games that i didnt like (1 Viewer)

[Kelley_B]

Must get me one of those GBA-TV things!

 

[Dan Hine]

I was just thinking the same thing Kelley! I had no idea you could do that and there have been a few games that did look interesting enough on the GB Advance but I was against it b/c of the screen. This info makes me very happy! Thanks Romier!

 

[Joseph Young]

I think developers should take the steps into 3-D, but I would prefer they do it in a spinoff series that employs mechanics and ideas from the 2-D games without actually continuing the series of the 2-D games.

That's a good idea. Kind of like insurance in case the game flops... I'm sure Konami wishes Castlevania64 could be swept under the rug in this same manner...
Anyway, take my comments with a grain of salt... after all, we musn't let a thread called 'games I didn't like' get boring!
cheers,
~j

 

[Dan Hine]

quote:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
when I picked up Zelda: The Ocarina of Time I felt like I was playing Mario with a green hat and a sword.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Again, eh?? How can a game without a jump button be that reminiscient of Mario64 other than being in 3D? I can't think of two more dissimilar games personally, other than both having advanced the 3D action/adventure genre.

All I'm saying is when I started playing it I didn't feel like I was playing Zelda. And since both Zelda and Mario did have (IMO) graphics that seemed to better fit a 7 yr old, I lumped them together. And it's more than they are both 3D. They use the same character design. The worlds looked very similar too. Probably because both games were created from the same basic engine. I just didn't feel like I was playing Zelda. And seeing how Zelda, Metroid, and the Final Fantasy games pre-PS One (though I haven't played 9 or 10 yet) are my favorite games of all time, I was hurt when I played Zelda: The Ocarina of Time. For whatever reason, I felt cheated.

 

[Morgan Jolley]

I'm sure Konami wishes Castlevania64 could be swept under the rug in this same manner

Well, they did make Castlevania: Legacy of Darkness...

 

[Dan Hine]

And they can't do this in 3-D?

I have nothing against 3D. I just feel that some games could/should be 3D and others shouldn't. Metroid, I feel, is more true to the essence that is Metroid in a NON-3D game format. That's all. Mario64 was my favorite Mario game. Even though I suck at them, 3D fighting games are more enjoyable to me. To be fair, I could live with a 3D Metroid, though I would prefer standard 2D/side scrolling. I just have a feeling that a 3D Metroid would not keep its dark, evil, creepy feeling. And a first person Metroid doesn't interest me at all. I have a feeling that most people buying Metroid Prime will not be Metroid fans but rather first person shooter fans.

 

[Romier S]

I have a feeling that most people buying Metroid Prime will not be Metroid fans

Hold those horsies ther bucko. I will be there 10am sharp to buy Metroid Prime at my local EB and I'm damn skippy a Metroid fan. As are ALLOT of the people on this forum who are interested in Metroid. To be honest I dont think that statement will hold true for the general public as well. Metroid is a well recognized name and with the saturation of FPS games on the market right now, the Metroid name will sell Prime before the inclusion of a first person perspective will.

 

[Dan Hine]

Metroid is a well recognized name and with the saturation of FPS games on the market right now, the Metroid name will sell Prime before the inclusion of a first person perspective will.

Still, I guess what I mean is that I don't think the game will sell b/c it is a good game. You seem to be wanting to buy it b/c it is called Metroid and you are a Metroid fan. IMO Metroid Prime is NOT Metroid. It is a first person perspective game that will have some similarities in weapons and familiar enemies and that's all. This is all my opinion but Metroid Prime is NOT what Metroid is about. And as a die hard Metroid lover, I'm not buying it b/c I don't condone what has been done to the series. I'm surprised you don't feel the same way.

 

[Romier S]

And as a die hard Metroid lover, I'm not buying it b/c I don't condone what has been done to the series. I'm surprised you don't feel the same way.

Why the suprise? You shouldn't be. You are correct. I'm buying the game because it is Metroid. Because I can once again play as Samus Aran, do the ball roll. To experience the Metroid universe. Most importantly because I'm open to a new experience even if it includes some changes that I don't particularly agree with. Its your money Dan, do with it as you wish but please if you were a diehard fan of the series as you say you are, you would at the very least give the game a chance and play it instead of looking at a few movies and pictures and slapping a "This will suck" label on it.

 

[Morgan Jolley]

Plain and simple C64 and LOD did not feel like Castlevania

I should have been more clear since you just stated what my point was (they screwed up once, then made a director's cut).

About Metroid Prime...

