#22714 - alek - Sun Jun 27, 2004 7:29 pm
http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=3914
Does anyone here know anything about this console?
A new GameBoy and the Nintendo DS...*drool* (someone get me a towel fast)
Are the going to be on the market at the same time?
#22715 - Lord Graga - Sun Jun 27, 2004 8:14 pm
o_O
Where the hell have you been the last couple of months? In a hole, or something?
EDIT: I know I'm not very informative, but, take a google, or try to check the new category in the forum or something.
#22719 - alek - Sun Jun 27, 2004 9:47 pm
Is the new Game Boy mentioned in the DS section?
According to gamasutra Nintendo just confirmed this about two weeks ago
Gamasutra wrote:
"Speaking at a recent ELSPA conference, David Gosen, head of Nintendo of Europe, has admitted that the company is currently working on another next-generation Game Boy console.This is expected to be a direct successor to the current Game Boy Advance and separate to the forthcoming Nintendo DS"
"the fact that it will play Game Boy Advance games has lead some to believe that the company may be considering branding it (Nintendo DS) as a Game Boy console after all"
Where is this console mentioned in the DS section?
#22721 - Lord Graga - Sun Jun 27, 2004 9:59 pm
Ah, my fault. I haven't got any user for the site you pointed to, so, I just thought that it might have been the DS that you were speaking of.
I mean. Of course they are working on a new console already, they always do. GBA SP started being developed just a month after the GBA was released, etc, etc, and I would be much surprised if their technicans wasn't working on the next handheld by now.
#22738 - alek - Mon Jun 28, 2004 9:24 am
No problem,
| Lord Graga wrote: |
| Ah, my fault. I haven't got any user for the site you pointed to, so, I just thought that it might have been the DS that you were speaking of. |
I figured that was the case...
| Quote: |
GBA SP started being developed just a month after the GBA was released,
|
The GBA SP isn't a completely new console, It's still a GBA. And the DS hasn't even been realesed yet...
Any way, does anyone know anything about this console?
#22747 - Abscissa - Mon Jun 28, 2004 4:28 pm
| alek wrote: |
| Any way, does anyone know anything about this console? |
At this point, I doubt anyone outside of Nintendo (or maybe a developer or two under NDA) knows anything.
#22772 - sgeos - Tue Jun 29, 2004 5:53 am
I doubt anything is concrete. I suspect that the hardware designer knows what the system will and will probably include.
-Brendan
#22812 - dagamer34 - Tue Jun 29, 2004 10:10 pm
I'm wondering what the next Game Boy will do that the DS can't. The only thing I see that can be improved are the graphics.
_________________
Little kids and Playstation 2's don't mix. :(
#22819 - alek - Tue Jun 29, 2004 10:54 pm
| dagamer34 wrote: |
| I'm wondering what the next Game Boy will do that the DS can't. The only thing I see that can be improved are the graphics. |
Maybe it can be hooked up to the revolution console
#22831 - dagamer34 - Wed Jun 30, 2004 1:01 am
| alek wrote: |
| dagamer34 wrote: | | I'm wondering what the next Game Boy will do that the DS can't. The only thing I see that can be improved are the graphics. |
Maybe it can be hooked up to the revolution console |
That doesn't warrant making another handheld. I think it will probably have the smae graphics as the DS, but drop the 2 screens, touch screen, and mic to make it a supped up game boy that way the special DS function won't be there.
_________________
Little kids and Playstation 2's don't mix. :(
#22861 - alek - Wed Jun 30, 2004 4:47 pm
| dagamer34 wrote: |
That doesn't warrant making another handheld. |
I didn't mean that that would be the only reason to make the console. It was just an example of one of the things they might include
#22914 - dagamer34 - Thu Jul 01, 2004 12:53 am
| alek wrote: |
| dagamer34 wrote: |
That doesn't warrant making another handheld. |
I didn't mean that that would be the only reason to make the console. It was just an example of one of the things they might include |
The problem is that there isn't much else TO include. Just updated graphics. The problem is that you begin to have these "graphics vs. gameplay" threads all over the internet. Sure, they are there now in the "DS vs. PSP" battle, but the DS isn't a Game Boy and has many features never combined into one console before.
