The DS is a wonderful platform for RPGs, but SRPGs, in particular, would benefit from the 2 screen setup. The bottom half is your playfield, and the top is the battle order, current unit's stats, and action list.
Just being able to see the area of affect without having to block out the playing field first would be great.
Panel de Pon is different from Yoshi's Cookie in that in Panel de Pon you can remove 3 squares at a time from the field. In Yoshi's Cookie, you remove entire rows or columns at a time.
Both are different from Diamond Mine/Bejewelled/Zookeeper because in those games, you can only move one tile one space to make your grouping of the three. This isn't the case in Yoshi's Cookie, and I don't think it's how Panel de Pon works.
Here here, and it's talked about a lot on/., but Katamari Damacy proves that even we Americans don't need realistic graphics to have fun.
The people are made of blocks, and it flew off the shelves. Good gameplay makes a good game, and I'm sure the new LoZ, regardless of graphical style will be fun to play _and_ pretty to look at.
By that argument, Twilight Princess still doesn't look realistic. When was the last time you saw a green-tinged wolf with a statue thing on its back. Those creatures look fantastic, but they certainly don't look real.
Assuredly, the new installment looks darker, but it looks no more "real" to me than Wind Waker did. Nintendo decided to go someplace new with the art style again, and good for them. If it conveys the mood of the game better, so be it.
Cel shading worked for Wind Waker. It looks like dark "realistic" (I don't know what other word to use here) graphics will work for Twilight Princess. Play the game for the game. If you played Wind Waker, were you seriously only interested in the graphics the entrire time? No, you were (or should have been) interested in gameplay, too, and LoZ games have that in abundance.
You've made my point for me. Porting is a complicated process. You write for the hardware with videogames, and when you've got to move it to a new set of hardware, it's either not going to look as nice or it's going to take a very long time to get there.
Of course last generations games looked ugly. It's when the industry adopted 3-D.
Look at the first years. SNES games look a lot better than NES games because the perspective (2-D) remained, but the hardware and comfort level programming improved. This is why GameCube games look better than N64 games. 3-D was new to Nintendo with the N64 (aside from StarFox, I think), and they got it right and polished it up with the Cube.
Whatever sparkly innovation comes next will wow us in the next generation and be perfected in the one after that. You can't fault them for moving forward and stumbling a bit along the way. The jump from sprite-based 2-D games to 3-D immersive games seems like a big one to be made. It's bound to take time to get it right.
You don't port your exclusives because those are the games that move systems. Also, there are bound to be control issues and rework costs that may not outweigh the added income from PS2 sales on a LoZ game.
For what it's worth, I'm not sure you could put most GCN games on the PS2 without taking a graphics hit and using a controller that the game wasn't designed for. Have you seen the screen for RE4 on the PS2? They don't look anywhere near as nice as the GCN ones.
Console makers don't port games because it's bad business. Games houses port games to reach every audience. Nintendo is only interested in selling games to people with GameCubes. You want to play Zelda? You'll need a GameCube. Then when you play it, Nintendo got profit from the game and the system.
I may not be who you directed this at, but I still haven't beaten OoT. I can't make it past the Fire Temple, and I was stuck inside Jabu-Jabu's Belly for weeks. The world was beautiful, but I think Nintendo really figured out 3-D LoZ with good controls in Wind Waker.
The challenge I find in Wind Waker is due to game design. The challenge I find in Ocarina of Time is due to the control scheme. It just feels clunky, and I can't convince Link to do what I want him to. I don't have this issue in WW.
It's good, but it's certainly not the be-all and end-all of third-person adventure games. Maybe I'm just nostaligic, but the best third-person adventure game award, I think, ought to go to Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past.
Relying on established franchises doesn't necessarily mean that Nintendo (or Sony or Microsoft) isn't being innovative. Franchise usage and innovation aren't mutually exclusive concepts.
Take Donkey Kong games as an example.
