Support NeoGAF

[akascream]

Kaz recently pointed this out. When the Xbox launched the PS2 was at 5m in the US. As of the start of this year there was close to a 20m unit difference between the PS2 and Xbox in the US.

That's not a very accurate comparison though. There's kind of a snowball effect as a console takes off. There is better developer support as a userbase grows, which spawns more purchases. Consumers see other people with something and they end up getting one. Granted, we are talking about playstation, but I still don't think it is as cut and dry as you make it.

 

[Red Blaster]

PS2's 2001 Fall Lineup had some fucking groundbreaking games. I don't see how anyone can say the DS's lineup this fall can begin to approach that level of quality. I mean, what's there gonna be? Castlevania, Advance Wars, Mario Kart, Mario & Luigi and then what?

 

[akascream]

PS2's 2001 Fall Lineup had some fucking groundbreaking games. I don't see how anyone can say the DS's lineup this fall can begin to approach that level of quality.

I think you'd have to use some fucking groundbreaking hyperbole to make such a claim.

 

[Red Blaster]

I think you'd have to use some fucking groundbreaking hyperbole to make such a claim.

You're telling me that GTA3 and MGS2 weren't groundbreaking?

 

[SolidSnakex]

I think you'd have to use some fucking groundbreaking hyperbole to make such a claim.

Well 2001 had GTA3, which is the biggest and most influential series this generation.

 

[akascream]

You're telling me that GTA3 and MGS2 weren't groundbreaking?

Hell yeah bitch, they blew the roof off gaming.

Well 2001 had GTA3, which is the biggest and most influential series this generation.

Sad but true. I was just poking fun anyway. =P

 

[Teddman]

Before we can arrive at the startling conclusion that everyone should go back in time to Fall of 2001 and buy a PS2 rather than a Nintendo DS today, I want you to consider this important point:

Because a PS2 then cost twice as much as the DS does now, ($299 vs. $149), and its games also cost nearly twice as much as today's DS games on average, the PS2 must have had at least TWICE as many good games during its first year to be considered comparable to the DS.

Discuss.

 

[Ranger X]

The Xbox came out when the PS2 already sold a ton of consoles with no competition. :lol

If MS would have launched the same time as Sony did there is no way in hell that it would have sold 4 times as much as the Xbox did. Just compare what the PS2 sold to when the Xbox was out and you will see this. That's why there is no way in hell that the PS3 will be able to sell 4 times as much as the Xbox360 because MS will now be launching with Sony and not behind them.

Jeez, i thought that was easy to understand. When the PS2 was selling 40k there wasn't an Xbox at 36k (maybe until lately or last year - in america only). The entry of the PSP in the handheld market is obviously more strong than the entry of the Xbox in the console world.
And the DS is pretty much only selling half strong the GBA was selling before it came out.
Nintendo survived the PSP and they probably stay ahead for this gen but just watch out, there's real competition now and the wind can turn pretty much anytime.

 

[Zeo]

MGS2 was in no way groundbreaking. It was just a sequel with improved gameplay and a much much worse story.

 

[Amir0x]

Sad but true. I was just poking fun anyway. =P

Why is GTA being the most influential game this gen sad? Good games like that should be influential.

 

[Red Blaster]

MGS2 was in no way groundbreaking. It was just a sequel with improved gameplay and a much much worse story.

I hate using it, but :lol


I think MGS2's story was a wacky ass piece of mismash, but to say it wasn't groundbreaking is poppycock. Fuck, if there was any game that ushered in the next-gen, it was MGS2.

 

[akascream]

Why is GTA being the most influential game this gen sad? Good games like that should be influential.

Yeah, that kind of violence really should make its way into more games. There just aren't enough hookers, brutal beatings, or brutal beatings involving hookers in videogames these days.

Honestly, the best innovation from my pov is a streaming world. Maybe gta made a positive difference there.

 

[Ranger X]

Because a PS2 then cost twice as much as the DS does now, ($299 vs. $149), and its games also cost nearly twice as much as today's DS games on average, the PS2 must have had at least TWICE as many good games during its first year to be considered comparable to the DS.

First of all, the premise of a handheld compared to a home console is not the same. I think a handheld should ALWAYS cost less than it's home console counterpart.
I bought my PS2 at 299$ and the DS is selling right now at 199$ (well, here in Canada). This is tierce less, not half.

