This depresses me, Nintendo has fallen (even farther)

[sega fan]

You'll never see anything like that on the Genesis. Don't you still own one of those?

Okay, how does that comparison even count, in a conversation about current-gen.

[Tanegashima]

They're just video games, somehow, you will all still be awake in the morning if Sega Fan or anybody still likes the N64. It's okay to like the N64, or any console for that matter. When it comes to video games, to each their own.

I don't see how people can take something like somebody's preferences personal.

...you don't like the color blue?! Well FUCK YOU then!!

[gamevet]

EDIT : gamevet, you are starting to blow thing out of proportion, the n64 is only SLIGHTLY, keyword : slightly, blurry.

One man's slightly, is another man's completely.

Would you rather play a game in progressive scan or interlaced? I'd guess that someone who has never played a game in progressive scan, would probably never know the difference. Sure, I can enjoy most of the titles on the PS2, but I'd much rather play those titles in progressive scan, if the option was available.

ALSO IM COMING OUT AND SAYING IT.

okay the reason I prefer the n64 over snes is because of the variety of titles. I mean, seriously, GAMES LIKE DOOM, 007, AND QUAKE ON A NINTENDO CONSOLE, the modern day equivilent to that is having Gears of War on wii. If you look at the good SNES titles, it's either RPG's or sequals/remakes to NES games. Sorta like



Nes = good, then, SNES = crappy, same basic thing on new hardware.

The variety of titles on the SNES, is far greater than that of the N64. And these titles have no equal on the NES.

Utopia: Is an original strategy game that incorporates city building elements somewhat comparable to that of Sim City.

Pilot Wings: Sure, I enjoy the N64 game more, but you can't deny that this title wasn't pretty original in its day.

Super Mario Kart: How can you deny that this isn't a pretty unique style of racing game?

F-Zero: A futuristic racer unlike anything before it.

Street Fighter II: One of the biggest arcade ports to ever hit a console. There's no fighting game on the N64 that holds as much historical value as this one, not even Super Smash Brothers.

Starfox: The N64 version was pretty boring in comparison.

Ogre Battle: It's a strategy RPG, but there's no denying its impact on the console. I do prefer Ogre Battle 64 though.

Actraiser: There's nothing like it on the NES or N64.

Rock N' Roll Racing: A futuristic racer that makes use of gravity, car upgrades and taking out your opponent.

Out of this World: I haven't seen anything like this title on the NES or N64.

Populous: The PC/Amiga hit makes its debut on the consoles with this SNES port.

n64 = good, then, Gamecube = crappy, same basic thing on new hardware.

I don't recall seeing anything like Metroid Prime on the N64 and Wind Waker was pretty ground breaking with its cell-shaded graphics.

Rogue Squadron II pretty much negates what was done with Rogue Squadron on the N64 and I have no doubt that it was the best looking game of that generation of consoles.

Resident Evil 4 isn't just a great game, it's the best game in the series.

Pikman is a pretty unique title for the system and its was pretty popular with the Nintendo crowd.

Super Monkeyball debuted on the Gamecube and its popularity led to ports on other consoles.

Burnout also made its debut on the Gamecube. There's no denying it's one of the biggest franchises of that generation.

Animal Crossing got its start on the GC. It was popular enough to get a sequel on the Wii and NDS.

MGS: The Twin Snakes is the best version of the highly rated Playstation game. So what if it's an upgraded port, it's one of the more highly sought out titles on the console.

[MrMatthews]

Well done, you managed to counter my argument without actually backing up your opinions with anything other than a few choice words such as "laughable" this doesn't do well in reinforcing your point of view tbh, in fact it virtually sounds like you've got nothing to say in defence of your point at all.

Alright, I guess that's fair. I wanted to keep it rather brief to avoid this debate going on for pages and pages and pages . . . but I suppose that was unavoidable. I'll elaborate, then.

Yeah, good riddance to the company who made 10 odd games consistantly rated as some of the best of that whole generation.....hey...wait a minute

Yeah, I know the drill; I've marvelled at it myself. Look at the top 10 "best" N64 games and they're all either Nintendo games or Rare games. But here's the thing: outside of a few scattered titles, I don't like Rare. I'll take Goldeneye and I'll borrow Blast Corps to at least try it out, but all the other games can get flushed.

The SNES had massively better graphics than the Atari 2600, with the 2600 you'd have to have a pretty good imagination to see anything other than blocks, on the other hand the N64 had graphics to the standard that you could see what everything was supposed to be and move about in proper 3D, I guess saying slightly better is being a little bit unfair still though.

