biostud
Lifer
- Feb 27, 2003
- 19,730
- 6,808
- 136
Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: EpsiIon
You aren't serious, are you? Yes, the game looks old. But if you can't appreciate a game without modern graphics, you aren't a true gamer.
so . . . do you still play Pong? . . . it is a classic and the grandfather of modern games.
:roll:
i really DO appreciate the suggestions (if not the snide comment) - but you must remember i am a FPS player (very definitely "spoiled" ANYWAY with the generally better gfx of the FPS over the RPG) and it is very difficult for me to play something that looks worse than the original Doom (what is it, 6x4 max res?)
:shocked:
No, I don't play pong. But I HAVE played it. And I definitely wouldn't dismiss it just because the graphics aren't fancy. The main reason I don't play it anymore is that it's too simple. It gets boring quickly.
Fallout and Fallout 2 have so much depth and character that to dismiss them based on their graphics is, for lack of a better term, wrong. BTW, they both look a LOT better than the original Doom.
Another point: making the excuse that "I'm an FPS player" is just silly. I'm an FPS player too and I love good games regardless of genre or presentation. If what you're really saying is "I'm a shallow person," then just say it. Don't hide behind the label of an "FPS gamer," whatever that really means.
Another note: I also have no problem with you disliking games that I love. I dislike plenty of games that other people love. But at least I've tried them and can tell you why I dislike them.
Fern
Elite Member
- Sep 30, 2003
- 26,907
- 174
- 106
WTF? He likes FPS. There's nothing wrong with that and certainly doesn't make one a "shallow person" (IMHO, resorting to name-calling over game preference is whats "silly" here)
And what is a "FPS gamer", everyone knows what he's talking about. Prolly you as well. You don't have to be hardcore gamer to know the difference between the various genres. And they are classified into different genres because there is a difference.
Shallow Person, rubbish. Seems more like he's a discerning gamer who knows what he likes. Maybe he's a "Busy Person", and doesn't have time to screw around with stuff he knows from experience he's unlikey to enjoy.
Nothing wrong with enjoying good graphics either. If content was all that mattered we'd still be watching TV/movies in black & white.
Fern
Originally posted by: EpsiIon
Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: EpsiIon
You aren't serious, are you? Yes, the game looks old. But if you can't appreciate a game without modern graphics, you aren't a true gamer.
so . . . do you still play Pong? . . . it is a classic and the grandfather of modern games.
:roll:
i really DO appreciate the suggestions (if not the snide comment) - but you must remember i am a FPS player (very definitely "spoiled" ANYWAY with the generally better gfx of the FPS over the RPG) and it is very difficult for me to play something that looks worse than the original Doom (what is it, 6x4 max res?)
:shocked:
No, I don't play pong. But I HAVE played it. And I definitely wouldn't dismiss it just because the graphics aren't fancy. The main reason I don't play it anymore is that it's too simple. It gets boring quickly.
Fallout and Fallout 2 have so much depth and character that to dismiss them based on their graphics is, for lack of a better term, wrong. BTW, they both look a LOT better than the original Doom.
Another point: making the excuse that "I'm an FPS player" is just silly. I'm an FPS player too and I love good games regardless of genre or presentation. If what you're really saying is "I'm a shallow person," then just say it. Don't hide behind the label of an "FPS gamer," whatever that really means.
Another note: I also have no problem with you disliking games that I love. I dislike plenty of games that other people love. But at least I've tried them and can tell you why I dislike them.
you misunderstand me.
no excuse re: FPS . . . just that i AM "spoiled" by superior gfx (period).
After playing FC, HL2, PK/BoOH, Thief - DS, DE:IW, Chron of Riddick and (even) Doom iii, it's pretty hard to go back to '97 gfx - especially if you are NEW to RPG (and it's "inferior" gfx, anyway)
. . . i mean, i enjoyed the original DeusEx, but i don't replay it . . . if i didn't and had a choice, i'd go for DE:IW.it is IMPOSSIBLE for me - timewise - to go back and play ALL the great games . . . therefore i LIMIT myself to modern ones . . . . right now - due to the urging of EVERYone - i am playing a 1999 game System Shock 2 with updated GFX . . . it's is decent enough, but i'd hate to go back in time another couple of years and have to install Win98SE.