I also don't know where you buy your games but most DS games here are at 39$. Most PS2 game BACK THEN (because it's even cheaper now) were 49,54 and 59. I would go for a 54$ average. 54 / 2 = 27 (not 39)

 

[Amir0x]

Yeah, that kind of violence really should make its way into more games. There just aren't enough hookers, brutal beatings, or brutal beatings involving hookers in videogames these days.

Honestly, the best innovation from my pov is a streaming world. Maybe gta made a positive difference there.

I refuse to believe that this is an actual serious post.

But I guess you're one of them GTA haters/doubters/indifferenters who cannot fathom how GTA3 is one of the highest rated/popular games of all time?

It's all because of the controversy and gratuitous violence!

 

[radioheadrule83]

I agree on MGS2. The first MGS still holds up in gameplay incredibly well. The added moves and look in no way add up to anything ground breaking for me. Metal Gear Solid 3 nails the storytelling, but even that (which is probably my favourite game this gen) doesn't change tack in the same way that something like Resident Evil 4 does.

As for GTA - I think it's sad too... the games are fucking incredible but it IS sad that there were three of them in one generation, sad that Vice City had the best music and it's sad that these games have not propelled games with great free roaming gameplay into popularity - but propelled generic, inane, pseudo-urban "bad ass" shit even further into popularity. Games of pure image, and no substance or soul.

 

[Ranger X]

Games of pure image, and no substance or soul.

That's what maybe GTA influenced but i hope you're not saying that this is GTA.
GTA falls where many great people and things fall - into uncomprehension and i know by fact (i read GAF) that there's people not understand how great GTA is.

 

[akascream]

I refuse to believe that this is an actual serious post.

But I guess you're one of them GTA haters/doubters/indifferenters who cannot fathom how GTA3 is one of the highest rated/popular games of all time?

It's all because of the controversy and gratuitous violence!

Why do you think it is so influential, and how has it influenced the industry outside of a bunch of knock-offs?

 

[dark10x]

I hate using it, but :lol


I think MGS2's story was a wacky ass piece of mismash, but to say it wasn't groundbreaking is poppycock. Fuck, if there was any game that ushered in the next-gen, it was MGS2.

Yeah, MGS2 did indeed usher in the next-gen. I don't see how anyone could suggest otherwise (even if they don't like it). From gameplay options to visuals, this was the game that showed us where the next-gen could go. I believe MGS2 is somewhat responsible for the sudden focus on the "smaller details" and things like physics and lighting.

GTA3 was also a very new experience. It was based on old concepts, obviously, but it ran with them in new directions. Violence and cursing was old hat, but the fully realized world in which you were placed combined with the freeform mission structure was incredible. I would often just explore the world and marvel at the way it came together. While rough around the edges, the world was closer to what I originally had hoped Shenmue would accomplish but didn't.

ICO receives plenty of love AND hate, but that was one hell of a game and was one of the first games to truly bring up the question of whether games can be considered art. The game is well designed, but the atmosphere and presentation were out of this world and still a benchmark.

Plenty of other examples out there as well. The point is, many of the games released during that period on PS2 are STILL commonly discussed. They were really important games and made a large impact on many people.

Does anyone really think those DS games will have the same impact? Those PS2 games demonstrated many things that had never really been seen before. As much fun as CV will be, I'm not expecting something special to the point that people will still be talking about it 4 years later.

I agree on MGS2. The first MGS still holds up in gameplay incredibly well.

Man, I totally disagree. I loved MGS1, but I always said that it was more about the story than the game...as the game was weak in a lot of areas. MGS2 was a VASTLY superior game in everyway AND presented an even more interesting story (though few agree with me on that).

 

[SolidSnakex]

Why do you think it is so influential, and how has it influenced the industry outside of a bunch of knock-offs?

So you don't think that developers have started trying to take on a more open ended approach since the release of GTA3?

 

[radioheadrule83]

That's what maybe GTA influenced [snip!]

Yeah that's what I meant.

 

[Red Blaster]

Heh, I like how no one's talking about the DS or PSP anymore.

 

[----]

This survey is about as useless as any other anecdotal evidence. Going by the sales charts in the US at least the PSP has taken over the handheld market basically overnight. PSP hardware is outselling the DS and GBA by a huge margin every month. The top handheld game sales in the US are dominated by the PSP every month. So they made a survey that says some group of people has a lot of negative comments about the PSP? Who gives a shit? People vote with their dollars not with surveys. In my honest opinion the DS is being completely propped up by Nintendo fans (the loud minority) and it is not doing particularly well in the United States compared to PSP or GBA. Stories like this are fluff.

