Last-Gen Console Discussions (PS3, Xbox 360, Wii)

Started by Ushgarak507 pages

I hate this idea that games have to have continuous online components. This ridiculous sentiment "Oh, after you have completed it you have nothing to do."

Well... DUH... that's been true of gaming since it started and everyone was perfectly happy with all the classics in that time. It's kinda what 'completed' means.

Certainly I don't think it adds that much to a game's design that you can strut around on-line trying to prove you have the biggest balls on the block and blaming it on hacks if you lose.

The only decent multiplay is with your friends.

Gah, this is why I am not that happy about Starcraft II...

okay, im not saying that a game HAS to have online play. hell, im rather new to it myself and i dont to it all that often. A great game doesnt NEED online because once you've completed it you'll be satisfied with the outcome and you can put the game to rest or beat it again or whatever.

My point was that online does add to the package its definetly not a drawback. Multi player is fine but with online your not confined to those people around you can play with pretty much the world.

and to say that the ONLY decent play is multiplay is with your friends is kind of farfetched because as the gaming world advances so should the gamers. So that kinda negates the whole "thats what we liked about the classics" concept

Although games like crackdown and tenchu z fail to recogonize the fun in regular multiplayer, because they only offer online m.p. When it comes to multiplayer theres nothing wrong with old but please be fair to the new.

People demanding online play all the time is the fault of Microsoft for putting all their ****in shooters online, and people getting spoiled. Sony is getting as annoying by putting all of the classic games online, and people bitching more and more. People need to shut up already, Pokemon just got released with Wi-Fi, Mario Strikers Charged will be the 2nd game, Brawl in the Fall will be 3rd. That's ENOUGH for a START, considering Nintendo will have Wiiware to counter XBox Live, and the Playstation Shop to release exclusive games, and have even MORE online stuff.

Meanwhile the Virtual Console has had tons of downloads, yet people just want a damn shooter to be online.

I think people have a right to demend online play. It's 2007 and online is becoming more profitable every year.

I'm paying over 80 bucks now (tax obviously included) for an 360 game, I want online play to back up that SP, especially if its an shooter.

Ush, your seriously being shortsighted about saying that the only decent multiplay is with friends. I have to completely disagree with you. Aside from obvious titles like Wii Sports, and such, I rather play an shooter online with friends over Live, or the Net for PC, than stuck in a room with four friends with four small screens. What about the times when I cant play with my friends (I work in restuarants so I never play games with friends)

I didn't say in the same room, thank you. You will note that in saying you like playing game x with friends, you are actually still doing exactly what I say.

The industry isn't focussed on that though. It's focussed on competition with strangers. Look at Starcraft.

Having seen the sheer spite, malice and hideous urges for superiority involved in the mass drive fior competitive gaming, I am certain that it is harming gaming in general.

Games were always expensive. On-line play is a luxury and the point where you think it is a necessity is a point where perspective is being lost.

Originally posted by Kenshinswife
and to say that the ONLY decent play is multiplay is with your friends is kind of farfetched because as the gaming world advances so should the gamers.

Actually I think gaming is actively DEvolving in that direction.

A lot of people have totally lost the whole point gaming took off in the first place- the idea of not having to play against Humans.

Putting Humans back in the equation in a worldwide scale leads to a truly nasty mindset.

Humans are also the weakest point in gaming as they can never be improved by the efforts of game designers. Absolutely everything else can be.

I do feel that, luckily, this obsession with this shallow on-line play culture will dwindle. And it is those who throw their weight behind it who are shortsighted. And also very unimaginative.

Originally posted by Ushgarak

Humans are also the weakest point in gaming as they can never be improved by the efforts of game designers. Absolutely everything else can be.

I'd like to see a game designer program AI to be as smart as a human but not cheat as well. Plus how would a games developer develop something that is beyond human use if they are just human themselves?

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Actually I think gaming is actively DEvolving in that direction.

A lot of people have totally lost the whole point gaming took off in the first place- the idea of not having to play against Humans.

Putting Humans back in the equation in a worldwide scale leads to a truly nasty mindset.

