PSX5Central
Playstation/Gaming Discussions => Gaming Discussion => Topic started by: Bobs_Hardware on February 14, 2002, 07:56:56 AM
-
I really havent put much thought into it, i typed it up in 10 mins, and my thoughts were all over the place so i left some points out and had many of them out of order
Plus this part of the forum is really slow tonight..
I thought of this topic after a discussion with an unnamed board member here who claimed it was "sad" to be arguing about which game has the superior graphics, game on Console X, or game on Console Y.
So my question; is it "sad" to discuss/debate over which games on which console has the better graphics?
I say its a great discussion point, and of an interest to people who like to think that game A has better graphics than game B. Or maybe it goes deeper than that, Console X promised this, but Console Y does it better, Console X is doing this, Console Y isnt, but still looks just as good.
Graphics important to the overall impact of the game? Yes. Why do we get better graphics cards for out PC when the game works at 15 fps with no detail? Graphics do infact include framerate and colour depth and more. These things can play a factor in the game. While playing GT3 i found points where a turn was not recognisable enough to even recognize it in time, why is TimeSplitters 2 going to lengths to be a great FPS at 60fps when Halo is proclaimed the best console FPS (generally) at a mere 30 fps? Because these things matter. They are important to some people. Even if it is only of slight importance, it is very intriguing to discuss such things, as far as i am concerned.
Even something as artistic design is interesting to discuss. Or perhaps the different techniques developers are using to achieve optimum effects.
Then again, why is the GBC or GBA or any hand held popular? Why am i currently hooked on Final Fantasy 5 and 6 and eagily awaiting for my local EB to re-stock in Golden Sun. Why was Vib Ribbin so popular and critically aclaimed (in some circles) Why is retro gaming so lucritive?
While its not important to the quality of a game on a grand scale, it is important enough to put a lot of effort into it, graphics alone can sell some games. So i believe that alone makes it enough of a reason to actually put discussion and even \'debate\' into the graphics of a game.
Anyone else have any thoughts?
-
Graphics for me aren’t really that important..
Sure they are nice to look at for a while, but when you get used to them and find the gameplay boring you are just going to lay down the game.. (At least I would)
Bouncer was a very pretty game, great graphics.. Nice artwork ect.
It was nice to look at for the first hour.. Then you discovered the poor gamplay.. Ugh.
Watch cutscene.. Fight, watch cutscene with alot of blah blah blah.. Run, fight and so on.
I think I played it 2-3 hours.. And I haven’t completed it yet.
-
the question wasnt
"do graphics matter when choosing a game?"
it was along the lines of "are graphics an interesting topic to discuss?"
now i know for a face that you Fastson love arguing/discussing graphics...come on boy...admit it...come on *cracks whip*
-
Originally posted by Bobs_Hardware
the question wasnt
"do graphics matter when choosing a game?"
it was along the lines of "are graphics an interesting topic to discuss?"
now i know for a face that you Fastson love arguing/discussing graphics...come on boy...admit it...come on *cracks whip*
Ya.. I got distraced by a nude woman walking outside... :shy:
Ok.. Yes its pretty fun arguing.
But it aint more important than gamplay when it comes down to the games :clown:
Its interesting to see how each console improves in this area. :)
-
In answering the question "do graphics make for an interesting topic of discussion" I will say most definitely yes, they do. My reasons for saying so are:
1) Game play was [in the beginning] far from stellar. Back when you ran a large yellow mouth around a screen (that never changed) eating dots and ghosts, only to find yourself later upgrading to a small ship that swung side to side on the bottom of your screen shooting what looked liked aliens as they approached you at the speed of Heinz 57. The story lines have gotten better, but the more improvements to the graphics, the more I wanted to play.
2) I\'m the type of guy that likes to hear about statistics. I especially enjoy it when they make sense. When I hear about the graphic enhancements that each console maker has made, it makes me read on. I want to know more.
3) Realism. One word. I love to see how realistic the graphics can be. How close to reality the game can look. I love it when your a squint away from a race car looking like the real thing, and I will love it even more when you can\'t decipher the "game play" image from the real image. I love realism.
These are just a few reasons why I think graphics are a great topic of discussion; there are more of course - many more. But I\'m sure, as time goes on those reasons will surface.
:D
-
IMO graphics is eveything at lest 80%. I just can\'t stand playing a game that really looks bad and have great gameplay. If I wanted real gameplay, I would play RPGs games. But I don\'t buy or like any RPG games. It\'s just not my speed and adventures taste. IMO, eveyone buys a new systems for the up-grade in graphics. If graphics means nothing to me I would just be still playing my PSone.
-
80%, no wonder all you do is talk about the xbox:rolleyes: . Well I can still play games from the NES and have fun, graphics don\'t matter to much to me, gameplay is way more important
-
Is this thread about how much more important Graphics are to game play? I didn’t think so. A game is made only good through its graphics AND game play. A game can have less than stellar graphics, but have a compelling story line (and visa versa) and still get a good rating in my book. It\'s good when you get the best of both worlds. Those are the 9\'s and the 10\'s in my list of favorite games.;)
-
Ok well here is what i think. Graphics are great, but......... they are more like an addition to me. I luv playing my genesis and nes and the graphics suck compared to now. Sure they were good then but now its a whole new ballgame and when ppl like microsoft come out sporting their spiffy new xbox i say that looks kinda kool, but when they give me something like a wrestling game that is the best looking game ever i wont give a $#!t because first i dont like those kinda games and second because the gameplay sux! I mean would you play school 2003 because it looked like real life? If you would then your an idiot. Has anyone played skate and destroy (thrasher) for ps? I luved that game almost more than i loved thps2 because the game overall was just so stellar. When all you have is a game like doa3 with some pretty graphics then after you play it for a few hours what do you have left??? I rather play street fighter alfa 3 with my cuzin. W/e i rest my case.
-
Graphics and Gameplay are 50/50.
Just like women. Personality is a must, but if they aren\'t attractive, sadly, I\'m not interested. Personality can go a long way to improve attractiveness, but like good gameplay, it can only do so much. This may seem shallow, but if there is no attraction, what\'s left? By the same token, a complete knockout is thrilling for a while, but if there\'s nothing else about her that is desireable, I don\'t hang on long.
