The first real game work that I did was on Link's Awakening. But at the same time, I came in to write the manual, as I did on the previous game. But they had nothing in place. So I ended up making an entire story to go along with the game. The dream, the island, that was all mine.
Sir, thank you for the best story I've ever experienced in a Zelda game. Awesome.
I hate tilt control, but my wife loves it. Thus, she plays warhawk with tilt (and frees that analog stick for the turret). Me? I turn it off.
I'd love to play Warhawk using tilt control, but the damn Playstation controller gives me hand cramps (really, Sony, there's nothing you could find to improve in that thing in the last decade???), so I use a somewhat bigger Logitech controller which doesn't have tilt support for longer game sessions (and Warhawk typically leads to longer game sessions).
The wii tilt games get old... except wiisports, which I love, I don't like tilt on the wii either.
I still love Super Monkey Ball, Wing Island and Excite Truck, among others:-)
Nintendo's true genius was giving wiisports away
I agree. Wii Sports is the number one reason why the Wii sells that well.
Imagine if every XBOX360 came with Halo, or if every PS3 game with MGS4. It would define how funt he system is, even if there wasn't enough content for a while.
I think he genius of Wii Sports is that it's viral. Give anyone a Wii Remote - your kid, your spouse, your granny - and they'll figure it out and get hooked within minutes. Halo 3 or MGS4 would not do for their respective consoles what Wii Sports has done for the Wii.
Anyway, the wii's games look like PS2 games.
Some do. Others look like nothing on the PS2 - Residen Evil 4 or Super Mario Galaxy blow away anything on the PS2.
And graphics are important to every gamer. A shitty game is not fun with great graphics, but a good game is a great game if it has great graphics.
So Heavenly Sword should be great? I don't see it.
I think the wii's graphics will hurt it more than people realize in a year or two,
I think not. I'm just playing through Indiana Jones 4, and the game is as awesome as it was the day it came out. Graphics on the Wii (and the last gen, too) have reached a level where you can do pretty much anything you want. They're good enough for 99% of all games. Super Mario Galaxy will be as great in five years as it is now, just like games like Monkey Island or Zelda: A Link to the Past have held up just fine.
and nintendo will not make as much money as Sony in the next five years.
I find that extremely unlikely.
I also don't think Microsoft will be able to beat Sony (even though the 360 is the best system). MS will try to outdo the PS3 in a year, screwing 360 owners a bit, and taking a loss on their systems.
Here's my prediction: As soon as sales of the Wii start to go down (maybe in half a year or a year), Nintendo will lower the price to 200 US$ and bring out Wii Sports 2. Then, they'll sell 120 million Wiis within four or five years, overtaking even the PS2.
The other two will both sell around 60 million consoles, with the PS3 possibly selling a bit more than the 360 with the release of MGS4 and the new FF.
Yeah, you're right. I didn't know GripShift and Blast Factor had tilt control, as I didn't buy them. I only played the ski game once after buying it, and promptly erased it from my mind, and the tilt control in Loco Roco is very minor, which is why I forgot it, but you're right: there are more PSN games using tilt control than I remembered.
And fl0w is still not a game (I only played the PSN version). As long as there's no score and no goal, there's no game:-)
Okay, since you seem hell-bent on misunderstanding the question, let my try to rephrase it:
Would you not play a game like Mario Galaxy - which is the second-highest reviewed game of all time - just because it looks like it is suitable for children?
The question is rhetorical, by the way, and the implication I'm trying to make is that not playing a game because it appear "childish" is extremely strange. Psychonauts has a deep story, interesting characters, good gameplay, and is amazingly written, yet you disclaim it because it seems childish to you. "Childish" is not even a negative qualifier; it doesn't look "bad" or "boring" to you, just "childish," as if things which are suitable for children were automatically not suitable for adults.
I was trying to express that I just do not understand your decision not to play a game because it seems suitable for children. This is the kind of decision a teenager would make, who feels it necessary to dissociate himself from children. We adults, however, are free from such burdens:-)
Also, tilt control works just fine *without* a PSEye.
So when you said "The downloadable PS3 games (with motion control) are selling for 1/3rd what disc based Wii games are selling for, and quite frankly are more innovative than the series of Wii-hashes that Nintendo has been pumping out", you were talking about Super Rub-a-Dub?
Hell I consider myself a real gamer and there are almost no Wii games I'm interested in buying. I almost regret buying the damn thing, should have gotten an xbox 360.
Why don't you sell it on eBay then? There are more than enough people who'd love to own one, and are willing to pay more than full price for your used Wii.