Humans are also the weakest point in gaming as they can never be improved by the efforts of game designers. Absolutely everything else can be.

I do feel that, luckily, this obsession with this shallow on-line play culture will dwindle. And it is those who throw their weight behind it who are shortsighted. And also very unimaginative.

I doubt the idea of gaming was not playing with humans. Because there have always been vs mode games. so to take humans out of the equation would be silly. Gaming has always been slightly competetitive. The mindset has always been there its just that online brings it to a larger scale with more humans. the more humans the more competivitness. and ofcourse it'll be an ego boost for some people, but thats just part of it always has been. Maybe not as blatant...but its been there.

And im not saying the point of gaming is for the online play. That would be idiotic. You buy a game and beat it....And thats the point.

But if you realy liked the game you can always further enjoy yourself by online play. Its just another way of ensuring you get your moneys worth. a bonus. and i fail to see how that would make people who are "devoted" to online gaming shortsighted or unimaginative.

and i highly doubt that online gaming is going anywhere. If anything its only going to get better or in your case worse.

Hey I've heard all over the place the PS3 sux, but what I wanna know is why?

Because $600 is far too much to pay for a CONSOLE, Sony jacked up the price for their precious Blu-ray. 360 and Ps3 make basically the same graphics from what I've seen from the Gamespot comparisons, and selling a console for that much money is ridiculous.

Also, a console with 4 exclusive franchise titles is destined to fail. MGS4 can't sell 10 million consoles by itself, and all of Sony's exclusive titles COULD fail. And Heavenly Sword getting the God OF War treatment, is just a pathetic way to try to sell consoles, and if they try to change the game play in a sequel, it will fail.

Originally posted by JToTheP
Because $600 is far too much to pay for a CONSOLE, Sony jacked up the price for their precious Blu-ray. 360 and Ps3 make basically the same graphics from what I've seen from the Gamespot comparisons, and selling a console for that much money is ridiculous.

Also, a console with 4 exclusive franchise titles is destined to fail. MGS4 can't sell 10 million consoles by itself, and all of Sony's exclusive titles COULD fail. And Heavenly Sword getting the God OF War treatment, is just a pathetic way to try to sell consoles, and if they try to change the game play in a sequel, it will fail.

I admit f*ck Blu-ray we don't give a shit bout it but btw wtf is Heavenly Sword?

It's a SCEA game that's getting God OF War type gameplay, so of course it will sell. Blu-Ray only has a shot because sony is a major company compared to Toshiba.

basically its the female god of war....they say it isnt but it is...

God of War 1 and 2 were great games. Why would a game with similar gameplay piss you off?

Originally posted by Violent2Dope
God of War 1 and 2 were great games. Why would a game with similar gameplay piss you off?

Because like I said, they're only doing it for sales, and if they try to change the gameplay in a sequel, they'll end up screwed. If you need to paste the same gameplay in another title, you clearly know you ****ed up.

Originally posted by JToTheP
Because like I said, they're only doing it for sales, and if they try to change the gameplay in a sequel, they'll end up screwed. If you need to paste the same gameplay in another title, you clearly know you ****ed up.
So in this game you use chain blades like Kratos or what? Oh, and every time a game is sold it's done so to make money.🙂

Originally posted by Violent2Dope
So in this game you use chain blades like Kratos or what? Oh, and every time a game is sold it's done so to make money.🙂

She has a sword or some shit, I don't know, I just saw comments saying that, and with games these days, and Sony's ridiculous ass, they prolly need to sell close to a million worldwide to actually MAKE profit. Just for their precious graphics.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
I didn't say in the same room, thank you. You will note that in saying you like playing game x with friends, you are actually still doing exactly what I say.

The industry isn't focussed on that though. It's focussed on competition with strangers. Look at Starcraft.

Having seen the sheer spite, malice and hideous urges for superiority involved in the mass drive fior competitive gaming, I am certain that it is harming gaming in general.

Games were always expensive. On-line play is a luxury and the point where you think it is a necessity is a point where perspective is being lost.