The way I see it, making the game first person (it's not a FPS game, it's a FPAction/Adventure game) is a good thing for two reasons: 1) a 2-D game on the GameCube won't go over well with stupid people and 2) it brings the game into a new realm and opens up new possibilities. Will we have all the platforming stuff that the 2-D ones had? No, but we instead have the ability to form strategies for bosses in the third dimension, we can run circles around enemies, we can see what it would look like through Samus' eyes, and we may also get an entirely brand new experience. No offense to 2-D games, but once you play one Castlevania game, you've got the basics of the series; you can jump, walk, duck, throw an object, whip things, and there are platforms. What separates the games are boss fights, music, and the storyline (which includes characters). Does that mean the games are dull and boring? Absolutely not, but by moving the series into a new realm of gaming, you can explore many new possibilities and try to expand the experience, even though you have to cut out a few things.

 

[Andre F]

Hold those horsies ther bucko. I will be there 10am sharp to buy Metroid Prime at my local EB and I'm damn skippy a Metroid fan. As are ALLOT of the people on this forum who are interested in Metroid. To be honest I dont think that statement will hold true for the general public as well. Metroid is a well recognized name and with the saturation of FPS games on the market right now, the Metroid name will sell Prime before the inclusion of a first person perspective will.

I couldn't agree more. Metroid for the SNES holds a very special place in my heart. I remember playing it for the first time (where I was, how many beers I had etc). I'm buying Prime strictly because it's Metroid. I normally don't play FPS games, but I'm willing to give this one a try for a few reasons.

1. It looks amazing
2. It's Metroid
3. Miyamoto oversaw and worked with the development team on it

Number 3, is really enough for me.

 

[felix_suwarno]

"That's like saying we should abandon black & white films as a valid artform because all the B&W movies have already been done to death. There's no limit with what you can do with a supposedly 'stale' artform, including 2D. "

no, a new movie with a new story that has never been told would be more than acceptable. but 2D gameplay elements? i think, based on the number of 2D platformer on 8 bit and 16 consoles, it was already done to death. really. they wont be able to think about new gameplay elements. hell, even the new 3D games borrowed a lot of 2D elements! example, compare tomb raider with prince of persia. compare the secret levels on sms with any 2D platforming game. dont you think they are similar?

with 3D, you can at least include new elements, like the element of fear. imagine doing silent hill 2 on, say, saturn. in 2D. are you going to get the same creepy effect? no waaay. can you make your character peek around the corner to see what lies ahead in 2D?

 

[Sean Moon]

2D can deliver many thrills that 3d cannot. 3D can deliver thrills that 2D cannot. I want both around forever, but I fear 2D is dying too damn fast. There are games that just wouldnt be the same in 3d. Castlevania, Shooters like R-Type, Mega Man. 2D is just an art form, like using watercolor instead of acrylic paints.

 

[felix_suwarno]

do you know what i think could not be done in 3D?

any of you remember yoshi's island? on snes? you cannot do that kind of graphics style in 3D. i think it will only work in 2D.

 

[DeanWalsh]

Anything by 3DO... lol

 

[Joseph Young]

no, a new movie with a new story that has never been told would be more than acceptable. i think, based on the number of 2D platformer on 8 bit and 16 consoles, it was already done to death. really. they wont be able to think about new gameplay elements.

Films and videogames embody different mediums, but they can be a valid artform (game designers and movie directors, respectively, can play similar roles).
For anyone who believes that 2D games have 'all been done before': consider that most games, be they 2D or 3D games, follow a successful formula, just as many films do. If someone were to break from that formula, radically or even slightly (for instance, a 2D platformer with gameplay elements in a context never seen before, yes, it can be done), they would be taking a financial gamble (the reason we don't see more innovation) and a logistical gamble (what if it isn't fun?) but just because it hasn't been done doesn't mean it can't be done.

~j

 

[Steve Y]

I gotta jump in and disagree with the whole logic here behind the concept "2D has been done to death". Following that same logic, eventually 3D will have been "done to death" as well, when enough games are made! Or is 3D somehow exempt from creative stagnation? Does the existence of polygons somehow render creative juices inexhaustable?
As Joseph says there are limitations to both "play formats". There are many ways to move pixels on a screen... some people simply prefer one method over the other. For the record, I love great games, be they 2D on rails, 2D nonlinear, 3D on rails, or 3D nonlinear, etc. etc. Some of the greatest games use a combination of the two (right now I'm thinking about the great 3D effects in Yoshi's Island or Klonoa on the PS2 or Sega's Nights for heavens' sake...!)
Videogames certainly can be art. They can also be, to get a little less delicate, steaming piles of dung.
Anyone remember Super Pitfall for the NES? Boy, now there was a crappy 2D game... the control and collision detection were both terrible. But I understand Felix's comments on the first page because for some odd reason I played the heck out of the game (maybe because I spent my own money on it). Almost as if it was so bad I just couldn't look away.
~Steve

 

[JoshF]

I gotta agree with Steve. I just love great games. While I really love the immersion and exploratory nature of nonlinear 3D games like GTA3, Jak and Daxter, and Mario64, I can still pick up my Gameboy and play Super Mario for hours on end.

Here in NYC, Ms. Pac Man rules the bars. Still. That game never gets old.