That way, you'd get your 360, and we'd get rid of your pointless comments:-P
Nintendo got a lot of things right, but shipping a console without multiple gigabytes of storage in the post-Original XBox world is just plain inexcusable.
Most people couldn't possibly care less. In fact, most casual gamers I know who own Wiis have never even started the online store. They put in a disc and play that game, end of story.
You're going to see one of two things: Nintendo will allow downloaded content to be played off peripheral storage
I truly hope they will. Even launching games from the SD card would be a huge boon. Also, more channel slots, please.
or the Wii wii turn out to be a fad that passes as quickly as it arrived.
That's not going to happen, regardless of what Nintendo does.
The fact of the matter is that if it weren't for the price difference, the PS3 would be the superior casual-games machine at this point just because of the PSN content.
What, you mean your mom would rather play PAIN or Calling all Cars than Wii Sports? Dude.
The downloadable PS3 games (with motion control) are selling for 1/3rd what disc based Wii games are selling for, and quite frankly are more innovative than the series of Wii-hashes that Nintendo has been pumping out.
You must be getting different PSEye games from me, then.
Yeah the whole console vs PC argument is lost on me because I enjoy playing split-screen multiplayer games a lot
So true. Which is why the recent trend to omit split-screen gaming in favour of an online component is just bloody annoying. Here's what every (applicable - stuff like RPGs are excused) current-gen game should offer:
Four-player split screen gaming
Split-screen co-op mode
Split-screen online and LAN gaming
There are some games who do this right: Warhawk offers four-player split-screen online gaming. Halo 3 offers split-screen online gaming. There are some games who get this horribly wrong. Motorstorm does not have a split-screen mode at all. What the hell? That's as if Mario Kart got rid of the split-screen mode. Geez.
Really, if the N64 can do four-way split-screen gaming, every current-gen system should be capable of doing it for every current game. There's no excuse.
But it felt too childish for my tastes (particularly because it seemed aimed for a younger audience)
Trust me, it's definitely not aimed at children. And even if it were, so what? It's an awesome game. Are you not going to play Super Mario Galaxy (the second best rated game of all times on gamerankings.com) just because the graphics have too many colors?
I think in comparison, the toony graphics from team fortress 2 were better
Perhaps that might be because one of these two games is a few years old and the other is brand new?
Same age bracket, same gaming taste. Games like Phoenix Wright (btw, if you've played the first two games, you'll love the third, the final case is amazing), Okami or Mario Galaxy are not rated M, but I would guess that you'll find more adults playing them then teenagers.
While some "mature" games are great for adults (you mentioned Bioshock and Mass Effect), a lot of them are just dumb, bloody crapfests with breast physics thrown in to satisfy teens. M-Rated games are hardly ever actually targeted at adults.
The idea that only teens are interested in M rated games is flawed. I mean, what are all the 30 year old gamers playing then? Phoenix Wright?
???
I'm two years shy of 30, and I play Phoenix Wright, but no Halo. I think Halo is a pretty average FPS overrun by swearing homophobic kids, while Phoenix Wright is a well-written, engaging Adventure game for more mature gamers who are not adverse to doing some actual reading and thinking.
So I have no idea what you're trying to imply with your PW comment.
Surveys have shown time and time again that teenagers prefer games and consoles ostensibly targeted at adults. This is the first one I found, after a bit of googling:
It's not surprising, either. When I was young, Mortal Kombat was the shit because it had blood and decapitation and stuff. Nowadays, I play the games I actually like, not the ones that are most likely to impress my pals.
Um, wouldn't that mean they are geared more to adults? No. Actual adults are mature enough to play whatever the hell they like. It's teenagers who get off on playing violent games.
Is Hockey only intended for a mature audience because of the body checking? What about football? They literally run into each other and TACKLE one another to the ground... ON PURPOSE.
Seriously, you people need to give this a rest. Are you implying that tackling is not violent because it's being done in Football? The fact that some societies accept violence in some sports does not make said violence any less violent.
How about the cost to actually come up with and create the service.
Are you kidding me? Seriously, is your post intended to be ironic?
If you don't find value in the offerings of the product: DON'T USE IT, go get a PS3
Uh, yeah, I did that too. I have both a PS3 and a 360, and I play online games on the PS3.
Whining on message-boards seems to be a rather fruitless solution.
Okay, I don't get it. I should not complain about something I don't like because you think complaining does no good? It's a free market, you know. That doesn't only mean that corporations can do whatever the fuck they want, it also means that I can complain about it if I don't like it, and maybe convince others that it's a bad thing which they should not support with their money. So what's your problem? Why is Microsoft allowed to demand money for doing nothing, yet I'm not allowed to complain?
What do you mean by "where"? On the Microsoft Mac Dev Unit Blog, I think. It was widely reported and discussed all over the web, for example here. just fucking google it:-)
I think Gruber had it right when he said that Apple wants its users to think of Windows as the new Classic, i.e. if Windows apps run inside Mac OS X, they should do so the way Mac OS 9 apps used to run inside OS X: With distinctly different windows, in a separate environment, and a bit glitchy. Users need to be reminded that running Windows apps is not the preferred choice, but merely a last resort.
The idea is to tell users "Yeah, you can run your Windows apps using Parallels or VMWare if you really have to, but if you can, we'd much rather you ran real Mac applications." Running Windows apps quasi-natively by implementing the APIs would send the wrong message; it would put Windows apps on the same or a similar level as Mac apps. That's a bad thing: The Mac relies on Mac-only or "better on Macs" applications; the high quality of software is one of the Mac's selling point. If developers could write Windows apps and they would run on Macs just fine, hey, why not write Windows apps and have five or ten times the market at no additional cost?
Of course, I'd personally love to see something like this; Office for Macs is about to lose support for Macros, so I'll probably have to run Office in Parallels, soon. Come to think of it... Maybe that's Apple's way of fixing Microsoft's Macro Mistake? Maybe the idea is to let Windows Office run natively on Macs?
Anyway, Apple's actions have been extremely hard to predict recently, so I'm not ruling out anything. Maybe they are indeed going to give the Windows APIs the Carbon treatment...
I know most people disagree, but I also think Network Prefs was better in Tiger. For example, in Leopard, FTP and Windows sharing is hidden, and there's no easy to way to figure out the address you're required to use on Windows to access the Mac.
The OS just grays out my desktop and pops up a dialog box telling me I've got to reboot. Like the whole thing is my fault. I even snapped a picture of it. After all, I HAD PLENTY OF CHANCES!'
That's a kernel panic. There's something seriously wrong with his system if he has six kernel panics since Leopard arrived. I doubt his experience mirrors that of other Leopard users.
Yeah, the PS2 sold more than any other console in history, but it also sold mainly to males between 15 and 25. You don't see a PS2 with a box like the Videopac had, showing a whole family playing games. So in a way, while the PS2 sold a huge amount of consoles, it didn't really reach the mass market, only a very specific subset of the whole market.
"Ill-fated" may be a harsh and poorly chosen phrase, but the GameCube is not exactly going down in history as a favorite for gamers.
In the sudent flat I lived a few years ago, we had a PS2 and a Cube. Most of the time, the PS2 wasn't even plugged into the TV. Depending on what you use your console for, the Cube may be the clear winner of the last gen; four controller ports from the get-go and tons of Party games sealed the deal for us.
Why play GTA when you can race your pals in Mario Kart?:-)
Slashdot Mirror
Sir, thank you for the best story I've ever experienced in a Zelda game. Awesome.
I'd love to play Warhawk using tilt control, but the damn Playstation controller gives me hand cramps (really, Sony, there's nothing you could find to improve in that thing in the last decade???), so I use a somewhat bigger Logitech controller which doesn't have tilt support for longer game sessions (and Warhawk typically leads to longer game sessions).
The wii tilt games get old... except wiisports, which I love, I don't like tilt on the wii either.I still love Super Monkey Ball, Wing Island and Excite Truck, among others :-)
Nintendo's true genius was giving wiisports awayI agree. Wii Sports is the number one reason why the Wii sells that well.
Imagine if every XBOX360 came with Halo, or if every PS3 game with MGS4. It would define how funt he system is, even if there wasn't enough content for a while.I think he genius of Wii Sports is that it's viral. Give anyone a Wii Remote - your kid, your spouse, your granny - and they'll figure it out and get hooked within minutes. Halo 3 or MGS4 would not do for their respective consoles what Wii Sports has done for the Wii.
Anyway, the wii's games look like PS2 games.Some do. Others look like nothing on the PS2 - Residen Evil 4 or Super Mario Galaxy blow away anything on the PS2.
And graphics are important to every gamer. A shitty game is not fun with great graphics, but a good game is a great game if it has great graphics.So Heavenly Sword should be great? I don't see it.
I think the wii's graphics will hurt it more than people realize in a year or two,I think not. I'm just playing through Indiana Jones 4, and the game is as awesome as it was the day it came out. Graphics on the Wii (and the last gen, too) have reached a level where you can do pretty much anything you want. They're good enough for 99% of all games. Super Mario Galaxy will be as great in five years as it is now, just like games like Monkey Island or Zelda: A Link to the Past have held up just fine.
and nintendo will not make as much money as Sony in the next five years.I find that extremely unlikely.