DK64 (N64) - 3-D platformer (new for Nintendo with the N64)
Diddy Kong Racing (N64) - Fun racing game featuring 3 types of vehicles (karts, planes, and hovercraft)
Mario vs. Donkey Kong (GBA) - 1/2 old school DK, 1/2 puzzle game
Donkey Konga (GCN) - Yeah, we've seen music games before, even drum games, but I think this might be the first bongo game
Donkey Kong Jungle Beat (GCN) - Pure fun, points based game. I can't think of any other non-music games that control with a music controller
DK King of Swing (GBA) - 1/2 platformer, 1/2 puzzle with a unique control scheme (L and R only for movement
You can't really blame them for using a franchise people recognize. Square did it with Final Fantasy Tactics, too. Different gameplay, but the name will at least get your average gamer to look at the package.
No, the Silver package is free. Everybody with a 360 and a broadband connection can play online for exactly $0 extra.
The only one that seems worth it is the 12 month Premium Gold. You get $20 for another game, a headset, and a quick Billiards game. Once your year's up, just go silver.
For the record, I understand that most of us can't go out and duel or race F-1 cars. I was merely implying that instead of playing video games we could be playing _other_ games.
But for what it's worth, my comparison does hold for sports games.
Why the hostility here? Not all of us have living arrangements that allow pets. And some children aren't allowed real pets even if their living situation would allow it.
For a child whose parents have forbidden a dog in the house, this could actually be a good alternative. I could also see it going over pretty well as a precursor to a real dog to see if the child is ready for the responsibilities of pet ownership. Obviously, some things can't be simulated well (walking, cleaning up mess, etc.).
And what of the people who are allergic or just prefer simulations? We don't all have the time for real pets. If you do, that's great, but there's no need to chastise those who would make choices different from yours. Couldn't the same really be said for all games? Why aren't you outside playing? Don't you like real games? Wouldn't actual physical activity be better from a societal standpoint than button-mashing?
It won't be new. G4 already runs a block of programs they call "the G-Spot." I don't know all of what's in it, but I think X-Play and Attack of the Show are part of it.
I know, and I *think* I addressed that in a reply. But the N64 didn't require a memory card. Select titles did, but every N64 game I own saves to the cartridge just fine.
I don't remember my entire collection off the top of my head but I know that Paper Mario, Diddy Kong Racing, Ogre Battle 64, Mario Kart 64, and Star Wars Episode 1 Pod Racer all feature cart save.
You bundle* an official card because they're the ones that are guarenteed to work. I've had 3rd party cards corrupt saves and then refuse to work ever again. I've never had an official card do that.
*my GCN bundle did include an official card, the most recent card in question to die on me was a Mad Catz GCN 59, and I'll most likely never use a 3rd party save peripheral again.
I'm fine with paying for more cards. Like I said, I'm sure Nintendo made their money back (if they were ever out any at all) when I bought an additional 251 and then a 1019. It's the fact that the systems no longer come with everything needed to play today's games as they were meant to be played.
Microsoft (or anybody else) selling a console without a save mechanism would be like Microsoft selling Excel without the save button (it would be available as an online patch for $40 though).
If I run out of save slots, that's my fault. I knew the capacity of the card when I bougt it (or got it with my bundle). If I never had a card to start with, that's crummy business practice, in my opinion.
Ah, I came off wrong. What I was driving at is that either console manufacturers ought to start bundling cards with either consoles or launch titles or they'll just have to wait for those of us with less money to wait until Best Buy (where I got my GCN bundle) or some other retailer offers a reasonable bundle the rest of us can afford.
I think you're right. When consoles started requiring memory cards, they should have shipped with them. It's not like they'd lose money on it anyway. Even if the first is "free" they'll get it back when I run out of space (I have 2 PS2 cards, 4 PSX cards, and 3 GCN cards...no XBox for me yet, I figure it'll be good and cheap after the 360 launches).
$40 for a memory card? That's ridiculous. I know most XBox 360 buyers will be interested in the HD, but what happened to the reasoning people bought consoles in the first place?
