If you can't make money selling it, guess what? It wasn't that good.
So The Longest Journey is one of the worst games ever then? And conversely, the horror that is Myst is one of the best?
Sales figures are a weak indicator of quality for many reasons, biggest among them the fact that many designers of good games can't afford to market them.
And Phantasy Star Online (which you mentioned) originated on the Dreamcast. I can't remember whether or not that would really count as an MMORPG, though.
That's the term I use as the superlative of gaming difficulty, simply because many of the games for the NES were exactly that. Some of them would make much better examples of difficulty than Pitfall does. Remember Ghosts 'n' Goblins?
As for the difficulty of today's games, it's pretty obvious that it's lower in general. I don't think that necessarily makes modern games "too easy," though.
Though I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo was just putting a positive spin on simply understocking the retailers, it's possible that the GC really is doing well in the US right now. I can think of two reasons for this:
1. The GC is only $99.
2. Tax refund checks are coming in.
I'd say that #1 is the major reason for it. I don't pay income taxes, but I still went down to the local Wal-Mart a few days ago to get a GC (and yes, they were sold out). My reasoning is similar to the reasoning I had when I bought a Dreamcast: Hey, there aren't that many games on the GC worth buying the system for, but it's only $99. With the DC, Soul Calibur and the Virtua Tennis series were enough to justify the cost; I figure it's the same with Zelda, Mario, and Metroid on the GC.
So, when you're working with a team on, say, the other side of the continent, just going down to the racketball court together could be a tad tough.
Don't muddle my facetiousness with your logic!
Though I don't really see the point in playing a physical game with someone who isn't there. A big part of playing a sport is the physical closeness of the competitors, and taking that out of the equation seems to make the whole endeavor pointless. Maybe I'm just weird.
"It was designed... to show how remote strangers can bond and feel more at ease with each other more rapidly when they have to exert themselves physically, rather than when relying on 'traditional' electronic communication, like instant messaging or e-mail"
How about instead of using this technology, we just go get some friends, head down to the racketball court, and actually play together?
Yeah, yeah, I know this is a revolutionary concept, but I think it could work.
They say that skill is involved in high-level encounters. That's great and all, but what do you have to do to get to those high-level encounters in the first place? Hint: It has little to nothing to do with skill.
Basically what I'm trying to say is that if getting to the point of the game where actual skill is involved requires months of treadmilling, that's not a good thing. It also means that skill is only required in the small percentage of people who play the game for hours at a time, which makes the whole thing moot.
It's true that most console RPGs and some computer RPGs require little more than hard leveling. There are other RPGs, though, especially on the PC, that require some actual thought to play. Fallout and Planescape: Torment are a couple of good examples.
"Most popular video game as of right now" implies NOW.
He didn't say "now," he said "as of right now." Which is redundant. I mean, how the heck are you supposed to vote on games that aren't out as of right now? And if most GameFAQs voters vote for games that are new (which they probably will), then how would "now" be any different from "ever" in the first place?
No, I knew that Guybrush would never win the whole thing. But to lose to such an inept character from such an inept game just stuck in my craw. People should've voted for Guybrush even if they didn't know who he was.
Saying this just makes you sound like a bitter Microsoft fanboy.
Unfortunately, it's also the truth. Even though he neglected to mention the significant (though not huge) number of Sega fanboys as well.
I clearly remember the day when a character who does nothing but buy things from vending machines and pet kittens (Ryo Hazuki, Shenmue) defeated one of the most hilarious video game protagonists of all time (Guybrush Threepwood, Secret of Monkey Island) in one of those big GameFAQs polls. I think I heard the computer adventure genre roll over in its grave when that happened.
Star Wars is probably one of the most popular, yet Citizen Kane is "the best" whether you like it or not.
ITYM "the greatest." "The best" is almost entirely subjective, and relies mostly on personal taste. I think the best movie is Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai: Across the Eighth Dimension. How could you prove me wrong?
Now, when Gamespy referred to its poll as being for "the greatest game of all time"? That was wrong. Especially when you consider the piss-poor way the poll was designed.
Really I just wish they would rename the contest to "most popular video game as of right now". As opposed to "best game ever".
