StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Vympel wrote: No, calling it a success on metrics that mean absolutely dick to the gamer (i.e. it turned a profit) in a discussion in this context is retarded. I've noticed that noone has really deigned to tackle the issue of it's craptastic selection of games across genres besides apologetics that while its selection may be shite in some areas, in other areas its alright. Well, shit, other consoles have kickass franchises in all areas. That's what I care about.

For shooters, they have Metroid Prime 1&2. For Platformers, they have Super Mario Sunshine, Paper Mario 2 and Viewtiful Joe. For RPG's (not a fan of the genre, so I haven't played many of these), Final Fantasy CC, Tales of Symphonia, Skies of Arcadia, and Harvest Moon. For fighting, they have Soul Calibur 2 and SSBM. For Horror games, they have Resident Evil 0, 1, and 4 (Yes, there are others RE games, but these were the best.) and Eternal Darkness. For adventure games, they have The Legend of Zelda: WW. For racing games, they have Mario Kart and F-Zero. For Strategy games, they have Battallion Wars, and the recently released Odama. For stealth games there was MGS:TTS.

That's 20 exclusive games. Now I have played many of these, but not nearly all of them. And yet, I am more than content with my game library (not to mention the good multi-platform titles availiable.)

Vympel wrote:If you're a stockholder, sure. I'm not, so I don't give a shit. What I do care about is a wealth of good gaming, and Gamecube didn't provide that, irrespective of it having a handful of good games. Third party developers abandoned it in droves, a trend that started with N64, and the few good games they did churn out were not enough. I just need to compare my library of Gamecube to PS2 games to see that. I didn't buy a Gamecube with the expectation that I'd own less than ten games for the thing, and I doubt anyone else did either.

If that's what you go by, here's a tip: I own over 30 games for the Gamecube, and over 30 games for the N64. The ones I named were the best of the best (read: The ones I enjoyed most.), and most oft, the exclusive. Not to say that I didn't enjoy the rest. I enjoyed the vast majority of them. In fact, out of all of them, there were only a few that I didn't enjoy. Lots of the games I did enjoy were 3rd Party games available on more than one system, far from being "Abandoned in Droves" by third party developers.

So by your pathetic standard, the N64 and Gamecube were more than successful for me. For you, it was not, meaning that your analysis that the Gamecube was a failure is based solely on your opinion, and can no way be applied to anyone but you. Since that can't even be debated, we debate it's success based on how well it did in the global market based off marketshare, affordability, profit, and chance of success.

It seems that you, on the other hand, would rather base a system on whether or not it's controller runs on batteries, how many games you decided to buy, and how "retarded" it looks. These claims have all been refuted, so in the end, our opinion means Jack Shit.

Andrew J. wrote:For you it did not provide a wealth of good gaming. For many people all around the world and even in this thread, it did. That's why we don't use subjective data to determine success or failure. We use numbers: facts, figures, statstics. In this case, profit and market share.

I agree with this method, although I'm not fond of talking about any company's profit share in a positive way unless I'm actually benefiting from it. I'm very apathetic to any company that isn't making me money. None of next gen consoles have really statisfied all of their claimed abilities. I could easily bash 360 for being nothing but an eye-candy machine with buggy features, or redicule the Revolution for being a half-assed attempt to bridge the gap between gamers and "normal" people. I could complain with the best of them, but I'd much rather not dignify these systems by buying them, which is in reality just paying the assholes who "gave" me said lackluster systems in the first place.

I don't have any stock in Nintendo or Microsoft, so like Vympel I could really give a shit how well these companies are pedaling their products.

I don't, as I am not getting one red cent from their success, and neither should anyone else unless they have a very good reason, usually the fact that they have stock in the company and actually are benefiting from the sales of a system.

Vympel wrote:

The idea that a console is a success or failure based on one person's opinion is.. Well.. Flat out retarded.

No, calling it a success on metrics that mean absolutely dick to the gamer (i.e. it turned a profit) in a discussion in this context is retarded. I've noticed that noone has really deigned to tackle the issue of it's craptastic selection of games across genres besides apologetics that while its selection may be shite in some areas, in other areas its alright. Well, shit, other consoles have kickass franchises in all areas. That's what I care about.