They used to work straight out of the box. Need to hook it to your TV? There's a cord in the box. Need a controller? There's one in the box. Need to save? Either it came with a memory card or the games saved to the cart.
I'll be waiting to buy any new console until I can buy it the way I bought my GameCube (I got the cube, a controller, a game (choice of 5 I think), and a memory card) at a reasonable price.
A time attack is a "tool-assisted speed run." The point is that a speed run can be performed by any gamer with an original copy of the game on its original platform. Time attacks can not.
Videos and tricks related to speed-running through the Metroid series can be found here. There's also a lot of good tips and videos on sequence breaking, low % games, and 100% games.
It all depends on why you're there. Metroid Prime 2: Echoes looks to use the same engine (or was adapted from it) as Metroid Prime. Is it worth another $50 to me? Yes. Is it worth another $50 to you? Maybe not. Wait for it to go bargain bin or pick it up used. Or if people don't want the sequel, just don't pick it up. Just remember, if the Madden sequels weren't making EA enough money at $50, they wouldn't be selling them at $50.
Also, what about games that are developed on others' engines? Should they be instantly regarded as lame because you've seen graphics like these and environments like these before? Games aren't all about engines and graphics tweaks. Hell, if I recall, GTA III and GTA:VC were both running on an engine from an N64 title, Body Harvest. If you can tweak an engine and make a good game or buy somebody else's and make a good game, more power to you.
I've got to disagree here. Great play mechanics should remain largely unchanged from sequel to sequel if players are there exclusively for gameplay and/or story. Why change how a 2-D Zelda title controls? Nintendo's already got it right. Should Square radically change their turn-based battle system in the Front Mission series every iteration? No, players are there for solid battles and a coherent story. Let the mechanics naturally evolve. Then, when they're right, leave them alone.
FM4, for example, added linking, but they didn't change the way a shield works. Different mech parts act the same as similar parts in other iterations of the series. Is it because the devs are lazy? No. It's because it makes sense to do so. The core battle mechanics are the same because they're good.
If change isn't neccessary, should we really force it?
I'm sure the game will move plenty of units as a simple graphical update. If you change the story it's not FF VII any more.
If you want a different story, why not get excited about FF XII?
Slashdot Mirror
The DS is a wonderful platform for RPGs, but SRPGs, in particular, would benefit from the 2 screen setup. The bottom half is your playfield, and the top is the battle order, current unit's stats, and action list.
Just being able to see the area of affect without having to block out the playing field first would be great.
Panel de Pon is different from Yoshi's Cookie in that in Panel de Pon you can remove 3 squares at a time from the field. In Yoshi's Cookie, you remove entire rows or columns at a time.
Both are different from Diamond Mine/Bejewelled/Zookeeper because in those games, you can only move one tile one space to make your grouping of the three. This isn't the case in Yoshi's Cookie, and I don't think it's how Panel de Pon works.
Here here, and it's talked about a lot on /., but Katamari Damacy proves that even we Americans don't need realistic graphics to have fun.
The people are made of blocks, and it flew off the shelves. Good gameplay makes a good game, and I'm sure the new LoZ, regardless of graphical style will be fun to play _and_ pretty to look at.
By that argument, Twilight Princess still doesn't look realistic. When was the last time you saw a green-tinged wolf with a statue thing on its back. Those creatures look fantastic, but they certainly don't look real.
Assuredly, the new installment looks darker, but it looks no more "real" to me than Wind Waker did. Nintendo decided to go someplace new with the art style again, and good for them. If it conveys the mood of the game better, so be it.
Cel shading worked for Wind Waker. It looks like dark "realistic" (I don't know what other word to use here) graphics will work for Twilight Princess. Play the game for the game. If you played Wind Waker, were you seriously only interested in the graphics the entrire time? No, you were (or should have been) interested in gameplay, too, and LoZ games have that in abundance.
You've made my point for me. Porting is a complicated process. You write for the hardware with videogames, and when you've got to move it to a new set of hardware, it's either not going to look as nice or it's going to take a very long time to get there.