GTA3 is one of my favorite games, and I am 22. The correlation might work one way, but that doesn't make it work the other way. I'm actually insulted by the suggestion that it does work the other way. Just because I'm old and embittered compared to the young punks that are now playing video games doesn't mean that I can't appreciate progress.
Anyway, if anyone cares:
PlayStation - Final Fantasy 8 Genesis - Phantasy Star 4 Master System - Phantasy Star Sega CD - Lunar: The Silver Star Nintendo 64 - The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time NES - Dragon Warrior 4 Super Nintendo - Chrono Trigger Turbo CD - Ys Books 1 and 2 TurboGrafx 16 - Military Madness DOS/Windows - Planescape: Torment Macintosh - Marathon Infinity MSX - Metal Gear 2: Solid Snake Dreamcast - Soul Calibur PlayStation2 - Grand Theft Auto 3
(Notes: Picked FF8 instead of FF7 or MGS because I figured it would be underrepresented. Picked Lunar because I haven't played Snatcher or Dark Wizard. Planescape: Torment is my favorite game in general.)
When making this point, though, remember one thing about school starting from high school onwards (in most areas): algebra and basic mathematics are not taught in the same classroom.
Preparing students for society actually is the primary function of school. It's far more important than either educating the kids in traditional subjects or keeping kids out of their parents' hair. Read The Six-Lesson Schoolteacher by John Taylor Gatto for more info.
Yes, sometimes the truth hurts, but that doesn't make it "overrated."
Most people who have a problem with PE because it's "pointless and ego-busting" forget the fact that, to a jock, academic subjects are exactly the same. And I don't think most people would advocate the abolition of schooling just because some people don't like the subjects that schools teach.
Remember, schools are supposed to be in the occupation of education. That includes education of the body as much as it does the mind.
You do not get a PS/2 with every TV you buy / have bought for the last 10 years.
As I said elsewhere, I didn't have to buy Windows the last time I built a PC, and building a PC is pretty easy to do. The average consumer simply can't build a console or a TV, or even have a small-time technician not constrained by OEM policy do it for him.
The XBox has more console marketshare than Linux has on the desktop.
What about the Mac?
Windows does not require a license from Microsoft to distribute software for it.
Wouldn't that be in Windows' favor as far as not being a monopolistic OS goes?
Companies should be allowed to do anything they want to increase their profit margins, as long as those things are legal. The only way securing third-party exclusivity would be illegal is if it led to a monopoly. This is pretty unlikely for the simple reason that it tends to be bad business for a third party to stay exclusive. Fewer systems on which your game is available equals lower sales. That's why Sony usually has to pay big bucks to secure exclusivity. Since Sony's finances are finite and the other two console makers also have a lot of money, this effectively keeps Sony from buying up all of the third-party gaming. (Though the PS2's popularity compared to the other two systems is a big advantage for Sony.)
Does it suck that console makers are allowed to reach exclusivity deals with third parties? Yes. But it also sucks that console makers are allowed to keep their own first-party games exclusive. I don't think anyone would sanely expect them not to, though.
As for territorial lockouts, they're completely pointless. At least they are in Japan and North America; the Europeans only have themselves to blame for using PAL TVs.
Labor MP Ian Gibson said he "feared that children would gain a distorted view of animal experimentation", and a spokesperson against animal cruelty "claimed that the game made light of animal suffering, which was offensive."
Well, at least the MP's argument makes a little sense, unlike the other one, which shows a lack of distinction between fantasy and reality. Animal experimentation is a much maligned area of science, and much of that indignation is undeserved. Suggesting that all scientists do is torture cute, fuzzy animals certainly isn't helping us go away from these preconceived notions.
Slashdot Mirror
That's not slow; that's a dinosaur.
Rob
KOTOR is most certainly not an adventure game.
Rob
If you can't make money selling it, guess what? It wasn't that good.
So The Longest Journey is one of the worst games ever then? And conversely, the horror that is Myst is one of the best?
Sales figures are a weak indicator of quality for many reasons, biggest among them the fact that many designers of good games can't afford to market them.
Rob
To this day, there is no MMORPG for the console market.
Eh?
