Just saw this on another forum, apparently PSM3 has rated Gunstar Heroes 37% :lol:
Complaints are aimed towards graphics, length and dated gameplay that can't stand up to contemporary games.
Printable View
Just saw this on another forum, apparently PSM3 has rated Gunstar Heroes 37% :lol:
Complaints are aimed towards graphics, length and dated gameplay that can't stand up to contemporary games.
They don't know how good the Treasure-games are.
Unbelievable. Might as well dismiss every retro game as "dated" and be done with it. (And by the dismissing party I mean Sony, and by "be done with it" I also mean Sony).
P.S.> Who in his/her right mind would compare "Retro" with "Current"? Graphics, sound effects, music and gameplay are relevant only to the era in question. The games of old should only be compared to their counterparts. The same goes for current gen games.
P.S.S.> But, seriously, length? Oh, I see. I guess they meant to play the game for ten minutes, save it, and come back to it the next day for another ten-minute round.
Like "Cookie Cutter FPS #15,692"?Quote:
Originally Posted by jesus.arnold
If you just look at colours and backgrounds, perhaps Gunstar Heroes isn't very impressive. But apparantly, PSM3 don't know that programming and animation are a big part of graphics too, and that is what makes the game so impressive.
Pfff, Gunstar Heroes is better than like 80% of PS3s game library.
This just Proves that there idiots! Gunstar Heroes is one of the best games on the GenesisQuote:
Originally Posted by jesus.arnold
Gunstar Heroes is one of the best games PERIOD.
How have they rated other "retro" games? It's understandable if they think that all 16-bit games suck.
Let's put it this way:
Gunstar Heroes is not only one of the best Genesis titles, but it is one of the few games which showed what the Genesis hardware could do, tapping past the potential most thought impossible. Now, show me a game on the PS3 that has managed to do the same (and the ability to play your games on Blue Ray does not count towards said innovation).
P.S.> All I see nowadays (and I know I'm not alone on this) are Consoles short of being termed personal computers, which you can attach to your HD Televisions. Remove the Disk Drive and Hard Drive from current gen consoles, and any current game can be ported nigh seemlessly across all of these systems (In fact, include the Dreamcast, Gamecube, PS2 and Xbox on said note). Innovation of the sort that occurred every single year during the 1990s has not yet occurred since the birth of our beloved Dreamcast.
Actually make that better than 80% of the games made this generation.Quote:
Originally Posted by GriskaGyoran
Quote:
Originally Posted by nissling
I think I know why...Quote:
Originally Posted by PSM's latest issue
Why exactly is a magazine rating a retro game to begin with? It's old and not relevant anymore as far as reviews go for magazines, I don't see why they need to bother. Did it just get released on some downloading service for PS3 or something?
Either way who cares what a magazine thinks. Your personal memories are worth more than that :p
Not really a fair comparison, Gunstar Heroes came out 5 years after the Genesis was released. The PS3 hasn't even had 3 full years on the shelf yet. With the complexity of current systems (especially compared to that of 16-bit systems), we probably won't see the PS3 or 360 top out for a at least a few more years. Hell, some people argue that God of War II is one such game on the PS2, and that came out nearly 7 years after the PS2 launched. Give the developers a few more years to get used to the hardware and we'll see some great things.Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSciFi
Innovation is becoming more and more of a relative term, I guess. I think this generation is full of innovation. As far as gaming goes, you have motion controllers coming into their own, online console gaming hitting it's stride, and Natal and whatever-the-hell Sony is coming up with potentially (probably not though) being a huge innovation in how we play video games.Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSciFi
I agree with you in so many ways. But we're actually talking about the PS3 (well, actually were talking about GSH on PSM3), not the PS2 (or 360). The fact that you make a mention of GWII for the PS2 makes it all more evident: The fact that the PS3 is nothing but a supped-up PS2. That's the point I'm trying to make (the same goes for Microsoft). But yes, God of War II, Metal Gear Solid 2, etc... these games are at the top of my favorite PS2 list.Quote:
Originally Posted by AD2101
BTW: It was a fair assessment on my part. A current gen console should, in fact, produce a game that reaches the hardware's full potential not far from the launch date. Just to mention one example, I could point back at Soul Calibur for the Dreamcast (which was essentially a launch title and one of the best in its lifetime).
Well, motion sensing controllers are not really a mark of the 2000s. Already a version for Nights into Dreams' sequel was being created for the Saturn almost 15 years ago. And I can bet you anything that they had other prototypes before that. Technology advances far more rapidly than CEO's venture to grasp. It's all a matter of money, of course.Quote:
Originally Posted by AD2101
Also, innovation is and always will be innovation. There's nothing relative about that. Blue Ray and HD capabilites marked such advancement in the field of graphics and television. But in gaming, most of what it actually does is allow for more data. Add Blue Ray or HD to a dreamcast, gamecube, PS2, Xbox (or even Wii) and you can pretty much port more than 95% (and I'm just being cautious here) of current gen games across these platforms almost seemlessly.
