Son Of General Retro Discussion

Myrddin

o1s1n wrote: »

did you not see the xbox 360 lookalike controller?

Thats the Wii U though isn't it? I meant the original Wii, some of the games would have been more enjoyable if it wasn't for having to wave that abomination around to control them

johnny_ultimate

I actually don't think many games were too negatively impacted by the Wiimote. Despite a few frustrating moments (those ****ing temple keys!), they really went out of the way to make Skyward Sword particularly work. Always thought the controls in the Mario Galaxy games were nicely subtle and intuitive - the waggling requirements were more general and were actually really enjoyable. Some of the more gimmicky titles - No More Heroes and the 'mobile phone' calls - were a lot of fun. The games that really needed a traditional controller - Monster Hunter, Last Story, Xenoblade, Smash Bros. - usually allowed the Classic Controller. Special kudos to Smash Bros. and its glorious Gamecube controller support.

Only game it probably negatively effected was Metriod: Other M. The 3D aiming was really awkward as the game was solely controlled by the Wiimote. No nunchuck or anything! Overly eccentric stuff.

The Wiimote was far from perfect tech, but I think enough games made inventive use out of it to make it a worthwhile piece of kit. Not for every game, but for a lot of the better games on the system it was a worthy addition.

Myrddin

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

The Wiimote was far from perfect tech, but I think enough games made inventive use out of it to make it a worthwhile piece of kit

For sure, they did at that. But that doesn't mean they wouldn't have been improved upon by using a modern pad design.

Motion controls need to die in a fire tbh

johnny_ultimate

EnterNow wrote: »

For sure, they did at that. But that doesn't mean they wouldn't have been improved upon by using a modern pad design.

I'd say some titles would have improved from a traditional control pad, true - and I have to stress I'd be a purist in that regard too (especially the dual analogue design, which was missed in several Wii games).

But... I actually think several games ultimately played best with motion control. The thrill of the chainsaw in Madworld was probably the best thing that game had. And I genuinely think Super Mario Galaxy would have lost some (not too much) of its charms without the motion controls. Shaking to jump between planetoids never got boring over two games. But there they were very general and inexact by design. It's the one's that relied on pinpoint accuracy that were doomed to failure.

CiDeRmAn

I want a WiiU.

I want to buy the games I can buy for my 360 on a WiiU instead, cos that's how I roll.

Now we can all be like Steve, owning everything twice!

Bought Batman Arkham City?
Finshed it?
Now buy it again, over a year later!
Now with added gimmicks!!

Finished Mass Effect 3?
Love the game?
Hate the ending?
Buy it over a year later for the Wii U!
Hope they've made some directors cut and given you wood with a few extra scenes, maybe... maybe not! Probably just the same game, but with added gimmicks!!!


I wonder if the 3DS will be compatible as an alternate to the big dumb touch pad thingy?

Of course, until the advent of a proper second circle pad it'll be pointless, but you never know...




Actually, just realised....

The WiiU... another opportunity to buy Ocarina of Time again!

Andrew76

EnterNow wrote: »

Motion controls need to die in a fire tbh

+1

Leave the joypad waving about/shaking crap to sports or fitness type "games". Do folks not think having to look down at that remote screen then back to the tv will be a little off-putting? It's not like the DS where your eyes barely have to move, this yoke you have to look down away from the tv altogether.

Myrddin

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

But... I actually think several games ultimately played best with motion control

There are definitely games that do lend themselves to it well, & you've given good examples of them. For the majority though, an evolution of the Gamecube pad would have been so cool.

Andrew76 wrote: »

Do folks not think having to look down at that remote screen then back to the tv will be a little off-putting?

Massively so. Imagine playing your DS, & you kept having to look up at your tv for status checks etc... Without having used it, it sounds like its gonna be a huge distraction from looking at the actual game action on the tv.

That being said, one of the guys in the Nintendo forum mentioned the pad itself accounts for 1/4-1/3 of the whole cost of the console itself - I think that's utter insanity, & part of me thinks Nintendo actually want you looking at the pad itself seeing as it took up so much of a the development cost.

To me, a pad is but a control mechanism for a game...it shouldn't, nor ever should, replace or intrude on what the console does best. Splitting the action between the tv screen & a screen on the pad just reeks of gimmick. However, I remain hopeful

johnny_ultimate

Only minimal support for my campaign on the RAGE facebook page to get DinoRex voted the greatest fighting game of all time.