When i read the Fallout 2 reviews and see the "recommended specs" are a P-120 with 32MB system ram AND the Difficulty IS "Hard", i tend to cringe.
:roll:
ANYway hasn't Interplay licensed Bethesda Softworks to develop and publish Fallout 3? That was back last August. The X-box version of the follow-up Fallout seemed pretty well hated.
-----------------------------
i thought you were ALSO talking about Fallout 1/2 . . . thanks for clarifying.
i am reading the reviews now . . . . i ALREADY have Might and Magic VI: The Mandate of Heaven which is a newer game (with awful gfx -
. . . just kidding) and also awesome reviews . . . it just seemed really HARD . . . . first of all what relation is the one i have to the one you are suggesting? And is it as "difficult"?(thanks for your patience)
++++++++++++
Thanks, Craig. i hate getting defensive over my preferences & tastes.
i mean how far back am i supposed to go to be a "true gamer" to prove my "depth"? . . . text-based games? How about D'nD' with pencil and paper.
:roll:
i don't upgrade my computer EVERY year to play games that were suited for a P-100 CPU . . . nor do i listen to vinyl anymore or mono or . . . . even have a B&W tv.
OK, here is what i DON'T like to read about in a game i am considering (HoMM III):
i really don't care that much for KotOR's 'turn-based' combat (compared to FPS's combat) although i have accepted it . . . now give me an ancient game with clunky combat that has a difficulty of "hard" in a brand new unfamiliar genre . . . and i have to say 'no thanks' . . .
. . . perhaps i'm just "shallow"
:shocked:
is it too much to ask for? . . . a quality MODERN RPG with a great story and good gfx.
:roll:
KotOR II is on my list as 'next' after SS2 . . . .
any further comments on Vampire: Bloodlines?
i really don't care that much for KotOR's 'turn-based' combat (compared to FPS's combat) although i have accepted it . . . now give me an ancient game with clunky combat that has a difficulty of "hard" in a brand new unfamiliar genre . . . and i have to say 'no thanks' . . .
. . . perhaps i'm just "shallow"
:shocked:
is it too much to ask for? . . . a quality MODERN RPG with a great story and good gfx.
:roll:
KotOR II is on my list as 'next' after SS2 . . . .
any further comments on Vampire: Bloodlines?
I didn't say there was anything wrong with that... at ALL. Where did you get that? I love good FPS games.
I wasn't talking about genre preferences; I don't care what genres he likes. I was talking about his general attitude toward games. Perhaps I just misunderstood him. Let me break down my perception of the situation to you:
He asked for RPG recommendations. This implies that he's open to more genres than FPS. Also, RPGs aren't known for their graphics. (I think: He's looking for quality games)
I recommend Fallout and Fallout 2. (Thinking: Sure, they're from the late 90s, but anybody who likes RPGs should try them at least once)
He says something like "Don't those have bad graphics?" (My response: He has to be joking. He just asked for good RPGs! How can he possibly care about graphics?)
It still baffles me that anybody could like a genre, ask for recommendations, and then NOT take one simply because of graphics... If you like RPGs, you're likely to enjoy Fallout and Fallout 2. Saying "don't those have crappy graphics" shows a complete lack of understanding of what makes good games good.
Discerning gamer? My initial response was the complete opposite: "How can he care so much about graphics? He must be one of the horde of pretty-picture impulse buyers that is destroying the genres I love." Rejecting games that don't look good enough is just... unbelievably silly.
Where did I say anything about enjoying good graphics? Stop reading things into my post. I never said ANYTHING about being content with the current state of graphics. My criticisms were ENTIRELY about pre-judging a game entirely on its graphics (one that was even good-looking for it's day, too). I seriously thought everybody regarded that mentality as ignorant and shallow. I guess I was wrong...
Judging things based only on their appearance is, without a doubt, shallow. I'm sorry I implied that he was a shallow person; that was a mistake. Perhaps "shallow gamer" is better. But I still think it's ridiculous.
Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: EpsiIon
Originally posted by: apoppin
Originally posted by: EpsiIon
You aren't serious, are you? Yes, the game looks old. But if you can't appreciate a game without modern graphics, you aren't a true gamer.
so . . . do you still play Pong? . . . it is a classic and the grandfather of modern games.