 

[akascream]

So you don't think that developers have started trying to take on a more open ended approach since the release of GTA3?

I wouldn't say it was the first open ended game though...I think that kind of freedom was always a goal for many videogame developers. Look at the progression of even very linear platformers like Mario as the technology became available for 3D worlds. Things have progressed to free roaming...maybe moreso since gta, but I'm not convinced.

In my honest opinion, people just like the violence. They like beating the fuck out of things, and driving around causing mahem, and ultimately becoming some big crime boss. And yes, I think that is sad.


Just look at mobster movies for an example of the kind of draw I'm talking about. These aren't especially good movies if you take out the violence, they are actually quite average, and do nothing other movies do not. For some reason people glorify some of the worst kinds of people and behaviors imaginable.

 

[Ranger X]

Yeah that's what I meant.

Ok i should have posted my question explicitly: Is GTA a game of pure image and no substance or soul?

 

[SolidSnakex]

I wouldn't say it was the first open ended game though...

OoT wasn't the first game to use lock on targeting either, but when its brought up what's the game thats brought up as the one that influenced developers? Yep OoT.

In my honest opinion, people just like the violence. They like beating the fuck out of things, and driving around causing mahem, and ultimately becoming some big crime boss. And yes, I think that is sad.

By your definition the clones should be just as popular as GTA...Yet they aren't even close. The big difference is that the amount of freedom in those games isn't up to par with the amunt you get in GTA.

 

[dark10x]

In my honest opinion, people just like the violence. They like beating the fuck out of things, and driving around causing mahem, and ultimately becoming some big crime boss. And yes, I think that is sad.

I think it is very short sighted and insulting to the developers to suggest that violence alone carried the game...

It didn't do much for games like Kingpin, now did it?

 

[Ranger X]

In my honest opinion, people just like the violence. They like beating the fuck out of things, and driving around causing mahem, and ultimately becoming some big crime boss. And yes, I think that is sad.

Casual gamers maybe. Personnally i like to drive without wrecking my car and playing the game trying to kill the less people as possible -- and this is where my fun lies, seriously.
I also really like the well done cut-scenes with nice voice acting and all the parody/humoristic side of GTA, it's very well done. The people that can't see what's genuine in GTA, i say they really miss something and they probably miss alot of things about the rest of reality.

 

[akascream]

I think it is very short sighted and insulting to the developers to suggest that violence alone carried the game...

It didn't do much for games like Kingpin, now did it?

One could only hope they'd be insulted by thier outrageous game. That gta even exists shows otherwise. And I didn't say violence alone carried the game now, did I. I'm not saying they did nothing else right, but those things aren't specific to gta.

 

[dark10x]

One could only hope they'd be insulted by thier own actions. That gta even exists shows otherwise. And I didn't say violence alone carried the game now, did I. I'm not saying the did nothing else right, but those things aren't specific to gta.

Violence certainly isn't exclusive to GTA either. GTA3s other accomplishments were much more unique than the violence (which was already becoming tired, by that point).

You seem so bitter against the game for some reason...

Plenty of other games were blasted for heavy violence prior to GTA. I guess Doom is all about the violence eh? There were other FPS titles available before it, afterall. Surely it was the violence and satanic icons that made it popular...right?

 

[akascream]

By your definition the clones should be just as popular as GTA...Yet they aren't even close. The big difference is that the amount of freedom in those games isn't up to par with the amunt you get in GTA.

Which just proves my point. Even developers that want to make a clone can't. There are technological and financial limitations, not a lack of imagination. Honestly, how much creativity does it take to imagine a game where you are free to run around and do stuff. This isn't a new concept.

 

[dark10x]

Which just proves my point. Even developers that want to make a clone can't. There are technological and financial limitations, not a lack of imagination. Honestly, how much creativity does it take to imagine a game where you are free to run around and do stuff. This isn't a new concept.

Yeah, I remember all those shitty Doom clones that were never as popular either...

There were too many technological and financial limitations.

 

[akascream]

Violence certainly isn't exclusive to GTA either. GTA3s other accomplishments were much more unique than the violence (which was already becoming tired, by that point).

You seem so bitter against the game for some reason...

Plenty of other games were blasted for heavy violence prior to GTA. I guess Doom is all about the violence eh? There were other FPS titles available before it, afterall. Surely it was the violence and satanic icons that made it popular...right?

Some games just have a better sense of violence to them than others. There is quite a bit of difference between blasting zombies and monsters in doom 3, and beating grandma with a lead pipe in a more realistic game. Especially if that game manages to not be completely boring.

Yeah, I remember all those shitty Doom clones that were never as popular either...

There were too many technological and financial limitations.

Doom isn't a hooker simulator.

 

[dark10x]

Some games just have a better sense of violence to them than others. There is quite a bit of difference between blasting zombies and monsters in doom 3, and beating grandma with a lead pipe in a more realistic game. Especially if that game manages to not be completely boring.

Sounds like you never tried playing the game at all. The freedom it brought to the table allows actions like that to occur, but it isn't the focus and it isn't fun for very long.

The game was less violent and crude than games like Kingpin, of course. KP never became popular, though...

Doom isn't a hooker simulator.

Neither is GTA3! Can you believe that I finished the game without ever trying that? I didn't care and that wasn't the focus. Running around the streets beating people up is dull as hell to me and was not why I played it. However, as an open-ended game, people should be able to do as they please.

 

[Amir0x]

Why do you think it is so influential, and how has it influenced the industry outside of a bunch of knock-offs?

Popular, influential games will ALWAYS spawn knock-offs. That's not an insult, that's the worlds biggest compliment. You should be hatin' on the shitty knock-offs, not the spectacular originals.

And ya know, it's disingenous to claim violence is the reason it is the best selling series this generation. Sure, controversy played a role. But the fact that it was a genuinely good, alarmingly open-ended experience which surpassed anything to come before it catapulted it into success. The "atmosphere" it created, with funny radio stations, licensed music and a living, breathing world is what solidified its position and quality. The fact that it pushed the videogame envelop on profanity and violence is just supplimental. But ya know what, that IS a good thing.

Pushing the limits on what is acceptable in terms of content in games is almost always a good thing, and I applaud most developers who do it. But it usually takes popularity to inspire change. Thank goodness, then, that GTA is so good. Sure, it might inspire lame knock-offs. Sure, it'll inspire a hundred derivative, juvenile stories that are there solely for the tits, ass and ghetto-ization. But if it led the way for even one game that uses these mature aspects to create a more compelling world/story, I'm all for it. After all, there are lots of movies that have raunchy sex scenes. But not all of them do it for titilation. Some, for example, do it to showcase the dark side of sexual obsession (In The Realm of the Senses).

Violence hasn't helped about a billion other games become popular, either. So it's a weak argument. GTA is popular and influential because they're quality, and presented things other games refused to for a long time. Good on GTA. Obviously, it's not a perfect game. But it does have a shit ton of charm, and a great sense of humour.

 

[radioheadrule83]

Ok i should have posted my question explicitly: Is GTA a game of pure image and no substance or soul?

No... GTA has plenty of substance and soul. The missions are entertaining, the layout and planning put in benefit the game greatly. One of the things that rarely get mentioned when mainstream press talk about GTA is the comedy and the movie spoofing. I mean, that's totally where GTA gets ALL of its charm! That's why shit like True Crime will NEVER touch this franchise.

The acclaim and subsequent coverage that the media seems to bestow upon GTA3/Vice City/San Andreas seems to focus solely on the shootings and hookers. It completely overlooks the vast sandbox you've got to play in and so on. I think some companies too, have seen GTAs popularity, reconciled themselves with this kind of media coverage, and come to the conclusion that they have to make dark, violent games to succeed too. Which simply isn't the case in my opinion. For one thing, I think GTA is one of the more cartoony games this generation - the perception it has is misleading. And another? If a game is fun enough to play, the word will spread! I'm not saying some games haven't bombed unfairly, but I do think for the most part it's true.

• Latching onto movie franchises with the appropriate image in games,
• Urbanising existing video game franchises and marketing them as whole new games (hello EA),
• Filling a game with swears, blood or gore for the sake of it...
• ...lauding your own product as the next big thing because of it.
• Making things dark and broody for the sake of it.
• Licensing out supposedly appropriate music (it almost never is).
• Marketing campaigns that appeal to children/teens in the guise of advertising to a mature market of adults.

It's bullshit. Some games this generation have used these practices and don't back it up in any way with gameplay exciting or new. They're the ones with no substance or soul. And they're the sad thing about this generation. In some way, I think a lot of it does tie back to GTAs success too.

 

[Zeo]

I hate using it, but :lol


I think MGS2's story was a wacky ass piece of mismash, but to say it wasn't groundbreaking is poppycock. Fuck, if there was any game that ushered in the next-gen, it was MGS2.