I fear the GBE won't be able to stand up to the PSP because graphics is all it will have.
_________________
Little kids and Playstation 2's don't mix. :(
#22926 - keldon - Thu Jul 01, 2004 12:41 pm
I think that the gameboy days are up. The PSP has far superior graphics, will have a better line up of games and can't survive alone on Nintendo's exclusives (remakes of previous games most probably).
The N-Gage didn't beat the gameboy simply because it was a phone more than a console with a delay from pressing the joypad and seeing a response. Plus it was overpriced for handheld games playing. The PSP however will not be like this.
And sony are far smarter than Atari(or whever they are), so we won't be having another SNK.
#22931 - alek - Thu Jul 01, 2004 3:26 pm
| keldon wrote: |
| I think that the gameboy days are up. The PSP has far superior graphics. |
How do you know that the new Game Boy that is in development now will not match or beat PSP in graphics?
#22944 - Abscissa - Thu Jul 01, 2004 5:55 pm
The Gameboy's days are not up. The PSP is going to:
1. Cost a ton (At least as far as handheld systems go).
2. Have short battery life. (It may be ~10 hours just playing MP3's, but only ~2 hours of games).
3. Be incredibly fragile. One of the head guys at Sony has even stated, and I quote, "you don't want to drop it".
4. Continue SCE's tradition of being a pain in the ass to develop for.
5. Continue SCE's tradition of marketing exclusively at the stereotypes of one specific demographic, artificially shrinking their market.
6. Require a Sony memory stick to save games (Ok, this one is speculation, but the UMD is not writable, and I doubt the system will have embedded savegame memory like the SegaCD and Saturn. Nobody wants to use Sony's proprietary memory stick, so they WANT ways to boost memory stick sales)
7. They're placing a lot of emphasis on the "playing movies" aspect. Nobody is going to buy movies on Sony's UMD anymore than they bought music on the old MiniDiscs. BetaMax -> MiniDisc -> Memory Stick -> UMD. Sony has lousy history of getting storage mediums to really take off.
8. They're not billing this as purely a gaming machine. It's yet another attempt at a multifunction device. History has shown time and time again that these just don't sell in large numbers. This has even been confirmed by the shitty sales numbers of the all-in-one 'PSX' in Japan (Sony was actually suprised by this - I frankly don't see how this should have come as a suprise).
9. The PS2 has proven that a system doesn't need to have the best graphics, or the fastest hardware, or the most memory, or even the most reliable hardware in order to lead in market share. And if there were any doubt that applies to the handheld arena too, consider the NGage. It supports 3D better than the GBA, but that obviously didn't do Nokia a bit of good.
#22954 - DiscoStew - Thu Jul 01, 2004 8:13 pm
| keldon wrote: |
| The PSP has far superior graphics |
Since when were graphics the main priority in a game?
| keldon wrote: |
| a better line up of games |
Just because a game is announced doesn't mean that it is actually a good game. A game could have all this spiffy stuff in it, gorgeous graphics and sound, created from a well known company, and could be the best game ever made from what you see, and yet when you finally get to play the game, it could be a sucky game because it was hard to play, kinda like Square's Driving Emotion Type-S.
| keldon wrote: |
| can't survive alone on Nintendo's exclusives (remakes of previous games most probably) |
And yet they are selling. At least the time difference of the remakes was not from the last previous console (N64), but from the console before that (SNES), and even before that (NES). Enough time for the people who never really played an SNES or NES because they were too young to have a chance to play classic games of old to get that chance. Besides, the GBA isn't a great system because of only Nintendo's games but with 3rd party games. Would you like to see remakes of PS2 games if you already own a PS2, being Sony's current game console? If anything, I'd like to see remakes of some PS1 games myself.
| keldon wrote: |
| The N-Gage didn't beat the gameboy simply because it was a phone more than a console |
And the PSP was stated by Ken Kutaragi (president and CEO of SCE) to be "the Walkman of the 21st century", not a pure game console.
| keldon wrote: |
| Plus it was overpriced for handheld games playing. The PSP however will not be like this. |
The price of PSP games have not been announced yet, although I would assume that the games would be priced at least as much as a current home console game, considering all the factor of the UMD and the PSP (like its size, proprietary, etc.)