-
With a lot of developers releasing high res pics of there games with FSAA (*cough* Xbox *cough*) even though the final version won\'t be/have either, graphics are a lot less interesting to talk about IMO. We can\'t have pic wars like we used to because of the developers releasing touched up pics.
For example, we all remember how beautiful Rallisport looked before. The pics were extremely high res and had perfect FSAA. The latest pics, shown at a normal resolution and without the FSAA look a lot worse.
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.teamxbox.com%2Fimages%2Fgames%2Fss%2F283%2Fimage4554.jpg&hash=209d5e3286d16f36a611fa1c0412ac9e64168c75)
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.teamxbox.com%2Fimages%2Fgames%2Fss%2F283%2Fimage4551.jpg&hash=6beb8f0f5c3015b5e609b37d3cb1ce8141842040)
Remember how Microsoft said teh Xbox has FSAA built into the hardware? He he he, yeah right. This is from the official Rallisport forums:
FSAA is not a free feature. It costs a developer memory, fill rate, and frame rate.
For RSC, balancing where our memory was allocated was a challenge. With 64MB, you need to squeeze in the code you want to execute, any music/sound effects you want to play, and load up whatever textures/meshes you want to display. All games struggle with memory usage in this way and you end up reducing texture resolution, using lots of compression, using lower bitrates for sounds or fewer different sounds, and so on, just to fit.
FSAA requires a few MB of memory just to turn on the feature. So any game that spent its memory on visual/audible detail like we have, has to decide whether to reduce that level of detail to add FSAA. It\'s not as simple as giving up some frame rate...if it was, we would have considered shipping a 30fps/FSAA mode as an option.
Back to my point, graphics are not worth discussing until the game is actually released, because up until that time, we don\'t know for sure how the game will look. And by that time, it\'s not nearly as fun to discuss. Graphics are starting to get to the point of diminishing return. I think that in the next 5 years, developers will change their focus from graphics back to gameplay where it belongs. Then we can all have debates on what game plays better. ;)
-
Graphics for me aren’t really that important..
Sure they are nice to look at for a while, but when you get used to them and find the gameplay boring you are just going to lay down the game..
BS!!! Then why don\'t you go play your SNES or Atari. If what you said were really true then we would still be playing with our SEGA Geneses and stuck in the 16-bit era.
Graphics are extremely important, granite the game that a company’s them must be good as well, and other wise it\'s just eye candy. The more realistic the graphics are the more involved we get into the game, especially if it\'s a really well made one.
-
Originally posted by IronFist
I think that in the next 5 years, developers will change their focus from graphics back to gameplay where it belongs. Then we can all have debates on what game plays better. ;)
LOL!! 5 years, developers will change their focus from graphics back to gameplay? When hell freezes over this will happen. IMO, graphics will just get better and better. Do you think the PS3 will have bad graphics and great gameplay? ;)
Do you still think that MS post bad screens shots? You better see Wreckless on your tv because it looks much better then a screen shot. :D
-
I think that in the next 5 years, developers will change their focus from graphics back to gameplay where it belongs. Then we can all have debates on what game plays better.
LOL, I can\'t believe you just said that, what a JOKE! Graphics is what is driving the whole business in video game companies. Why do you think SONY corp. and NVIDIA and the rest are spending millions on creating new graphics chips that allow us to close in the gap between game\'s and reality
Matter of fact I actually agree with 90% of your statement, the flaw in it, your belief that this will happen in 5 years. Developers, I\'m sure will totally shift from graphics to game play when we have chips that create graphics that look just like real life or close enough. Only then will there be no real need to but all there energy into graphics as opposed to game play. Do keep in mind I’m not saying that they are not paying attention to game play at the moment, they defiantly are, just that I can only name a handful of developers out there that fit that profile. The rest of them are lazy ass graphics/eye candy horrors that just want to sell their games on looks.
-
Wow, it\'s uncanny! But I got one question. When they have perfected the issue on graphics, and the game play is so compelling that everyone in the world plays video games in there free time...what happens next? :eek:
-
and the game play is so compelling that everyone in the world plays video games in there free time...what happens next?
We wire are brains to the computer, the untimate form of virtual reality. You will then be part of the game, as if it were real.
-
Well pstwo and TheOgodlyThlng, I would love to stay here and defend my opinion, but I\'ve got better things to do, EDIT: like debunking your arguments. (Heh. I really don\'t have anything better to do.)
TheOgodlyThlng
LOL, I can\'t believe you just said that, what a JOKE! Graphics is what is driving the whole business in video game companies.
Sure graphics are important, but not to the extent you are making them out to be. Graphics DO NOT drive this industry. We can do comparisons of every generation since gaming started, and in every case, the console with better graphics never came out on top. The weaker, uglier system always did better (or just as good in the Genesis/SNES era). How can that be if graphics are what drives this industry?
Why did DOA3 sell like crap compared to Halo? It had unbelievable graphics, so it should have been the top seller last year. Why did GTA3 shoot to the top of the charts (already selling over 4 million copies worldwide)? Is it because of the unbelievable slowdown, or the beautiful low polygonal people (relatively speaking)? How come The Bouncer was one of Square\'s biggest flops? It\'s graphics were unprecedented at the time. Why did the PS2 sell more than the Xbox and NGC combined in the last couple months of last year? Why is the PS2 still selling more than the Xbox and NGC combined this year? It\'s graphics are obviously a lot more jaggie. How come the PSone sold just as much as the NGC in the 3rd week of January? (about 10 thousand each)
I\'ll tell you why. Because people, even the non-hardcore gamers, look past the graphics.
Why do you think SONY corp. and NVIDIA and the rest are spending millions on creating new graphics chips that allow us to close in the gap between game\'s and reality
They are not only making newr graphics chips, but completely new ways of developing games. The CELL (Sony\'s and IBM\'s newest chip in development) is obviously going to be able to handle better graphics. But even more importantly, it will be able to handle better gameplay. Do you think games like Dynasty Warriors 3 and State of Emergency could be done on the PSX, Saturn, or N64? Of course not. There is way too many characters on screen at once and, a bigger problem, way too much AI to process at once for those older, less powerful systems.
And even though you were not replying to me, I\'m still going to respond to it:
BS!!! Then why don\'t you go play your SNES or Atari. If what you said were really true then we would still be playing with our SEGA Geneses and stuck in the 16-bit era.
