Originally Posted by Sladeophile I agree with you guys too, that final fantasy VII isn't the best RPG. I liked Chrono Cross better on the PS1. I did play some of the older FF games too, they are excellent.
Well, then we are in agreement. I'm glad you could see my way
FFVII=weak title for a FF game. I definitely agree with Blitzula's remark that if FFVII was your first FF experience you may think it was all that, but it wasn't to us old schoolers. I still like FFV a lot, that game was so dense it was exciting to try a new job out and build up your characters. FFVIII was a joke, a really pathetic one at that. How was FF9? That's the old school one right? I always wondered if it was any good.
Originally Posted by gloco Well, then we are in agreement. I'm glad you could see my way
FFVII=weak title for a FF game. I definitely agree with Blitzula's remark that if FFVII was your first FF experience you may think it was all that, but it wasn't to us old schoolers. I still like FFV a lot, that game was so dense it was exciting to try a new job out and build up your characters. FFVIII was a joke, a really pathetic one at that. How was FF9? That's the old school one right? I always wondered if it was any good.
Ha, I never said weak though, just not as good. I'm excited to see what square will come up with on the PS3 though. While I'm not going to say that FFX was great, I actually did enjoy it. Kingdom Hearts games aren't bad either, and my wife actually liked watching me play them. That's one reason I voted PS3.
I agree on the sentiments on FFVII. I played through the first disc and tried to like it, but it just didn't get anything out of it. Back in the days of Super Nintendo Square was amazing, now I usually wait til their games hit the bargain bin before I consider purchasing them. Dragon Quest VIII, which was developed by Level5 and released by Square Enix is an exception.
Originally Posted by mr.karmalicious Isn't there going to be a Dragon Quest game on Wii? I remember that there was a Dragon something... it's in the E3 video. I'll look later.
A buddy of mine told me about a game called Blue Dragon that will be out on the 360 sometime this year, and it's supposedly done by the same crew behind Chrono Trigger. Not sure about the details though...
Originally Posted by seeberg A buddy of mine told me about a game called Blue Dragon that will be out on the 360 sometime this year, and it's supposedly done by the same crew behind Chrono Trigger. Not sure about the details though...
Originally Posted by Id I think the one major thing that MS and Sony could do to innovate their games is to up the AI programming. The consoles are so powerful now that they can program much more complicated AI routines, I'd rather have that then glossier graphics. Although right now, the AI for games is still pretty piss-poor, I foresee a dramatic increase in realism for in game bots and helper characters. Of course, perhaps online gaming will see some sort of explosion in interest and in it would totally defeat the purpose, but for one player games, it would be integral. The only thing more frustrating then seeing clipping issues with hyper realistic characters would be characters behaving erratically and to the contrary of what's needed in a situation.
In regards to Halo, people are always raving about the graphics, they're alright. The one thing that really shines in Halo was the AI programming, which was much better then games spawned after Golden Eye 007. I'm very excited about that new Bioshock game, with its "emergent AI", nothing more exciting then to witness AI that reacts unexpectedly rather then following limited scripts.
On a related note, games may take even longer to come out, so I guess you can't have your cake and eat it too haha.
Catch you later,
Id
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Duke_Of_Eli You are incredibly off-topic here. This is about consoles. The 360 and PS3 and Wiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiii have powerful enough cores to be a small super-computer. It's all about the software programmers. No games will use the full potential of the systems' graphics for another few years. It takes time for programmers to adopt to a new system with graphics and special features. The hardware is there, now it's time for software to catch up. It's always that way.
But you do raise a good point. Console wars aren't won hardware-wise, it's software wise.
Um... how was I being off topic
You just basically summed up everything I said over again. I never once mentioned anything about graphics aside from a quick blurb on Halo
I was stating that everyone looks to graphics first and foremost, the flash, I think the meat of the game is much more important. I was just saying that with the consoles being so powerful, their AI had better be up to snuff, since graphics and AI go hand in hand if one wants to strive for realism. As I said, nothing's worse then seeing a perfectly realistic *looking* character behave erractically. A great example are helper bots in some games, they rarely ever serve any practical purpose, a great example is the Kingdom Hearts games. The two characters Goofy and Donald play very big roles in the games, yet they aren't ever very helpful, you never get the sense that they are anything other then cardboard standins if not for the bits of dialogue and cutscenes. The AI isn't any more advanced then it was on Playstation really. I'm hoping that developers start focusing on more realistic AI, the graphics are looking great enough already, if they could start working on making strides towards truly autonomous characters, the gaming experience would be that much more immersive.
Agreed. I remember when MGS2 came out, it was hands down the most realistic feeling game I'd ever played, yet I remember thinking on how relatively low-polygon the graphics were compared to contemporary games. To this day I'm convinced that visual realism in games comes mostly from lighting, animation (and frame rate!!) and physics. And acting if applicable. Textures and actual detail are far less important.
Hmm, I imagine Nintendo will not be losing money on the hardware since they claims its only a few times more powerful than the GC's hardware. Low cost hardware=cheaper prices...$250 might seem a bit much if that's the case. Unless they bundle a few titles in there, but I intend on buying a Wii regardless.
The latest poll at Famitsu magazine placed Nintendo Wii heads above the competition. When asked which console had Japanese gamers interest the most at E3, a whopping 68.8 percent chose Wii, with Sony in the distance with 21 percent, and Xbox 360 at 7.2 percent, DS rounds it out with 3 percent of the vote. When asked which console do gamers expect to win the console war, Wii crushed all garnering 73 percent, with PS3 at 22.6 percent, and 360 getting 4.4 percent.
Finally the last big question pertained to whether gamers felt the PS3 was priced too high, 88.4 percent felt the price was too high, 10.9 felt the price was reasonable, and an insane 0.7 percent felt the price was too low.
It's pretty exciting to note that your average Famitsu reader is a hardcore Squaresoft loving, Playstation addict as well.
Haven't bought one since N64. But Wii has my vote not because of $$ but the controller will lure new players into the market. The total gaming market $$ has been flat for 4 years despite price increases, new consoles, etc. That means that if they don't lure new players/buyers in, sales will be flat, and the higher res units will just replace older units bought by the same gamers. Nintendo has the right idea, they just gotta come up with the games.
I won't be buying any of these but I know the PS3 will be in my home. My younger brother is going crazy at the idea of using it under linux as a low cost powerful compilation unit. I'm not sure a handful of engineers wannabe will make the difference though
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
