Gaming World Forums

General Category => Entertainment and Media => Topic started by: Zeitgeist on February 01, 2008, 02:28:30 am

Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Zeitgeist on February 01, 2008, 02:28:30 am
Is the best generation gaming has ever seen, without counting the accomplishments of the first generation.

In my opinion, the gaming of today blows hardcore. The PS3 and 360 have a few key games each that focus mainly on online play, which I view as flawed (I view these as flawed because they are basically forcing you to pay for online play regardless of whether or not you want it, because that's where all the features are. I know that PS3's online is free, but you are not at any time guaranteed a good quality online game unless you are actually shelling out money for said online service). The Wii tries to promote gameplay, but ends up lacking when compared to the Nintendo 64/Playstation One generation, imo. I've owned one. Nothing besides Galaxy and Twilight Princess have aroused my interest. I beat both of them and did not feel the want nor need to go back and play through either of them that I have had for years when it comes to Super Mario 64 and The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time. Not to mention the Wii lacks capable specs, the 360 breaks down every time a full moon passes around, and the PS3 doesn't seem promising at all (lack of GOOD exclusives so far and lack of GOOD exclusives in the future really prey upon it).

This is strictly my opinion, but I will back it up with some fact.

1.) The Nintendo 64/Playstation One generation was the first era of 3D gaming. It's basically the median between the "ancient" generations of NES and SNES/Genesis respectively, and the current generation which is run completely on either cheap gimmicks or complete graphic-based/advertised hype.

2.) Said era introduced the first games of their kind, creating a gaming landmark.

3.) Gameplay was heavily favored in basically any game you could pick up and play from this generation. Not many people were worried about graphics at this point because it was just the first step towards mainstream 3D gaming. It was all about the gameplay at this point in the history of gaming; now it's nothing but making sure something looks good.

As I said, this is just my opinion, but I think that:

1.) Gaming cannot get any better than it currently is. In fact, it will get worse.

2.) Gaming will not see another generation that was as influential as the N64/PS1 generation.

3.) Graphics are now the mainstream concern, meaning that the games will sell even if they have an hour of atrocious gameplay and terrible controls (as long as it looks good).

My question is, do you agree or disagree with any points made here, or the general idea that the N64/PS1 generation was indeed the best gaming generation? Back up with your statements with your own opinion and/or good reasoning/facts; I want to get an entire debate rolling out of this topic.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Rowain on February 01, 2008, 02:59:50 am
It's a good thing you kept reiterating that this is all just your opinion. I might've taken issues otherwise!
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Zeitgeist on February 01, 2008, 03:01:38 am
It's a good thing you kept reiterating that this is all just your opinion. I might've taken issues otherwise!

I just would like to see if people agree with me on this. It may be extreme in some cases, but at least some of my points are at least somewhat valid.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Mama Luigi on February 01, 2008, 03:06:40 am
I think you are right and wrong in some most aspects. Gaming has a long way to go yet, and I mean a LONG way to go. You said, "Gaming cannot get any better than it currently is. In fact, it will get worse," and I couldn't possibly disagree more. I can just sit here and come up with AMAZING games that don't exist due to technological limitations (lack of powerful enough servers, AI not smart enough yet, etc). I also think you are downplaying the importance of graphics and ignoring the fact that we HAVE had some great games already this generation - there's plenty more to come. The increase in power on these gaming machines is allowing us to experience more complex games than ever before.

Look at games like Crysis, Bioshock, Devil May Cry 4, Portal, Mass Effect, Oblivion, Spore... none of these experiences would have been even remotely possible on the N64 or PS1.

I mean, you praise the N64/PS1 era, but surely you couldn't expect them to stay in that era forever now could you? Logic would follow that they wouldn't one day just say "uh yeah I guess the graphics/power/everything is good enough we don't need to make more gaming consoles to stay competitive and meet consumer demand" would they? What we are seeing is a natural evolution of games. You complain that graphics are now the main concern. Hah, since when has it not been the main concern? Until we reach photorealism, they will be the main concern. If your argument was true that only recently graphics became important than we probably wouldn't have seen anything past the SNES (the graphics were good enough).

Also I think the SNES generation was a much better one.

EDIT: Yes I keep expanding this post.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Lainge on February 01, 2008, 03:09:36 am
I just would like to see if people agree with me on this. It may be extreme in some cases, but at least some of my points are at least somewhat valid.
Not really...
I mean I do like alot of PSOne and N64 games, but... These days games are just plainly better, I mean I just got Oblivion and I can't decide wat to do because it is so much fun.

Quote
3.) Graphics are now the mainstream concern, meaning that the games will sell even if they have an hour of atrocious gameplay and terrible controls (as long as it looks good).

Have you played any games lately. Because you are just blinded to todays mass of excellent games.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Zeitgeist on February 01, 2008, 03:14:34 am
I think you are right and wrong in some aspects. Gaming has a long way to go yet, and I mean a LONG way to go. You said, "Gaming cannot get any better than it currently is. In fact, it will get worse," and I couldn't possibly disagree more. I can just sit here and come up with AMAZING games that don't exist due to technological limitations (lack of powerful enough servers, AI not smart enough yet, etc). I also think you are downplaying the importance of graphics and ignoring the fact that we HAVE had some great games already this generation - there's plenty more to come. The increase in power on these gaming machines is allowing us to experience more complex games than ever before.

Look at games like Crysis, Bioshock, Devil May Cry 4, Spore... none of these experiences would have been even remotely possible on the N64 or PS1.

Probably. What I mean't by "In fact, it will get worse," is that the genres that were developed in the N64/PS1 generation have been basically beaten to death if not in the current generation, in future generations. The N64/PS1 generation by itself puts out an experience of "freshness" that while in itself seems like a contradiction because the games are very old, still explains the experience because the games were developed at the time where the genres were just being formed and there was no real redundancy. I do agree that Bioshock for one gave an excellent gameplay experience, but I'm generalizing the game libraries based on the majority of said library at this current moment. Also, as I said, I believe that the PS1/N64 gen was the first step in the direction of 3D gaming. It was not even thought of as far as consoles go at the time of the SNES/Genesis gen (I'm not a buff on the history of computer gaming, so I'm just assuming that they were at the level of 3D graphics at the point of SNES/Genesis). I also never mentioned that people should stay in the N64/PS1 generation, I am merely stating that this generation was the best as far as the quality of games and any other factors you could even consider go, and that I really don't think any certain generation of gaming will get it right as many times as the N64/PS1 generation did.

Lainge: Oblivion is not a bad game. Nowhere in my original post did I directly single out Oblivion and say it was a bad game, nor do I think so. Also, the majority of the games that you call "new" and/or "excellent" can be looked upon as terrible shortly down the road. Excellence is not something a game retains unless it really, really deserves it and I doubt that more than a handful so far this generation deserve any type of mention of "excellence". Also, I've owned a 360 for over a year and a half (make that 3 360s), and I've had a Wii for about 5 months.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Lainge on February 01, 2008, 03:18:24 am
Lainge: Oblivion is not a bad game. Nowhere in my original post did I directly single out Oblivion and say it was a bad game
I didn't say you did...