:roll:
i really DO appreciate the suggestions (if not the snide comment) - but you must remember i am a FPS player (very definitely "spoiled" ANYWAY with the generally better gfx of the FPS over the RPG) and it is very difficult for me to play something that looks worse than the original Doom (what is it, 6x4 max res?)
:shocked:
No, I don't play pong. But I HAVE played it. And I definitely wouldn't dismiss it just because the graphics aren't fancy. The main reason I don't play it anymore is that it's too simple. It gets boring quickly.
Fallout and Fallout 2 have so much depth and character that to dismiss them based on their graphics is, for lack of a better term, wrong. BTW, they both look a LOT better than the original Doom.
Another point: making the excuse that "I'm an FPS player" is just silly. I'm an FPS player too and I love good games regardless of genre or presentation. If what you're really saying is "I'm a shallow person," then just say it. Don't hide behind the label of an "FPS gamer," whatever that really means.
Another note: I also have no problem with you disliking games that I love. I dislike plenty of games that other people love. But at least I've tried them and can tell you why I dislike them.
you misunderstand me.
no excuse re: FPS . . . just that i AM "spoiled" by superior gfx (period).
After playing FC, HL2, PK/BoOH, Thief - DS, DE:IW, Chron of Riddick and (even) Doom iii, it's pretty hard to go back to '97 gfx - especially if you are NEW to RPG (and it's "inferior" gfx, anyway)
it is IMPOSSIBLE for me - timewise - to go back and play ALL the great games . . . therefore i LIMIT myself to modern ones . . . . right now - due to the urging of EVERYone - i am playing a 1999 game System Shock 2 with updated GFX . . . it's is decent enough, but i'd hate to go back in time another couple of years and have to install Win98SE.
When i read the Fallout 2 reviews and see the "recommended specs" are a P-120 with 32MB system ram AND the Difficulty IS "Hard", i tend to cringe.
:roll:
ANYway hasn't Interplay licensed Bethesda Softworks to develop and publish Fallout 3? That was back last August. The X-box version of the follow-up Fallout seemed pretty well hated.
Yes, I did misunderstand you. I'm sorry. Most of the things you mentioned (though still not graphics, IMO) are fine reasons not to want to play the game. I have to ask: why didn't you just say that instead of "don't those have bad graphics?"
Now to address of a few things:
Fallout and Fallout 2 run perfectly in Windows XP. In fact, I can't think of a big-name title other than System Shock 2 that you have to fight with to get it run in Windows XP. There may be some, but I haven't heard of them.
The difficulty of the game is a fine reason not to play it. Age is not. Doesn't the fact that the game is being recommended after almost seven years speak of its quality?
About Fallout 3: Black Isle was developing it when they were shut down. They sold the IP to some other company (Bethesda, I guess) and that company scrapped everything they did. They're starting over, but with product cycles what they are, we're not likely to see anything for several years now. And even then, nobody's sure whether it will be same.
The X-Box Fallout game was an abuse of the license. It was not the Fallout fans know and love. It appeared to be some trashy, cobbled-together Gauntlet clone, which is why everybody hated it.
Why didn't i say something a certain way is probably due to my inability to express myself perfectly . . . . "outdated gfx" are just part of the problem i immediately saw with Fallout . . . i also completely MISunderstood (mixing up a couple of games and their release dates) and ASSUMing that Fallout was more primitive graphically than the original Doom.
i DO have "issues" with very old graphics - especially in genres i am unfamiliar with . . . . so - at least for now - i'd like to give myself every advantage and play an up-to-date game IF possible . . . .
now in reading your comments to Fern:
KotOR is the FIRST rpg i EVER really played. It was TORTURE for the first 10 or so hours for me and very alien. After "catching on" (so what - i am "slow"
), i realized it was a great game and a great story with so-so fighting and gfx. So then i ask for OTHER games in this genre that won't DIScourage me (with extreme complexity, or whatever).i don't "like RPGs" . . . i like FPSes including hybreds and now i like KoTOR . . . . i just want to know MORE about RPGs - THEN i can talk about a whole genre.
You mentioned Fallout and have to realize i NEVER heard of it - totally ignorant. So i ask about the gfx (which still appears to be a "natural" question). Then i got dumped on.
i DO know what makes a great game. . . . anyway, i really DO appreciate your comments about Fallout .. . . . . i'll certainly keep it in mind as i explore the RPG universe . . . .
