Listen, games like classic mario games are always going to be popular because they're just that, classics. But if you think for one second the general population doesn't like to see updates to gaming consoles than that's just wrong. People want to see how far technology has gone and how realistic games can get, and yes it is important to many people. It doesn't make or break a game but my point was that it can bea huge part....gt series wouldn't of worked well on 2d systems, halo is more enjoyable in 3d, (in my opinion) prince of persia on xbox is more enjoyable than the original, medel of honor and battlefield 1942 definetly would not of worked as a 2d model...graphics are important, but the most important but they are a factor...and i'd definetly rather play new, good, more realistic games (such as Halo series) than be stuck with Super Mario Bros all my life (even though it's my favorite game).
I agree 100 percent with you, 113.
I prefer the Sony stuff. The PSP is just better than the DS. The dualscreen thing was just a stupid gimmick and a waste of money. Extra graphics was not a huge thing to me because it was a given. PSP is a phone, a dvd player (sorta... lol) an image wallet, an mp2 player (not quite at mp3, It don't play everything)
The stylus... WHY?? why, why, why!! It's not a Blackberry, dammit! The size was nice though. PsP manages to put some very nice, lean graphics into a tight space and make it work.
PS3 is looking pretty good. The next Gengames are fantabulous to look at from afar. Rev. does have a god thing going with it's complete compadability, but it is a completely unfair disadvantege, since PS3 can't go back that far. Literally. It will be playing PS games though... hehe... I will call it a tie right now, since Sony gets the handheld, and I am forced to hand it to Nintendo in the next gen category. But we'll see. Maybe my bloody online will kick in on my DS!! (ps: the chat was a gay idea. it's called msn, or yahoo, or textmessaging... or a cell phone call on the DS, baby!!)
i dont agree with that, people doesnt want to see how far technology goes, people want to have fun in their games, of course the graphics are important, but they arent the main point, i would say they are the last point.That is why many times xboxs games are worse than nintendo 64 games, that is why nintendo is a huge legend in the world of games .That is why ocarina of time is considered the best game in all world .Although i thin ps3 will be better i cant say it is because from its technology.
hoshi i never said graphics were the most important, but i'd say they're pretty important for certain types of games....games that are supposed to be realistic deserve to have the best graphics around (i.e. halo series, gt series, gta series, socom series, ghost recon series, splinter cell series, metal gear solid series, the new gears of war game, project gotham racing, etc....) i think nintendo and their fans think that when it comes to graphics and gameplay it's an either/or type of thing, why not have both; the best graphics possible for the time and the best gameplay w/the best games......playstation has a history of coming up with the best of both words...great selection of great games and good hardware. Now the PS3 is going to continue on that path with the best hardware out of the 3 systems (most likely) and will once again probabaly have the best game selection.
rgaphics may not be most important, fun is, but graphics are there to inhance the fun level. Some people prefer a good graphics game, some prefer gameplay. You can't just say 'graphics aren't important, gameplay is all there is' (I know it's not what you said, but it's pretty close) Diff. people prefer dif. things. PS is aimed at a league of kids in between the Nintendo (good game for fun) and Next Gen (great graphics and such). Nintendo tries to stay true, which will always keep it blue (oh, god!! You know you love that ryhme!! lol)
KMC Community Forums
Aug 6th, 2005 10:04 PM