I'm not trying to dis on the PSP or the PS2 in any way as there are many games I would like to play that are on Sony's game consoles. I just don't have the money. I even agree with Abscissa's 9th opinion that the PS2, compared to the likes of the GC and XBox, is still leading even thought it doesn't have better hardware, but a plethora of good games.
_________________
DS - It's all about DiscoStew
#22977 - Abscissa - Fri Jul 02, 2004 1:09 am
| DiscoStew wrote: |
Just because a game is announced doesn't mean that it is actually a good game. A game could have all this spiffy stuff in it, gorgeous graphics and sound, created from a well known company, and could be the best game ever made from what you see, and yet when you finally get to play the game, it could be a sucky game because it was hard to play, kinda like Square's Driving Emotion Type-S.
|
lol, That's funny, right before I read that last sentence, I was thinking "The Bouncer" ;)
#22986 - DiscoStew - Fri Jul 02, 2004 4:11 am
I hadn't read up on "The Bouncer" except for the fact that it was extremely short, even after having played as all 3 characters. Driving Emotion Type-S really stuck out there (far out there), so I used that example.
_________________
DS - It's all about DiscoStew
#23019 - Abscissa - Fri Jul 02, 2004 8:20 pm
Heheh, it's horrible. The only way I'd recommend even a rental is just to laugh at how shitty it is. Even the cutscenes suck, in fact, anything that could possibly suck about a video game sucks in The Bouncer.
#23026 - DiscoStew - Fri Jul 02, 2004 8:59 pm
I know that both of those games were back in the early days of the PS2, but what happened to Square with those sucky games? And the FF series? I consider 4, 6, 7, and 9 to be great games, but 8 stunk, and reviews that I've read on 10 and 10-2 showed that they stunk also. I could be wrong as I never played those 2 versions ( I have no PS2).
_________________
DS - It's all about DiscoStew
#23035 - sgeos - Fri Jul 02, 2004 11:25 pm
Around the time Square move to the Playstation, they seemed to shift their producing content games to special effects games. (My observation. It could be flawed.)
-Brendan
#23037 - DiscoStew - Sat Jul 03, 2004 12:28 am
Another reason why gameplay and story needs to be a much higher priority than graphics and special effects.
EDIT:
Has anyone noticed that we've began to go off-topic on an off-topic topic? Started about the new GBA, and now we are talking about Square's sucky game. :B
_________________
DS - It's all about DiscoStew
#23040 - keldon - Sat Jul 03, 2004 1:32 am
At the end of the day the PS2 is selling good because it's run by sony. The n-gage was crap as you pressed the button and it responded a minute later. It had few games to consider buying it for and was over over-priced.
And even though the PS2 has less powerful hardware than the cube, like the PS when compared to the N64 - - - the games simply looked better!
People are shallow, and they probably only have gameboys because there is no PSBoy. Yes that little thing released by sony was a flop, but so was virtual boy, the 64DD, the N64 and the SNES CD. I'd like to see Nintendo at the top of the game, but let's be honest =)
#23041 - sgeos - Sat Jul 03, 2004 2:16 am
| Quote: |
| Has anyone noticed that we've began to go off-topic on an off-topic topic? Started about the new GBA, and now we are talking about Square's sucky game. :B |
Feel free to port it to a new thread if you feel it has gotten sufficiently off topic. The subject may want to take the form of "New Subject (Was Old Subject)".
| DiscoStew wrote: |
| Another reason why gameplay and story needs to be a much higher priority than graphics and special effects. |
This really depends on the goal of the game. It is easy to throw cash at special effects and make something look nice. If I personally want to see something flashy, I'll pick up an anime, but some people like pseudo interactive movie type things (marketed as games).
Keep in mind that a game and a story are completely different. A game has goals and objectives. Combining a game with cinematic elements will make it more interesting if done right. If a good mechanics are given a bad 'flavor', it will turn people off.
Take pokemon, for example. The mechanics are rock solid, balanced and complex. There really is a lot of good stuff there. Now, the game has a kiddie flavor, and the story is infatuated with itself and generally really silly. That is a bit of a turn off to most older players regardless of the depth of the mechanics.
I'm more interested in game mechanics and general balance than I am in flahsy graphics (I usually turn off animations to speed up game play if I have the option).
I do wish people would put more thought (and perhaps mathematical modeling) into the design of their game mechanics. So often games have interenting mechanics that are made meaningless the game progresses. (Fixed Faith and Brave if FFT for PS is interesting. This mechanic is easily bypassed and broken.)
| keldon wrote: |
| People are shallow, and they probably only have gameboys because there is no PSBoy. |
Sure most people are shallow, but flashy effects are not the only thing people take into account. Anybody who believes that their funds are sufficiently limited will take price into account. (New Alien Space Handheld- it does everything! It's only $2499.95 after rebate! Holographic display and neural link sold separately.)
-Brendan
#23072 - DiscoStew - Sat Jul 03, 2004 10:35 am
keldon, you're not very fond of Nintendo, are you? Indeed the Virtual Boy and the 64DD were flops, and the SNES CD (which was a joint venture between Nintendo and Sony) wasn't exactly a flop considering it never got released or finished. And why is the N64 considered a flop? Because it didn't sell as well as the PS1? That's true, but it was still successful.
So Nintendo was never at the top of the game? Does the NES and SNES ring a bell?
| keldon wrote: |
| At the end of the day the PS2 is selling good because it's run by sony |
Can you say the same about Sony's other products?
| keldon wrote: |
| like the PS when compared to the N64 - - - the games simply looked better! |
There you go with graphics again! Please, let's not argue about this. If graphics are that important, why hasn't there been any discussion about the X-Box graphics? Is it because it doesn't matter? Exactly! Take the very bouncy, virgin blinding, DOA: Extreme Volley game. Graphically gorgeous, but very weak on the gameplay part. Many copies sold, but for gameplay?
[Magic-8-ball] Signs point to no [/Magic-8-ball].
_________________
DS - It's all about DiscoStew
#23073 - keldon - Sat Jul 03, 2004 12:52 pm
I had an N64 and I liked it very much. I'm a Nintendo fan, but most people will buy into this sony game stuff.
The XBox is just a sort of rubbish in the general public's eye with only one game.
The N64 flopped because it sold far less than they wanted or expected. A few games done well but shops didn't stock its games that much because of its low sales.
Never said Nintendo weren't at the top of the game. As it goes they're the only one of the three actually making a profit. But as for the SNES - sony have taken that entire market with them; and Nintendo only have the hardcore fans/gamers and the new generation.
#23081 - alek - Sat Jul 03, 2004 4:26 pm
I think the next generation console battle will be a little less dominated by sony, both nintendo and microsoft has stated that they will not let sony get a head start this time. That must have been a big factor to sony's dominance, I mean didn't they release their console about a year before the Game Cube?
#23082 - keldon - Sat Jul 03, 2004 4:41 pm
I think the release time had more of an effect on the PSOne than the PS2; most of those people would have bought it anyway and didn't the dreamcast come out a year before the PS2 with a bucket of tripple A titles?
Also I want some proper racing titles on the next ninty console. FZero and mario kart are good; but I also want a decent rally / gt game
#23085 - tepples - Sat Jul 03, 2004 5:00 pm
| keldon wrote: |
| I think the release time had more of an effect on the PSOne than the PS2; most of those people would have bought it anyway and didn't the dreamcast come out a year before the PS2 with a bucket of tripple A titles? |
And stomped by Sony's FUD that the PS2 would be so much more powerful than the DC, when it still isn't that much more powerful. The other thing boosting the PS2 was that it could play DVD Video titles; given the price of DVD players at the time, the PS2 capability was almost free.
_________________
-- Where is he?
-- Who?
-- You know, the human.
-- I think he moved to Tilwick.
#23089 - DiscoStew - Sat Jul 03, 2004 10:27 pm
| keldon wrote: |
| A few games done well but shops didn't stock its games that much because of its low sales |
And probably because of the price. Weren't the games about $59.99? I read something interesting about if you added the tax or something, the total would actually come to $64.64. Coincidense? Who knows? Heck, I remember buying Secret of Mana and Chrono Trigger on the SNES for $80 when they came out. I still love those games to bits. They are precious to me....my precious..... um, ahem.
The PS1 was a very big jump in console gaming from 2D to 3D. Nobody could resist, except for those who couldn't afford to have another console at the time.
| alek wrote: |
| didn't they release their console (PS2) about a year before the Game Cube? |
Very true. Sony got started a year earlier than Nintendo and Microsoft, which helped in their success. Another small factor may have been contributed to the fact that the PS2 was backwards-compatible with PS1 games, and giving those games the option for some PS2 features, like bilinear filtering.
_________________
DS - It's all about DiscoStew
#23100 - alek - Sun Jul 04, 2004 10:16 am
If nintendo is going to have a chance against sony and microsoft in the future I think they have to get rid if the "child" label they got. I don't get it they have plenty of "grown up's" games...
#23103 - tepples - Sun Jul 04, 2004 6:12 pm
I've almost got to thinking that in order for a game console to shed its "just a toy for kids" image, it has to have some sort of triple-M not-safe-for-kids-at-all game such as Grand Theft Auto or DOA Beach Volleyball that gets the console into the 6:00 news and riles conservatives. Perhaps Nintendo might have better luck now that Yamauchi and his "Nintendo is a toy company" philosophy are gone.
_________________
-- Where is he?
-- Who?
-- You know, the human.
-- I think he moved to Tilwick.
#23125 - keldon - Mon Jul 05, 2004 3:26 am
You can't lose when making a machine marketted at kids; they're always going to be there.
GTA to me isn't exactly an 'Adult' game, just one with graphic blood. My little brother and sister have all the other GTA's; adult games are colin mcrae, GT etc. and winter sports.
The N64 and Gamecube fell short on racing titles, the N64 suffered from no fighting titles; apart from Fighters Destiny, which should have had an update because it was pretty good. This time round the PS2 had the killer titles to remember, DMC, Omnimusha, the other one to that, and GT.
I think the next generation will be just the same now; only that there will probably be a few more devices to add to the various interactive dance mats, phasic sensors and pneumatic action light phasers. Oh, and plenty of commercial cheese.
#23132 - Abscissa - Mon Jul 05, 2004 6:25 am
| keldon wrote: |
| GTA to me isn't exactly an 'Adult' game, just one with graphic blood. My little brother and sister have all the other GTA's; adult games are colin mcrae, GT etc. and winter sports. |
Excellent man, I like your thinking. Lately, 'Adult' has somehow come to mean "Things that appeal only to teens and guys in their twenties who have a Junior High mentality", instead of "Things that would primarily appeal to adults with some level of maturity".