BTW: I'm actually glad that Sony opted for a slimmed-down version of a PS3 rather than venture into the PS4. Not that I care about the company one way or another, it has my interests in certain places anyways, but because a PS4 (or a next Xbox, or a next Wii) will only be yet another excuse on behalf of these companies to follow up into a trend empty of innovations. Don't get me wrong, I feel very strongly techonology has advanced enough to produce a really innovative next gen console, but the way Sony is going (or the industry in general) I don't believe it's going to happen anytime soon; nothing truly innovative, that is.
Please dont shoot! I didn't like this game either!
Why does a publication like that bother to review retro games? I have a nasty feeling they don't put much consideration into what they like now, and what was probably good back in the day.
You have to know the era of the game released to truly understand its quality.
Case In Point: PONG is still good, go ahead and say it looks bland, but you can still have fun with it in my opinion.
Gunstar Heroes is one of the most fun games I've ever played in my life, and the fact that they complain that it can't match modern games boggles me because it is an older game.
....
They reviewed it because it came out on PS3's downloading service thingy.
You can be my human shield....I never cared for it either and never understood the hype this game had.....Quote:
Originally Posted by The Sports Guy
See now, I used to not understand why MUSHA was so epic, but it has grown on me and now I understand.
This game and Herzog Zwei, I'll never understand why they are so awesome. Gain Ground is kind of in that territory for me too.
EDIT: ^^^ I like GameInformer's retro section (Classic GI). In fact, I usually always flip right back there and read the three or four games they review. Some issues even have a whole section. Either this month's or a few months ago's issue (whatever one is on my magazine rack in the bathroom) had an article on the most expensive games ever made.
You guys can both be my human shields then. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by runback22You can be my human shield....I never cared for it either and never understood the hype this game had.....Quote:
Originally Posted by The Sports Guy
I agree 37% is a low rating for Gunstar Heroes, and I agree that Treasure delivered pure graphical awesomeness. As far as gameplay and fun go, however, the game always sounded overrated to me.
It isn't mindbogglingly overwhelmed with story and narrative aspects like today's games. Gmaes these days are meant to be played through only once. All games now have save points, etc. After you play through to the end, you play multiplayer. That's it. Gunstar Heroes does not feature this time of play, so it is a huge failure. Also, it has colors other than grey and brown (not good!!!!)
Hold on guys, let's not get mad at them just yet.
PSM3 is a PS3 magazine right? They're reviewing the PS3 version right?
I've heard some terrible things about the PS3 version. Apparently Backbone fucked it up big time. Aside from the emulation being terrible the online is apparently virtually unplayable, something Backbone actually announced they WERE NOT GOING TO FIX BECAUSE THE GAME DIDN'T SELL ENOUGH.
Maybe this version *does* deserve a 37. I need to read the review though.
Don't you think you're asking a little too much there ? =PQuote:
Originally Posted by Puffy2k316
"The rosiest-tinted specs in the world can't save Gunstar Heroes from showing its age." [Sept 2009, p.76] - doesn't sound like they're unhappy with the emulation....
37% for Gunstar Heroes is among the most incompetent ratings I have ever seen in a "professional" magazine. - and I remember the 12% rating a German magazine called "MegaFun" gave Street Fighter 3: Third Strike on Dreamcast because it would be in 2D and 2D would be out.
But back to Gunstar Heroes: I can't see how anyone could possibly rate this game below 50%. A lower rating would indicate that there's something fundamentally wrong with this game. So let's have a look shall we ? - You can play Gunstar Heroes without running into any bugs. Controls are okay, and there's two totally different types of control schemes and plenty of weapons to choose from. You can play it with two players in co-op mode. There are various difficulties that have a significant impact on the game's difficulty. Sound and graphics aren't bad - especially considering the 1993 release on a 16-bit hardware from 1988. In fact it's pretty colorful and there's a shitload of stuff going on. The game's not very long but not too short either. Music and sounds do fit the action. - There's no damn reason how anyone could possibly rate this game below 50% even if you personally don't like it for whatever reason.
Who the hell has time to really pay attention to graphics in Gunstar Heroes any ways?
Pause button ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Iron Lizard
On a serious note, there's lots of live arcade games that are 2D, oldschool, and whatever else I forgot that's similar to 8/16bit school. I'm sure the PSN has them too (don't have a PS3, so don't know). Wait...where was I going with this? Huh..I don't remember :/Quote:
It isn't mindbogglingly overwhelmed with story and narrative aspects like today's games. Gmaes these days are meant to be played through only once. All games now have save points, etc. After you play through to the end, you play multiplayer. That's it. Gunstar Heroes does not feature this time of play, so it is a huge failure. Also, it has colors other than grey and brown (not good!!!!)