But what games do you specifically like on PSOne and N64?

I do admit my favourite game is a on Playstation. 'Jade Cocoon'...
But some of the other games that were released back then just do not hold my interest anymore, such as Kula World. (Not sure if that's the exact name. The one with a ball)
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Zeitgeist on February 01, 2008, 03:22:51 am
I didn't say you did...

But what games do you specifically like on PSOne and N64?

I do admit my favourite game is a on Playstation. 'Jade Cocoon'...
But some of the other games that were released back then just do not hold my interest anymore, such as Kula World. (Not sure if that's the exact name. The one with a ball)

My favorites have to be Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, Legend of Legaia, Brave Fencer Musashi, and several other RPGs that were not continued past that gen/other gen defining series' such as Bandicoot, Spyro, Gex, etc.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Sarhan on February 01, 2008, 04:05:53 am
My favorites have to be Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, Legend of Legaia, Brave Fencer Musashi, and several other RPGs that were not continued past that gen/other gen defining series' such as Bandicoot, Spyro, Gex, etc.

I completely agree with you. With the exception of a few games, the 64/PS1 days were the best gaming has seen. The ratio of good titles to titles produced seems to have been much larger back then than it is now. Maybe it's the fact that I'm older now and maybe I'm not impressed as easily, but games back then just seemed better.

Oh, and Brave Fencer Musashi is fucking epic.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Marcus on February 01, 2008, 05:06:53 am
I would post my own WALL OF TEXT breaking down your arguments but I have some art to finish so I'll keep it short.

People who think one specific generation of gaming is better than another is either blinded with nostalgia or doesn't know what they're talking about.  Games today are actually more difficult to make than games 10 years ago because not only do you have to keep up with the latest technological advances you also have to appeal to a growingly jaded audience.  The average gamer is over 20 meaning he's played shit from the NES period on up and those that are new to games have to get something that's high in the "WOW" factor and fun in the gameplay factor as well.

Games use to be a niche market that only the hardcorest of nerds bothered with but it's accessible to all and a multi-billion dollar franchise bordering on Hollywood production values BECAUSE it's gotten better over the years.  There are very, very few (read: VERY VERY FEW) games of this generation that specifically focus on online play and if you honestly think there's nothing of value for you then you're not looking hard enough or maybe you just don't like videogames as much as you thought you did.

As far as no good games being available EASE BACK.  This shits only been out for a year, except the 360 which already has quite a few good titles on it.  This spring has a ready rad slew of gaming goodness coming out (SPORE, LittleBigPlanet, MGS4, Too Human, Dark Sector, Smash Bros Brawl, blah blah blah) so give it a little more time.  The PS2 was a shovelware dumping ground it's first year and then it exploded with weeaboo rpg's and platformers.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Killface on February 01, 2008, 05:14:33 am
These were simpler times.
I still have a 64. It provides endless entertainment to this day.
You 360 people may have your fancy technology and graphics, but us 64 people have Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, Star Fox 64, Donkey Kong 64, Banjo Kazooie and Tooie, Bomberman 64, Goldeneye 007, Duke Nukem, Rayman 2, 1080, and many more that I can't think of...
I'm not saying it's better, but to me, it's a little more entertaining sometimes. Just going back and playing some memorable games.
I imagine in 10-20 years, the 360 will be the new 64. "You know, I remember Gears of War. Sure it's not as great as these games today, but it was damn fun. In fact, I still have a 360."
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: big ass skelly on February 01, 2008, 05:46:45 am
I just want to make it absolutely clear that I Am NOT Nathan Petrilli and neither are you.

N64s are kewl though 8-)
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Pugwash on February 01, 2008, 10:00:41 am
no multiplayer game will ever be as much fun as Goldeneye was.
nor will any single player experience be as flawless as OOT.

(long live the MEGAdrive though)
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: [Sam] on February 01, 2008, 11:24:03 am
Nostalgia makes the N64/ PSOne generation seem a lot better than it actually was.  Yes there were a lot of great games, but we also had a lot of great games and memories in the Mega Drive/ Super Nintendo generation, heck, I quite enjoyed the PS2/ XBox/ GC gen - Eternal Darkness, Resident Evil 4, Jak and Daxter, Ratchet and Clank, Halo, Half Life 2, Grand Theft Auto 3, Viewtiful Joe, Shadow of the Colossus, Gitaroo Man, Burnout, TimeSplitters, Guitar Hero...

And I'm optimistic about this generation.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Neophyte on February 01, 2008, 12:01:20 pm
Clearly you guys are basing your views off of nostalgia, except for Marcus and a few others.
I do agree to a point though. I LOVE the SNES days, where I enjoyed just about every RPG it had, regardless of whether it was good or not. The catchy tunes and things like that stay in your head forever.
While the SNES/N64 days did start the games that are now in their third and fourth titles, it is by no means better than the current gen. None of us can say that either gen is better or worse right now, since the current gen has just started. Just putting in my opinion.


And Half Life 2 rocks.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Swordfish on February 01, 2008, 01:55:56 pm
And Half Life 2 rocks.

AMEN to that! but Team fortress 2 also rocks, and so does guitar hero, and halo 3 multiplayer, City of heroes, Eve online... well the list could go on but i have better things to do :)​.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: goat on February 01, 2008, 01:57:02 pm
gears of war, portal, and crysis are definite titles that stick out from this generation, to me
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: maladroithim on February 01, 2008, 04:44:01 pm
3.) Gameplay was heavily favored in basically any game you could pick up and play from this generation. Not many people were worried about graphics at this point because it was just the first step towards mainstream 3D gaming. It was all about the gameplay at this point in the history of gaming; now it's nothing but making sure something looks good.

This is patently untrue.  I recall the marketing of the consoles at that time touting 3D graphics as an incredible innovation that would change videogames forever.  They were right, but that's beside the point.  The marketing and praise for games like Final Fantasy VII and Mario 64 focused very heavily on the graphics; I remember TV commercials for Final Fantasy VII showing these amazing videos of cutscenes and never once mentioning that maybe you would enjoy the story or exploring dungeons.  Marketing for the new consoles told me ridiculous things like "Powered by the same technology that made the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park!" and other things.  Certainly game designers then and now like to make games that are fun because they drive review scores and in turn drive sales to core gamers (who buy games that get high review scores and turn titles like Bioshock into million-sellers).  Before the game is released, though, all you really have to show are screenshots; developers now and then can't help but focus on how a game looks if they don't have anything to give people to play.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: JohnnyCasil on February 01, 2008, 05:05:37 pm
I remember TV commercials for Final Fantasy VII showing these amazing videos of cutscenes and never once mentioning that maybe you would enjoy the story or exploring dungeons.

