by Χρνος on May 29, 2003 19:42:35 GMT -5
OK well, I think your missing my point about GTA3...
See, GTA3 is so good because (other than the do whatever you want [which IS cool]) it looks so good.
Think of this: if you take the graphics out of a game, and its STILL a good game, then its main focus was on gameplay. If you take the graphics away from GTA3 and say, replace them with 8-bit graphics(which would actually be funny) it WAY would not be as good of a game. Therefore, since if you take the graphics away from the game and it looses the gameplay, the focus of the game was on graphics.
If anyone would want to play Halo if it looked like FF1, I would like to know.
|
|
|
Post by DOOFY on May 29, 2003 19:47:59 GMT -5
i think i get your point, but the original GTA looked like crap and i still played it just because i liked the game so much, i bought it, traded it in and bought it again because i liked it and i got rid of it too soon.
|
|
Χρνος
Forum Regular
God of Time
Posts: 785
|
Post by Χρνος on May 29, 2003 19:51:20 GMT -5
Well, im pretty sure it was topatha line graphics back then, like GTA3 is(was) now.
|
|
|
Post by Cobra5 on May 29, 2003 19:54:38 GMT -5
I suppose it's a conbinatation. GTA's apeal is it's gameplay, I believe. There just arn't any other games like it. The whole thing about GTA3 was how new and revolutionary it was.
But, you can't have that special gamplay without the graphics. It just won't work. You'll just get another GTAII, which wasn't bad, but by no means met up with GTAIII
And I agree fullheartedly about the RPGs. The best ones were on SNES. Chronotrigger, FF5, FF6 (1-4 didn't spark my tastes), Etc. Etc. I think the only RPG on a newer console was FF7, which was as good as the SNES ones. FF8-10, 10 in particular, were just crap, though. (And there's a perfect example- FF10 had good graphics, bad game...)
Oh, and BTW... G4 does have MINIMAL stuff on older games, but that's only because you can't have 'news' or previews, or things like that on games that have been around for years. However, they by no means shrug of the older ones- On the top 100 games of all time, many of the games were older, like X-com, and chronotrigger, and space invaders, tetris, pac man, etc...
|
|
|
Post by DOOFY on May 29, 2003 19:54:55 GMT -5
no it wasn't, trust me, look some snap shots of it
|
|