Anyway, the new issue of game informer (or whatever the hell it's called, I'm too lazy to go get the mag at this moment) has a "now and then" segment. Under bad "d-pads", then=genesis 3button controller, now=360 controller. And the second bit of Genesis bashing (if you can really call it that) is that there is a piece on how some mascots just need to die. Sonic was one of them. The "retro" guy wasn't talking about killing him off now, he was referring to way back (right after the down swing of the mascots prime).
As cliche as it sounds, a lot of games would play better with a second thumbstick. Gunstar, Ranger-X, E-SWAT, Earthworm Jim, and Ristar spring to mind - I can understand why someone who either didn't grow up with the game or has only a passing interest in the game wouldn't get the 'brilliant game' vibe.
That and the music is so LOUD. It's as though it's stuck in permanent overdrive.
I think the nostalgia bug has bit you a few too many times, of course the PS3 is a supped-up PS2, the same way a Genesis is essentially a supped-up Master System. What's your point?Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSciFi
Keyword: Should.Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSciFi
It'd be nice if developers just had an innate knowledge inside and out of a system when it hit shelves, but like with almost ANYTHING else, there's usually a learning curve.
No, but people's perception of innovation seems to be. Again, I think your looking at the situation too much with the mindset of "Oh back then things were so much better than they are today" and not really giving the present a chance. There's a lot of great things out/coming down the pipeline, but if innovation for you ended in the 90's with the Activator, Sega Channel, and wireless controllers, there's no point in talking about it anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSciFi
To end on topic, I'm not really surprised Gunstar Heroes got a bad score. I didn't think it was going to get a 37 because that's a little ridiculous, but I think people these days don't react as well to harsh, 16-bit kind of difficulty as they did when that was the only way to play.
I just read that, and I'm still confused as to how someone could actually believe such a fallacy. GI bashes Sonic nearly every issue (Sega kind of has it coming at this point), but I would at least think that whoever they have on the payroll there knows what a good controller feels like.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomaitheous
Nostalgia has nothing to do with this particular point. You agree that the PS3 is a supped-up PS2, that's the point. However, the Genesis is NOT a supped up MS, nor is the Saturn a supped-up Genesis, nor is the Dreamcast a supped-up Saturn.Quote:
Originally Posted by AD2101
Let's see: Millions of dollars go into these projects, multi-million dollar teams brew over them. The companies themselves are worth billions and the CEOs, Presidents and Board of Directors strive for the them to remain that way. These are people who are educated, intelligent, business-oriented and very financially capable. I don't think they'd throw-in a new hardware unit and call it a home console if they didn't see its full potential. There's no learning curve because it's just not financially viable to them. With the ammount of money they throw into these projects, there just isn't much room for error left over after debute day. Sorry, but the technology is there, the minds are there to work it, it just happens to be all about money and risk assessment.Quote:
Originally Posted by AD2101
I don't think so; some people, perhaps, who do not know the meaning of innovation, or simply tend to use the term incorrectly. Innovation is all about bringing New, feasible concepts into an otherwise saturated environment. The lack of it is just what's keeping the gaming industry saturated, in this case. Once more about the depiction of nostalgia: Sorry, it has nothing to do with it. It has everything to do with educating oneself about the past so that we may learn to be better in the future. The "present" that we've been refering to is simply the first decade of this millenium. It'll be over in less than five months. Simply look back at the last two decades concerning the gaming industry, and the lack of innovation in the latter is very much evident.Quote:
Originally Posted by AD2101
However, if you consider the Activator as innovative, then there's really nothing else I can say. The 90s was ridden with bad designs as much as innovation. It is, after all, the bi-product of innovation. But if you don't want to talk about it anymore, then simply stop quoting me as you've failed to do from the start.;)
The point of the original post, and of many who have followed-up (including myself) was that there just isn't a feasible comparison between the 16-bit era and current gen gaming. They produced entirely different products for the consumer. That is exactly the point in bringing forth the topic of innovation. To rate Gunstar Heroes a 37% is just not adequate; in fact: to rate Gunstar Heroes, period, on PSM3 is simply not a venture they should've taken in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by AD2101
Also, just as we "old" gamers play current titles with a mind towards a different perspective, so should "young" gamers with respect to retro titles. Perhaps that's the mistake the reviewer(s)/editor(s) over at PSM3 made in the first place (as I have said before). They simply opted to look at Gunstar Heroes with a current gen mindset, allowing themselves to mistake a nigh 15 year-old title as current.