This reminds me of when FFVII came out.  I remember seeing all commercials and thinking, "Wow, this is the most amazing game I have ever scene, but how do you play in a world that is so graphically complex."  I didn't have a PSX at the time, so I went to my friend's house to play it.  Upon seeing the actual gameplay, I thought to myself, "What game were they advertising?"
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: kentona on February 01, 2008, 07:49:14 pm
You 360 people may have your fancy technology and graphics, but us 64 people have Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, Majora's Mask, Star Fox 64, Donkey Kong 64, Banjo Kazooie and Tooie, Bomberman 64, Goldeneye 007, Duke Nukem, Rayman 2, 1080, and many more that I can't think of...
Bah, you 64 people may have your fancy technology and graphics, but us SNES people have Super Mario World, Link to the Past, Star Fox, Donkey Kong Country, Super Bomberman, Contra, not to mention the best crop of RPGs ever released.

PS.  Feel free to rebutt with NES examples.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Ragnar on February 01, 2008, 09:37:53 pm
I thought N64 was kinda shit, like for every real game there were like 25 racing games and pretty much everything felt really thrown together even some of the first and second-party stuff. Also there was LAG

PS-X seemed cooler and unlike N64 not EVERYTHING needed to be 3D, if it just didn't suit the game. I thought Playstation was kind of a good middle-ground because it had a couple of things that was just beautiful 2D art that even though it was 2D, it would've had to have been downgraded to run on an SNES. Like Symphony of the Night comes to mind

Also yes the 3D games did try to act like they were the most mind-blowing things ever when most of them actually had no sense of design and felt like big polygon farts. At least the games today seem like they have concept art and storyboards and people design the 3D models and environments around them. I always use Resident Evil 4 as an example but I really do like the style they did for that game. For all the CINEMATIC BACKDROPS the earlier games had this was framed such a way where I would be walking around some area and it really felt like they designed all the different props and things so it was set up in a very movielike way. Like they actually thought of it as a film set and spent a lot of time with little virtual cameras getting it just right

Like I hope people get what I'm saying, a game like Chrono Trigger LOOKED like Chrono Trigger and not anything else, but really I could imagine Goldeneye being any sort of generic shooter game and if the license were dropped all of a sudden it could've been without anyone noticing imo

And as for FFVII I wasn't that dissappointed by the graphics. I still thought the backdrops were beautiful and the way they transitioned from the videos kept the illusion pretty well.

But yeah I think SNES was best because at that point anyone could've really made anything as long as it was 2D. Also they had MODE7 and SUPER FX so it's not like 3D was an entirely new thing
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Red Vortex on February 01, 2008, 10:40:34 pm
I get where you're coming from, but like some have said or, at least made reference to, you're a little bit extreme. At the time, the PS1 and the N64 focused mainly on RPG's (or action RPG's, or light action shooters) which focused on story because on-line play was not available at the time. This led to an era where nearly every game you played told a unique story with unique characters in a unique setting. The only problem with this was that a lot of people simply did not like RPG's, in-depth story-lines nor puzzles. They simply wanted shooter games, like Golden Eye (N64) or Jet Force Gemini (N64). Game producers probably realized this and began to put emphasis on this once the Xbox and PS2 came into production and consequently, the majority of the games are all shooter based games. Once the on-line notion came into play, it simply took-over the industry. If you have 5%-10% of a population of gamers who are die-hard RPGers why would you continue to make a lot of RPG games if the other 90%-95% of the gaming population enjoys playing, mainly, shooters with on-line-play? And even when a company does make a game they are usually under-budgeted.

Also, another reason why the PS1 and N64 era was so good was because of the emergence of a new generation of gaming. 3D games with NICE sound-clips. Prior to that it was mostly 2D with midi music o.O

So, the current generation of gaming consoles isn't necessarily bad.. but it's nothing new. So far, all the gaming industry has done is increase the graphics and introduce on-line-play (which is, actually, a big feat, but nothing truly new). So until they come out with some NEW genre of game play, I don't see a very bright future for RPGs in this current era (they have, however, started to create the non-linear RPG games like Mass Effect which should prove to be interesting).

Rv
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Ragnar on February 01, 2008, 11:17:34 pm
Earthbound has the best music and art ever sorry
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: hobomasterxxx on February 02, 2008, 02:32:12 am
I never owned a SNES and i think it was the best generation.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Warlin on February 02, 2008, 02:36:40 am
I love my Nintendo 64 and my Playstaion. Together, we were undefeatable... Well until the PS2 came along.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Brown on February 02, 2008, 12:12:15 pm
Bah, you 64 people may have your fancy technology and graphics, but us SNES people have Super Mario World, Link to the Past, Star Fox, Donkey Kong Country, Super Bomberman, Contra, not to mention the best crop of RPGs ever released.

PS.  Feel free to rebutt with NES examples.


man....I wanted to do the snes examples  :sad: but its already done. Ohe welll here goessss

Chrono Trigger, Super Mario RPG Legend of the Seven stars, FF(insert number up to 6 here), Breath of Fire series, 7th saga, AAH Real monsters, Actraiser 1 and 2, the tick, tetris, dr mario, zombies ate my neighbhors, Ys III (ok i admit i didnt like this game too much), xmen, wolfenstein 3d, doom, warios woods, mk 1, 2  ultimate 3, uniracers, top gear series, ninja turtles, super turrican series (loved these games), super mario allstars/world/world2/kart,  primal rage, ninja gaiden trio, prince of persia, power rangers movie/mightymorphin/fighting edition. I named the ones i played yesterday on the xbox (minus the series i mentioned, mightve played one)  :fogetcool:
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Ash on February 02, 2008, 04:10:50 pm
Basically [whatever ][/whatever] is the best generation.

(http://www.gamingw.net/pubaccess/24455/DucktalesNESCover1.jpg)
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Mateui on February 02, 2008, 05:20:32 pm
^
I agree, except I found this better:
(http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/1730/g02642bs48bgj7.jpg)

Personally I found the SNES/Genesis generation awesome because Disney platformers were all good those days... unlike today were Disney has lost most of its magic.

I'm sure most of us remember these gems (obviously not all are Disney but they're still great):
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: EvilDemonCreature on February 02, 2008, 05:26:23 pm
Basically [whatever you played as a kid] is the best generation.

There's a simple explanation for that. The entertainment industry has gone constantly downhill for the past 50 years, meaning what you experienced as a kid really was the best to you, because everything better than it was before your time, and everything after was worse.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Ash on February 02, 2008, 06:45:08 pm
(http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/1730/g02642bs48bgj7.jpg)
Man, I had quackshot as a a kid, and I was stuck in Transylvania for like A YEAR. In fact there were a lot of games as a kid, where I just hit this impassable point my little brain couldnt figure out.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: jamie on February 02, 2008, 07:24:17 pm
"being a kid is like a really bitchin acid trip and everything after the age of 13 is an epic come down."
- Saul Towers, Linguist and Amateur Alphabetizer

i think that quote truly spreads some light mayonaise on the chicken sandwich at hand, if you will.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Ragnar on February 02, 2008, 08:22:07 pm
That explains Lisa Frank pretty well

and Teletubbies

but Boobah is still inexcusible

Edit: Actually it's kind of off topic but apparently some people have synesthesia when they're kids but lose it around puberty
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: -Datriot- on February 02, 2008, 10:05:17 pm
I also agree with Ash. The games you played when you were a kid only seem better because of nostalgia and the fact we were too stupid to notice flaws in the game; because gaming was new to us back then.

