Revolution = "paradigm shift"

[Fox5]

i wonder if GC will get it's equivilent to CBFD.

the new zelda

Zelda games have never been particularly...well narrated. Also CBFD had an excellent multiplayer mode.

I don't think GCN will have a CBFD, it won't have 1 game to go out on hopefully, it just had a ton of great games released in a short time. Paper Mario 2, Mario Power Tennis, Metroid Prime 2, Viewtiful Joe 2, Pikmin 2, and Resident Evil 4.

 

[jvd]

The new zelda game will be the game for it to go out on . Trust me . This is going to be a much darker zelda and will be a great stepping stone to the future

 

[Wunderchu]

"The keyword for the DS was 'innovative product,' but it will be 'paradigm shift in [game] play' with the Revolution," Iwata said in his interview with Kyoto's popular local newspaper.

"The concept behind our new console, tentatively named 'Revolution,' is the same as the DS. We want it to broaden the [video gaming] audience range, and we don't want it to be something that people will see as too irrelevant to them, too difficult to use, or as something that wastes space. We'll announce specific details at the E3 ......

Iwata said the DS and PSP aren't directly competing, because Nintendo is aiming for nongamers and retired gamers with its handheld, while Sony is targeting the traditional gaming audience. He added that his company will also attempt to avoid competing in the next-gen console market.

"Similar to the relationship that the DS has with the PSP, we won't fight over the same share of the pie with another company. We have no intention of fighting over shares of the market in a way that will shrink it. For us, success will depend on whether we can call back people that have stopped playing games, and whether we can also bring in a new base of customers. That way, our share [of the market] will increase since the market will grow bigger," Iwata said.

[source: http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/01/14/news_6116439.html ]

 

[hovz]

You really have absolutely no idea on this subject hovz. Why even comment on something if you can't even be bothered to read a review? Or at least read some of the comments on this very forum.

First Resident Evil 1 and 4

Res Evil 1 has pre-rendered backgrounds, Res Evil 4 has all realtime graphics.

Res Evil 1 has a fixed camera, Res Evil 4 has a proper camera with control over your own view.

Res Evil 1 has no real aiming, just bottom, middle and top (aim at feet, stomach or head). Res Evil 4 has full precision aiming so you can fire anywhere you want.

Res Evil 1 has fairly simple enemy reactions, that's all that's needed since you can only fire in 3 area's. Res Evil 4's enemies react differently depending where you hit them. Shoot them in the foot and they'll fall and be crippled. Hit them in the shoulder and they'll grab the wounded shoulder, hit them in the knee and they'll limp, and so on.

Not to mention stuff like no zombie's, no umbrella corporation, no t-virus ect ect. Res Evil 1 is a standard clunky RE survival horror (a good one but standard stuff for the series never the less). Res Evil 4 is a third person action-survival horror. New camera view, new enemies, new gameplay, new weapons and more. They are actually quite different games!

Now Resident Evil and Eternal Darkness:

Eternal Darkness has full and easy control over the movement of the character so you can go in any direction just by pressing that direction on the stick. Nothing like Res Evil 1's controls which are based on turning with left and right and walking forward with up.

Eternal Darkness allows sword fights and is very focused on magic attacks as well as guns, again nothing like Resident Evil 1 which is just about guns. I'm not even going to bother continuing. Basically it would be quicker for me to list the similarities between the games since there are so few.

Either read some reviews of these games (or even better play them) or just stop posting.

so going by your logic, ut2003 was all new gameplay from ut99? . exlain to me again how control of the camera, different enemies, and more enemy reactions adds up to new gameplay? oh wait it has a new story, so while ur doing the same stuff u were in re1, this time only with differnt backrounds and things to shoot at, and for a different purpose, ur enjoying a 'fresh' game. puu lease

 

[jvd]

so going by your logic, ut2003 was all new gameplay from ut99? . exlain to me again how control of the camera, different enemies, and more enemy reactions adds up to new gameplay? oh wait it has a new story, so while ur doing the same stuff u were in re1, this time only with differnt backrounds and things to shoot at, and for a different purpose, ur enjoying a 'fresh' game. puu lease

by your logic there is not 1 single game on the ps2 that offers new game play .


Grand turismo 4 and 5 are exactly the same as the first 3 , grand theft auto 3 is the same as the first 2 .

Why did u buy a ps2 ?

at least nintendo has 2 new games . Sony doesn't seem to have anything

 

[cthellis42]

Explain to me how Halo 2 or offered "fresh gameplay" over Halo or--in fact--most other FPSes? (Gameplay, not "game modes.") How about GTA:SA over Vice City over GTA3? And to cross system, how about the Silent Hills compared to Resident Evil 1, if you're going to treat RE4 the same?

You honestly have a really warped view of the video game industry and "new gameplay" (not to mention "games of the same genre" and "games of the same license") if you're taking Nintendo to task for it, but shrug off every other example of it throughout ALL video games on ALL systems.

 

[hovz]

first of all who said i play/like any of those games on xbox/ps2?

secondly who said i own a ps2?

ps2 has plenty of fresh games. games that bring somethong new to the table, that affects the way you play the game. as an example of a recent game that brought something fresh, ut2004 brought onslaught, which is great.

 

[cthellis42]

You're complaining vociferously about a problem that pervades the industry and--I have little doubt--looking at Nintendo with a far more accusing eye than the others.

The PS2 has plenty of fresh games, sure. But it also simply has a ton MORE GAMES. More games, more genres, more takes at them... And that's fine. I mean, what's to complain about that?

You are, however, in this particular example complaining about a game within the same genre and within the same license as if it was supposed to be some genre-busting new icon of completely different gameplay. Here's a hint: fans don't want that, and they won't buy that. They look to certain genres and licenses for the gameplay they've come to expect and refinement thereof. Different takes that make for a new and enjoyable experience for them, but don't make them feel like they're playing a completely different game. And for anyone who's a fan of survival horror in general and Resident Evil in particular, RE4 most certainly delivers.

If you want to take an issue with THAT, please take issue with basically any game that has a number following it. (And therefore, almost every major title of 2004.)

 

[hovz]

my issue is that with the exception of a few games thats all nitendo has released for the entire lifespan of the gamecube. rehashed sequels with new graphics.

 

[cthellis42]

That is an entirely different arguement than what your comments said about RE4 and Eternal Darkness specifically, though. Remember which replies are responding to what.

 

[hovz]

thats cvuz he brought up those games specifically as being example of the great new experiences to be had for the gamecube.

 

[Readykilowatt]

I can't believe that you are all arguing with hovz. Anyway, as of now I find this "mysterious" Nintendo Revolution to be more interesting than both the Xenon and the PS3 (E3 can't come soon enough). BTW, 4 Resident Evil is awesome.

 

[Mulciber]

i'd like to see an isometric action/horror, or maybe a side scrolling racing game. perhaps a massively multiplayer online puzzle game.....that uses a stylus input.

 

[hovz]

tetrisphere was the best puzzle game ever made. it was so complex and required so much skill.

 

[Fodder]

After having some friends round on Friday night for beers, DVDs and MKDD, then breaking out MK64 last night after a party at mate's place had wound up, I've come to the conclusion that anyone who claims DD is 'a rehashed sequel with new graphics' is a moron.

 

[hovz]

anyone who thinks mario kart DD is anywhere even close to the level of mario kart 64 is a moron. to this day mario kart 64 is one of the funnest video games available in 4 player mode. same can be said for goldeneye, wrestlemania 2000, and lots of other great games(those things nintendo actually released before they launched the gamecube).

oh and beer and gamecube shouldnt even be mentioned in the same sentence. its like putting smart and jessica simpson in the same sentence.

 

[GwymWeepa]

You really have absolutely no idea on this subject hovz. Why even comment on something if you can't even be bothered to read a review? Or at least read some of the comments on this very forum.

First Resident Evil 1 and 4

Res Evil 1 has pre-rendered backgrounds, Res Evil 4 has all realtime graphics.

Res Evil 1 has a fixed camera, Res Evil 4 has a proper camera with control over your own view.

Res Evil 1 has no real aiming, just bottom, middle and top (aim at feet, stomach or head). Res Evil 4 has full precision aiming so you can fire anywhere you want.

Res Evil 1 has fairly simple enemy reactions, that's all that's needed since you can only fire in 3 area's. Res Evil 4's enemies react differently depending where you hit them. Shoot them in the foot and they'll fall and be crippled. Hit them in the shoulder and they'll grab the wounded shoulder, hit them in the knee and they'll limp, and so on.

Not to mention stuff like no zombie's, no umbrella corporation, no t-virus ect ect. Res Evil 1 is a standard clunky RE survival horror (a good one but standard stuff for the series never the less). Res Evil 4 is a third person action-survival horror. New camera view, new enemies, new gameplay, new weapons and more. They are actually quite different games!

Now Resident Evil and Eternal Darkness:

Eternal Darkness has full and easy control over the movement of the character so you can go in any direction just by pressing that direction on the stick. Nothing like Res Evil 1's controls which are based on turning with left and right and walking forward with up.

Eternal Darkness allows sword fights and is very focused on magic attacks as well as guns, again nothing like Resident Evil 1 which is just about guns. I'm not even going to bother continuing. Basically it would be quicker for me to list the similarities between the games since there are so few.

Either read some reviews of these games (or even better play them) or just stop posting.

so going by your logic, ut2003 was all new gameplay from ut99? . exlain to me again how control of the camera, different enemies, and more enemy reactions adds up to new gameplay? oh wait it has a new story, so while ur doing the same stuff u were in re1, this time only with differnt backrounds and things to shoot at, and for a different purpose, ur enjoying a 'fresh' game. puu lease

Well you have a point, in fact Super Mario Brothers and Mario 64 are in fact identical games.

 

[hovz]

nope, the gameplay mechanics were entirely different in every single aspect.

 

[GwymWeepa]

nope, the gameplay mechanics were entirely different in every single aspect.

Well duh. RE4 is nearly as different to the original RE.

 

[Teasy]

so going by your logic, ut2003 was all new gameplay from ut99? . exlain to me again how control of the camera, different enemies, and more enemy reactions adds up to new gameplay? oh wait it has a new story, so while ur doing the same stuff u were in re1, this time only with differnt backrounds and things to shoot at, and for a different purpose, ur enjoying a 'fresh' game. puu lease

I haven't played those games (UT) so I'm not going to discuss them. That's something I think you should learn from!

Earlier you claimed that Res Evil 4 was an identical remake of Res Evil 1 with new graphics. Now your changing you're argument and talking about "all new gameplay". Since when did the lack of "all new gameplay" mean a game was an identical remake of the last? Even Mario 64 didn't have all new gameplay compared to previous Mario games, its gameplay was different, but not completely different. No sequal ever has all new gameplay, if it did it wouldn't be a sequal. If Res Evil 4 had completely new gameplay then it would not be right to even call it Resident Evil. It would be called Feel the magic or WarioWare!... Basically what you're doing here is using a phrase that can be stretched to the nth degree in order to make it impossible for anyone to prove you wrong. It doesn't matter how different Res Evil 4 is compared to Res Evil 1, because as long as it doesn't fit in with you're defenition of completely new gameplay then its just an identical clone of the last game right? How incredibly convenient for you....