That argument is so lame. He was obviously not saying, "graphics don\'t matter in games and I think all games should be made pong style." But he was saying that at the point that graphics are at today, is there really a need for them to get better? Will that really make the game that much funner to play?
BTW TheOgodlyThlng, it\'s good to have you back. :) What\'s up with your post count though?
PStwo:
IMO, graphics will just get better and better. Do you think the PS3 will have bad graphics and great gameplay?
No, I think the PS3 will have great graphics and even better gameplay. Especially with online gaming being the standard then.
Do you still think the MS post bad screens shots? You better see Wreckless on your tv because it looks much better then a screen shot.
I didn\'t say MS did. (even though they do sometimes). I said some individual developers do. And I know Wreckless has some wonderful graphics, but are they as high res as the original pics were? Heh, I didn\'t think so.
-
edit
-
BUMP so people see my edit above.
-
Graphics can be an interesting topic to discuss but not with knuckel heads that think a stuttering Halo or Wreckless at 30 fps is some kind of record benchmark to be worshiped.
5 years before graphics are to a point where they take a back seat compared to gameplay? Sounds reasonable enough to me. What are you silly whores laughing about?
-
FSAA is not a free feature. It costs a developer memory, fill rate, and frame rate.
Nothing is free in hardware,and HRAA costs memory bandwidth,not fill rate...
Give the XBox more time...I waited almost 2 years to see good graphics on PS2...
...and about Rallisport...I\'ve watched the latest movies...and it\'s great! no complaint about AA...
-
Originally posted by TheOgodlyThlng
BS!!! Then why don\'t you go play your SNES or Atari. If what you said were really true then we would still be playing with our SEGA Geneses and stuck in the 16-bit era.
Graphics are extremely important, granite the game that a company’s them must be good as well, and other wise it\'s just eye candy. The more realistic the graphics are the more involved we get into the game, especially if it\'s a really well made one.
How do you know what I play?
I still play the StarWars games on my SNES, DonkeyKong 1 ect.
I still play my old PSX games.. I still play some of my old PC games (NFS1 which I still love.. StarCraft, Red Alert)
I play my old GameBoy games (Trax, Tetris, Burn and Hercules;))
-
Graphics is important for me,but what I want is more available power for animations,physics,AI,collision-system and more interactive environments...in a word,more power for a more realistc and involving game-play...and a much greater freedom in the actions...but I know...PS2,GC and XBox are not enough powerful to show what I want...maybe the next generation:D
...PS2?...months and months ago I believed this console were able to show all this...but I was a fool...or...I\'d say better,Sony made a fool of me..."The Next Generation Graphics...the Next Step...the next generation games..."...like a brainwashing...Where? Where?? Always the same game-play,the same games(J&D the true next Gen Game? Where?)...I\'m pissed off...Hope the XBox will show something more...let\'s wait and see....
IMO...the DreamCast is the only one console,right now,which has lived up to my expectations!
-
BizioEE: Congrats on your 1000 post..
Im hoping Outcast 2 will be a game were you get to explore big worlds. Ive only played the demo of the first and it had some exploration.
It sure has the looks. Im hoping for AAA gameplay as well. :)
I dont want to start a screen vs screen debate so Ill just give you the link to Gamespot. -> Here (http://gamespot.com/gamespot/filters/products/screenindex/0,11104,536649,00.html)
I liked Jak and Daxter alot. It did not have as much exploration (it was more like "collect x number of powercells and you can advance") as I had hoped, but it was still a very good game.
in a word,more power for a more realistc and involving game-play...and a much greater freedom in the actions...but I know...PS2,GC and XBox are not enough powerful to show what I want...maybe the next generation
That is not only limited by power.. But the developers as well.. You know every action has to be programmed for it to happen. Coding a lot of actions will take a lot of time. Especially on these new consoles.
A game which lets you do anything is going to take a lot of time to do, and cost a lot of money.
I think its more limited by developers and money than it is by power..
-
I love graphics
love discussing them, and being educated on how they work technolgy wise.
Arguing over what machine is superior is worthless cause most of us know where each console has strengths and weaknesses
but Graphics are only one of the A\'s in AAA
Have a groovy day
-
well, it seems to have turned into a graphics vs. gameplay debate...not that i mind too much, as long as there is some discussion happenen..
everyone seems to be posting intelligent replies....except pstwo (80%??? :laughing: )
I believe the issue has changed quite a bit in recent times. Years ago, graphics didnt matter at all it was 100% about the gameplay and the images on the screen merely had to be there (or you could have just played Dn\'D board games). However, once polygons became more widely used (i.e. after the 16 bit era) it came to the point where the console industry became more focused on casual gamers who might be impressed or conned into buying a game by the promise of sweet graphics, many developers got lazy trying to cash in on this market, many games became worse, with probably about 5 - 10% of them worth purchase (rough estimate). Now that graphics have gotten to the point where i dont care anymore, they should focus on gameplay.
I think that framerate is the more important issue nowadays. I would much rather play Twisted Metal: Black at its non-stop 60fps thrill ride, than some suped up version with a 30fps (Halo? :p j/k) At that point, graphics do effect the gameplay, and how much enjoyment you can get out of the game.
IMO graphics is eveything at lest 80%. I just can\'t stand playing a game that really looks bad and have great gameplay. If I wanted real gameplay, I would play RPGs games. But I don\'t buy or like any RPG games. It\'s just not my speed and adventures taste. IMO, eveyone buys a new systems for the up-grade in graphics. If graphics means nothing to me I would just be still playing my PSone.
you just spouted out a round-about circle of bull****. Graphics are 80%?? no wonder your the only person who likes wreckless. We play the games, we dont just sit there looking at them. Why dont you go buy Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within... i hear you can click on the DVD a few times and select which scene you wanna watch..now thats gameplay :rolleyes:.
When a new console is released there are more than just cosmetic upgrades that take place in a game, AI, Physics etc. can all be improved. Some games could not be achieved on PSX (and especially lower down systems) no matter how badly the graphics looked. Your a complete waste of times at these forums if your only playing games for 80% graphics...
Graphics and Gameplay are 50/50.