I only have a Wii so I can't comment on the PS3/360 but I've played quite a few Wii games and I don't see anything wrong with them.

I believe that it only seems like there are less original/fun games now then back then because now gaming is more popular so a lot more games are being created thus adding to the illusion that there are less great games.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Cardinal Ximenez on February 02, 2008, 10:08:44 pm
I find old generations of games quite overrated; some are near unplayable. I think interface optimization has been best since 2003 and has been continuing well into the current generation. N64 and PSX games had the disadvantage of clunky hardware and bizarre controls (how many c-button z combos did you have to do in Banjo-Kazooie?) The recent polish has been much better for the art form as whole, making the experience more dynamic.

Although, I must admit, sometimes a complicated control scheme works in games where the sheer amount of actions possible would be difficult to fit into six or seven buttons (i.e. NetHack).

And still, you cannot beat the most recent generation for ease of online play.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Zeitgeist on February 02, 2008, 11:30:26 pm
I agree that my views may or may not be nostalgia, but I can play basically any notable game from that generation now and enjoy it much better than any game in the current generation. That applies to games in the N64/PS1 generation that I haven't played, too. Creativity and basically anything outside of shooting games are at an all-time low and will only continue to decline.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Neophyte on February 03, 2008, 12:07:33 am
Vectorman....oh my god...
Nostalgia x2. That game was insane for it's time, IMO.

The best Disney game has to be this, by the way:
I must have spent months on this game.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Mateui on February 03, 2008, 12:32:12 am
Vectorman....oh my god...
Nostalgia x2. That game was insane for it's time, IMO.

The best Disney game has to be this, by the way:
I must have spent months on this game.
Me too.. I loved how you aged in the game and how varied the levels were. For some reason I could never master throwing Scar off the top of Pride Rock at the end of the game. Actually, I don't think that I've ever done it to this day. :cry: (That's it, I'm putting it on my PSP.)
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Christophomicus on February 03, 2008, 03:16:26 am
Dude, WORLD of Illusion was six million leagues above Castle of Illusion. I mean, seriously; cooperative simultaneous play? Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck? Platformer? Fuck yeah.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: im_so_tired on February 03, 2008, 08:56:20 am
maybe you just liked your life better when you were 10.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: UPRC on February 03, 2008, 03:31:34 pm
3.) Gameplay was heavily favored in basically any game you could pick up and play from this generation. Not many people were worried about graphics at this point because it was just the first step towards mainstream 3D gaming. It was all about the gameplay at this point in the history of gaming; now it's nothing but making sure something looks good.

I don't know how to break it to you, but you're sort of wrong. Everyone I knew wanted the biggest, baddest looking games because fully 3D console games were new and exciting. They were hot shit.
Gran Turismo, Resident Evil, Final Fantasy.. These games made people blow their loads, they looked ORGASMIC back in the day. Some people even dismissed Gran Turismo as "just good graphics" because the realism wasn't what a lot of arcade racer fans were used to.

It's gotten a lot better now, I think. HD capabilities are making people want the best graphics, sure, but nobody is absolutely ape-shit over graphics like they were six or seven years ago anymore.


Now... The day we go 4D... Holy batfuck.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Pugwash on February 03, 2008, 04:02:03 pm
Vectorman....oh my god...
Nostalgia x2. That game was insane for it's time, IMO.

The best Disney game has to be this, by the way:
I must have spent months on this game.


I could never get past the stampede level ):
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Warlin on February 03, 2008, 07:18:44 pm
I had the SAME problem D:
I gamegenied that bitch UP.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Remix on February 03, 2008, 09:57:41 pm
I will never ever get over duck hunt.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Dale Gobbler on February 04, 2008, 01:52:11 am
The Lion King game rocked. I dusted off my Genesis and played it a bit today :D​.

For their time even crappy games were awesome, but then we play them now and realise how much they kinda sucked. Still brings back memories though, of a...simpler time.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Lord Amesius on February 11, 2008, 02:01:14 am
1. As a guy who owned the 64, its way over rated and outside of Zelda, Rogue Squadron, Mario and Turok it didn't offer much. The only Nintendo system I've ever owned that I really "loved" would be the Snes. It's pretty much just "The PS1 Gen".

2. The Genesis sucked ass. it had Sonic, Lunar, Phantasy Star, and.... Oh yeah thats it.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Dapper Swindler on February 11, 2008, 05:37:13 am
This is a very good idea for a topic, I've put a lot of thought into this.  Your opinion that the N64/Playstation generation was the best since it was so influential.  I would agree that it was very influential, but I would judge the quality of a generation by the games it produced.  I don't think very highly of that generation because the 3D looked so terrible, it was a mess.  It was worse than sprites.  At least with sprites, you could tell what you were looking at.

So here is my list of best to worst generations

* Playstation 2/Gamecube/Xbox generation - the best.  I know it was only last generation, but I can still say with all objectivity that this was the best generation for video games. 

* Super Nintendo/Sega Genesis - so many great games came out of this generation.

* NES - Lots of terrific games that are still fun to play today.

* N64/Playstation - Insistence on using rudimentary polygons made some games that don't stand the test of time very well.  But still many great games.

* Playstation 3/Xbox360/Wii - worst generation yet.  Games worth playing can be counted on one hand.  Exploding development costs to keep up with hardware have killed innovation and have only made room for run-of-the-mill.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Neophyte on February 11, 2008, 05:54:33 am
* Playstation 3/Xbox360/Wii - worst generation yet.  Games worth playing can be counted on one hand.  Exploding development costs to keep up with hardware have killed innovation and have only made room for run-of-the-mill.
They've only been out for a year, and you're calling it the worst generation?
Also I can name 5 great games on two of those systems.

Bioshock.
Mass Effect.
Super Smash Brothers Brawl.
Super Mario Galaxy
Portal, HL2(they came out on console, so they count).
Oblivion.

I don't see how they have killed innovation when Super Mario Galaxy is probably the best Mario game since Mario 64, maybe even better in some eyes. Bioshock easily replenished the FPS genre, and Super Smash Brothers Brawl is just fucking fun. We've got another 4+ years of this generation, in which games like MGS4, Final Fantasy, etc are going to be coming out.
I don't know if you have a "next gen" console or not, but you clearly haven't played these games.

But it's your opinion so I can't argue that.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Rye Bread on February 11, 2008, 05:56:36 am
This generation is starting to be pretty good.

Then again I've learned to take off my nostalgia goggles while looking at past gens.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Dapper Swindler on February 11, 2008, 06:19:44 am
They've only been out for a year, and you're calling it the worst generation?
Also I can name 5 great games on two of those systems.