| keldon wrote: |
| The N64 and Gamecube fell short on racing titles, the N64 suffered from no fighting titles; apart from Fighters Destiny, which should have had an update because it was pretty good. This time round the PS2 had the killer titles to remember, DMC, Omnimusha, the other one to that, and GT. |
I think that's cutting the N64 and Gamecube a little bit short. They did have much fewer than Sony, but I think you're overlooking Killer Instinct Gold, F-Zero, and, umm.... Ok, I guess you've made your point ;)
My predictions for the next round:
- Sony's gonna continue to make mistakes just like they did with the PS2, only this time it'll actually hurt them. They're in basically the same position that Nintendo was at the end of the SNES - screwing up because they think they're invincible. Part of this may involve continuing their current obsession with making these all-in-one systems that nobody wants (Sony's a big company, and they've been trying to cram parts of all their divsions into SCE). Part of this may also involve the Cell turning out to be a royal pain in the ass to develop for - moreso than the PS2 and PSP. And part of it may involve more hardware problems (Defective optical drives anyone?), or relying too much on the rated-M, Ultra-gore, GTA demographic. They'll definately lose market share, but at worst they'll only be neck-and-neck with the competitors. They won't fall far behind, but they won't stay very far ahead. Oh and the PSP will turn out to be Sony's equivilent of something in between the N64 and the VirtualBoy. They will continue to borrow good ideas from their competitors, ideas that their fanboys once heckeled (Like the system connectivity) but will suddenly think is great.
- Nintendo's going to see the best improvement. They'll continue to innovate, and many of their ideas will later make their way into their competitor's peripherials (Like the N64's Analog Stick and Ruble Feature). Their third party support will continue to improve (They've already been working on this). If anyone at all were to pull ahead of Sony, it'll be Nintendo. Just like always, they'll be the only ones to be practically guaranteed a nice profit even if they have poor sales. Although nobody's going to beleive that the DS is not a GameBoy sucessor unless they do something fancy with the marketing that catches us off-guard. And StarFox will come out and suck ;)
- Microsoft's somewhat difficult. I'd like to say that it'll continue the XBox tradition of being top-of-the-line hardware and finally get the respect it deserves, but the hardware spec rumors have me worried. If it turns out my worries are unfounded, they'll pick up better third-party support and finally have more than just a few worthwhile exclusives (I don't buy into the idea that Halo is the *only* worthwhile game. I would rank Dead or Alive 3 up there too.). I think that the current reason there hasn't been much in exclusives lately is that they're saving them up for the next system. If, however, these rumors are true (No HD or equivilant for savegames and soundtracks, more "media-center" oriented), then it'll nearly wind up as a new WebTV.
- Both Sony's and MS's will be more "all-in-one" and less "primarily games" than the current generation and it will hurst them. Nintendo's obviously won't.
- On a "features" level, the systems will be more varied than the current generation. However, on an internal hardware level (CPU, GPU, RAM, etc.) they're just going to get more and more similar until the following generation where we may finally see some hope of a standard universal platform like the movie industry has (Or at least gamers and developers would hope.)
- None of them will be as much of a graphical leap as previous generations (expect roughy the quality of Epic's Unreal 3 demonstration from all of them.)
Wow, that turned out to be long ;)
#23146 - DiscoStew - Mon Jul 05, 2004 8:47 pm
| keldon wrote: |
| You can't lose when making a machine marketted at kids |
That is probably the reason why Nintendo hasn't changed their main target audience. Kids. If you don't have games for kids to play, then chances are they won't really play games when they get into their teens. It seems to me that Nintendo gets them when their little, then Sony takes them when they grow up. If Nintendo can focus a little more on the older age group while maintaining as much as possible with their current focus on kids, then they can steal away players from Sony's flock, and keep any new entries they get from the younger age group.
_________________
DS - It's all about DiscoStew
#23147 - Abscissa - Mon Jul 05, 2004 10:17 pm
| DiscoStew wrote: |
| That is probably the reason why Nintendo hasn't changed their main target audience. Kids. It seems to me that Nintendo gets them when their little, then Sony takes them when they grow up. |
So many people seem to believe all of that, but none of it's really true.