Just like women. Personality is a must, but if they aren\'t attractive, sadly, I\'m not interested. Personality can go a long way to improve attractiveness, but like good gameplay, it can only do so much. This may seem shallow, but if there is no attraction, what\'s left? By the same token, a complete knockout is thrilling for a while, but if there\'s nothing else about her that is desireable, I don\'t hang on long.
god damn you watchdog! i was saving the attractive woman analogy for when some real debate sparked up! and the way i put it was better! :p
BS!!! Then why don\'t you go play your SNES or Atari. If what you said were really true then we would still be playing with our SEGA Geneses and stuck in the 16-bit era.
I cant speak for everyone else, but i know i will enjoy FF6 (havent finished it) much more than i will FFX.. as good as FFX is chances are...its just not the superior game.
Graphics are extremely important, granite the game that a company’s them must be good as well, and other wise it\'s just eye candy. The more realistic the graphics are the more involved we get into the game, especially if it\'s a really well made one.
booyah, see point above, i bet ill be more involved in FF6 over FFX despite the fact that FF6 has no animations, and is quite tacky by today\'s standards.. then again.. i might now :D
and FF7 was greater than all of them! :p
LOL!! 5 years, developers will change their focus from graphics back to gameplay? When hell freezes over this will happen. IMO, graphics will just get better and better. Do you think the PS3 will have bad graphics and great gameplay?
that wasnt the point he was trying to make..moron...
I love graphics
love discussing them, and being educated on how they work technolgy wise.
Arguing over what machine is superior is worthless cause most of us know where each console has strengths and weaknesses
but Graphics are only one of the A\'s in AAA
Have a groovy day
at least Ddaryl got the point of the thread :p
Now, thanks everyone for finally sparking some discussion in here, even though the debate has shifted over to grapgics vs. gameplay (like i didnt see it coming)..the mere fact that you are all participating in the thread basically says that they are a fun issue to discuss... take THAT unnamed gamer! :D;)
-
You shoud be happy this turned into a debate. Discussions fall to the bottom of the forum rather quickly, but debates usually last for 5 or 6 pages before they get locked. :)
-
All I have to say is if you think graphics is more important than gameplay you should be dragged 10 miles by a car in a rally race;)
-
Originally posted by Bozco
All I have to say is if you think graphics is more important than gameplay you should be dragged 10 miles by a car in a rally race;)
Bob, everyone seems to be posting intelligent replies but what about this. :laughing:
-
Originally posted by pstwo
Bob, everyone seems to be posting intelligent replies but what about this. :laughing:
Its the most intelligent thing said today:p , 80% bahhhhh
-
This is crazy.
As far as I\'m concerned, we shouldn\'t be discussing if another discussion is worthful. I\'d be interested in your replies to that idea, because to me, the real question is whether or not discussions of discussions about a discussion\'s worthfulness are worthful.
-Eik
-
damnit Eik, STOP MAKING RATIONAL SENSE!
it makes my cranium hurt
AAAARGH!
-
You can tell how a game is going to look bye looking at
screens of it. (Ironfist)
I mean you can tell if a games is going to looks crappy and you can tell if a game is going to look good. Without waiting til it is completely finished.
And the graphic engine is like the first thing that is built in game.
I mean there is no excuse these days for having crappy graphics when we have all seen developers put out good games with great graphics.
Great gameplay is something that every developer just can\'t do. But graphics that just freakin technology come on crappy graphics are just no excuse.
AND If a game has crappy graphics 9 times out of ten the game sucks.
-
Originally posted by fastson
BizioEE: Congrats on your 1000 post..
Im hoping Outcast 2 will be a game were you get to explore big worlds. Ive only played the demo of the first and it had some exploration.
It sure has the looks. Im hoping for AAA gameplay as well. :)
I dont want to start a screen vs screen debate so Ill just give you the link to Gamespot. -> Here (http://gamespot.com/gamespot/filters/products/screenindex/0,11104,536649,00.html)
Thanks fastson...
...I\'m simply feeling slightly uneasy,tired of the same stuff...it\'s like playing the same games with "different characters and environments"...with the exception of some:)...
I liked Jak and Daxter alot. It did not have as much exploration (it was more like "collect x number of powercells and you can advance") as I had hoped, but it was still a very good game.
Yes,it\'s a good game,I liked it too...but it\'s not the game I was waiting for!
That is not only limited by power.. But the developers as well.. You know every action has to be programmed for it to happen. Coding a lot of actions will take a lot of time. Especially on these new consoles.
A game which lets you do anything is going to take a lot of time to do, and cost a lot of money.
I think its more limited by developers and money than it is by power..
Yes...power is not the only limiting factor...but what I mean is that power is a "necessary condition",not sufficient!
Coding a lot of actions in a huge,interactive and alive environment,ruled by realistic physics where character move and react among them and other objects in a credible way whould take a lot of time,money but even power ;) ...so...if you have power...you can deal with this complex subject...if you have not enough power...you can\'t...
...and I\'ve formed the idea that all the "next" gen console(not so sure about the XBox) have not the power to show what I was expecting from these consoles...
-
I like it when graphics are used to enhance a game- a la Silent Hill2.........the graphics of the backrounds and lighting really helped make for an eerie experience! I don\'t think it would have been quite so scary if it wasn\'t for all the bloody-rusty-dirty-graffiti-ridden walls and amazing lighting effects.
-
Graphics play a big role but that doesnt me that it can be totally over shadowed. Some games are just too fun to put down just because the grafics suck, and im sure a few of you have encountered this before. Graphics will always be important. They can make the game more engaging. Like if you were in a dark city lit by a volley of flourecent lights where tons of people roam the streets in the rain with towering buildings and everyday is an adventure. That cant be done with dynamic lighting and high poly\'s on each character, and ai where you can interact with each person and even explore the insides of every house on a system like today. But in the end the gameplay is were its at ya know. :cool:
-
Firstly, according to some detail review and explanation done at
http://www.firingsquad.com, a highly respectable PC and hardware review site, there is NO CURRENT X-BOX games thats use FSAA.
Even on the PC, most people don\'t use FSAA even when using Gforce 3 card coz it takes too much resources and slows frame rates significantly - even to unplayable level, however, on the PC most people can just crank up their resolution higher to overcome this problem. I always play my game at 800x600 on my 15" monitor where possible and basically, there really is no aliasing issues unless you wanna pause the game and stare hard at the screen(for what!!!!!???).