Bioshock.
Mass Effect.
Super Smash Brothers Brawl.
Super Mario Galaxy
Portal, HL2(they came out on console, so they count).
Oblivion.

I don't see how they have killed innovation when Super Mario Galaxy is probably the best Mario game since Mario 64, maybe even better in some eyes. Bioshock easily replenished the FPS genre, and Super Smash Brothers Brawl is just fucking fun. We've got another 4+ years of this generation, in which games like MGS4, Final Fantasy, etc are going to be coming out.
I don't know if you have a "next gen" console or not, but you clearly haven't played these games.

But it's your opinion so I can't argue that.

Yes, I have next gen consoles and own or have played all of those games (except Brawl of course).  Of course, they are not bad games at all.  I'm sure I will run into people who disagree with me because they are emotionally invested in the success of their favorite games and consoles.  But all we can do is argue about it on a game-by-game basis, and I do not wish to do this.  Just understand that I have played those games, I have played the games offered by the previous generations I listed, so my opinion is at least informed if not agreeable. 

Yes, let's hope that the generation improves in the next four years.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: XaviarCraig on February 11, 2008, 11:45:14 pm
I think that every "generation" of games has it's "sweet spots". In the past there were MANY MANY more games being made than today because the hardware limitations were so low that single individuals were able to craft an entire game within a year or two that would appeal to most average "gamers". Just look at the production team head count of games made from 1986-1992. They are useally in the single digits(well the old DOS games were at least).

That being said; more games being made means there is most likely going to be more "good" games than if the total number of games being made is lower. Nowadays the standards which people judge games on are relatively higher than what they used to be. Because of this, it takes ALOT more people to produce a "good game" in the eyes of the "average gamer" than previous years. The number of games being made for desktops and consoles per year is continuously going down because of the higher standards and demands. This causes the number of "sweet spots" to decline as well. While the number of good games released is declining, I am pretty sure the ratio of good to bad games released is significantly better than what it was back in previous years...

I think the OP likes the stated generation of consoles the most because there were more "sweet spots" that appealed to him then than now. I know people who try to start similar arguments about ANY generation of consoles and they all use similar points  to debate it.

Peace~
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Marcus on February 12, 2008, 01:34:09 am
Every gaming generation people jump the gun and start talking about how shitty it is when it's only been, what, 2 years?  One year for the Wii and PS3. 

When the SNES and Genesis came out, there was about 4 launch games for each system with Alex Kidd (blech) on the Sega and Super Mario World on the SNES being the only ones that weren't forgettable.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: maladroithim on February 12, 2008, 04:22:10 pm
I think that every "generation" of games has it's "sweet spots". In the past there were MANY MANY more games being made than today

Actually I believe this is not true at all.  In recent years there have generally been progressively more titles out every year:
 
2000: 1304
2001: 1266
2002: 1450
2003: 1909
2004: 1972
2005: 2089
2006: 2107
2007: 2505
2008: 1166 (so far; note that this includes a number of titles that are releasing soon but are not in-stores today like Splinter Cell: Conviction and others)

Source:
http://www.gamerankings.com/itemrankings/simpleratings.asp?max=2500&range=2007
You can modify the address bar to tweak for the year of your choice. 

GameRankings unfortunately does not have data from before year 2000, but you can see a pretty substantial linear trend.  I think it's telling that we all seem to have grown up playing exactly the same small handful of video games -- there were actually not that many out so we all bought the same things.  If you are going to count independent games as well (such as the one-man, one-year projects you are talking about), I'm still pretty sure that the modern indie scene is way bigger than it was in the 80s considering that there are so many middleware tools out there (like legal English releases of RPGMaker) and an indie/homebrew developer does not actually need to learn how to program.

Yes, the production teams are sometimes several hundred times larger than they used to be, but at the same time, the industry overall is several hundred times larger than it once was and happens to earn several thousand times as much revenue.  Nintendo is Japan's first or second-most valued stock, I recall, when 20 years ago they were viewed as a small electronic toy manufacturer -- a high-risk investment in a small but growing company.

Sorry to shoot you down but it is a particular pet peeve of mine that people in internet forums often cite completely made-up statistics about video games.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Yeaster on February 12, 2008, 06:20:03 pm
I didn't play games that much when I was a kid, so the only games I played on my N64 were Gold Eye and Ocarina of Tima, and that was enough for me. I didn't get a PS1 until like Christmas of 99.

I think there are many great games coming out today. Perhaps I'm just easily pleased, but to me, a fun game is a fun game, no matter when it was made.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: bonzi_buddy on February 12, 2008, 06:46:26 pm
Man i am waiting for the time when
a kid in the future says "bleh why games are so gay nowdays. the retro games are so much better universally..."
and then proceeds to play Gears Of War on his old faithful xbox360
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Dale Gobbler on February 12, 2008, 07:02:51 pm
Man i am waiting for the time when
a kid in the future says "bleh why games are so gay nowdays. the retro games are so much better universally..."
and then proceeds to wish he could play Gears Of War on his old faithful xbox360 but the Red Ring of Death claimed it's life long before. So he plays his grandfather's ancient SNES and Genesis by blowing on the cartridges.

In the future, games and graphics will be so integrated into everyday life that they won't want to/care to play old systems. Or hopefully the Matrix Prophecy will take hold by then.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Leric on February 12, 2008, 09:05:23 pm
1.) Gaming cannot get any better than it currently is. In fact, it will get worse.
Hmm, I don't really agree with this. With better technology & more power comes better opportunities to make more advanced gameplay concepts & to fresh out & show story ideas better. As graphics reach their peak (or the point when there's no reason to go any further) gameplay & story will start to become more important as these are areas with infinite expandablility.

2.) Gaming will not see another generation that was as influential as the N64/PS1 generation.
Well since it was the introduction of 3D to the mainstream that lead to that generation's influentiality I'll say that it's possible that there will be another just as influential generation when a new major overall innovation such as holographic gaming hits.

3.) Graphics are now the mainstream concern, meaning that the games will sell even if they have an hour of atrocious gameplay and terrible controls (as long as it looks good).
Well I've never bought a game just because I thought it was pretty & while it's commonly said that alot of people do I'm not sure if that's true or that it's ever been true. I mean off the top of my head I really can't name one game that sold well simply because of its graphics. Usually the people that bought & loved the game have their reasons for loving it (usually with graphics just being one reason if a reason at all) & the people who hate the game will claim that the people who love the game do so simply because it's gorgeous.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Zeitgeist on February 13, 2008, 03:52:00 am
1.) Gaming cannot get any better than it currently is. In fact, it will get worse.
Hmm, I don't really agree with this. With better technology & more power comes better opportunities to make more advanced gameplay concepts & to fresh out & show story ideas better. As graphics reach their peak (or the point when there's no reason to go any further) gameplay & story will start to become more important as these are areas with infinite expandablility.

2.) Gaming will not see another generation that was as influential as the N64/PS1 generation.
Well since it was the introduction of 3D to the mainstream that lead to that generation's influentiality I'll say that it's possible that there will be another just as influential generation when a new major overall innovation such as holographic gaming hits.

