What do you prefer??? - Page 2

BigJustinW · 12-07-2003, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Canyarion

Hm when I think of innovative games, I think of Half Life, WarCraft 3 and Aliens vs Predator. Problem whith those is that they're too polished!

I was also kinda thinking 1080A vs SSX3. 1080 has cool stuff as speed and nature, while SSX has more balanced gameplay perhaps.
But then I realised that 1080 misses a lot that SSX3 has... like LONG tracks and cool trick system.

Well, the poll said unfinished... that doesn't mean that the game has to have bugs or look ugly, just released a bit to fast and lacks features is obviously should have had.

Morph, here's another example, Timesplitters 2 vs Halo... Timesplitters being the tandard sequal thar lacks any type of innovation... and Halo being the innovative game that was rushed out to the Market.

There are planty of examples but only a few pop to mind... I guess you could use True Crimes vs GTA:VC... it's too obvious for me to explain which falls into which category

Morpheus1 · 12-08-2003, 12:10 PM

Quote:

MM was anything but standard. The mask systems and 3 day time limit were things that had never before been seen in a Zelda game. The only new thing WW had in it was a boat and a different look.

I was thinking the same thing after I posted it. You are right about Sims too, except I was talking about the Console games. I thought it was obvious that any game listed as standard is a sequel or new addition to the game series.

+Rep

The Duggler · 12-08-2003, 01:12 PM

Here's how I see it.

Innovative but unpolished = casual fans (mainly ps2)
Standard but polished = hardcore gamers (mainly nintendo)

BigJustinW · 12-08-2003, 04:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nitram

Here's how I see it.

Innovative but unpolished = casual fans (mainly ps2)
Standard but polished = hardcore gamers (mainly nintendo)

I see it the other way around... I think the innovative unosihed games are more for the hardcore, and the polished standard sequals are for the casual gamers. I could give examples if you would like to see them... but meh

Yoda9864 · 12-08-2003, 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigJustinW

I see it the other way around... I think the innovative unosihed games are more for the hardcore, and the polished standard sequals are for the casual gamers. I could give examples if you would like to see them... but meh

Ditto. Casual gamers want the cool-looking games, or the sequels to established series. Hardcore gamers are willing to try new, innovative games.

Vampyr · 12-08-2003, 07:13 PM

I also agree with that.

But I would still take the perfect game over the non perfect innovative game, even though I consider myself a "hardcore" gamer.

Put between these two options:
1) Innovative Perfect
2) Standard Perfect

I would MOST DEFFINATLY go for the Innovative game.

BigJustinW · 12-08-2003, 10:02 PM

Most change Agent games aren't perfect though... and it's standard sequal almost allways proves that

Think of it like this... imagine your dream game and think about your favorite game (that isn't original, like your favorite sequal to somthing)... would you rather have your dream game but not realized 100% due to financial constraints or a sequal to your favorite game?

GameKinG · 12-09-2003, 12:25 AM

Yes, I think MM is more innovative than TWW. Though, I didnt like the time limit.

The Duggler · 12-09-2003, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigJustinW

I see it the other way around... I think the innovative unosihed games are more for the hardcore, and the polished standard sequals are for the casual gamers. I could give examples if you would like to see them... but meh

I disagree, hardcore gamers want quality games. Look at WW, Metroid, FZero, Rogue Squadron, Mario Kart, Golf etc... Not much innovation in those games, but they're quality games and almost bug free. But if you take games like GTA and the like, well they are pretty much innovative in the sense that the possibilities are very large, and you can do so much stuff in the game, but they're full of bugs as well.

BigJustinW · 12-09-2003, 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nitram

I disagree, hardcore gamers want quality games.

Well DUH!

Everybody wants quality games... the arguement in question is new innovative content that isn't polished vs a standard sequal that is polished. Quality has nothing to do with it, imagine that both games got an equal score from most review places... but one is innovative incomplete and has a few bugs, but the things it does have allows it to have the same score as the standard sequal. We are talking Halo vs Smash Brothers Melee here... not some crappy innovative game vs a great polished game... two games, equal scores, but one not living up to it's potential, and the other living up to it's full potental....

Canyarion · 12-10-2003, 06:15 AM

Right said fred.

The Duggler · 12-10-2003, 09:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigJustinW

Well DUH!

Everybody wants quality games... the arguement in question is new innovative content that isn't polished vs a standard sequal that is polished. Quality has nothing to do with it, imagine that both games got an equal score from most review places... but one is innovative incomplete and has a few bugs, but the things it does have allows it to have the same score as the standard sequal. We are talking Halo vs Smash Brothers Melee here... not some crappy innovative game vs a great polished game... two games, equal scores, but one not living up to it's potential, and the other living up to it's full potental....

Well I guess it depends on how you see it. For me a game that is not polished that has bugs and a not so good game play = not quality. Games like GTA, Enter the matrix etc... fall into that category. Those game are cool, but not up to the quality of games like Metroid or Wind Waker.

Yoda9864 · 12-10-2003, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nitram

Well I guess it depends on how you see it. For me a game that is not polished that has bugs and a not so good game play = not quality. Games like GTA, Enter the matrix etc... fall into that category. Those game are cool, but not up to the quality of games like Metroid or Wind Waker.

I don't know about GTA on the consoles, but GTA on the PC was one of the better games of it's time. One of the better games looking games of it's time and hardly any bugs either.

BigJustinW · 12-10-2003, 05:24 PM

[quote=Nitram]Well I guess it depends on how you see it. For me a game that is not polished that has bugs and a not so good game play....QUOTE]

Who said the game has to have bad gameplay?

Plud I'd take GTA over Zelda:WW or MP anyday.... guess that makes me a casual gamer

PuPPeT · 12-10-2003, 07:56 PM

This is a bit of a funny one really for the most part I like to play games that add some thing new to the whole world of game's. Lets face it Doom was one of the best games of it's time but I would hate to think what life would be like if people only made FPS to the model of DOOM I and 2. but at the same time I fond it real fun many years after doom to S SAM I and II.

I think what I'm trying to say is all DEV should look at doing more innovative games then most do at this time but it's not the end of the world if some games play like the last one as long as DEV's don't take it too far (No names.........EA).