'It's not a success because I didn't think it is'. Have you considered this, Vympel, in the light of anything other than fanboyism? Your opinion is somehow fact? Um, no. Never gonna happen.

You hate it's selection of games, that's just dandy. You're welcome to your opinion, such is ultimately always subjective. But you can stop stamping your feet declaring that your view is somehow unassailable fact. Frankly, it's embarassing to watch you like this.

You don't like the Gamecube? You think you'll hate the Rev? DANDY. You can stop trying to say it's objective fact anytime, because your opinion is not fact.

Praxis wrote:Can any of the experts here tell from the screenshots if this is true? Or is it not clear enough?

IGN's specs claims for a non-final dev kit wrote:Sources we spoke with suggest that it is unlikely the GPU will feature any added shaders, as has been speculated.

Gamecube already has a programmable "TEV" which can do shadery things, but must be implemented differently than a standard DX shader.

As for this game, I don't think it's using anything more than standard GC technology. The lighting model looks similar to Marvel Nemesis.

SAMAS wrote:[

Or they could shoot you in the back. And besides, if you really need their help to get through a section, then the game wouldn't let you kill them (like HL2).

Jadeite wrote:Or they could shoot you in the back. And besides, if you really need their help to get through a section, then the game wouldn't let you kill them (like HL2).

Maybe the story will progress differently depending on who you kill and who you spare.

It's called variable gameplay, Jadeite. It's called depth.

Besides, the whole idea frankly isn't a brand-new concept: there've been variations of it in games for years.

Here's the quote from Nintendo Players again, just for re-clarification:

“In many situations, there will be a higher-ranking enemy who commands the others in the area. By defeating him, and sparing his life, he will offer you his respect, and help. The enemies will surrender their guns, and the boss may offer you a new weapon, a special path, or another reward. Any time you spare an enemy, you will be rewarded. As it always takes more skill to spare a life, than to take it”

I frankly have no idea why some of you are having such fucking cows and crying foul with paranoia over a gameplay detail like that...

Jadeite wrote:Or they could shoot you in the back. And besides, if you really need their help to get through a section, then the game wouldn't let you kill them (like HL2).

Three NPC gimmicks I hate:

1: NPCs that cannot be killed, to the extent that you can't even shoot them when the crosshairs finally land.

2: "MISSION FAILED" when an arbitrary NPC that really does deserve a horrible death gets his due. Why not make so killing a NPC that will either eventually betray you or die anyways have a POSITIVE impact for once!

3: Binary desicions when it comes to NPC death. I hate it when no one seems to consider how cool it would be for the story to change not only when a NPC character is killed, but also depending on where/when/how/why. These are questions/scenarios that should be included and most importantly should be fairly intuitive to work out.

I don't think a game should "require" that NPCs to stay alive, even when there is an abundance of them and they are not crucial to the story. Call of Duty II pissed me off pretty severely in this regard when I didn't get a mission where the commissar gets killed and I have to take up his responsibilities in the Russian campaign. Hell I would have been happy if they just didn't give me that stupid, stupid fucking "friendly fire will not be tolerated" bullshit. Killing fellow soldiers when they can't handle it = much fun to be had for ALL.

*Pittifull sarcasm mode: ON*

Of course thats why I don't make games, they might actually be fun and sell...

*sarcasm mode: OFF*

In other words, we need another Deus Ex.

Uh, why did a mod change the title to "Nintendo bashing here"? I see like two people bashing Nintendo and more people defending them.

Praxis wrote:Uh, why did a mod change the title to "Nintendo bashing here"? I see like two people bashing Nintendo and more people defending them.

Because the thread has devolved away from the actual topic and into fevered rantings of 'I DIDN'T LIKE THE GAMECUBE THEREFORE IT FAILED!!!'.

SirNitram wrote:

Praxis wrote:Uh, why did a mod change the title to "Nintendo bashing here"? I see like two people bashing Nintendo and more people defending them.

Because the thread has devolved away from the actual topic and into fevered rantings of 'I DIDN'T LIKE THE GAMECUBE THEREFORE IT FAILED!!!'.

Don't you think the Nintendo Bashing could be split from the original topic? 'Cause I would like to get back to the topic at hand.

Nintendo Players wrote: Red Steel Officially Announced by Ubisoft
First-person action title will debut at Revolution launch.
by Robert Hiskey

April 11, 2006 - Today, Ubisoft France officially announced Red Steel, the first-person action title slated to launch alongside Nintendo's Revolution console later this year. The game made big news last week when screenshots were revealed in Game Informer magazine, as those were the first screenshots of a Revolution game made public. According to Ubisoft's press release, the game will be set in modern-day Japan and "players will master both the ancient art of the katana and the sophisticated technology of modern firearms taking advantage of the emotion and immersive gameplay possible only with the Revolution’s remarkable controller."

“We’re honored to announce this exciting new franchise and we’re confident that Red Steel will be the must-have title for the Revolution when it launches,” said Serge Hascoet, chief creative officer at Ubisoft. “We have been working closely with Nintendo to take full advantage of the innovative controller to create a thrilling experience that can only exist on the Revolution.”

“Nintendo is excited to have Ubisoft bring Red Steel to the Revolution launch lineup,” said Reggie Fils-Aime, executive vice president of sales and marketing at Nintendo of America. “Ubisoft makes some of the most innovative and critically acclaimed games in the industry and from what we have seen from Red Steel it is going to be a standout exclusive title on the Revolution.”
The press release also confirmed that Red Steel will be playable at E3, which begins in less than a month. We'll be sure to try it out, so expect our hands-on impressions of the game shortly thereafter!

Judging by the new scans being circulated, I'd say this game is definately beyond what Gamecube could do, but it isn't better than Xbox. I don't see any normal mapping, character models are low poly, some of the shots are most definately touched up, however, it does look very good for a "current gen" game. Hopefully the final hardware will be better than what was reported by IGN, but these scans are hinting that will not be the case.

Davis 51 wrote:

SirNitram wrote:

Praxis wrote:Uh, why did a mod change the title to "Nintendo bashing here"? I see like two people bashing Nintendo and more people defending them.

Because the thread has devolved away from the actual topic and into fevered rantings of 'I DIDN'T LIKE THE GAMECUBE THEREFORE IT FAILED!!!'.

Don't you think the Nintendo Bashing could be split from the original topic? 'Cause I would like to get back to the topic at hand.

It could be, but there's rules about not moderating threads you're participating in. Sorry.

SirNitram wrote: 'It's not a success because I didn't think it is'. Have you considered this, Vympel, in the light of anything other than fanboyism?

Riiight, I own a PS2 and a Gamecube, have owned an N64, and a SNES, and I must be a Nintendo-bashing fanboy. Give me a fucking break.

Your opinion is somehow fact? Um, no. Never gonna happen.

It's not my opinion that the selection is shit, it's fact. Or are you now going to deny the fact that it's third party support was a fucking joke, and call it my "opinion"?

You hate it's selection of games, that's just dandy. You're welcome to your opinion, such is ultimately always subjective. But you can stop stamping your feet declaring that your view is somehow unassailable fact. Frankly, it's embarassing to watch you like this.

Selection is an OBJECTIVE, not a subjective, question- how many fucking games, of what type, from who, and how does it compare. Of course, if someone wants to say that they like the pathetically narrow selection of Gamecube, that's their prerogative, but whining that it's all my opinion blah blah blah is nothing but apologetic nonsense, and it is far more obvious fanboyism than me calling a spade a damn spade.

I find it amazing that the ignomious history of the Gamecube can somehow engender it as a "success" by any metric- it didn't recapture N64s market share, popular third party games (like GTA, for example) skipped Gamecube entirely despite appearing on both PS2 and XBox, they didn't support the Gamecube's online abilities due to a lack of interest, etc.

But yeah, saying it wasn't a success, all my opinion. Not a shred of objective fact in there. All Nintendo managed to do with Gamecube was stake out a niche. That's not a success.

Vympel wrote:

SirNitram wrote: 'It's not a success because I didn't think it is'. Have you considered this, Vympel, in the light of anything other than fanboyism?