3.) Graphics are now the mainstream concern, meaning that the games will sell even if they have an hour of atrocious gameplay and terrible controls (as long as it looks good).
Well I've never bought a game just because I thought it was pretty & while it's commonly said that alot of people do I'm not sure if that's true or that it's ever been true. I mean off the top of my head I really can't name one game that sold well simply because of its graphics. Usually the people that bought & loved the game have their reasons for loving it (usually with graphics just being one reason if a reason at all) & the people who hate the game will claim that the people who love the game do so simply because it's gorgeous.


Points taken/your avatar is amazing.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Marcus on February 13, 2008, 04:00:41 am
Quote
If you are going to count independent games as well (such as the one-man, one-year projects you are talking about), I'm still pretty sure that the modern indie scene is way bigger than it was in the 80s considering that there are so many middleware tools out there (like legal English releases of RPGMaker) and an indie/homebrew developer does not actually need to learn how to program.

I wouldn't say middleware is what's causing it, just a growing increase of people who want to break away from the mainstream game world and create something unique.  To me, Xbox Live Arcade and PS3's online thingy are gaming godsends because it allows people with little money to release games without the needs of a penny pinching publisher.  I think I logged more hours on Catan on the 360 than any other game.

With that said, I hate it when people are like "LOL ITS ALL ABOOT TEH GRAFIX" which I think is a crock of shit.  Of course graphics are going to get better as technology increases and I wouldn't want it any other way.  But gameplay has gotten significantly better with the new technology.  It's not JUST about graphics, it's raw processing power in itself.  A game from this generation like Assassin's Creed can have dozens of characters on screen with no slowdown, something that was impossible with PS2 games.  People like to address that they hate realistic graphics and want everything to stay stagnant but that's a terrible idea and will only hurt the industry by remaining in one place for too long.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: bonzi_buddy on February 13, 2008, 09:25:48 am
In the future, games and graphics will be so integrated into everyday life that they  :words:
And that my friend misses my point.
luckily Marcus has already bought most of my points i wanted to say but yeah, i'm underlining that nostalgia is a big boost when it comes to enjoying a game. i mean gotdamn, nowdays hardly any games shakes my balls. the reasons however has nothing to do with games getting worse over time.

generally, when people are young, everything feels new and great, you have the patience to grind that shit like there's no tomorrow and ... well, to summarize, when you are young games just feel much better. It's like being high all the time, games just feel great for some reason. I don't know why.

I played CS:S a lot few years a-back and i thought it was great shit. I installed it recently, to only find it kind of irritating. I just can't enjoy that hourless grinding, shooting and dying anymore, especially when the only motivation are all those short moment of delight when i win somebody in the battle of REFLEXES. What's driving me, the will to beat somebody in a fucking race?
I'm not interested in the modern shooters but that has nothing to do with them getting shittier. Of course dolgeneye and half-life feels great because every good shooter felt good back in those days. Modern shooters are so much better than shooters those days, i just can't help it that i can't get no satisfaction.

Of course harley davidson is the best because that's what you grew up with in your youth!
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: GirlBones on February 13, 2008, 09:30:40 am
quest 64 was the worst game i have ever played holy fuck
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: bonzi_buddy on February 13, 2008, 09:38:09 am
quest 64 was the worst game i have ever played holy fuck
Quest 64...?oh oh myOH SHIT HOLY FUCKING SHIT QUEST 64NO

I'm glad you have some taste Panda, urgh. That IS the worst game i have ever played too. I can't believe how bad it was. my god, thanks for bringing up painful memories, thanks alot pal.
I still feel bad for going to that underwater place... and getting stucked to the boss BECAUSE I DIDN'T GRIND FOR HOURS GOD DAMNIT. i'm not lying when i say i feel like crying when i think about that game.

So umm, whoever pro-ps said some N64 games felt like they were quickly thrown together WELL GUESS WHAT YOU ARE NOT COMPLETELY WRONG *goes to play some Blast Corps

--

Jesus christ the best bit in my opinion is that besides the huge desibellevels i'm launching right now, i'm not exaggarating at all!
Man i'm gonna put some bad n64 games in hidetags now a sec
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Killface on February 13, 2008, 09:51:36 am
Hey hey hey. Blast Corps was a great game. It was a bitch to get used to, but very fun.
Quest sucks.
But wait! The 64 had Conker's Bad Fur Day!
Beat that!
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: bonzi_buddy on February 13, 2008, 10:03:15 am
Uh, i don't want to derail this topic too much but um, all i say is that while Blast Corps had some nice idea behind it, it gets tedious and boring after awhile, not to mention some levels are ridicilously hard to beat. Like, i don't think the gameplay was that great in it.
It doesn't help that the sound and musics were repetitive and annoying.

Oh yeah, i also indicated that Blast Corps really felt kind of cheap. I mean, it wasn't graphically too good, the m&s were terrible, the gameplay was repetitive, some levels were ridicilously hard to beat (i would say... impossible to beat (discussable)) ... in general, i didn't really feel such a "nice, little puzzlegame" was really worth the full bloody price, especially since N64 were so overpriced where i lived.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: kentona on February 13, 2008, 03:38:14 pm
I think I logged more hours on Catan on the 360 than any other game.
I think I logged more hours on Catan on my kitchen table than any video game released in the past 5 years.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: maladroithim on February 13, 2008, 03:57:52 pm
I think I logged more hours on Catan on my kitchen table than any video game released in the past 5 years.

That's because you are a dinosaur  :sad:
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: kentona on February 13, 2008, 06:39:02 pm
I've found that real life > video games.  it's sad, i know.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: RPGoddess on February 13, 2008, 06:47:55 pm
FYI, Aladdin was a much better game then the Lion King.

Or Mickey Mousecapades for the NES FTW.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: XaviarCraig on February 14, 2008, 12:04:15 am

If you are going to count independent games as well (such as the one-man, one-year projects you are talking about), I'm still pretty sure that the modern indie scene is way bigger than it was in the 80s considering that there are so many middleware tools out there (like legal English releases of RPGMaker) and an indie/homebrew developer does not actually need to learn how to program.

I am only counting all games where the creators had to actually write a significant amount of original code. Ken's Labyrinth for example was released 3 times within 2 years and it had a single digit amount of developers. Each release had major changes as well. As brutal as rude as this may sound; I don't consider games made with a gamemaker(such a RPG maker or ZZT) a real "Game". To me its more of an add on or something.

My source of statistics is simply game demo CDs that my dad used to get yearly from 1991 to 1995. They only have game demos of games released the year before. The count per year was always going down... the 1991 disk boasted over 600 titles, where the 1995 disk boasted around 400. These disk were for DOS/WIN games only as well. Thats not taking into fact all the MAC and console games created at the time either.

However, if you include ALL games for ALL systems (cell phones, consoles, desktops) regardless how much (or lack there off) coding was required. I will admit; Yes every year more games are made than the year before.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: HappyCloud on February 14, 2008, 12:43:52 am
My source of statistics is simply game demo CDs that my dad used to get yearly from 1991 to 1995.
:thumbsupbuddy:
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Layzer Phish on February 14, 2008, 02:44:17 am
It's pointless to argue which generation was the best, because everyone is going to have there own opinions about it anyway because of things like nostalgia and good happy memories. Each gen had its plus sides and minus sides.

Also, didn't the N64 contoller go down as the worst in the history of gaming?
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: maladroithim on February 14, 2008, 03:54:26 pm
As brutal as rude as this may sound; I don't consider games made with a gamemaker(such a RPG maker or ZZT) a real "Game". To me its more of an add on or something.

I would like to see you explain why you feel this way!

I'm inclined to agree in the majority of cases, but there are definitely exceptions.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: bonzi_buddy on February 14, 2008, 04:40:15 pm
Also, didn't the N64 contoller go down as the worst in the history of gaming?
Well, the controller felt kind of cheap because of the structure and the material used to it. I can tell you that the controller is durable... well, excluding the buttons. The buttons got stuck and worse faster than on dualshock and weren't as sturdy. This is especially problem on the L/R buttons which gets stiff over time, plus on A/B because the frequent usage (hardly happened to me).

The worst thing - while being less stiff than dualshock's counterpart -  was that the joystick is bad. Like, now the material choosings really hits the fan because the joystick would crumble WHITE DUST from the root of the stick over the time: Thus, the control and moving in games will be lost gradually over time because of the shattering of the stick's root.
Quote
The analog stick was prone to some long-term reliability issues. If used excessively, the stick became "flaccid", which means that it will not return to center position. Instead, it "droops" off to one side. This can be caused by rotating it intensively with the palm of the hand (common practice in games like Mario Party, in which it gives advantages in some mini-games). If not played enough, the stick could become hard to move. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nintendo_64_controller
Second problem: Only one stick. As a ps-player you know how useful a second joystick is! On most games this problem was avoided in the games with the better controlling system for one stick and buttons... but on games that were pure fps-es, it's like having... just the keyboard controllers. Yeah, go figure.

--

Now, while i have listed quite many downsides of the controller, i think that the design and idea behind the controller was actually pretty smart and cool. It looks quite funky-clunky but it's infact quite comfortable in hands, much more fluent than the Dualshock.

It was ergonomically well-thought: You hold at the middle of the "trident", the joystick was under your left thumb, with the Start button on the reach. If you needed the normal D-pad instead of joystick, you switched the left hand from the middle to the left "spike". The right hand was on the rightmost spike. You had A and B beside the Start - button (within reach) and a C - buttons in the right, which consisted of four buttons pointing at the all points of the compass. At the shoulders were L and R buttons, you usually used R with the right hand's indexfinger: the left hand's index was wrapped behind the controller, on "Z" button. It's an excelent idea since it worked perfectly as a action button: after all, everybody knows how to shoot with a gun.

Conclusion: A good idea and design but the materials made the controller less good than it really was.

Quote
My source of statistics is simply game demo CDs that my dad used to get yearly from 1991 to 1995.
Yeah for real, thumbs up PAL!

I would like to see you explain why you feel this way!

I'm inclined to agree in the majority of cases, but there are definitely exceptions.
I'm sure there is but i think he really means that compared to professional games most of the amateur games really do feel very amateurish and i think that you agree on this. 
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: goat on February 14, 2008, 05:08:34 pm
Also, didn't the N64 contoller go down as the worst in the history of gaming?

The N64 controller was brilliantly designed compared to the asstastic gamecube controller. And It didn't bother me not having two analog sticks (pad is fine for strafing) as much as it did only having access to one button on each hand when using it that way.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: kentona on February 14, 2008, 05:23:36 pm
I think the original north american Xbox controller wins for worst standard controller for a console ever.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Sarhan on February 14, 2008, 05:50:19 pm
I think the original north american Xbox controller wins for worst standard controller for a console ever.

Agreed.

And Neophyte, what exactly do you think makes SMG better than SM64? SMG seemed so simple and watered down compared to SM64. It made me sad too because I was really looking forward to it. My main beef is that it offered almost no challenge whatsoever. Graphically, it's a beautiful game, and even the stage design is okay, but that's about all it has.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: tuxedo marx on February 14, 2008, 06:14:20 pm
FYI, Aladdin was a much better game then the Lion King.

Or Mickey Mousecapades for the NES FTW.
NEVER. The Lion King and Land of Illusion ftw. =D
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Neophyte on February 14, 2008, 06:30:56 pm
And Neophyte, what exactly do you think makes SMG better than SM64? SMG seemed so simple and watered down compared to SM64. It made me sad too because I was really looking forward to it. My main beef is that it offered almost no challenge whatsoever. Graphically, it's a beautiful game, and even the stage design is okay, but that's about all it has.

Super Mario Galaxy revived the genre, just like Super Mario 64 did on the N64(okay it wasn't dead but still). Now I do think Mario 64 also revolutionized the way we play adventure games now, but since it was Nintendo's first step into 3D, I think that was to be expected. The game is too easy like you said, and the levels are a little too small for my tastes. I do think the game pulled everything else off almost perfectly though. The game had almost had no flaws. I don't know, it was just a really fun game for me. If I had to choose which game is actually better, I wouldn't be able to choose.
Some people would say it's better, some would say that it's not. It really does challenge the crown of SM64 though, IMO.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: GirlBones on February 14, 2008, 06:42:03 pm
do you guys remember the stage in super mario 64 where you swam through that tunnel and ended up in some concrete box with a little town inside, and you could change the water levels and shit. i loved the song in that level. i think they also used that song in the level with the sunken pirate ship and that cave with the treasure chests and columns that fall over as you would walk by them.

i could never find 100 coins in the haunted house level.

i love super mario 64.


banjo-kazooie was also a fuckking tight game. treasure trove cove was an awesome level (fyi) probably the first game i ever got 100% in



EDIT:

The N64 controller was brilliantly designed compared to the asstastic gamecube controller. And It didn't bother me not having two analog sticks (pad is fine for strafing) as much as it did only having access to one button on each hand when using it that way.

i'm not saying the n64 was bad, but how could you possibly justify this? iirc, the gamecube controller has more buttons than the n64 controller, but you can actually press ANY button at ANY time without shifting your hands, which seems like a much better design to me.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: goat on February 15, 2008, 05:58:00 am
I think the original north american Xbox controller wins for worst standard controller for a console ever.

That controller wasn't THAT bad. I guess you just need big hands for it to fit like they meant for it. But at least it had usable analog sticks, unlike the gamecube controller.... which brings me to...

i'm not saying the n64 was bad, but how could you possibly justify this? iirc, the gamecube controller has more buttons than the n64 controller, but you can actually press ANY button at ANY time without shifting your hands, which seems like a much better design to me.

...the analog sticks! the controller was horrible for fpses of any type. and the non standard button layout just futher complicated things just cause they wanted to be different (and wtf, two right shoulder buttons, but only one on the left??). and if you had your thumb on the right analog, you couldn't hit any of the face buttons so not all buttons were accessible at all times.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: dada on February 15, 2008, 07:27:14 am
i could never find 100 coins in the haunted house level.

i love super mario 64.
If you're still interested, you can just see how it's done in the speedrun.

http://speeddemosarchive.com/Mario64.html#SS100p (120-star speedrun of Super Mario 64, or go here (http://speeddemosarchive.com/demo.pl?Mario64_SS_100p_20940) for download mirrors)
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: kentona on February 15, 2008, 01:06:22 pm
That controller wasn't THAT bad. I guess you just need big hands for it to fit like they meant for it. But at least it had usable analog sticks, unlike the gamecube controller.... which brings me to...
The thing had it's own gravitational pull!

Seriously, unless you're Shaq, the thing was awkward to use.  However, the Xbox Controller S is awesome.  It's one of my favorite controllers.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: maladroithim on February 15, 2008, 04:02:49 pm
The thing had it's own gravitational pull!

Seriously, unless you're Shaq, the thing was awkward to use.  However, the Xbox Controller S is awesome.  It's one of my favorite controllers.

I read an interview with some professional gamer girl with small dainty hands and way too much slutty makeup on who said that all real gamers use the massive classic XBox controller exclusively.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Shadowtext on February 15, 2008, 04:12:51 pm
do you guys remember the stage in super mario 64 where you swam through that tunnel and ended up in some concrete box with a little town inside, and you could change the water levels and shit. i loved the song in that level. i think they also used that song in the level with the sunken pirate ship and that cave with the treasure chests and columns that fall over as you would walk by them.

I think you're talking about "Dire, Dire Docks." I've got that song on my iPod. :D

Also, Gamecube-controller-wise, the Z button was poorly handled. You might not have to shift your hand to use it, but you certainly couldn't use it as easily as the trigger on the N64 controller. I always hated when they made the Z button important in Gamecube games.

I never had to shift my hand on the N64 controller really, because I can't think of many games that used the d-pad or the L button for much on N64. But it's still the most comfortable controller I've ever held.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Dale Gobbler on February 15, 2008, 04:18:11 pm
Most of the Gamecube games use the Z Button for like a map or something (even with shooters).
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: GirlBones on February 15, 2008, 06:28:50 pm
That controller wasn't THAT bad. I guess you just need big hands for it to fit like they meant for it. But at least it had usable analog sticks, unlike the gamecube controller.... which brings me to...

...the analog sticks! the controller was horrible for fpses of any type. and the non standard button layout just futher complicated things just cause they wanted to be different (and wtf, two right shoulder buttons, but only one on the left??). and if you had your thumb on the right analog, you couldn't hit any of the face buttons so not all buttons were accessible at all times.


first of all, what was the problem with the analog sticks? they worked just fine for me. and the button layout? video games are played by pressing buttons, so i don't see the problem with having a button layout that's a little different. how long does it take to get used to? ten minutes? also, the fact that you couldn't press any buttons while using the analog stick isn't really any different than any other controller, but it would be nice if game companies started putting the sticks in the center and ABOVE the buttons, instead of below,  so you can use the pad of your thumb for the sticks, and the base and joint for buttons and digital pads.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: goat on February 16, 2008, 06:42:56 am
That tiny little right analog stick! That thing was hard as fuck to aim with. Course maybe its just my Shaq-like hands I need to operate the original xbox controller!
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Silhouette on February 28, 2008, 06:12:39 am
I object to the SNES being called "ancient." I grew up with that. :o
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: kentona on February 28, 2008, 06:27:17 pm
I object to the SNES being called "ancient." I grew up with that. :o
Man, you're young.  I grew up on the NES.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: maladroithim on February 28, 2008, 06:50:18 pm
Man, you're young.  I grew up on the NES.

Yeah well I grew up playing outside!
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: kentona on February 28, 2008, 07:07:32 pm
Yeah well I grew up playing outside!
When I was your age, I only had a piece of wood with a nail in it!   And by the time I got it, it had no nail!
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Grindie on February 28, 2008, 07:33:48 pm
Most of the Gamecube games use the Z Button for like a map or something (even with shooters).

It was secondary fire in Timesplitters. The Z button was a fuck up. Nintendo always have to fuck SOMETHING up with each new console. I remember when they were thinking of not even including a fucking dpad on the Cube's pad!
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: Silhouette on March 08, 2008, 07:16:08 pm
Man, you're young.  I grew up on the NES.

No, it's just that my parents didn't get me a console until the SNES came out. I ran around outside pounding on trees with hammers. I have the home videos to prove it. :P
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: The Dude on March 09, 2008, 06:44:41 pm
The PSX/N64 era was truly great, but only because production costs were so low. Consider the amount of time, manpower and money that must be spent on a mainstream game today as opposed to the ones they could pump out back in the day? There were countless terrible games on both systems back then, as well as a large few that were awesome. Littered here and there were a few brilliant gems no one noticed. It's different in today's gaming age because all those countless shitty games can't get the OK for production; or the odd gem won't be produced because it isn't solidly included in the mainstream ideals. So we get some amazing games still, and some shit games. It's just that the magnitude of selection has decreased with the increase of production cost. That's my opinion.
Title: The Nintendo 64/Playstation One Generation
Post by: maladroithim on March 10, 2008, 03:01:42 pm
The PSX/N64 era was truly great, but only because production costs were so low. Consider the amount of time, manpower and money that must be spent on a mainstream game today as opposed to the ones they could pump out back in the day? There were countless terrible games on both systems back then, as well as a large few that were awesome. Littered here and there were a few brilliant gems no one noticed. It's different in today's gaming age because all those countless shitty games can't get the OK for production; or the odd gem won't be produced because it isn't solidly included in the mainstream ideals. So we get some amazing games still, and some shit games. It's just that the magnitude of selection has decreased with the increase of production cost. That's my opinion.

Well you know, while it costs 50 million dollars to make a game today it still cost like 3 million dollars or whatever to make a game for the Playstation or Nintendo 64.  Either way you're still talking about a huge amount of capital that either needs a large corporate backer, a lot of venture capitalists, or both.  When you're talking about any development cost that exceeds a few tens of thousands of dollars, you're talking about a serious financial risk and a project that needs to appeal to your "mainstream" in order to recover its investment.  Like I don't want to be the guy that says NUH UH YOU ARE FULL OF CRAP but you know you really are if you're saying that games made for the Playstation are somehow less driven by market research and the quest for a dollar or two you're actually pretty much completely wrong. 

If you want to talk about games not made with mainstream ideals in mind the closest you can get is probably the mod scene or homebrew scene like RPGMaker and GameMaker games (even though stuff like the Torque homebrew scene are now completely inundated people selling their services and their games and real indie producers who want to make free games in their spare time aren't taken seriously by the community and it's pretty lame).  But you know if you have been paying attention even those scenes are dominated with the dream of being the most popular nerd on the internet so that's pretty lame too.