The general public just can't handle the undisputed truth of its technical and narrative superiority. RAAAAWWRRRR!

Sparks43

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Only minimal support for my campaign on the RAGE facebook page to get DinoRex voted the greatest fighting game of all time.

The general public just can't handle the undisputed truth of its technical and narrative superiority. RAAAAWWRRRR!

Yeah it seems only myself and the rage agree at the moment:mad:

o1s1n

EnterNow wrote: »

Thats the Wii U though isn't it? I meant the original Wii, some of the games would have been more enjoyable if it wasn't for having to wave that abomination around to control them

Ah sorry, was reading the thread on my phone thought you were talking about the WiiU.

The main use I can see for the WiiU controller is so kids can keep playing their game once mam and dad come along to steal the telly.

But then wouldn't a 3DS be easier?

It does seem a bit pointless to me too, kinda like Nintendo need something drastically different today to compete.

I can't really think of many situations where I'd want to be looking down at a pad though?

They better release Pacman VS. for the thing! Would be one damn good reason to own it.

johnny_ultimate

o1s1n wrote: »

They better release Pacman VS. for the thing! Would be one damn good reason to own it.

You're getting a shameless clone. Does that count?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ylMzvwgQw-k

DinoRex

I think the asymmetrical gameplay has the potential to be very interesting.

Think of the Pac-man versus concept taken to a more complicated game like Dungeons and Dragons with the player with the pad being the dungeon master setting up obstacles and challenges for the other 4 players.

It's trying something new and could have a lot of potential. The games actually look fun. I'll take that over a new machine with slightly better graphics any day.

johnny_ultimate

Aye, given so many on here frequently express their distaste for the supposed blandness of modern consoles, the one thing WiiU certainly isn't is bland and predictable.

Sure, it's grand to remain on the fence until they've proven their worth. But it's a brand new idea, and it has to potential to surprise and innovate.

DinoRex

Yeah. If it just leads to a bunch of shaking the controller around nonsense then I won't be too impressed.

Interesting to note that each WiiU console can support 2 pads as well, although at half the frame rate.

Myrddin

Sure, it's trying something new & for that, & because it's Nintendo, I'm still confident that it'll all blend together & make an intuitive and original console.

But, they're veering quite far from the path of established success with this one screen is the tv & the other is your pad thing. To me, a great console doesn't rely on trying to be different for the sake of being different - it simply is what it is... & that's usually a console, a controller, & a slew of brilliant games - graphics prowess isn't the make or break.

This screen thing will make or break depending on what game devs do with it really...but on paper, it has all the makings of a pet simulation enthusiasts dream & another gimmick. It shall remain to be seen...

Myrddin

DinoRex wrote: »

Interesting to note that each WiiU console can support 2 pads as well, although at half the frame rate.

Which tells me the console is lumbered with rendering whatever is displayed on the pad...

Given the size of the screen, it would have been better to have each pad render its own graphics...it wouldn't have taken much prowess to do it & would have freed the console of having to render for its own pad.

johnny_ultimate

EnterNow wrote: »

& that's usually a console, a controller, & a slew of brilliant games.

You mean like the PS3 and PSP? Sure :P

Myrddin

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

You mean like the PS3 and PSP? Sure :P

Yeah but I never said the PS3 nor the PSPare great consoles. They're not, they're bland, sterile & boring.

I'd rather go back & look at the likes of the Snes. It had good power of the generation prior, it improved established pad design, & had tons of brilliant games. It wasn't different so it could say, "hey look at me, I'm different"...it simply proved itself through its library.

johnny_ultimate

EnterNow wrote: »

Yeah but I never said the PS3 nor the PSPare great consoles. They're not, they're bland, sterile & boring.

You can say that, but doesn't mean it's correct

I continue to fail to see people's issues with the PSP particularly. Sure PS3 gets dragged down by a handful of hardware eccentricities (can't ignore the great games on it, though), but the PSP is in many ways on par with the DS in terms of software, and perhaps retains the finest widescreen in the history of gaming.

You could argue they don't match up to the PS2 - perhaps the last truly great console, software wise any way - but they're no less sterile than the Megadrive was as a pure hardware packages.