Now back to gameplay and graphic issues. I\'m a supporter of gameplay over graphics anyday. This doesn\'t means graphics is not important. I can enjoy a game with average graphics but good gameplay but not the other way round. great graphics with stinky gameplay.
Example, IMO, ShenMue is a piece of graphic marvel but the gameplay(if there\'s any in it) stinks big time. I\'ll rather play Panzer Dragoon Saga on my Saturn anyday in all it\'s low res and jaggie glories.
AS for the PS2, I\'ve to admit the early games are really crap looking...I think it\'s not only the jaggie that\'s the problem but the horrible shimmering. Some of the worst I\'ve seen included DOA2:HC and another game what zit name? Portal Runner(the shimmering is so bad that the main character looks like been chop up into little bits of pixels).
However, the recent PS2 games have all but solved this problem. I\'d read somewhere that Baldur\'s Gate:Dark Alliance is one of the first PS2 games that uses FSAA. I\'ve played the game and the graphics are really looking clean.
Lastly, I think all these graphics argument are really waste of time coz in the end, the PC will have the beefiest hardware provided if u have the cash.
And that is why I guess I\'ll alwasy enjoy console gaming more. Coz console games place more importance in gameplay and innovation compared to the average PC games.
-
Shenmue stinks?
Uh-oh, I smell a fight brewing. Shenmue is a marvel of gameplay and graphics and my opinion is just as valid as yours--maybe more because I\'m stubborn and I\'ll just keep arguing until you stop responding and the person who ends the thread wins the argument; it\'s a rule!
-
Yes. ShenMue stinks. in fact, the DC could still be alive if SEGA had spend those rumoured 40 million bucks to develop a Final Fantasy killer instead...but NOOOO...they want ShenMue...crappy no brainer no humour linear adventure with crappy Fighting Force action with crappy "push buttons in this sequence" aka Dragon\'s Lair gameplay with overhyped F.R.E.E(free my arse...you can only interact with a few objects in the game!).
ShenMue is utter crap.
THE END.
I win. :D :D
-
You really think you can win an argument over Shenmue when mm is here?
Shenmue OWNS...
-
Well everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I think shenmue is ok from what ive played and seen of it. If someone doesnt like it then they dont, big deal. Its one game. If you worship the series then good for you. jeeze:p :D
-
I\'ve no problem with MM. He\'s a very reasonable dude who respect opinions and can tell the difference between a flame and an expression of opinion. :)
The biggest lie about ShenMue is definitely the FREE thingy. It\'s nowhere even near what Yu Suzuki said it\'ll do. In fact, it\'s even a BIGGER lie than the 66 million poly/sec on the PS2 or the 300 micro poly/sec on the X-Box claimed by SONY and Microsoft.
At least, those were conditional half-truth!!!!
================
The Bluff is out there!!
================
-
*Gasp*
A company hyping their product??? NO WAY!!! I gotta lie down...
Puh-leeze...
If the reason why you dislike Shenmue is because of failure to live up to the hype, then you\'d better trash your PS2 and several other products you probably own.
-
Originally posted by Ashford
If the reason why you dislike Shenmue is because of failure to live up to the hype, then you\'d better trash your PS2 and several other products you probably own.
What hes saying is that he thought the game was actually gonna be good, but it didn\'t live up to the hype and hell to many people it just ended up boring. Maybe the company shouldn\'t have hyped it as much as they did considering how not even close it was with what they said.
-
If the reason why you dislike Shenmue is because of failure to live up to the hype, then you\'d better trash your PS2 and several other products you probably own.
What has hating Shenmue for not living up to it\'s hype and didn\'t help the DC to survive has got to do with thrashing PS2 or Xbox or Gamecube for that matter???
R u on drugs???
Sheesh!!
-
This is my comment:
Sweden sucks in HOCKEY!!! I hate Tommy Salo!!!
nuff said :sleepy:
-
Originally posted by Paul
What has hating Shenmue for not living up to it\'s hype and didn\'t help the DC to survive has got to do with thrashing PS2 or Xbox or Gamecube for that matter???
R u on drugs???
Sheesh!!
No, I\'m not on drugs. Thanks for your concern.
If you hate Shenmue for the sole reason that it didn\'t live up to the hype, then you\'d better hate the PS2. Sony also failed to deliver on their hype.
If you dislike Shenmue for its boring gameplay, then we\'ll just end this debate: You dislike Shenmue, I love it.
Good day.
-
I feel really sorry for Sundin--far and away the best player in the tournament--it\'s a shame. Oh well, Go Leafs Go. Go Canada!
-
Originally posted by Ashford
No, I\'m not on drugs. Thanks for your concern.
If you hate Shenmue for the sole reason that it didn\'t live up to the hype, then you\'d better hate the PS2. Sony also failed to deliver on their hype.
If you dislike Shenmue for its boring gameplay, then we\'ll just end this debate: You dislike Shenmue, I love it.
Good day.
well just because your a sega person and dont happen to like ps2, doesnt mean you have to make such comments.:p . And even if ps2 didnt deliver its still all in the eye of the beholder. Ps2 easily has the room to get better, and in a shorter time then shenmue ever will. capiche:)
-
Ashford: How old r u? R u a Nazi? Fine if you love and sleep with ShenMue for all I care. but u ain\'t got no bleeding rights to tell me what to hate or like.
You obviously lack the capacity to debate or even explain why love ShenMue so much(other than the fact you\'re a fanboy) or you just want to beat off on it.
I don\'t give a damn.
The End of conversation.
-
Ashford: How old r u? R u a Nazi? Fine if you love and sleep with ShenMue for all I care. but u ain\'t got no bleeding rights to tell me what to hate or like.
You obviously lack the capacity to debate or even explain why love ShenMue so much(other than the fact you\'re a fanboy) or you just want to beat off on it.
I don\'t give a damn.
The End of conversation.
-
Paul, you\'re a dumba$$...
Go re-read what I said, moron.
And yes, thank you, I will go and sleep with my copy of Shenmue. Tell me, how is it with the Dual Shock shoved all the way up your a$$? Love that vibrating function, don\'t we?