Riiight, I own a PS2 and a Gamecube, have owned an N64, and a SNES, and I must be a Nintendo-bashing fanboy. Give me a fucking break.

Actions > Words. You stamping around pretending your personal view is fact certainly casts you in that light.

Your opinion is somehow fact? Um, no. Never gonna happen.

It's not my opinion that the selection is shit, it's fact. Or are you now going to deny the fact that it's third party support was a fucking joke, and call it my "opinion"?

Nice moving of goalposts. First it's the games, now it's that there's no third party support.. Well no shit. Does this mean people can't like it for the first party ones? Or must they automatically bow to your opinion?

You hate it's selection of games, that's just dandy. You're welcome to your opinion, such is ultimately always subjective. But you can stop stamping your feet declaring that your view is somehow unassailable fact. Frankly, it's embarassing to watch you like this.

Selection is an OBJECTIVE, not a subjective, question- how many fucking games, of what type, from who, and how does it compare. Of course, if someone wants to say that they like the pathetically narrow selection of Gamecube, that's their prerogative, but whining that it's all my opinion blah blah blah is nothing but apologetic nonsense, and it is far more obvious fanboyism than me calling a spade a damn spade.

Except you haven't been, no matter how much you insist otherwise. You have declared it a failure because it has no games. This is clearly hyperbole, but to apply the same to, say, the X-Box: There are absolutely no games there for most anyone outside of the Fratboy demographic. And most Gamecube games are aimed at kids or at least kids at heart.

You veer off into 'There's great franchises!', and yet, you ignore the same for the 'Cube(Zelda, Mario, Mario Kart...).

End of the day, you're being awfully selective in yelling about how you don't like the small selection. I'll admit it's small. Then again, I'd take any four of those over the shit pumped out for the X-Box..

Riiight, I own a PS2 and a Gamecube, have owned an N64, and a SNES, and I must be a Nintendo-bashing fanboy. Give me a fucking break.

You know, I'm sick of the "I can't be a fanboy because I own the system!" excuse. Heard it so many times...

http://www.nintendoplayers.com/article. ... icleID=206

It's just been confirmed that Red Steel will be playable at E3.

I'll make sure I try it when I get there and report

Praxis wrote:
You know, I'm sick of the "I can't be a fanboy because I own the system!" excuse. Heard it so many times...

Yeaah, because you know I just go on and on about how everything Nintendo does sucks and Playstation and XBox rocks it all the time ... really you can see it in so many of my posts over the years. The only fanboyism in this thread is the reaction to the criticism.

The idea that there's limited 3rd party support hardly makes something a 'failure', unless the specific goal is large 3rd party support.

Let's try not to forget you only classify things as 'failures' or 'successes' based on the goals set for it. We're not going to call Iraq a resounding success because it's ready to create an independent Kurdistan, despite that not being a stated goal.

Praxis wrote:http://www.nintendoplayers.com/article. ... icleID=206

It's just been confirmed that Red Steel will be playable at E3.

I'll make sure I try it when I get there and report

Davis 51 already posted that article.

SirNitram wrote:

Davis 51 wrote:
Don't you think the Nintendo Bashing could be split from the original topic? 'Cause I would like to get back to the topic at hand.

It could be, but there's rules about not moderating threads you're participating in. Sorry.

Just a suggestion. My apologies.

Praxis wrote: I'll make sure I try it when I get there and report :Very Happy:

Awesome! We're all anxeous!

Vympel wrote:Selection is an OBJECTIVE, not a subjective, question- how many fucking games, of what type, from who, and how does it compare.

how does it compare

how does it compare

I'm not sure how you missed this, but that criterion right there-arguably the most important one- is subjective.

FAIL.

Spanky The Dolphin wrote:

Praxis wrote:http://www.nintendoplayers.com/article. ... icleID=206

It's just been confirmed that Red Steel will be playable at E3.

I'll make sure I try it when I get there and report

Davis 51 already posted that article.

Oops, yes, he did, sorry.

Awesome! We're all anxeous!

I'm one of the two NintendoPlayers writers going to E3- I intend to film the Revolution booth and gameplay and put it on the internet, and I'll both post my hands on experience here and write up an article for NintendoPlayers.