Nintendo remains the only console manufacturer who's consoles stand out as wholly unique, experimental entities. It doesn't always hit, but without their presence the gaming world would be a bland, more boring place. The WiiU at this stage seems to match their legacy nicely.

Myrddin

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

You can say that, but doesn't mean it's correct

Ah but again you misread my friend, this is all but my own opinion

EnterNow wrote: »

To me, a great console doesn't rely on trying to be different for the sake of being different - it simply is what it is... & that's usually a console, a controller, & a slew of brilliant games - graphics prowess isn't the make or break.

I continue to fail to see people's issues with the PSP particularly. Sure PS3 gets dragged down by a handful of hardware eccentricities (can't ignore the great games on it, though), but the PSP is in many ways on par with the DS in terms of software, and perhaps retains the finest widescreen in the history of gaming

Its joystick is rubbish, the UMD drive is shoddy & overly prone to failure, its distribution media [UMD] is ridiculously restricting size wise, battery life tends to be weak, amongst other annoyances.

You could argue they don't match up to the PS2 - perhaps the last truly great console, software wise any way - but they're no less sterile than the Megadrive was as a pure hardware packages.

So to you, a Megadrive/Snes is every bit as enjoyable to play as a PSP? I envy you sir, I wish I found the PSP as enjoyable.

Nintendo remains the only console manufacturer who's consoles stand out as wholly unique, experimental entities. It doesn't always hit, but without their presence the gaming world would be a bland, more boring place. The WiiU at this stage seems to match their legacy nicely.

But unique doesn't necessarily mean good. They have a proven track record for sure, but past record is no guarantee of future success. I'm sure it will be good, it's Nintendo after all, but I have to say...it's all controller hype so far & I'm far from sold by a game controller.

johnny_ultimate

EnterNow wrote: »

So to you, a Megadrive/Snes is every bit as enjoyable to play as a PSP? I envy you sir, I wish I found the PSP as enjoyable.

Yes, there are several games on the PSP I have enjoyed just as much as the best of what the MegaDrive or SNES has to offer (not necessarily saying anything on the PSP is another Link to the Past or Super Metroid, mind ). Hardware wise, it has significant flaws, but also has benefits a Megadrive never had (to continue the analogy).

I think it's easy to get dragged down with the old vs new argument (not proposing that's what you're suggesting, by the way: we're basically on the same side, if anything). There is an equal place for both. We can never forget the greatness that paved the way, but it's easy to get bogged down over-analysing the flaws of the newer consoles when in reality - romanticism removed - they still offer many, many great games. The MegaDrive had great games, the Dreamcast had great games, the PS1 had great games, the Gamecube / Wii had great games, the PSP / PS3 had great games. Play them all, and be happy!

Retr0gamer

Even the CDi had great ga....

Actually maybe a bad analogy.

Myrddin

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Even the CDi had great ga....

Actually maybe a bad analogy.

Shouldn't you be warming up for the pride festival? Go on with ya

CiDeRmAn

Rarely is there bad hardware, although for the CDi we'll make an exception, more often just bad software.
No real excuses for the PSP outside of the choice of media.
And, I know Retr0 agrees with this, there is a vast collection of great games on the PSP.
Unfortunately Sony fell into a hole, with the UMD.
They made the same mistake that Nintendo made retaining the cart for the N64, a mistake Sony capitalised on back in the 90's, making the disk based PS a massive success.
Imagine the PSP with carts, would it have been more successful?
The PS3, I don't know, too expensive at launch and for too long afterwards, despite the Xbox launch showing the folly of this, nothing like a decent launch lineup, so people who spent all that cash had to wait for something good to play, just like the PS2 as it happens.
No rumble in the controller, due to legal wranglings but Sony tried it on with some tech nonsense, then brought out the DualShock3 anyhow later.
Next the irrelevant Move, a rubbish device trying to ape the success of the Wii.
They never seemed to produce one FPS of note, outside of the now stale Gran Turismo series no exclusives in the racing genre either.
So, what are we left with?
A series of HD reheats?
More Killzone, Resistance and Ratchet and Clank??

At least the 360 has had a stead flow of worthy series exclusives, Halo [ ], Gears, Forza.
It's controller is perfect.
Ok, reliability has been an issue but the PS3 isn't glowing in this respect either.

So, next gen.
No one, outside of fanboys, is getting anxious and excited over a PS4.
No body at all.
I'm not sure the next 360 and a more powerful Kinect is going to get anyones juices flowing either.