Lord Nicon, don\'t be an idiot. I love Shenmue, ergo, I\'m a "Sega person"? Where\'s the friggin\' logic in that? And we\'re not debating PS2 vs Shenmue so don\'t bother posting retarded comments like "Ps2 easily has the room to get better, and in a shorter time then shenmue ever will. "
-
you humans better start being nicer to each other or im gonna kick all yer arses
:)
-
Now ashford, if shenmue was on the PS2 and not DC don\'t even try to tell me you would like it just as much
-
And we\'re not debating PS2 vs Shenmue
Ha! Ha! Look who\'s talking?? Who\'s the dork who brought the PS2 into the picture??
Don\'t waste breath with him guys.
He\'s turning it into a
Fanboy vs Rest of the civilized gamers
Yawn. ZZZZZZZZZzzz. Good nite.
-
True true. I was trying to have a healty debate of points of views but this guys just goes anal. sheeesh. and yes ashford you are a sega person. Is there anything wrong with that? No, so stop complaining.
-
Ok.. first off.. I wanna toss my 2 kopecks in about Shenmue.. because I think BOTH of you two are in the wrong.
1. Shenmue is a crappy adventure. I don\'t think many people who are into the adventure scene will refute that point. This genre has always been somewhat "lost" on the console gaming croud because of the consoles heritage of fast & furious gameplay. Many console gamers aren\'t used to the story driven latteral thinking that\'s necessary to complete your typical adventure. So Sega had to "dumb down" Shenmue for the console market. What happened was that they created a game which failed to strike a chord with their target audience, and was too tame for hardcore adventure fans. For what the game was designed to do.. it succeeds wonderfully. Bridging a gap, and giving console gamers access to a genre they might not have tried before. About the humor.. there\'s a reason why Shenmue lacks it... and that\'s because it\'s a drama - NOT a comedy -. Adventures are associated with whitty humor simply because of the attitudes of the two companies who usherd in the modern adventure game.. Sierra and LucasArts. Mist is a good example of an adventure game which lacks humor.
2. FREE is pure hype. I\'m surprised more people didn\'t use their heads and figure this out before. I mean, do any of you have even the slightest clue just HOW much code and programming goes into making every single little minute facet of a game interactive? The Dreamcast is good.. but not that good. If you want that kind of interactiveness in a game in this generation.. then you\'d better start praying to god because it would take a miracle for that to happen. And not only with pure console power comes the problem of time and manpower. To make a game of Shenmue\'s size with the kind of interactivity promised would take even a large development team years up on years to complete. There\'s just no way to do it and turn a profit. Not to mention that the control pad is a piss poor portal for the gamer to flex his will. The text parser was (and still is) the best for this because you can input fully formed thoughts into a game engine.. even if it\'s not practical these days. This is why I have severe doubts about just how well Project Ego will live up to it\'s hype. Shenmue does succeed in shifing focus towards interactivity instead of just pretty graphics. Just because it didn\'t live up to the hype, dosen\'t mean that it didn\'t reach an amazing level of interactivity that no other game on the market can even come close to matching. There will come a day when the graphical greatness of games is not measured in polygons or effects.. but in interactivity. You can\'t get much better than photo-realistic.. so game companies will naturally improve upon this area because of it\'s untapped potental.
3. Paul.. pulling Shenmue in lue of a "Final Fantasy Killer" wouldn\'t have helped Sega one bit. They simply didn\'t have the momentum or userbase to make the Dreamcast a success. How are you going to sell a "Final Fantasy Killer", if noone will even so much as buy your system? What Sega COULD have done to revive their buisness was to play on the nostalgia of old Sega gamers by reviving games that were assiociated with their last massively successful console. Even then, they\'d have to sustain an aggressive advertisement campaign for these titles and the console itself so as to force the attention of people who aren\'t even looking at Sega as an option. Sorry, but 20 Million (what Shenmue cost to produce) or even 100 million wouldn\'t have done the job.
4. Shenmue\'s fighting system was only "Fighting Force"-esqe if you didn\'t know how to use the buttons. If you learned how to preform the moves quickly and appropriately.. you\'d notice that it\'s fighting system can be very deep considering that\'s just a side feature. This is most appearant in the 70 man battle. (Although I do wish it took more than 1 or 2 hits to drop your "average" enemines)
5. The voice acting sucked ass. I know no-one brought it up.. but I just had to say it seein as how it was so goofy at points that I was almost ashamed to play it in front of friends.
6. There is no point six yet. I jus wanna close out by saying that Shenmue far exceeds the boundries of traditional console games with an excellent epic story, great gameplay elements, a high level of interactivity & complexity, and graphics that put many PS2 (and even a few Xbox) games to shame. It simply fails to find it\'s clique. Too adventureish for action gamers... too simple for Adventure gamers. It\'s not a game for everybody, but for those it does strike a chord with... it\'s resonance will be heard for a LONG.. long time to come.
Now... pstwo. I don\'t wanna fight with ya because most of the time your posts are reasonable and non-flamitory. If you think that gaming is 80% graphics though, then I think you\'ve chosen the wrong hobby. You\'d probably be happier doing something else with your free time. If that the way you feel though, then fine.. just don\'t expect anyone here to agree with you or even comprehend your point of view.
As for graphics meaning anything to me? I spent four hours last night playing the hell out of this game...
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.classicgaming.com%2Fcc314%2Foldcc314%2Fpics%2Fss-ck101.gif&hash=e4f89c2c671ad1c90efba74f0fb6ad252ab31fa1)
And I have a litteral ton more like it on my computer. So no.. graphics don\'t mean sh*t to me when it all comes down it. I expect a certain level of graphical improvement with each successive generation because that shows growth. There\'s nothing wrong with drooling over the latest graphical advancements. They\'re just icing on the cake.. not the main course. I guess that\'s kind of a good analogy too. Some people like to gourge on frosting for the instant and fleeting gratification. Anyone who really enjoys cakes for what they are, knows the frosting is just an enhancement... and the real treat and appreceation comes from the subtleties and nuances of what\'s benieth the frosting.
-
Hey Sonyfan, you\'ve some really good points there. Here\'s my thoughts on it.
Point 1: Exactly my thoughts. You\'ve said it all. :)
Point 2: FREE is pure hype. I\'m surprised more people didn\'t use heir heads and figure this out before.