Perhaps my question should have been - would have been IF i knew then what i know now - "Can anyone sugggest a good RPG that is very 'story-driven', isn't terribly complex or difficult and has reasonably up-to-date gfx?"
i know it isn't realistic to expect everything .. . . . but i got much more than that in KotOR and it way surpassed my expectations . . . . KotOR 2 for sure!
EDIT: The original Dark Engine - Thief/SS2 has definite problems with Win2K. There are quite a few other games that require "compatability mode" for XP or other "workarounds". i still think "age" or ancient gfx is a valid reason to not be delighted with a game (besides "difficulty").
2nd edit: WHEN did you FIRST play Fallout1/2, EpsiIon? . . . . just recently or back when it ws first released?
If it was recently, you may have real validity to your arguument. If it was in '99, you have no room to talk at all.
:roll:
I played a little Fallout when it was first released (on my friend's computer). I played Fallout 2 shortly after it came out. I bought it again a few years ago, played it again, and still have that copy. I don't really see why my opinion would be invalidated by either of these facts. I've gone back to play very old games that I didn't play when they were first released.
The Legend of Zelda: A Link to The Past
Final Fantasy III (VI in Japan) (Although I didn't finished it. I think I lost the saved games at some point...)
The Secret of Monkey Island (Still haven't finished it... Don't remember why. Great game, though.)
Deus Ex
I'm pretty sure there are others...
My point was not that you should love Fallout or any other "classic," but that you should at least try them. My roommate's doing that with Final Fantasy VII as we speak. He's playing through it for the first time and, while it definitely looks dated, it also looks like a blast.
EDIT:
I see where you're coming from now. I'll drop it.
The Legend of Zelda: A Link to The Past
Final Fantasy III (VI in Japan) (Although I didn't finished it. I think I lost the saved games at some point...)
The Secret of Monkey Island (Still haven't finished it... Don't remember why. Great game, though.)
Deus Ex
I'm pretty sure there are others...
My point was not that you should love Fallout or any other "classic," but that you should at least try them. My roommate's doing that with Final Fantasy VII as we speak. He's playing through it for the first time and, while it definitely looks dated, it also looks like a blast.
EDIT:
I see where you're coming from now. I'll drop it.
What i meant was that Fallout may have been an incredible "rush" as it unfolded to gamers in 97-98 because it broke new ground. it was "new".
What you are forgetting is that 7 years have passed and other great classics in this same genre - often influenced by Fallout - have come out and each succeding one with better gfx. If i go NOW and play the game that so awed you 7 years ago, i just won't get the same "effect" . . . especially if the gfx are primitive by today's standards and what i am used to.
let me give an example . . . some people worshipped HL . . . i liked it and respected it as a groundbreaking FPS (yet thought 1/3rd of the game - Xen - truly sucked compared to the part in BM). If someone with a nice system asked my recommendation, i'd suggest HL2 - first . . . if he loved it, he might look back at the original . . . but i wouldn't start with the original HL . . . in '05.
i am going to further explore rpg and - if i like it - may consider trying Fallout2 as a classic
For a "parallel" - i don't care much for many film "classics" - the older you go back to the 1920s, the less i like them [generally] and often feel the remake is better (often not; but you get my point?).
i just saw your edit . . . . i guess we just have 2 different POVs . . . .
no problem
:thumbsup:
last edit and consider it dropped:
you mentioned several games that you played then REplayed . . . don't forget the "nostalgia factor" .. . . that's why "Atari's Greatest Arcade Hits" is so popular.
And personally, i wouldn't have a problem with the original DE's gfx (2000) and an updated texture pack although imo DE:IW is just as good - if very different and with much better gfx. . . . also SS2's (1999) gfx update works nicely . . . i run it vsynch 'on', 8xAA/16xAF, 10x7 max res, and 16 bit colour . . .
it's just that i prefer Q3 or better.