I also don't think Microsoft will be able to beat Sony (even though the 360 is the best system). MS will try to outdo the PS3 in a year, screwing 360 owners a bit, and taking a loss on their systems.Here's my prediction: As soon as sales of the Wii start to go down (maybe in half a year or a year), Nintendo will lower the price to 200 US$ and bring out Wii Sports 2. Then, they'll sell 120 million Wiis within four or five years, overtaking even the PS2.
The other two will both sell around 60 million consoles, with the PS3 possibly selling a bit more than the 360 with the release of MGS4 and the new FF.
Yeah, you're right. I didn't know GripShift and Blast Factor had tilt control, as I didn't buy them. I only played the ski game once after buying it, and promptly erased it from my mind, and the tilt control in Loco Roco is very minor, which is why I forgot it, but you're right: there are more PSN games using tilt control than I remembered.
:-)
And fl0w is still not a game (I only played the PSN version). As long as there's no score and no goal, there's no game
Well, fl0w isn't really a game, and all other games I've seen and remember right now don't make use of tilting, although some use shaking.
So, what other PSN games use tilt control?
Okay, since you seem hell-bent on misunderstanding the question, let my try to rephrase it:
:-)
Would you not play a game like Mario Galaxy - which is the second-highest reviewed game of all time - just because it looks like it is suitable for children?
The question is rhetorical, by the way, and the implication I'm trying to make is that not playing a game because it appear "childish" is extremely strange. Psychonauts has a deep story, interesting characters, good gameplay, and is amazingly written, yet you disclaim it because it seems childish to you. "Childish" is not even a negative qualifier; it doesn't look "bad" or "boring" to you, just "childish," as if things which are suitable for children were automatically not suitable for adults.
I was trying to express that I just do not understand your decision not to play a game because it seems suitable for children. This is the kind of decision a teenager would make, who feels it necessary to dissociate himself from children. We adults, however, are free from such burdens
So when you said "The downloadable PS3 games (with motion control) are selling for 1/3rd what disc based Wii games are selling for, and quite frankly are more innovative than the series of Wii-hashes that Nintendo has been pumping out", you were talking about Super Rub-a-Dub?
That doesn't answer the question, though.
I didn't know that at the time I posted, however - I don't believe models were that limited in 2005 and we certainly had bump-mapping back then.Yeah, it was mainly a console game, though. I'm guessing lead development platform was the PS2.
Why don't you sell it on eBay then? There are more than enough people who'd love to own one, and are willing to pay more than full price for your used Wii.
That way, you'd get your 360, and we'd get rid of your pointless comments :-P
Most people couldn't possibly care less. In fact, most casual gamers I know who own Wiis have never even started the online store. They put in a disc and play that game, end of story.
You're going to see one of two things: Nintendo will allow downloaded content to be played off peripheral storageI truly hope they will. Even launching games from the SD card would be a huge boon. Also, more channel slots, please.
or the Wii wii turn out to be a fad that passes as quickly as it arrived.That's not going to happen, regardless of what Nintendo does.
The fact of the matter is that if it weren't for the price difference, the PS3 would be the superior casual-games machine at this point just because of the PSN content.What, you mean your mom would rather play PAIN or Calling all Cars than Wii Sports? Dude.
The downloadable PS3 games (with motion control) are selling for 1/3rd what disc based Wii games are selling for, and quite frankly are more innovative than the series of Wii-hashes that Nintendo has been pumping out.You must be getting different PSEye games from me, then.
So true. Which is why the recent trend to omit split-screen gaming in favour of an online component is just bloody annoying. Here's what every (applicable - stuff like RPGs are excused) current-gen game should offer:
There are some games who do this right: Warhawk offers four-player split-screen online gaming. Halo 3 offers split-screen online gaming. There are some games who get this horribly wrong. Motorstorm does not have a split-screen mode at all. What the hell? That's as if Mario Kart got rid of the split-screen mode. Geez.
Really, if the N64 can do four-way split-screen gaming, every current-gen system should be capable of doing it for every current game. There's no excuse.
Trust me, it's definitely not aimed at children. And even if it were, so what? It's an awesome game. Are you not going to play Super Mario Galaxy (the second best rated game of all times on gamerankings.com) just because the graphics have too many colors?
I think in comparison, the toony graphics from team fortress 2 were betterPerhaps that might be because one of these two games is a few years old and the other is brand new?
Microsoft has written off enough money to replace every single 360 ever sold.
I recently bought a 360, and I hope Microsoft has been able to fix the issue.
Same age bracket, same gaming taste. Games like Phoenix Wright (btw, if you've played the first two games, you'll love the third, the final case is amazing), Okami or Mario Galaxy are not rated M, but I would guess that you'll find more adults playing them then teenagers.
While some "mature" games are great for adults (you mentioned Bioshock and Mass Effect), a lot of them are just dumb, bloody crapfests with breast physics thrown in to satisfy teens. M-Rated games are hardly ever actually targeted at adults.
???
I'm two years shy of 30, and I play Phoenix Wright, but no Halo. I think Halo is a pretty average FPS overrun by swearing homophobic kids, while Phoenix Wright is a well-written, engaging Adventure game for more mature gamers who are not adverse to doing some actual reading and thinking.
So I have no idea what you're trying to imply with your PW comment.
Surveys have shown time and time again that teenagers prefer games and consoles ostensibly targeted at adults. This is the first one I found, after a bit of googling:
Survey: Children Prefer PS3 Most, Wii Least
It's not surprising, either. When I was young, Mortal Kombat was the shit because it had blood and decapitation and stuff. Nowadays, I play the games I actually like, not the ones that are most likely to impress my pals.
Is Hockey only intended for a mature audience because of the body checking? What about football? They literally run into each other and TACKLE one another to the ground... ON PURPOSE.
Seriously, you people need to give this a rest. Are you implying that tackling is not violent because it's being done in Football? The fact that some societies accept violence in some sports does not make said violence any less violent.
Are you kidding me? Seriously, is your post intended to be ironic?
If you don't find value in the offerings of the product: DON'T USE IT, go get a PS3Uh, yeah, I did that too. I have both a PS3 and a 360, and I play online games on the PS3.
Whining on message-boards seems to be a rather fruitless solution.Okay, I don't get it. I should not complain about something I don't like because you think complaining does no good? It's a free market, you know. That doesn't only mean that corporations can do whatever the fuck they want, it also means that I can complain about it if I don't like it, and maybe convince others that it's a bad thing which they should not support with their money. So what's your problem? Why is Microsoft allowed to demand money for doing nothing, yet I'm not allowed to complain?
What do you mean by "where"? On the Microsoft Mac Dev Unit Blog, I think. It was widely reported and discussed all over the web, for example here. just fucking google it :-)
I think Gruber had it right when he said that Apple wants its users to think of Windows as the new Classic, i.e. if Windows apps run inside Mac OS X, they should do so the way Mac OS 9 apps used to run inside OS X: With distinctly different windows, in a separate environment, and a bit glitchy. Users need to be reminded that running Windows apps is not the preferred choice, but merely a last resort.
The idea is to tell users "Yeah, you can run your Windows apps using Parallels or VMWare if you really have to, but if you can, we'd much rather you ran real Mac applications." Running Windows apps quasi-natively by implementing the APIs would send the wrong message; it would put Windows apps on the same or a similar level as Mac apps. That's a bad thing: The Mac relies on Mac-only or "better on Macs" applications; the high quality of software is one of the Mac's selling point. If developers could write Windows apps and they would run on Macs just fine, hey, why not write Windows apps and have five or ten times the market at no additional cost?
Of course, I'd personally love to see something like this; Office for Macs is about to lose support for Macros, so I'll probably have to run Office in Parallels, soon. Come to think of it... Maybe that's Apple's way of fixing Microsoft's Macro Mistake? Maybe the idea is to let Windows Office run natively on Macs?
Anyway, Apple's actions have been extremely hard to predict recently, so I'm not ruling out anything. Maybe they are indeed going to give the Windows APIs the Carbon treatment...
I know most people disagree, but I also think Network Prefs was better in Tiger. For example, in Leopard, FTP and Windows sharing is hidden, and there's no easy to way to figure out the address you're required to use on Windows to access the Mac.
That's a kernel panic. There's something seriously wrong with his system if he has six kernel panics since Leopard arrived. I doubt his experience mirrors that of other Leopard users.
They do. It's called a "bundle." :-)
Yeah, the PS2 sold more than any other console in history, but it also sold mainly to males between 15 and 25. You don't see a PS2 with a box like the Videopac had, showing a whole family playing games. So in a way, while the PS2 sold a huge amount of consoles, it didn't really reach the mass market, only a very specific subset of the whole market.
In the sudent flat I lived a few years ago, we had a PS2 and a Cube. Most of the time, the PS2 wasn't even plugged into the TV. Depending on what you use your console for, the Cube may be the clear winner of the last gen; four controller ports from the get-go and tons of Party games sealed the deal for us.
Why play GTA when you can race your pals in Mario Kart? :-)