I think most clear headed people has figured this out already...except certain fanboys who refused to believe it. :D
The text parser was (and still is) the best for this because you can input fully formed thoughts into a game engine..
Wow! You still remember the text parser?? But I can\'t quite agree with u on this. I used to love text-parser but one day I replayed some of those games on my PC and I found text-parser is a chaotic chore of trying to speak in the language the game understand..many frustrating hours was spent just trying to guess what the parser knows and doesn\'t!!
You can\'t get much better than photo-realistic.. so game companies will naturally improve upon this area because of it\'s untapped potental.
I stil think we won\'t see photo-realistic graphics in a game...maybe ever..the reason is not technology, but the cost to produce that kind of graphics needs huge amount of money for many artist to produce it. Case in point would be FF the spirit within, it cost over 100million bucks to produce a 2 hourCGI movie.
Heck, I don\'t wanna pay 100 bucks for a game!! Of course, I could be proven wrong if the video games console can really reach critical mass as in a console in every home, then it might be possible for a photo-realistic game can be priced at a reasonable consumer level.
Point 3. Paul.. pulling Shenmue in lue of a "Final Fantasy Killer" wouldn\'t have helped Sega one bit.
Sorry dude, I can\'t agree with ya on that. DC never have a FF killer, so we really couldn\'t say for sure. Maybe put it in one of those "What if" Marvel comics. :)
They simply didn\'t have the momentum or userbase to make the Dreamcast a success.
yeah, it did pretty bad in Japan, but in the US, it has something like 5 million plus userbase. I believe if they can still continue with the US market if they wanted to but failure in Japan doesn\'t encourage 3rd party developer to pulblish game for it.
How are you going to sell a "Final Fantasy Killer", if noone will even so much as buy your system? What Sega COULD have done to revive their buisness was to play on the nostalgia of old Sega gamers by reviving games that were assiociated with their last massively successful console.
Potential FF killer: Panzer Dragoon Saga 2!!! This was was simply brilliant. A masterpiece in terms of graphics, gameplay and design. But now I guess I\'ll have to play it on the X-box.
Point 4. Shenmue\'s fighting system was only "Fighting Force"-esqe if you didn\'t know how to use the buttons.
Aww cmon, ShenMue fighting system is just a button smashing romp. I\'ve never bother to perfect all those moves in the dojo and still win with my eye closed.
Point 5. The voice acting sucked ass. I know no-one brought it up.. but I just had to say it seein as how it was so goofy at points that I was almost ashamed to play it in front of friends.
Ha-ha!!!
Point 6.games with an excellent epic story, great gameplay elements, a high level of interactivity & complexity, and graphics that put many PS2 (and even a few Xbox) games to shame. It simply fails to find it\'s clique. Too adventureish for action gamers... too simple for Adventure gamers. It\'s not a game for everybody, but for those it does strike a chord with... it\'s resonance will be heard for a LONG.. long time to come.
I can agreed with you on great story and graphics but not on gameplay element or level of interactivity. The interactivity in the game is no better than most other adventure game or RPG. NPC repeat themselves after a few conversation and only a few iobjects are interactable. And knocking doors with 95% people not at home is not what I would like to call interaction.
-
Paul...
Wow! You still remember the text parser?? But I can\'t quite agree with u on this. I used to love text-parser but one day I replayed some of those games on my PC and I found text-parser is a chaotic chore of trying to speak in the language the game understand..many frustrating hours was spent just trying to guess what the parser knows and doesn\'t!!
Oh yeah, I remember it. Most of my favorite games today are still the ones that use the Text Parser. What I\'m getting at though, is that since you can input a fully formulated thought into a game engine, you\'re actually using your brain more. You\'re figuring the puzzles out on your own, which is the whole point. Any moron can use the icon driven interface to go "Pixel hunting" by randomly click through objects and scenery in hopes of finding something that works. You can\'t do that with the text parser because the possiblities of just what you can put INTO that text parser are almost limitless. The interface itself is solid and very well adapted to adventure games. If the technology had advanced to include things like realtime spell checkers, "smart" interpretation, and things of that nature.. then it quite simply would be the most powerful and robust interface known to gaming IMO. Most gaming companies would make things easier on the user by using a similar language in each and every one of the their games. It\'s just a matter of becoming accustomed to that company\'s script writing style. It also helps to cut out any unnecessary words or actions. Instead of typing.. "Open the door and walk through", simply type "Open door"... and then "Enter Door" if it didn\'t take you automatically into the other room.
I stil think we won\'t see photo-realistic graphics in a game...maybe ever..the reason is not technology, but the cost to produce that kind of graphics needs huge amount of money for many artist to produce it. Case in point would be FF the spirit within, it cost over 100million bucks to produce a 2 hourCGI movie.
It all depends on the advances made with programming tools. More powerful and robust tools can cut development time and costs drastically. Hopefully they can advance as fast as graphical hardware does. Remember, when the PSX was first comming to market.. the idea of making a game which looks as good as DOA3 or the GameCube Resident Evil was ludicis. The production costs to undertake such a project at that time with the tools available to them would have been staggering. Today, it\'s not nearly so big a deal.
Aww cmon, ShenMue fighting system is just a button smashing romp. I\'ve never bother to perfect all those moves in the dojo and still win with my eye closed.
No.. for the type of game Shenmue was it\'s fighting system was very solid. The fact that you could just button mash your way through is more the fault of weak enemies and poor AI. The moves and their executions themselves were very nicely done. Not too difficult, not too easy, lots of variety, and well balanced damage ratios. But as I said before.. "I do wish it took more than 1 or 2 hits to drop your average enemines."
I can agreed with you on great story and graphics but not on gameplay element or level of interactivity. The interactivity in the game is no better than most other adventure game or RPG.
I can kind of agree with you on the adventure part.. but not RPG\'s. Most RPG\'s I\'ve played are VERY linear and offer very minimal interaction with your surrounding enviroment. I\'ve been playing adventure games all my life, and I think the level of interactivity is on par with, or exceeds some of the top games in the field. Sure it didn\'t live up to the hype.. but delivered so much more than what it could have gotten away with. The costs of making a game as interactive as what you\'re expecting just isn\'t practical right now. Why bother making a game if you\'re not going to make money on it? You also have to consider that Sega wasn\'t speaking to adventure fans when they hyped Shenmue.. they were talking to console gamers who have rarely, if ever, experienced this type of game. For this audience it was a first taste of something far grander than level based platformers or even the watered down adventures we call "Survival Horror".