And Phantasy Star Online (which you mentioned) originated on the Dreamcast. I can't remember whether or not that would really count as an MMORPG, though.
Rob
That's the term I use as the superlative of gaming difficulty, simply because many of the games for the NES were exactly that. Some of them would make much better examples of difficulty than Pitfall does. Remember Ghosts 'n' Goblins?
As for the difficulty of today's games, it's pretty obvious that it's lower in general. I don't think that necessarily makes modern games "too easy," though.
Rob
Though I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo was just putting a positive spin on simply understocking the retailers, it's possible that the GC really is doing well in the US right now. I can think of two reasons for this:
1. The GC is only $99.
2. Tax refund checks are coming in.
I'd say that #1 is the major reason for it. I don't pay income taxes, but I still went down to the local Wal-Mart a few days ago to get a GC (and yes, they were sold out). My reasoning is similar to the reasoning I had when I bought a Dreamcast: Hey, there aren't that many games on the GC worth buying the system for, but it's only $99. With the DC, Soul Calibur and the Virtua Tennis series were enough to justify the cost; I figure it's the same with Zelda, Mario, and Metroid on the GC.
Rob
So, when you're working with a team on, say, the other side of the continent, just going down to the racketball court together could be a tad tough.
Don't muddle my facetiousness with your logic!
Though I don't really see the point in playing a physical game with someone who isn't there. A big part of playing a sport is the physical closeness of the competitors, and taking that out of the equation seems to make the whole endeavor pointless. Maybe I'm just weird.
Rob
"It was designed... to show how remote strangers can bond and feel more at ease with each other more rapidly when they have to exert themselves physically, rather than when relying on 'traditional' electronic communication, like instant messaging or e-mail"
How about instead of using this technology, we just go get some friends, head down to the racketball court, and actually play together?
Yeah, yeah, I know this is a revolutionary concept, but I think it could work.
Rob
They say that skill is involved in high-level encounters. That's great and all, but what do you have to do to get to those high-level encounters in the first place? Hint: It has little to nothing to do with skill.
Basically what I'm trying to say is that if getting to the point of the game where actual skill is involved requires months of treadmilling, that's not a good thing. It also means that skill is only required in the small percentage of people who play the game for hours at a time, which makes the whole thing moot.
Rob
It's true that most console RPGs and some computer RPGs require little more than hard leveling. There are other RPGs, though, especially on the PC, that require some actual thought to play. Fallout and Planescape: Torment are a couple of good examples.
Rob
"Most popular video game as of right now" implies NOW.
He didn't say "now," he said "as of right now." Which is redundant. I mean, how the heck are you supposed to vote on games that aren't out as of right now? And if most GameFAQs voters vote for games that are new (which they probably will), then how would "now" be any different from "ever" in the first place?
Rob
No, I knew that Guybrush would never win the whole thing. But to lose to such an inept character from such an inept game just stuck in my craw. People should've voted for Guybrush even if they didn't know who he was.
Rob
Saying this just makes you sound like a bitter Microsoft fanboy.
Unfortunately, it's also the truth. Even though he neglected to mention the significant (though not huge) number of Sega fanboys as well.
I clearly remember the day when a character who does nothing but buy things from vending machines and pet kittens (Ryo Hazuki, Shenmue) defeated one of the most hilarious video game protagonists of all time (Guybrush Threepwood, Secret of Monkey Island) in one of those big GameFAQs polls. I think I heard the computer adventure genre roll over in its grave when that happened.
Rob
Star Wars is probably one of the most popular, yet Citizen Kane is "the best" whether you like it or not.
ITYM "the greatest." "The best" is almost entirely subjective, and relies mostly on personal taste. I think the best movie is Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai: Across the Eighth Dimension. How could you prove me wrong?
Now, when Gamespy referred to its poll as being for "the greatest game of all time"? That was wrong. Especially when you consider the piss-poor way the poll was designed.
Really I just wish they would rename the contest to "most popular video game as of right now". As opposed to "best game ever".
As noted above, those are basically equivalent.
Rob
GTA3 is one of my favorite games, and I am 22. The correlation might work one way, but that doesn't make it work the other way. I'm actually insulted by the suggestion that it does work the other way. Just because I'm old and embittered compared to the young punks that are now playing video games doesn't mean that I can't appreciate progress.