Cool. Comparing Rogue Squadron to Rogue Leader is all it would take for me to win that argument, anyway.

I was half with you until you mentioned the pathetic Gamecube as being better than the N64

I can't even get offended by a remark as ridiculous as this. Pathetic, really? Okay, whatever you say.

I owned both the Gamecube and the N64 when they came out and bought most of the biggest titles as they came out, the Gamecube was one of the biggest wastes of time out there, they lost RARE immediately and then Nintendo spent the whole generation remaking the same old games with slightly better graphics that I already owned on the N64 (Smash Bros, Mario Kart DD, Star Fox Assault, Zelda, Wave Race, Mario Sunshine, Mario Tennis, Mario Party, Mario Golf, F-Zero, 1080)

And you may say something like "thats what Nintendo always does, milk it's licences" well the difference is that the transition from SNES to N64 actually had a massive affect on gameplay, a 3D game plays much differently to a 2D one, 4 controller ports is a massive boon to multiplayer games, whereas taking a game and remaking it with better graphics and features and then reselling it is a major waste of time.[/

*scratches head*
So did you hate the SNES, too? As I recall, just about every successful franchise on the NES was regurgitated with better graphics on the SNES, too. Super Metroid? Super Mario World? Link to the Past? Man, talk about your wastes of time!!

And this what I don't understand: are you saying that any sequel that doesn't reinvent the series is a waste of time? So obviously, because Wind Waker controlled like Ocarina of Time, that meant it was essentially the same game and should be disregarded? Because Smash Bros Melee offered only better graphics and more characters that it wasn't worth getting? And if you are saying that StarFox Assault is the same as StarFox 64 . . . well, you can't be saying that (although I'd hope we'd agree that StarFox 64 is the superior game, regardless of graphical quality).

If any of the above is true, then you must disregard most sequels. Are the only "true" Sonic games for you Sonic 1 and Sonic Adventure? Sonic 2 and 3 really didn't change all that much from the first Sonic.

Also i'd like to say who buys a system for the 3rd party games? people buy systems for the exclusives, if most of the Gamecube 3rd party games are on the PS2 as well anyway and all the exclusives are lazy remakes then why not buy the PS2?

You keep finding new ways to say "the GameCube sucks." I have just about all the GameCube exclusives, and I can honestly say that I enjoy every one. I would hardly call them "lazy remakes."

after owning a Gamecube for that generation all I had to show for it was Eternal Darkness and Metroid Prime, I should've bought a Dreamcast, as should every other poor fool out there that bought the GC, then maybe the Dreamcast would've got the sales it actually deserved.

Obviously, I went the GameCube route. I'm very happy with my decision.

I'm not saying the N64 sucks, because it most certainly doesn't. But to dismiss the GameCube as being the inferior console of the two just doesn't make sense to me.

[MrMatthews]

Sorry about the double post, all.

Nes = good, then, SNES = crappy, same basic thing on new hardware.
n64 = good, then, Gamecube = crappy, same basic thing on new hardware.

See, that's exactly the kind of inflammatory comment that is going to start a 15-page debate. You and I have already gone around on this though () so I'll stop here.

But it's the same as if I said Hey guys! The Genesis and the Dreamcast were the most useless consoles Sega ever came out with!!! All those games SUCK - NO EXCEPTIONS!!!!!!!!!!!!

[retrospiel]

after owning a Gamecube for that generation all I had to show for it was Eternal Darkness and Metroid Prime, I should've bought a Dreamcast, as should every other poor fool out there that bought the GC, then maybe the Dreamcast would've got the sales it actually deserved.

GameCube was a nice machine. Really good heardware architecture. That's why the Wii is basically still a GC and why Nintendo DS "#2" will be based on GC too.

The most revolutionary thing on GC was Zelda: Windwaker. If you got the time, just pop it in and play the first ten minutes.

I have never ever before or since seen anything as beautiful. It looks like a freakin' Disney movie.


Now on your comment on Dreamcast: Peter Moore announced the end of the Dreamcast's production in January 2001, and GameCube did not come out until late 2002 IIRC. I think I bought mine in 2003.

I look at games like Assassin's Creed, Gears of War, and Uncharted and think "you'll never see anything like this on the Wii."

That is not entirely true. - I assume you are referring to the graphics: Since PS3/360 have to render their games with at least 720p, and Wii at max 480p, it makes up for the lack of hardware power (in theory at least).

But basically I think that games like these are old hats on PlayStation and PC; why should a Wii not be capable of rendering them ?

The difference is that the 360 isn't overwhelmed by an avalanche of licensed shovelware and kiddie games like the Wii is. You actually have to pick through the crap to find the good games on the Wii, which are there if you know where to look for them.

Thing is, I don't want to pick through a library of games made for my daughter and mom to find games for me.

To quote yourself:

That's a pretty narrow minded view of the console's library.

=P



You mention XBLA for the place to go for the real games. I think that this is part of why I find PS3 and 360 so unattractive: They sell you a bunch of blockbuster kiddie games (GTA and co.), while they offer the real games as downloadable low-budget shovelware.

Don't get me wrong: I really love the thought of being able to download classics like Rez and Ikaruga, but I think the Wii is the only console of the bunch that sees new games of this caliber.

[j_factor]

What's the difference? A game is a game. Are you going to travel so much with your Wii that you need a disc?

No, I just... don't want to download games. It's hard to explain. I just really don't like digital distribution.

What I mean is that I have a list of 360 games I want to play that I simply can't afford right now because it's a pretty big list. Be it used or new, I always find something good to play. When I had my Wii, I would spend a solid chunk of time in looking over the games, trying to find SOMETHING to buy. I played the Marios and Zeldas. I played Zak & Wiki and Ghost Squad. There were times when I'd go into TRU or Gamestop looking to buy a new Wii game and would end up buying one for 360 or just leaving empty-handed because there was nothing that interested me.

But you just said you never played Umbrella Chronicles. Ghost Squad interested you but Umbrella Chronicles, which is an original game, didn't?

This is the original point of my rant. I've seen people say this before... but I just don't get it. I feel like people are just saying nothing interests them on the Wii without actually looking at what the Wii has to offer. Or I'll say, "what about games X, Y, and Z?" And they'll say, "never played it, never played it, never heard of it." People are just saying the games are crap, or acting as though many of the good games don't exist, and not even trying to play them.

There are easily 50 worthwhile games for the Wii out right now.

Even worse, I look at the release list and can't see more than 2 or 3 games I'd buy for the whole year.

Once again, people say this, but I feel like they're not really looking. I've gotten into many of these conversations. There are 30 games on my Wii 2009 list. Every time I list them out for one of the people bashing the Wii, the response I get is usually "I've only heard of three of those games". Maybe there would be more games you'd buy if you were paying attention?

The Genesis is a modern console competing today. I remember commenting on the Wii's lack of power when it was released, and people gave me the litany of excuses about how the hardware took developers by surprise, good games take time to make, yadda yadda. Two years later and I'm still waiting. Wii games don't look bad, but they sure as hell don't look next gen, and after playing some of the awesome games released on the 360 and PS3 so far, to think that you'll never see games of that scope on the Wii is sad.

Why is that sad? Wii games definitely don't look next-gen, you're absolutely right. So what? Since when does everything on Dreamcast, Playstation 2, Gamecube, and Xbox suck?

[jesus.arnold]

Jesus why do I get myself into these longwinded arguments ok here we go.

The variety of titles on the SNES, is far greater than that of the N64. And these titles have no equal on the NES.

I'm staying away from the SNES side of the argument, I like the system a lot, it has a load of classic games, I think Sega-Fan is just trying to say that the SNES was more of an incremental upgrade of what was already available, and that it's games were more centred around improving on groundwork layed down by other consoles, whereas the NES and N64 came out of nowhere and included big changes and new experiences. Though I would say I find it strange that you give merit to the SNES based on a list of multi-format games and inferior ports (Street Fighter 2, Rock N' Roll Racing, Populous, Out of this World, I mean, is Street Fighter 2 a reason why the SNES is amazing or a reason why the Arcades are amazing?)

I don't recall seeing anything like Metroid Prime on the N64

Metroid Prime is a great game, but not without it's faults, I always hated the control method for one, it seems catered for people who can't play 1st person games and feels very restrictive, and the lack of any good multiplayer (2nd one had MP but was terribly implemented) seriously affected it's longevity, I would've taken Goldeneye and Perfect Dark during their respective times in a second over Metroid Prime, in fact, I took Timesplitters 2 over Metroid Prime on Gamecube anyway due to it's fun gameplay, co-op mode, and amazing multiplayer with it's massive amounts of options.

and Wind Waker was pretty ground breaking with its cell-shaded graphics.

You can't use the words "cell-shaded" and "ground breaking" in the same sentence unless you're talking about the Dreamcast, that technique was old hat by the time it appeared in Zelda, and when talking about Wind Waker itself, what a huge disappointment that was, inferior to both Ocarina and Majora's Mask in every way but graphics, it started out alright but then completely fell apart half way through.

Rogue Squadron II pretty much negates what was done with Rogue Squadron on the N64 and I have no doubt that it was the best looking game of that generation of consoles.

I haven't spent enough time with Rogue Squadron to comment, Rogue Squadron II was a very good game but I'd imagine it fell into my "Gamecube games that just took N64 games, improved them and rereleased them" bracket

Resident Evil 4 isn't just a great game, it's the best game in the series.

And it's on the PS2, along with masses of exclusives that never came to the Gamecube, or it's on the Wii with loads of extras and improvements over the old Gamecube version (all the extras of the PS2 version along with better controls)

Pikmin is a pretty unique title for the system and its was pretty popular with the Nintendo crowd.

Pikmin's pretty good, it's quite simple and short but hey this is the GC we're talking about here, I did prefer Pikmin 2 though.

Super Monkeyball debuted on the Gamecube and its popularity led to ports on other consoles.

They're not so much ports but special editions of both GC games with hoards of extras, completely negating and overshadowing the originals in every way.

Burnout also made its debut on the Gamecube. There's no denying it's one of the biggest franchises of that generation.

Burnout came out on the PS2 originally and wasn't ported to the Gamecube until 6 months later.

Animal Crossing got its start on the GC. It was popular enough to get a sequel on the Wii and NDS.

No Animal crossing started on the N64 but was never released outside of Japan, and was another of the already on N64 improved for Gamecube games I was talking about.

MGS: The Twin Snakes is the best version of the highly rated Playstation game. So what if it's an upgraded port, it's one of the more highly sought out titles on the console.

A ports a port, I'd played the game to death 5 years before it came out, and the same can be said for all those Resident Evil games too

[jesus.arnold]

Cool. Comparing Rogue Squadron to Rogue Leader is all it would take for me to win that argument, anyway.

what argument? I said slightly was going a bit too far anyway, and i'd imagine a person's idea of what constitutes a slight improvement and a major improvement differs massively from one person to another, as I said earlier I started gaming on an Atari 2600.

So did you hate the SNES, too? As I recall, just about every successful franchise on the NES was regurgitated with better graphics on the SNES, too. Super Metroid? Super Mario World? Link to the Past? Man, talk about your wastes of time!!

I like the SNES a lot, but I like the NES a lot more, I like Contra and Super C a lot more than Contra 3, I like Super Mario Bros 3 a hell of a lot more than Mario World, I like Mega Man 2 and 3 more than every Mega Man game on SNES, where Super Metroid is concerned I would say that the game had major improvements in multiple areas to the gameplay and graphics, there were a lot of faults with the actual gameplay of the nes original so I would call it an extremely worthwhile game and easily one of the best games of that entire generation, the same goes for link to the past, another thing pertaining to the SNES though, I would say that the experiences of certain genre's are massively helped by graphics, most notably the RPG genre, as RPG's really need a high level of presentation to capture the storylines and such.

are you saying that any sequel that doesn't reinvent the series is a waste of time? So obviously, because Wind Waker controlled like Ocarina of Time, that meant it was essentially the same game and should be disregarded? Because Smash Bros Melee offered only better graphics and more characters that it wasn't worth getting? And if you are saying that StarFox Assault is the same as StarFox 64 . . . well, you can't be saying that (although I'd hope we'd agree that StarFox 64 is the superior game, regardless of graphical quality).

I'm saying that if a developer grabs one of it's old games, throws a lick of paint on it and lazily rereleases it then they should be criticised for it, Wind Waker does a hell of a lot more than just take Ocarina's control method, but tbh with Wind Waker you chose probably the most original game out of all those I listed earlier anyway, whilst taking a lot from it's earlier incarnations it at least added a few new ideas into the mix such as the boating sections, you've put me onto another topic now too, games that were given a lick of paint but turned out worse than their N64 versions, such as Star Fox Assault, Mario Kart Double Dash, Mario Sunshine, Wind Waker.

If any of the above is true, then you must disregard most sequels. Are the only "true" Sonic games for you Sonic 1 and Sonic Adventure? Sonic 2 and 3 really didn't change all that much from the first Sonic.

Loved Sonic 1, Sonic 2 was a lazy remake, Sonic 3 rocked because it not only had much better graphics but a bunch of new ideas too, Sonic Adventure was brilliant, and Sonic Adventure took the 1st, improved the graphics and completely revised the way the entire game worked and so played very differently, not to mention some of the interesting ideas added to it.

Obviously, I went the GameCube route. I'm very happy with my decision.

Obviously you didn't spend any time with the other consoles of that gen otherwise you would've seen the Gamecube as the cynical waste of time it was.

Now on your comment on Dreamcast: Peter Moore announced the end of the Dreamcast's production in January 2001, and GameCube did not come out until late 2002 IIRC. I think I bought mine in 2003.

Yes but most people stick with one company each gen for the most part so it doesn't matter when the console actually arrives, I decided to get the Gamecube when it was going to be released, which is why I didn't buy the Dreamcast, I waited.

[MrMatthews]

Jesus why do I get myself into these longwinded arguments ok here we go.

LOL I was asking myself the same question last night. I just have a couple more thoughts on your comments and then I'm done.

Metroid Prime is a great game, but not without it's faults, I always hated the control method for one, it seems catered for people who can't play 1st person games and feels very restrictive, and the lack of any good multiplayer (2nd one had MP but was terribly implemented) seriously affected it's longevity

The control scheme is the only strike I'll make against Metroid Prime. The sad thing is, I never noticed how awkward is was until I completed Metroid Prime 3 and then went back . . . Metroid doesn't need multiplayer, either, which is why a game like Timesplitters is a perfect addition to your GameCube library.

what argument? I said slightly was going a bit too far anyway, and i'd imagine a person's idea of what constitutes a slight improvement and a major improvement differs massively from one person to another, as I said earlier I started gaming on an Atari 2600.

I'm saying that if a developer grabs one of it's old games, throws a lick of paint on it and lazily rereleases it then they should be criticised for it, Wind Waker does a hell of a lot more than just take Ocarina's control method, but tbh with Wind Waker you chose probably the most original game out of all those I listed earlier anyway, whilst taking a lot from it's earlier incarnations it at least added a few new ideas into the mix such as the boating sections, you've put me onto another topic now too, games that were given a lick of paint but turned out worse than their N64 versions, such as Star Fox Assault, Mario Kart Double Dash, Mario Sunshine, Wind Waker.

Loved Sonic 1, Sonic 2 was a lazy remake, Sonic 3 rocked because it not only had much better graphics but a bunch of new ideas too, Sonic Adventure was brilliant, and Sonic Adventure took the 1st, improved the graphics and completely revised the way the entire game worked and so played very differently, not to mention some of the interesting ideas added to it.

I can't and won't argue with cynical "logic" like this. How you can dismiss any sequel that doesn't reinvent the wheel is beyond me. Mario World was virtually the same as Mario 3, just as you described, but that doesn't make it any less fun. I think it's very narrow-minded of you to call these kind of sequels "lazy."

Obviously you didn't spend any time with the other consoles of that gen otherwise you would've seen the Gamecube as the cynical waste of time it was.

Well, you got me there. I bought a GameCube shortly after it came out, and that was the only console of the generation that I played for years. But what if I picked up a Dreamcast and a PS2 later, and only in retrospect realized that there were a whole lot more games on the GameCube that I like over either of those consoles . . . isn't that the same thing as if I played all three of them at the same time?

Don't assume that just because you consider the GameCube interferior to the PS2 and DC that I would, too.

Oh, sometimes updated ports end up better than their originals.

Example:

RE4 Wii > RE4 PS2 & RE4 GC

Resident Evil Gamecube > Resident Evil > Playstation

One final question: if you are so quick to dismiss games that add little more to a series than a "fresh coat of paint," then why are you defending Rare?

[gamevet]

Jesus why do I get myself into these longwinded arguments ok here we go.


I'm staying away from the SNES side of the argument, I like the system a lot, it has a load of classic games, I think Sega-Fan is just trying to say that the SNES was more of an incremental upgrade of what was already available, and that it's games were more centred around improving on groundwork layed down by other consoles, whereas the NES and N64 came out of nowhere and included big changes and new experiences. Though I would say I find it strange that you give merit to the SNES based on a list of multi-format games and inferior ports (Street Fighter 2, Rock N' Roll Racing, Populous, Out of this World, I mean, is Street Fighter 2 a reason why the SNES is amazing or a reason why the Arcades are amazing?)

The NES may have brought new gaming experiences to the console market, but a good portion of the games on the system were available on computers like the Atari 800 and C-64 years before it. I would have never bought a NES, if not for a few unique titles like Super Mario, Punchout!!!(dummied down arcade port) and Metroid. The SNES was a much larger step in gameplay, than that of the NES.

Most arcade ports to the NES either had to change gameplay from that of the arcade game (Ninja Gaiden and Bionic Commando to name a few) or dummy down the music because of the limitations of the hardware. The SNES port of Street Fighter 2 had better music than the arcade game and all of the gameplay was there. It was considered one of the best arcade ports of the time. Super-C on the NES was great, but it was hardly close to its arcade brother. Arcade ports were a big part of the success of both consoles and a big part of the 16-bit sales battle between Genesis and SNES.

Rock N' Roll racing isn't a port on the SNES. It was later ported to the Genesis, with the more twangy soundtrack.

I can list Populous, even though it was on computers before it, the same as Sega-fan listing Doom 64, like it was something new.

Metroid Prime is a great game, but not without it's faults, I always hated the control method for one, it seems catered for people who can't play 1st person games and feels very restrictive, and the lack of any good multiplayer (2nd one had MP but was terribly implemented) seriously affected it's longevity, I would've taken Goldeneye and Perfect Dark during their respective times in a second over Metroid Prime, in fact, I took Timesplitters 2 over Metroid Prime on Gamecube anyway due to it's fun gameplay, co-op mode, and amazing multiplayer with it's massive amounts of options.

Metroid was never a multiplayer game (before they tacked it on in Prime 2), so why would you expect it to be so? Metroid Prime is also not a FPS, and shouldn't even be considered one. Were you using a morph ball in Goldeneye. Perfect Dark is a horrible single player experience btw.

You can't use the words "cell-shaded" and "ground breaking" in the same sentence unless you're talking about the Dreamcast, that technique was old hat by the time it appeared in Zelda, and when talking about Wind Waker itself, what a huge disappointment that was, inferior to both Ocarina and Majora's Mask in every way but graphics, it started out alright but then completely fell apart half way through.

The way the cell-shading was used in Wind Waker, it was ground breaking. And if you're going to consider a game worthless because it was ported, than that takes Majora's Mask and Ocarina off of the list, since they are playable on the GC.

Seriously though, where do you draw the line on these comparisons? Does one game's worth become less, because an updated version came along. The line of comparison seems to be jumping all over the map.

I haven't spent enough time with Rogue Squadron to comment, Rogue Squadron II was a very good game but I'd imagine it fell into my "Gamecube games that just took N64 games, improved them and rereleased them" bracket

The gap of difference between Rogue Squadron and Rogue Squadron 2 is much larger than that of Super Mario 3 and Super Mario World. Besides, Rogue Squadron looked better on the PC.

And it's on the PS2, along with masses of exclusives that never came to the Gamecube, or it's on the Wii with loads of extras and improvements over the old Gamecube version (all the extras of the PS2 version along with better controls)

I'd still rather play the Gamecube version over that of the PS2, because of progressive scan, no jaggies and better textures. Adding more outfits and an extra level doesn't make up for the inferior graphics of the PS2 version. And just because we now have a Wii version of the game, does that suddenly make the GC version crappy?

A ports a port, I'd played the game to death 5 years before it came out, and the same can be said for all those Resident Evil games too

Well good for you. I know plenty of people that played the GC version, even though they've played the game before. I must have been a real fool to buy Super Mario Allstars, since I've already played those games on the NES.

[sega fan]

One man's slightly, is another man's completely.

Would you rather play a game in progressive scan or interlaced? I'd guess that someone who has never played a game in progressive scan, would probably never know the difference. Sure, I can enjoy most of the titles on the PS2, but I'd much rather play those titles in progressive scan, if the option was available.
.

I don't care about how the graphics are being "outputted" just so long as they're good looking for the time being. If it's a great game, it's a great game.

The variety of titles on the SNES, is far greater than that of the N64. And these titles have no equal on the NES.

Utopia: Is an original strategy game that incorporates city building elements somewhat comparable to that of Sim City.

Pilot Wings: Sure, I enjoy the N64 game more, but you can't deny that this title wasn't pretty original in its day.

Super Mario Kart: How can you deny that this isn't a pretty unique style of racing game?

F-Zero: A futuristic racer unlike anything before it.

Street Fighter II: One of the biggest arcade ports to ever hit a console. There's no fighting game on the N64 that holds as much historical value as this one, not even Super Smash Brothers.

Starfox: The N64 version was pretty boring in comparison.

Ogre Battle: It's a strategy RPG, but there's no denying its impact on the console. I do prefer Ogre Battle 64 though.

Actraiser: There's nothing like it on the NES or N64.

Rock N' Roll Racing: A futuristic racer that makes use of gravity, car upgrades and taking out your opponent.

Out of this World: I haven't seen anything like this title on the NES or N64.

Populous: The PC/Amiga hit makes its debut on the consoles with this SNES port.
.

The only thing you have me hard-pressed on is, Actraiser, Out of this world and populus.

BUT

I do see you liking the n64 counterparts in atleast 1/3 of your listing here.

Also, you could argue that F-zero and Mario Kart areboth the same game with different textures, phisics, & mechanics. however their n64 sequals are totally different from each other.

Also, I don't care much at all for street fighter of any type. Even though I wrote a failed sega-16 feature on it, I'd really rather play Mortal Kombat and Tekken.

and rock and roll racing can be easily rivaled with games like Beetle adventure racing, Rad Racer, and RC Pro am

I don't recall seeing anything like Metroid Prime on the N64 and Wind Waker was pretty ground breaking with its cell-shaded graphics.

Rogue Squadron II pretty much negates what was done with Rogue Squadron on the N64 and I have no doubt that it was the best looking game of that generation of consoles.

Resident Evil 4 isn't just a great game, it's the best game in the series.

Pikman is a pretty unique title for the system and its was pretty popular with the Nintendo crowd.

Super Monkeyball debuted on the Gamecube and its popularity led to ports on other consoles.

Burnout also made its debut on the Gamecube. There's no denying it's one of the biggest franchises of that generation.

Animal Crossing got its start on the GC. It was popular enough to get a sequel on the Wii and NDS.

MGS: The Twin Snakes is the best version of the highly rated Playstation game. So what if it's an upgraded port, it's one of the more highly sought out titles on the console.

Also, I don't care about gamecube because half of all it's good/decent games are multiplatform and sorry to pee on your parade, but if we had classic RE fans on the forums, they'd rip you a new ass for liking the new RE's. One of my friends likes the old ones and when I get excited about RE 5, he goes off for 10 minutes on me because of how they "gears-i-fied" a great franchise. Also stuff like pikman and animal crossing started nintendo's downfall. HEY NINTENDO, GAMES ARE MADE FOR GAMERS DAMNIT, NOT WII MOTE FLAILING SOCCER MOMS. REMEMBER THE 80'S/90'S WHEN GAMES WERE MADE FOR THE INTENDED DEMOGRAPHIC.


ALSO, i have a few thoughts on twin snakes. I don't like it for 4 reasons.

- good graphics do not make for a good game. I love how abstact the original version is, when I see the same thing and people have over animated faces/etc it seems so sterile and creepy it just took me out of it.

- the first person aim ruined the game. MGS 1 was perfectly crafted for 3rd person play, but when you can pick off all the enemies in 2 seconds by aiming everywhere, the game becomes a shooting gallerey.

- I am nostalgic for ps1 MGS because, it was the first ps1 game I played when I was 5 in 1999. and summer 2008 I beat it with a friend staying up all night over at my house.

- Snake was a vulnerable hero, he was strong, but when he got hurt he complains to campbell via codec. A good example is the tortue scene in mgs 1. also just watch the PS1 version's cutscenes, snake does things that any mortal man would do, the sniper wolf fight and the vulcan raven tank fight is a good example. but in the GC version, in the scenes I've mentioned, the wolf fight, snake kicks a sniper rifle to have him shoot it up above his head to cathch it, and in the vulcan raven tank fight he became solid neo the ultimate wire frame fighter.
go on you tube and see what I mean.

[sega fan]

The NES may have brought new gaming experiences to the console market, but a good portion of the games on the system were available on computers like the Atari 800 and C-64 years before it. I would have never bought a NES, if not for a few unique titles like Super Mario, Punchout!!!(dummied down arcade port) and Metroid. The SNES was a much larger step in gameplay, than that of the NES.

Most arcade ports to the NES either had to change gameplay from that of the arcade game (Ninja Gaiden and Bionic Commando to name a few) or dummy down the music because of the limitations of the hardware. The SNES port of Street Fighter 2 had better music than the arcade game and all of the gameplay was there. It was considered one of the best arcade ports of the time. Super-C on the NES was great, but it was hardly close to its arcade brother. Arcade ports were a big part of the success of both consoles and a big part of the 16-bit sales battle between Genesis and SNES.

Rock N' Roll racing isn't a port on the SNES. It was later ported to the Genesis, with the more twangy soundtrack.

I can list Populous, even though it was on computers before it, the same as Sega-fan listing Doom 64, like it was something new.

Dude, your helping my arguement, my point is every other console generation from nintendo (Nes, n64, but not at all wii) was revolutionary because of the different experiences never before seen anywhere else. even the games that were ports to nes were TOTALLY DIFFERENT TO ALL THE OTHER PORTS OUT THERE, thus giving you a fresh new experience and not ports of the samn damn hing you've played on every other consoles.

Also this irritated me.

I can list Populous, even though it was on computers before it, the same as Sega-fan listing Doom 64, like it was something new.

HAVE YOU EVEN SEEN DOOM 64. A violent game on a nintendo console was my point, plus, ALL THE SPRITES AND MAPS WERE REDONE. YES IT WAS NEW, IT WASN'T A CONSOLE PORT OF DOOM IT WAS A NEW DAMN GAME, and a pretty good one.

[gamevet]

Also, you could argue that F-zero and Mario Kart areboth the same game with different textures, phisics, & mechanics. however their n64 sequals are totally different from each other.

Beyond the Mode-7 graphics, the 2 games are totally different in speed, steering and ways of winning the race. It may be 3-D, but Mario Kart 64 wasn't much different from the first game and it wasn't quite as fun either. F-Zero felt like a completely different game on the N64, because the tracks would flip you upside down and have you driving around cylinder shaped tracks. But, there was no game like either on the NES, which was the original point.

Also, I don't care much at all for street fighter of any type. Even though I wrote a failed sega-16 feature on it, I'd really rather play Mortal Kombat and Tekken.

This doesn't surprise me.

Mortal Kombat is a horrible fighting game in comparison to Street Figher II. Mortal Kombat II though, fixed all the problems I had with the original and became a respectable franchise because of it.

I've never been a fan of Tekken. It's a shallow copy of Virtua Fighter, has nowhere near the depth in gameplay as the game it tries to copy and Namco was so bad about it, that several of their characters were obvious rip-offs from Virtua Fighter. Namco has been copying Sega for years and if Tekken isn't so obvious, how about Time Crisis?

and rock and roll racing can be easily rivaled with games like Beetle adventure racing, Rad Racer, and RC Pro am

Have you really played these games?

Rad Racer is closer to Top Gear than it is to RNR racing. Beetle Adventure racing is a slow plodding racer, that happens to have a nice paint customization feature. RC Pro-Am controls nothing like RNR and the only thing that is close between the two titles is the oil-slicks and rockets.

Rock N' Roll Racing is more like Racing Destruction Set on the C-64.

Also, I don't care about gamecube because half of all it's good/decent games are multiplatform and sorry to pee on your parade, but if we had classic RE fans on the forums, they'd rip you a new ass for liking the new RE's.

Classic RE sucked, just like Tomb Raider, because the controls were absolutely horrible. I like the premise of both games, but I'm not playing a game with crappy controls, just because it looks cool. Would you seriously play Mario 64, if you had to turn him like a tank? Resident Evil is one of the most over-rated franchises, right behind Tomb Raider. I'd play a remake of the original Resident Evil titles, if they used the control setup of RE4 and I believe most people that have played RE4 would agree.

Edge Magazine calls RE4 the second best game of all-time. Resident Evil didn't even make the list.

http://www.edge-online.com/magazine/...ime?page=0%2C9

Dude, your helping my arguement, my point is every other console generation from nintendo (Nes, n64, but not at all wii) was revolutionary because of the different experiences never before seen anywhere else. even the games that were ports to nes were TOTALLY DIFFERENT TO ALL THE OTHER PORTS OUT THERE, thus giving you a fresh new experience and not ports of the samn damn hing you've played on every other consoles.

That's not true though. You had a couple of arcade games, that were altered and became better games because of it. Then you had arcade ports that weren't anything special. You could list about a dozen titles on the NES that really were unique for their time, but you could come up with a larger list for the C-64 or PC of that era.

The N64 showed us new ways to look at 3-D gaming, but it wasn't the only console or system to do so. Mario 64, Zelda:OOT, Pilotwings and F-Zero were pretty unique games, but I don't believe 007 or Perfect Dark did anything special, beyond 4-player split screen.

Do you believe the Genesis was just a minor upgrade to gameplay of the 8-bit systems as well?

Also this irritated me.

HAVE YOU EVEN SEEN DOOM 64. A violent game on a nintendo console was my point, plus, ALL THE SPRITES AND MAPS WERE REDONE. YES IT WAS NEW, IT WASN'T A CONSOLE PORT OF DOOM IT WAS A NEW DAMN GAME, and a pretty good one.

Yeah, it's Doom, it's only 32 levels, is missing some enemies and added a missing gun. What part of this game is revolutionary in comparison to the previous games in the FPS genre or the other versions of Doom out there?

Mortal Kombat II had blood.

[sega fan]

Alright, I'm done fighting, all your going to do is keep refusing my opionions, and all it does is make us bitter towards each other so I am calling for peace.

Gamevet, lets stop, before we get at each others throats and I really don't want to be pissy with people I am constantly talking to.

All my posts in this thread are going to be this but quoted until this ends, peace.