-
. The costs of making a game as interactive as what you\'re expecting just isn\'t practical right now. Why bother making a game if you\'re not going to make money on it? You also have to consider that Sega wasn\'t speaking to adventure fans when they hyped Shenmue.. they were talking to console gamers who have rarely, if ever, experienced this type of game.
Yeah, that\'s because SEGA is stoopid??!!!
After all, they\'re coming back from a lost war and every cents they invest should have the projected return a the highest priority. Betting their last card on a risky endeavour such as ShenMue shows the management have no brains basically(or balls too big for their own good!!). I\'m pretty sure if Square has bet their last game on a similar game as Shenmue(instead of FF) then, there qould be no more square today. For those who doesn\'t know FF was Square last bet and they were prepared to fold after releasing FF but it turn out to be a mega success and brings Square to where it is today.
Your vision of the parser is very interesting, but it seems like it would require AI the level of Data of Star Trek fame to execute it.
Yes pixel hunting was a problem when the adventure games have just turned to graphic but I think the current generation of adventure games has already pass that level. The mini-games and puzzle are much way better executed.
In the end, I still think a picture is worth a thousand words. I don\'t see we\'ll ever get back to the text adventure of yonder years.
-
Excuse me, I should\'ve worded that differently.
What I meant to say was Shenmue is a game, whereas PS2 is a machine.
WTF does this mean?
"Ps2 easily has the room to get better, and in a shorter time then shenmue ever will. "
I tried to end this debate by saying I\'ll enjoy Shenmue while you can play whatever makes you happy but you just had to drag it out.
And Bozco...
Don\'t give me that crap that I wouldn\'t enjoy Shenmue as much if it was on PS2. If the rest of the series was announced as exclusive to PS2, I\'d buy one ASAP.
-
Originally posted by Ashford
If you hate Shenmue for the sole reason that it didn\'t live up to the hype, then you\'d better hate the PS2. Sony also failed to deliver on their hype.
You just dont get it. What i was trying to say was that here you made it seem that if you hate shenmue because it didnt live up the hype then you should hate ps2, but what i was trying to say was that you cant hate it (ps2. well you could but if it had good games i dont know why.) forever becuse with more games it has the ability to get better, and get better very quickly because many games come out simultaneously. Shenmue on the other hand can get better but it would take longer for another game of it to come out, thus hating shenmue is somewhat easier especially if you didnt like the first. So ps2 can correct the hype were as it would be much harder for a single game because it keeps a lot of the same elements etc. Know what i mean?
-
Paul....
Yeah, that\'s because SEGA is stoopid??!!!
No.. this comment comment above is stoopid.
Betting their last card on a risky endeavour such as ShenMue shows the management have no brains basically(or balls too big for their own good!!). I\'m pretty sure if Square has bet their last game on a similar game as Shenmue(instead of FF) then, there qould be no more square today. For those who doesn\'t know FF was Square last bet and they were prepared to fold after releasing FF but it turn out to be a mega success and brings Square to where it is today.
Sega didn\'t bet their last card - by FAR - on Shenmue. Yeah, it cost 20 million to make... big deal. The whole reason Sega went out of the market is not because the Dreamcast was failing.. it\'s because they didn\'t have enough money to make a successor console. In case you don\'t know, it doesn\'t cost millions to fund a console.. it costs BILLIONS. Microsoft spent 4 billion ALONE just on advertising. Shenmue\'s pricetag was a drop in the bucket compaired to the finacial requirements Sega needed to meet in order to continue on in the hardware market. Instead of playing the DC out and going from there, Sega decided to cut their losses and start development for 3 consoles which still had a ton of potential left. Had they waited, they would have been in even worse financial shape to continue on... and the competition would be much stiffer from their fellow 3rd party game developers. Also, Final Fantasy hit a system which was hugely popular at the time and had a massive userbase. The original Final Fantasy wasn\'t a smash hit either, but a moderate success which conviced Square\'s shareholders that the company WAS profitable. Their success grew from there. Sega still faced the problem that noone was buying their console. Even a "Final Fantays Killer" wouldn\'t have made a difference. Sure you hear the success stories.. but didn\'t you know that there\'ve been a litteral TON of great gaming gems that fell to the wayside over the years because they didn\'t happen to be on the system which was in the public\'s eye at the time? Sorry man, but 1 game never had a chance to save Sega.. expecially when you consider the sheer number of AAA games available for the system which got passed up for lesser counterparts on a different system.
Your vision of the parser is very interesting, but it seems like it would require AI the level of Data of Star Trek fame to execute it.
No, actually you\'d be surprised. With todays computers it\'d actually be fairly simple to execute once a basic engine was written. The way it worked was that developers actually had to write all the different combinations of ways to describe an action into the game engine for each specific event. Later on, they modified the engine to take out common words. I.E. Say you would type "Open the Door". The engine would recognise the word "the" and drop it because it\'s commonly used in grammar. What you\'d be left with is "Open Door" Which the engine recognises. However, if you mispelled "The", then it wouldn\'t be able to match your typ0 with the word "The" to be dropped and wouldn\'t understand your command. With the tools available today, I don\'t see ANY reason why a game engine couldn\'t be written which incorperates real-time spell check (already available in word processors), grammar checks (already available in word processors), and word string matching (already available in the form of Internet search engines).
In the end, I still think a picture is worth a thousand words. I don\'t see we\'ll ever get back to the text adventure of yonder years.
I\'m not sure what you\'re talking about. Text Adventures (The Genre) will almost certainly never be back in popularity because of their lack of graphics. Text (as in Parser to a graphics driven game) as a means to manipulate the game enviroment will never be back either. I simply said it had the potential to be the powerful and robust available.. but I also made note to say that it wasn\'t practical. Gamers these days simply won\'t sit down and type their way through a game. It\'s too archaic of a system to have any practical use in todays gaming market depsite it\'s potential. I COULD, however, see voice recognision technology coupled with controller input to bring a resurgance in this type of interface.. but that\'s a ways off until voice recognision software improves drastically.