Anyway, if anyone cares:
PlayStation - Final Fantasy 8
Genesis - Phantasy Star 4
Master System - Phantasy Star
Sega CD - Lunar: The Silver Star
Nintendo 64 - The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time
NES - Dragon Warrior 4
Super Nintendo - Chrono Trigger
Turbo CD - Ys Books 1 and 2
TurboGrafx 16 - Military Madness
DOS/Windows - Planescape: Torment
Macintosh - Marathon Infinity
MSX - Metal Gear 2: Solid Snake
Dreamcast - Soul Calibur
PlayStation2 - Grand Theft Auto 3
(Notes: Picked FF8 instead of FF7 or MGS because I figured it would be underrepresented. Picked Lunar because I haven't played Snatcher or Dark Wizard. Planescape: Torment is my favorite game in general.)
Rob
Or rather, the interface sucked when you had to control more than one character. Play Superhero League of Hoboken; that's a good superhero game.
Rob
When making this point, though, remember one thing about school starting from high school onwards (in most areas): algebra and basic mathematics are not taught in the same classroom.
Neither are general PE and varsity sports.
Rob
Preparing students for society actually is the primary function of school. It's far more important than either educating the kids in traditional subjects or keeping kids out of their parents' hair. Read The Six-Lesson Schoolteacher by John Taylor Gatto for more info.
Yes, sometimes the truth hurts, but that doesn't make it "overrated."
Rob
Most people who have a problem with PE because it's "pointless and ego-busting" forget the fact that, to a jock, academic subjects are exactly the same. And I don't think most people would advocate the abolition of schooling just because some people don't like the subjects that schools teach.
Remember, schools are supposed to be in the occupation of education. That includes education of the body as much as it does the mind.
Rob
You do not get a PS/2 with every TV you buy / have bought for the last 10 years.
As I said elsewhere, I didn't have to buy Windows the last time I built a PC, and building a PC is pretty easy to do. The average consumer simply can't build a console or a TV, or even have a small-time technician not constrained by OEM policy do it for him.
The XBox has more console marketshare than Linux has on the desktop.
What about the Mac?
Windows does not require a license from Microsoft to distribute software for it.
Wouldn't that be in Windows' favor as far as not being a monopolistic OS goes?
Rob
That's strange. I don't remember having to buy Windows the last time I built a PC. Or bought a Mac.
Rob (OK, I've never actually bought a Mac, but you get the point)
How the hell is it a monopoly when there are 2 other systems to compete?
I say the exact same thing about Windows, but no one listens to me.
Rob
Companies should be allowed to do anything they want to increase their profit margins, as long as those things are legal. The only way securing third-party exclusivity would be illegal is if it led to a monopoly. This is pretty unlikely for the simple reason that it tends to be bad business for a third party to stay exclusive. Fewer systems on which your game is available equals lower sales. That's why Sony usually has to pay big bucks to secure exclusivity. Since Sony's finances are finite and the other two console makers also have a lot of money, this effectively keeps Sony from buying up all of the third-party gaming. (Though the PS2's popularity compared to the other two systems is a big advantage for Sony.)
Does it suck that console makers are allowed to reach exclusivity deals with third parties? Yes. But it also sucks that console makers are allowed to keep their own first-party games exclusive. I don't think anyone would sanely expect them not to, though.
As for territorial lockouts, they're completely pointless. At least they are in Japan and North America; the Europeans only have themselves to blame for using PAL TVs.
Rob
I agree, and I'm a Final Fantasy fan!
Rob (Why would you pay to listen to video game music?)
Labor MP Ian Gibson said he "feared that children would gain a distorted view of animal experimentation", and a spokesperson against animal cruelty "claimed that the game made light of animal suffering, which was offensive."
Well, at least the MP's argument makes a little sense, unlike the other one, which shows a lack of distinction between fantasy and reality. Animal experimentation is a much maligned area of science, and much of that indignation is undeserved. Suggesting that all scientists do is torture cute, fuzzy animals certainly isn't helping us go away from these preconceived notions.
Rob