Of course last generations games looked ugly. It's when the industry adopted 3-D.
Look at the first years. SNES games look a lot better than NES games because the perspective (2-D) remained, but the hardware and comfort level programming improved. This is why GameCube games look better than N64 games. 3-D was new to Nintendo with the N64 (aside from StarFox, I think), and they got it right and polished it up with the Cube.
Whatever sparkly innovation comes next will wow us in the next generation and be perfected in the one after that. You can't fault them for moving forward and stumbling a bit along the way. The jump from sprite-based 2-D games to 3-D immersive games seems like a big one to be made. It's bound to take time to get it right.
You don't port your exclusives because those are the games that move systems. Also, there are bound to be control issues and rework costs that may not outweigh the added income from PS2 sales on a LoZ game.
For what it's worth, I'm not sure you could put most GCN games on the PS2 without taking a graphics hit and using a controller that the game wasn't designed for. Have you seen the screen for RE4 on the PS2? They don't look anywhere near as nice as the GCN ones.
Console makers don't port games because it's bad business. Games houses port games to reach every audience. Nintendo is only interested in selling games to people with GameCubes. You want to play Zelda? You'll need a GameCube. Then when you play it, Nintendo got profit from the game and the system.
I may not be who you directed this at, but I still haven't beaten OoT. I can't make it past the Fire Temple, and I was stuck inside Jabu-Jabu's Belly for weeks. The world was beautiful, but I think Nintendo really figured out 3-D LoZ with good controls in Wind Waker.
The challenge I find in Wind Waker is due to game design. The challenge I find in Ocarina of Time is due to the control scheme. It just feels clunky, and I can't convince Link to do what I want him to. I don't have this issue in WW.
It's good, but it's certainly not the be-all and end-all of third-person adventure games. Maybe I'm just nostaligic, but the best third-person adventure game award, I think, ought to go to Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past.
Relying on established franchises doesn't necessarily mean that Nintendo (or Sony or Microsoft) isn't being innovative. Franchise usage and innovation aren't mutually exclusive concepts.
Take Donkey Kong games as an example.
You can't really blame them for using a franchise people recognize. Square did it with Final Fantasy Tactics, too. Different gameplay, but the name will at least get your average gamer to look at the package.
I have been proven incorrect, and I apologize for inadvertantly spreading false information. Thank you for informing me of the facts.
No, the Silver package is free. Everybody with a 360 and a broadband connection can play online for exactly $0 extra.
The only one that seems worth it is the 12 month Premium Gold. You get $20 for another game, a headset, and a quick Billiards game. Once your year's up, just go silver.
For the record, I understand that most of us can't go out and duel or race F-1 cars. I was merely implying that instead of playing video games we could be playing _other_ games.
But for what it's worth, my comparison does hold for sports games.
Why the hostility here? Not all of us have living arrangements that allow pets. And some children aren't allowed real pets even if their living situation would allow it.
For a child whose parents have forbidden a dog in the house, this could actually be a good alternative. I could also see it going over pretty well as a precursor to a real dog to see if the child is ready for the responsibilities of pet ownership. Obviously, some things can't be simulated well (walking, cleaning up mess, etc.).
And what of the people who are allergic or just prefer simulations? We don't all have the time for real pets. If you do, that's great, but there's no need to chastise those who would make choices different from yours. Couldn't the same really be said for all games? Why aren't you outside playing? Don't you like real games? Wouldn't actual physical activity be better from a societal standpoint than button-mashing?
It won't be new. G4 already runs a block of programs they call "the G-Spot." I don't know all of what's in it, but I think X-Play and Attack of the Show are part of it.
There is a sequel to Gunstar Heroes coming out...just not for the next generation of consoles.
Gunstar Super Heroes
I know, and I *think* I addressed that in a reply. But the N64 didn't require a memory card. Select titles did, but every N64 game I own saves to the cartridge just fine.