Stone me for being picky.:Q
g'night
What you are forgetting is that 7 years have passed and other great classics in this same genre - often influenced by Fallout - have come out and each succeding one with better gfx. If i go NOW and play the game that so awed you 7 years ago, i just won't get the same "effect" . . . especially if the gfx are primitive by today's standards and what i am used to.
let me give an example . . . some people worshipped HL . . . i liked it and respected it as a groundbreaking FPS (yet thought 1/3rd of the game - Xen - truly sucked compared to the part in BM). If someone with a nice system asked my recommendation, i'd suggest HL2 - first . . . if he loved it, he might look back at the original . . . but i wouldn't start with the original HL . . . in '05.
i am going to further explore rpg and - if i like it - may consider trying Fallout2 as a classic
For a "parallel" - i don't care much for many film "classics" - the older you go back to the 1920s, the less i like them [generally] and often feel the remake is better (often not; but you get my point?).
i just saw your edit . . . . i guess we just have 2 different POVs . . . .
no problem
:thumbsup:
last edit and consider it dropped:
you mentioned several games that you played then REplayed . . . don't forget the "nostalgia factor" .. . . that's why "Atari's Greatest Arcade Hits" is so popular.
And personally, i wouldn't have a problem with the original DE's gfx (2000) and an updated texture pack although imo DE:IW is just as good - if very different and with much better gfx. . . . also SS2's (1999) gfx update works nicely . . . i run it vsynch 'on', 8xAA/16xAF, 10x7 max res, and 16 bit colour
. . . it's just that i prefer Q3 or better.
Stone me for being picky.:Q
g'night
First of all, when I said I'll drop it, I meant the graphics issue. I'm still open to discussing old games.
Actually, I didn't play and then replay those games. Only played them once. I wasn't talking about the nostalgia factor, although it definitely exists for many games and many gamers. Actually, now that I think about it, I played a game from the "golden age" of arcade gaming called Galaxian for the first time a few months ago. That's a sweet game, even if the idea is simple and the graphics are lackluster. Gameplay endures throughout the ages.
BTW, I also don't generally like old movies. I see why you'd draw the parallel, but it doesn't exist in my experience. *shrug*
I'm still open to discussing old games.Actually, I didn't play and then replay those games. Only played them once.
I wasn't talking about the nostalgia factor, although it definitely exists for many games and many gamers. Actually, now that I think about it, I played a game from the "golden age" of arcade gaming called Galaxian for the first time a few months ago. That's a sweet game, even if the idea is simple and the graphics are lackluster. Gameplay endures throughout the ages. BTW, I also don't generally like old movies. I see why you'd draw the parallel, but it doesn't exist in my experience. *shrug*
biostud
Lifer
- Feb 27, 2003
- 19,730
- 6,808
- 136
Originally posted by: apoppin
i thought you were ALSO talking about Fallout 1/2 . . . thanks for clarifying.
i am reading the reviews now . . . . i ALREADY have Might and Magic VI: The Mandate of Heaven which is a newer game (with awful gfx -
(thanks for your patience)
Actually I had a friend over last night and we had a fun game of HoMM 2 vs 6 computers. So I still play from time to time as there has been made a really cool usermod for the game called Wake of Gods. The only relation between "might and magic" and HoMM is it's in the same universe just like different starwars games that only share universe.
This is more strategy than RPG, but it's the combinations of a good hero with good skills, items, spells, and building structures and creating a massive army that drives it forth. It's pretty easy to get playing, but it will ofcourse take some time to master it. As the game is turnbased you can always take the time you need to consider your actions. You should be able to get it with all expansions for around $15, and download Wake of Gods later when you need a zillion extra tweaks and scripts you might want to try, but I would recommend that until later. The graphics are definately outdated, but the concept of the game is still fun and the phrase "Just one more turn, then I'm off to bed" is probably the most used phrase by HoMM players. When I play I turn of all sounds and listen to radio or music instead or watches TV.
Originally posted by: EpsiIon
First of all, when I said I'll drop it, I meant the graphics issue.
Actually, I didn't play and then replay those games. Only played them once.
BTW, I also don't generally like old movies. I see why you'd draw the parallel, but it doesn't exist in my experience. *shrug*
i played Galaxian when it first came out . . . 1979 . . . . it's really a "dressed-up" Space Invaders ('78) . . . Galaga was my favourite of it's type ('81). . . . however, Galaxian has the distinction of being the first ever color videogame (more-or-less).
Yep the gameplay is good . . .. but i wouldn't recommend it except as a history lesson.
Perhaps our POVs are different due to our unique experiences . . . . i believe my "movie parallel" is valid.
EDIT: i will take another look at the HoMM iuniverse . . . .
thanks, all for your suggestions and ideas. My gaming universe HAS expanded.
:thumbsup:
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter