Brian Hook's comment on 3dfx

[superbaby]

First off the link: http://www.voodooextreme.com/#9138


<< One of the reasons that games like Diablo 2, The Sims and RC Tycoon can sell so well is that they run on pretty reasonable systems using software rendering -- they're not technical marvels by any means, but they run on two year old computers just fine >>


This really bugged me. Perhaps he should focus more on gameplay instead of screenshot candy. I find it ridiculous that 80's games like Star Control 2 were much more enjoyable than any of the 3D FPS junk released today. They hardly last more than a week on my computer. Notice that all those games he mentioned that weren't &quot;developer nightmares&quot; are extremely strong in gameplay. IMO the entire gaming community has focused far too much on how many frames per second you get, and how nifty the graphics look. Where's the gameplay?

 

[BD2003]

I think that typical gameplay vs. graphics argument is total bs. Why dont you people go play pacman. Gameplay is not the most important thing about games, ENJOYMENT is. Visuals and sound add just as much to the experience as does gameplay. A great game will have both, not just gameplay. Besides, the development team is separated. Those who create the graphics arent the same that create the gameplay. Both go hand and hand. You cant have a great game without either.

 

[Czar]

So true, I still love to play Master Of Orion 2, Civ2 and all those old games that had a good gameplay. Cant wait for Master of Orion 3

There is a reason why I cheat in 90% of the games I play nowdays, never did cheat few years ago.

 

[bluemax]

Hey Czar! Did you find the Master of Orion 3 website yet?
It's not due for another 6mos at least, but it'll be soooooo nice!
I can't wait!

And yes, I'd prefer Pac-Man to a lot of the crap released today. Pac-Man in 3D would still have the same great gameplay compared to pure bunk like Daitakana or whatever.
Star Control 4 died quickly and painfully- you can't even find it in bargain bins... all because they tried to make it 3D and pretty, but they RUINED the **game**. If it's not FUN, what's the point?

 

[Mem]

I think if you ask any gamer,gameplay &amp; playability are more important then graphics,yes we would like to have it all,but nowadays too many companies spend too much time on graphics ,afterall if gameplay is bad all the best graphics in the world won`t turn it into a good game.

 

[jpprod]

I find it ridiculous that 80's games like Star Control 2

StarControl II: The Ur-Quan Masters was released by Accolade in late 1992


Star Control 4 died quickly and painfully- you can't even find it in bargain bins...

I personally have read that the whole game was cancelled, after first being renamed StarCon and turned from RPG to action shooter. StarControl III on the other hand can still be found from bargain bin, AFAIK.

 

[Czar]

bluemax, yeah I checked it out, to bad no screenshots yet, only concept art, looks promesing though. And its not 6months till the release, its more than a year, 1h of 2002 is the release date

 

[blurredvision]

You guys refer to Pac-Man and those classics as great quality games, and that they can't compare to today's games. Really, no sh!t?? You don't say. You can't compare the simple 2D game of the past to the overly-complex method of making games today. Plus, there were a lot of crappy games back then, too, you seem to forget. In 10 more years, you'll be fussing about the holographic real-time 3D games we 'interact' with because they just don't pack the same kind of quality that Half-Life did back in the 90's.

I agree with BigDee2003 also. A game could have all kinds of playability, but if the graphics suck or the sound is horrible, I don't want to play it. That why I love FF7 and FF9 on the playstation, but will not play the earlier ones because I can't stand those kinds of graphics anymore.

I guess it all depends on what you look for. Me, I look for some eye candy, because that's what keeps me coming back.

 

[Cerb]

Playability is key. I think the best use of eye candy is Tribes. Different shapes and skin designs for each weapon, projectile, and explosion. not too poly-heavy models, with definite shapes, etc.. Yet at the same time it looks wonderful with what it does have.
Of course I also still play Starcraft and Quake2 every now and then, so what do I know? ;-)

 

[superbaby]

IMO the graphics for FF7 were pretty bad Kinda blocky and all, but why don't you look at those RPGs that come out of Japan? They use 2D sprites but somehow manage to have gamers log over 200 hours in into them, I don't see myself playing Q3/UT for more than a couple of hours a day, even my residence floormates got sick of Q3 after little less than 2 weeks. Sure, we still play now and then but more than Starcraft? Our SC games last anywhere from 2 to 48 hours (no kidding, 256x256 airmap).

What I'm saying is eye-candy alone won't make a game-of-the-year, but a game with decent graphics and okay sound but with killer gameplay (read old SNES Final Fantasy) will outsell any Q3 clone. At the time, StarCon2 had groovy sound (I still listen to those .MODs) and the graphics were clean and sharp, but did the development team just concentrate on those?

Just look at Sacrafice. How many of you will be playing that game 2 months from now? It's got really good 3D graphics, the screenshots never stop popping up on review sites and everyone with a GeForce2 will say &quot;oooh look at those sparkles&quot;. But will it remain on your harddrive, like StarCraft/BW does? No FPS has survived longer than a month on my computer. Not even Q3/UT, I just reinstall those when I have to.

Did StarCon4 ever make it out of the development house? I had a feeling it was cancelled, I know it turned into a shooter/action game. StarCon3 was a disappointment as well, they touted 3D graphics and CD quality sound etc. but what was it in the end? A third-rate sci-fi novel with some nifty animations.

Master of Orion 2 was also another great game that didn't rely on nifty graphics and sound.

I have a feeling that a well designed 2D game, heavy on gameplay, doesn't require 2GB to install and runs on literally any computer than runs Win95 - would outsell anything currently on the market.

Blizzard probably is the definition of this but they too are moving for 3D, but it remains to be seen whether War3 lives up to its promise.

Before you say that you can't compare old games to new games, back in 1992 when I was gawking over StarCon2, this cool little shareware game called DZONE was available for download at Tucows. It was little more than 2D triangles represented as tanks, running around and trying to blast each other. I mean, the graphics were little more than DrawRectangle(), DrawLine() and DrawDot(). But it kept me and my friends at school entertained for more than 3 years until we discovered SubSpace (another 2D DirectX game, still exists today). These are the games that stay on my hard drive, not the latest 3D marvel to come out of John Carmack.

 

[Noriaki]

MOO2 rocked
Starcraft is still the game I play by far most often.
And Final Fantasy 2 and 3 for SNES were bloody awesome.

Honestly, I'm looking forward to warcraft 3 because it looks like it will have pretty sweet graphics. But mainly becuase it will be a sweet game to play.

A game like Quake3 or UT is pretty nice to look at...and honestly I'd love it if Starcraft or Final Fantasy X (meant to be variable..not 10) had graphics like that...but there is no way Q3 or UT can come close to the playability of SC or FF2/3 they just own....
Graphics are nice, and all other things being equal I'll defiantely take a game with excellent graphics over one with piss poor graphics...but msot of the time all other things aren't equal and the games with piss poor graphics tend to have much better gameplay.

 

[ElFenix]

pacman had no replay-ability. so the gameplay wasn't all that great. it was simple, and anyone could get the hang of it fast, but without replayability, its got do be better than that.

 

[superbaby]

I don't think that Pacman comparison was right. Pacman was pretty much a brainless game. I think we've got it reversed, Pacman is probably in the same category as Q3/UT (action games).

 

[BD2003]

Its all about the experience. Some games need graphics and sound to create the experience, some dont. Starcraft and diablo 2 don't have the greatest graphics, but the graphics arent by any means bad. But the storyline and gameplay fill the void, and make the game a great experience. The online portion truely makes the game what it is. On the flip side, the game no one lives forever has typical fps gameplay, but anyone who's played it will probably tell you its one of the best games theyve played. The graphics, and specifically the music, voice, storyline and general atmosphere put it above the top. One game can easily have better graphics than another, and one can have better gameplay, but judging which would be a better of the two games boils down to which gives you the most enjoyable experience. Theres a reason why people flooded the stores to get playstation 2s, and its not because of better gameplay.

 

[glen]

Superbaby,
Two of the best games of all time are out right now:
Tribes and Everquest.

 

[OS]

Star Control 2 was the freaking best game of all time imo.

 

[superbaby]

I loved StarCon2. I still have the collector's CD-ROM that has StarCon1 and StarCon2. StarCon1 was a great game too, simple, elegant and it simply blows all the free time (and no-so-free-time ) away. Too bad I can't get it to run on my computer, it simply goes too fast

 

[Vinny N]

This reminds me of the &quot;what's up with console games?&quot; question...

Super Mario Brothers 3 on NES(or SNES in All Stars)...96 or so levels?
Or was that Super Mario World on SNES with at least 40+ levels?

Super Mario 64...3d? BLEH, not with only 20 or so courses...

What's up with the 3d Castlevania64? ugh. give me 1,2, or 3 on NES or 4 on SNES any day...

What about those 3d fighting games like Tekken 1,2,3, Virtua Fighter, MK4...ew. I still go the newest 2d fighter I can find...usually some Capcom one...


Any play Shenmue? OMG...$45 for what...maybe 14-20 hours of gameplay?! And it's only 1 chapter! How many chapters will there be?...grrr...freaking Breath of Fire 2 on SNES gave me more hours of play.

What's with Zelda 64, Majora's Mask? seems shorter than Zelda 64: OOT, and shorter than even the Gameboy Zelda:LA, Zelda 2 on NES, Zelda 3 on SNES...

 

[Cerb]

3 games I regularly played were Tribes, Quake2, and Starcraft. Until two-way cable comes here, Q2 and Tribes are out of the picture. Tribes' graphics, while not stunning, do give to the experience. For one, unlike Q3, I have never had to look down to see what weapon I had. The shapes are very distinct. Everything is unique enough that after a week or two of playing, you can glance at a player and know what pack and armor he has, and his likely roles. Quake2's graphics are now pitiful...but the game still gets me wired, because it is extremely fun. My main problem with Quake3 was not too much graphics, but just that it requires faster reflexes over faster thought (I choose a target, predict the destination, and go for it. In Q3 everyhting moves too fast for this style of play. I survive not on reflexes--mine suck--but on quickly planning what to do the instant I see a threat).

 

[fs5]

Graphics/eye candy get you playing the game in the first place, gameplay keeps ya comin' back for more...

 

[superbaby]

<< Graphics/eye candy get you playing the game in the first place, gameplay keeps ya comin' back for more... >>


Hmm that's a grey area isn't it. I'd go so far as to say that if the gameplay doesn't hit you in the first 5-10 minutes of pressing &quot;START!&quot; then it probably ins't a good thing.

 

[ForeverSilky]

As much as I hate admitting this, eye candy does count for a lot with me. Ever since I got my Dreamcast I never played my PSX mainly because I couldn't stand the terrible graphics on the PSX games.

 

[superbaby]

The PSX has horrible horrible graphics. I doubt even the best gameplay could save it. Everything I've ever seen on a PSX (that's not CGI) is blocky and pixelated.

Obviously if the graphics are going to make you barf then no one is going to play it. What I'm saying is that developers shouldn't devote their time to making people go &quot;Ooooh AHhhhh&quot;, reviewers shouldn't go &quot;Look at this screenshot, it's amazing!&quot; and benchmarkers should go to hell with their FPS scores.

I mean go look at http://www.diabloii.net, all that webmaster does is proclaim how nice these screenshots are, he uses vocabulary such as &quot;gorgeous&quot; and &quot;breathtaking&quot;... which makes me want to barf. Barely 20% of his posts deal with how the game is played. It's just another indication that fansites out there are getting far far too superficial. Developers are going to get the wrong idea and start catering to these worthless sites by making graphics top priority and putting gameplay second. Anyone remember Messiah? VoodooExtreme milked those screenshots like hell because of that really cool graphics engine that was supposed to be soooo revolutionary. And what happens? After the initial week of hubbub about how great the game looked on a GeForce 256 32MB card, it disappeared.

Another example would be Monolith's Shogo MAD. Again, VoodooExtreme posts their weekly screenshots, builds up the hype around the game, saying it's a cross between Japanese Anime mecha and Q2 but what do we get? Another FPS with pretty graphics. As much as I enjoyed the anime content, the gameplay just wasn't there.


Mmm I think I'm ranting. That's enough for now

 

[EMAN]

Superbaby, I agree with you totally.

AND YES STARCON 2 WAS 1 OF THE BEST GAMES OF ALL TIME.

--------

What good is a game when all you do is run around and shoot people. Developers need to change the concept of shooting games for people to like it again. It's kind of getting old. You play 1 shooting game you played them all. It's lame..

Everyone in here will agree that Quake 3 has better graphics right? The reason Unreal Tournament in preferred by a lot of people against Quake 3 is not because of graphics but gameplay.

Either You can enjoy your games or you can be a zombie and look @ graphics and benchmark all day long. Personally I rather play a game during this blistering winter.