My fault, I assumed you meant splitscreen.

Isnt the whole idea behind XBOX Live is to play with friends? Considering the excellent friend system it has. How is the industry focusing on competitive gameplay when Sony, XBOX, Nintendo all have system in place to allow you join in a game with friends online.

Ush, are you an robot? Or did something take over your mind with crap?

"A lot of people have totally lost the whole point gaming took off in the first place- the idea of not having to play against Humans."

I'm pretty sure the first game ever made, and more subsequent games were meant to be played by humans, and to compete. Gaming as whole, ie boards games, sports and other activites are pretty much meant to be competitive. I have no idea why you think computer gaming was meant to be played against an computer. That is complete horseshit. The whole idea behind gaming is to have fun. That is it. To have fun.

"I do feel that, luckily, this obsession with this shallow on-line play culture will dwindle. And it is those who throw their weight behind it who are shortsighted. And also very unimaginative."

I'm also pretty sure that online gaming is here to stay. I also think its the more popular genre of gaming. Unimaginative? Any game, SP or MP can be that. SP games are just as reponsible of being generic as MP games are.

VIDEO gaming, genius. This being the video games area, and us talking entirely about video games. Good Lord, show some sense.

"I have no idea why you think computer gaming was meant to be played against an computer. That is complete horseshit. "

WRONG. I cannot put this strongly enough. You are wrong and I am right. Computer gaming as first developed was entirely based around the novelty of an automated opponent. Pong was a minorty, and besides was the old equivalent of Wii Sports, and not in the scope of my criticism. Gaming was founded on Asteroids, Space Invaders and Pac Man. If you played it multiplayer, you took turn.

I was actually around at this point and experienced the start of the gaming industrey. I saw it happen, I was part of it as it happened, and I damn know what it was like, what it was focussed on, and how it has changed. This was the foundation of the industry. Whilst people concentrated that, the nature of gaming expanded. Since it started focussing on this competitve element it has stalled.

(People complain that the obsession with graphics is killing games. THAT is horseshit. Games were ALWAYS obsessed with graphics, from day one. I remember the same complaints about graphics taking over the industry in 1985, and even then the response was that it had always been that way. Two decades later and people still think a graphic obsession is a recent issue- and miss whacking great problems like this one)

And yes, the industry is focussed on competitive play with strangers. That's pretty much just how it is- the pull, the thrill of victory. From Quake deathmatch onwards, and especially with Starcraft, it was all about going online, strutting your stuff and beating people you don't know. The whole culture is a curse on gaming. For every Hellgate- a game which has the balls to do MP gaming in a more positive way- there are a dozen shite deathmatch clones. And now Starcraft II is trying to perfect the formula riding on a wave of ridiculous far-east competitive obsession.

And that's magnificently untrue about single player games. Very few multi-player games have ever put anything remotely like the amount of effort that has gone into classic sinngle player games over time.

Like I say, humans are a weak link. It's only big now because only reently has broadband technology made this sort of thing truly possible. But the obsession will not last because gaming technology will improve continuously, and will continue to show the highlight that, basically, Humans make terrible opponents and also limit gaming experence.

Humans cheat, Humans exploit gameplay mechanics, Humans ruin immersive games with names like "Nobwank", and Humans also reduce gaming to a horrible basic formula. Look at, say, games of Civilization when played competuitively. It goes from being an elegant game about constructing your own Civilization the way you want to a desperate resource rush game, like Starcraft but not in real time. Destroyed. The only way to enjoy it is with a group of like-minded friends.

I am all for the online experience, but despite the facade of friendship, it's still based on the competitive destruction of strangers. it can and will change.

It's a pox on gaming, but it will pass. And thank God for Nintendo, who have never indulged in it.

Originally posted by Zen2nd
I'd like to see a game designer program AI to be as smart as a human but not cheat as well. Plus how would a games developer develop something that is beyond human use if they are just human themselves?

Your assumption that the objective is just to simulate Humans is way off.

Meanwhile, the essence of that is just babble- from the dawn of computing, programmers have always created mechanisms that can do things better than the programmers can.