I don't remember my entire collection off the top of my head but I know that Paper Mario, Diddy Kong Racing, Ogre Battle 64, Mario Kart 64, and Star Wars Episode 1 Pod Racer all feature cart save.
You bundle* an official card because they're the ones that are guarenteed to work. I've had 3rd party cards corrupt saves and then refuse to work ever again. I've never had an official card do that.
*my GCN bundle did include an official card, the most recent card in question to die on me was a Mad Catz GCN 59, and I'll most likely never use a 3rd party save peripheral again.
I'm fine with paying for more cards. Like I said, I'm sure Nintendo made their money back (if they were ever out any at all) when I bought an additional 251 and then a 1019. It's the fact that the systems no longer come with everything needed to play today's games as they were meant to be played.
Microsoft (or anybody else) selling a console without a save mechanism would be like Microsoft selling Excel without the save button (it would be available as an online patch for $40 though).
If I run out of save slots, that's my fault. I knew the capacity of the card when I bougt it (or got it with my bundle). If I never had a card to start with, that's crummy business practice, in my opinion.
Ah, I came off wrong. What I was driving at is that either console manufacturers ought to start bundling cards with either consoles or launch titles or they'll just have to wait for those of us with less money to wait until Best Buy (where I got my GCN bundle) or some other retailer offers a reasonable bundle the rest of us can afford.
I think you're right. When consoles started requiring memory cards, they should have shipped with them. It's not like they'd lose money on it anyway. Even if the first is "free" they'll get it back when I run out of space (I have 2 PS2 cards, 4 PSX cards, and 3 GCN cards...no XBox for me yet, I figure it'll be good and cheap after the 360 launches).
$40 for a memory card? That's ridiculous. I know most XBox 360 buyers will be interested in the HD, but what happened to the reasoning people bought consoles in the first place?
They used to work straight out of the box. Need to hook it to your TV? There's a cord in the box. Need a controller? There's one in the box. Need to save? Either it came with a memory card or the games saved to the cart.
I'll be waiting to buy any new console until I can buy it the way I bought my GameCube (I got the cube, a controller, a game (choice of 5 I think), and a memory card) at a reasonable price.
A time attack is a "tool-assisted speed run." The point is that a speed run can be performed by any gamer with an original copy of the game on its original platform. Time attacks can not.
Videos and tricks related to speed-running through the Metroid series can be found here. There's also a lot of good tips and videos on sequence breaking, low % games, and 100% games.
It all depends on why you're there. Metroid Prime 2: Echoes looks to use the same engine (or was adapted from it) as Metroid Prime. Is it worth another $50 to me? Yes. Is it worth another $50 to you? Maybe not. Wait for it to go bargain bin or pick it up used. Or if people don't want the sequel, just don't pick it up. Just remember, if the Madden sequels weren't making EA enough money at $50, they wouldn't be selling them at $50.
Also, what about games that are developed on others' engines? Should they be instantly regarded as lame because you've seen graphics like these and environments like these before? Games aren't all about engines and graphics tweaks. Hell, if I recall, GTA III and GTA:VC were both running on an engine from an N64 title, Body Harvest. If you can tweak an engine and make a good game or buy somebody else's and make a good game, more power to you.
I've got to disagree here. Great play mechanics should remain largely unchanged from sequel to sequel if players are there exclusively for gameplay and/or story. Why change how a 2-D Zelda title controls? Nintendo's already got it right. Should Square radically change their turn-based battle system in the Front Mission series every iteration? No, players are there for solid battles and a coherent story. Let the mechanics naturally evolve. Then, when they're right, leave them alone.
FM4, for example, added linking, but they didn't change the way a shield works. Different mech parts act the same as similar parts in other iterations of the series. Is it because the devs are lazy? No. It's because it makes sense to do so. The core battle mechanics are the same because they're good.
If change isn't neccessary, should we really force it?
I'm sure the game will move plenty of units as a simple graphical update. If you change the story it's not FF VII any more. If you want a different story, why not get excited about FF XII?