What real innovation have either company, MS or Sony, delivered to the gamer?

At least Ninty have consistently surprised us with things we never knew we wanted.
Gesture controls, when used well, have been wonderful, be it NSMBWii or Galaxy/2.
Most of the time they have disappointed have been in boring minigame collections or, more worryingly, when the developer has used gestures and pointing to make up for the lack of a 2nd analogue stick, such as in Epic Mickey, COD or the like.
That said, Metroid Prime Trilogy was a masterclass in the use of pointer and motion control.
Also, the innovation of 3D in handheld.
I think a DS successor would have made the grade with the basic increase in horsepower, but Nintendo gave us glassesless 3D.
And now we are seeing the rewards, Mario Kart 7, Marioland 3D, MGS:3D.

In order to compete, what did Sony do?
More Buttons!
More Touch Screens!
More...... well, actually less games worth playing.

And now for the WiiU.

We may look at this new pad and wonder what is next.
This is the right thing to think, because, to be sure, Nintendo will be coming up with uses we haven't even considered yet!


Personally I want to see F-Zero on both WiiU and 3DS, also I think Trauma Center with the WiiU tablet as a scanner could be really interesting.

Here's to this Christmas anyhow!

o1s1n

What needs to be next in hardware? For me it's very simple, glaringly obvious in fact. It's bee knocking around since the 90s but still never really done properly.

What is it?

VIRTUAL MOTHER****ING REALITY!

Why does every modern hardware developer seem to be afraid of those words?

If they don't consider going that way with the next gen PS4 and 360 then I can see us just having another ten years with no innovation, just the same old sequels.

Myrddin

o1s1n wrote: »

What needs to be next in hardware? For me it's very simple, glaringly obvious in fact. It's bee knocking around since the 90s but still never really done properly.

What is it?

VIRTUAL MOTHER****ING REALITY!

Why does every modern hardware developer seem to be afraid of those words?

If they don't consider going that way with the next gen PS4 and 360 then I can see us just having another ten years with no innovation, just the same old sequels.

Don't even get me started on Augmented Reality...gimmick central. A true VR environment it is not

Retr0gamer

I don't think it was the UMD that had anything to do with it. It was trying to put console type experiences on a handheld that held it back. Why play something on a handheld that you can play on the big TV and get a better experience? These games weren't suited to handheld gaming while Nitendo totally got it and continued releasing handheld games that could be played in bit sized chunks.

Sony realised this too late and before they started releasing games like Loco Roco and the likes it was too late. Except in Japan where Crisis Core gave it a second wind until Monster Hunter exploded because it's multiplayer suited the japanese commuter world to a tee.

Myrddin

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I don't think it was the UMD that had anything to do with it. It was trying to put console type experiences on a handheld that held it back. Why play something on a handheld that you can play on the big TV and get a better experience? These games weren't suited to handheld gaming while Nitendo totally got it and continued releasing handheld games that could be played in bit sized chunks.

Sony realised this too late and before they started releasing games like Loco Roco and the likes it was too late. Except in Japan where Crisis Core gave it a second wind until Monster Hunter exploded because it's multiplayer suited the japanese commuter world to a tee.

Very true, but trying to fit PS2 era games onto a 900MB UMD then was an even bigger mistake.

To make things worse, they then tried a 'remove the disc drive altogether approach' in the hopes that people would take to the download only model. Thankfully, this also miserably failed. At least Nintendo's experiments are in innovation. Sony experiments with DRM.

o1s1n

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Nintendo remains the only console manufacturer who's consoles stand out as wholly unique, experimental entities. It doesn't always hit, but without their presence the gaming world would be a bland, more boring place. The WiiU at this stage seems to match their legacy nicely.

I find Nintendo have become what Sega were. They just hit it at the right time - when the technology to support it was up to scratch.

Up until Sega's demise, they far surpassed Nintendo when it came to cutting edge, unique hardware.

Myrddin

o1s1n wrote: »

I find Nintendo have become what Sega were. They just hit it at the right time - when the technology to support it was up to scratch.

Up until Sega's demise, they far surpassed Nintendo when it came to cutting edge, unique hardware.

What was it, in a nutshell, that killed SEGA?

They gave us the Megadrive, The Saturn, The Dreamcast...I really would love a new console form them