First off, leading people at Nintendo have been saying time and time again that they make nothing that's targeted at any specific age group, and that everything they make is designed to be appreciated by people of any age. But, over and over again, everyone insists on ignoring them. The problem is that westerners (particularly Americans) are judgemental pricks and can't figure out that 1. Cartoon is not synonymous with kids. 2. Bright colors is not synonymous with kids. 3. Things don't need to be dark, gritty, violent, moody and/or sexually explicit to be appropriate for adults. Another part of the confusion is that Nintendo is the only company around (hardware AND software) that doesn't outright IGNORE the younger demographic.
By and large, the kids that Nintendo gets when they are little do not end up being taken by Sony. More often that not, they wind up growing up to be the only people who respect Nintendo, and stick with Miyamoto's franchises long enough to teach the overly-judgemental people that games like Wind Waker are, in fact, worthwhile for any age group (including adults) just as Nintendo has been trying to tell people all along. Most of the Playstaion audience are people who either 1. Are young enough that they missed the entire 2D era, or 2. Never got into videogames until high school or college.
#23148 - Abscissa - Mon Jul 05, 2004 10:20 pm
And I STILL find it insane that people who say Nintendo's for kids CONTINUE to ignore Conker's Bad Fur Day, which was all the way back on the N64.
#23156 - DiscoStew - Tue Jul 06, 2004 2:38 am
I guess what I said didn't come out correctly, and that I should rephrase it. Most games that go through Nintendo tend to be more "kid" friendly because the parents are the ones that buy the games, and what parent would buy a game that is unappropriate for their kids?
| Abscissa wrote: |
| Cartoon is not synonymous with kids. |
Right. I hope people don't think that "The Simpsons" is for kids....
| DiscoStew wrote: |
| It seems to me that Nintendo gets them when their little, then Sony takes them when they grow up. |
My mistake on that. Perhaps I should have said that Nintendo often has the attention of kids (look at this post above), while Sony tries to get the attention of the older generation. Since Sony doesn't direct their focus on kids as much as Nintendo does, they aim at teens and above. Anyone remember that old commercial that showed two vehicles in a race? The first was an F1 racer with a TV on the back of it displaying a Playstation F1 racing game. The other vehicle was more of a beaten down ice-cream truck with a TV on its back showing (GASP!) Super Mario Kart (the original). The people who created the commercial seemed to want to show off that nobody wants some "kiddie" racing game when there is something better, more realistic, and 3D (at the time). Now after many years, I think of that commercial and it makes me laugh. Why? If you think about it from a different perspective, the commercial is really infact quite stupid. At the time, they were comparing a next generation 3D racing game to a current generation 2D racing game. Did they really think they had competition, or were they afraid of the famous Mario Kart game that they had to show it as some old, clunky, rundown game? Hmmmmm....
Of course most gamers like us would never forget Conker's BFD ,even if they never played it before. Anyone remember what the Conker game was like before the sudden change? It was more of a cutsy game than a Bloody/Gory/PottyMouth/ETC game, and people began saying things about Rare and their "cutsy" games, which sent Rare into the opposite direction with what Conker was going to be. Definitely not for kids.
_________________
DS - It's all about DiscoStew
#23162 - sgeos - Tue Jul 06, 2004 4:35 am
| DiscoStew wrote: |
| Anyone remember what the Conker game was like before the sudden change? It was more of a cutsy game than a Bloody/Gory/PottyMouth/ETC game, and people began saying things about Rare and their "cutsy" games, which sent Rare into the opposite direction with what Conker was going to be. Definitely not for kids. |
I think one should aim for whatever presentation best suits the media at hand. If it happen not to be suitable for younger audiances, fine. Aiming to make games that are not for kids strikes me as misguided.
-Brendan
#24664 - mymateo - Mon Aug 09, 2004 1:59 am
[pokes head in]
Uh, yeah.
Thetitle of this should DEFINATELY be changed to THE FUTURE OF VIDEO GAME CONSOLES.
[/poke]