I don't think you understand what a groundbreaking game is.

 

[Ranger X]

Doom isn't a hooker simulator.

Dude, you really blew your cover here. :lol

 

[akascream]

Sounds like you never tried playing the game at all. The freedom it brought to the table allows actions like that to occur, but it isn't the focus and it isn't fun for very long.

The game was less violent and crude than games like Kingpin, of course. KP never became popular, though...

I'm not going to go around in circles with you. You keep wanting to bring up these other violent games to show that gta didn't only have violence. I know. But it didn't do anything new either. Did it bring together good game design and package it better than before? Sure. Does that have anything to do with innovation?

And you keep brushing past the reality of the GTA games. The closer games are to simulating the real world, aka not montsers or some cartoony thug game, with people walking around, basically a living breathing city, the closer you get to the real thing psychologically. This is an important point.

Dude, you really blew your cover here.

I'm not hiding from anything, I've never pretended to like the violence and sex in the gta games.

 

[dark10x]

What it did WAS NEW!!!!!

Bah, that's enough. As usual, your mind will not change...

 

[Ranger X]

No... GTA has plenty of substance and soul. The missions are entertaining, the layout and planning put in benefit the game greatly. One of the things that rarely get mentioned when mainstream press talk about GTA is the comedy and the movie spoofing. I mean, that's totally where GTA gets ALL of its charm! That's why shit like True Crime will NEVER touch this franchise.

The acclaim and subsequent coverage that the media seems to bestow upon GTA3/Vice City/San Andreas seems to focus solely on the shootings and hookers. It completely overlooks the vast sandbox you've got to play in and so on. I think some companies too, have seen GTAs popularity, reconciled themselves with this kind of media coverage, and come to the conclusion that they have to make dark, violent games to succeed too. Which simply isn't the case in my opinion. If a game is fun enough to play, the word will spread! I'm not saying some games haven't bombed unfairly, but I do think for the most part it's true.

Latching onto movie franchises with the appropriate image in games, urbanising existing video game franchises and marketing them as whole new games (hello EA), filling a game with swears, blood or gore for the sake of it and lauding your own product for it.. making things dark and broody for the sake of it.. licensing out supposedly appropriate music (it almost never is).. marketing campaigns that appeal to children/teens in the guise of advertising to a mature market of adults. It's bullshit. Some games this generation display many of these traits and don't back it up in any way with gameplay exciting or new. They're the ones with no substance or soul. And they're the sad thing about this generation. In some way, I think a lot of it does tie back to GTAs success too.

phew*, no doubt anymore about what you said earlier. I felt like to question you because you may have been that guy that doesn't understand what is GTA. I see that you do understand! I fully support this last post of yours.

 

[Amir0x]

No... GTA has plenty of substance and soul. The missions are entertaining, the layout and planning put in benefit the game greatly. One of the things that rarely get mentioned when mainstream press talk about GTA is the comedy and the movie spoofing. I mean, that's totally where GTA gets ALL of its charm! That's why shit like True Crime will NEVER touch this franchise.

The acclaim and subsequent coverage that the media seems to bestow upon GTA3/Vice City/San Andreas seems to focus solely on the shootings and hookers. It completely overlooks the vast sandbox you've got to play in and so on. I think some companies too, have seen GTAs popularity, reconciled themselves with this kind of media coverage, and come to the conclusion that they have to make dark, violent games to succeed too. Which simply isn't the case in my opinion. For one thing, I think GTA is one of the more cartoony games this generation - the perception it has is misleading. And another? If a game is fun enough to play, the word will spread! I'm not saying some games haven't bombed unfairly, but I do think for the most part it's true.

Latching onto movie franchises with the appropriate image in games, urbanising existing video game franchises and marketing them as whole new games (hello EA), filling a game with swears, blood or gore for the sake of it and lauding your own product for it.. making things dark and broody for the sake of it.. licensing out supposedly appropriate music (it almost never is).. marketing campaigns that appeal to children/teens in the guise of advertising to a mature market of adults. It's bullshit. Some games this generation display many of these traits and don't back it up in any way with gameplay exciting or new. They're the ones with no substance or soul. And they're the sad thing about this generation. In some way, I think a lot of it does tie back to GTAs success too.

It's genuinely creepy that this post and mine right behind it are both exactly 310 words (well it was the first time, but recounting it it seems to be 334 now or something)

 

[radioheadrule83]

Just edited it for bullet points and what not.
How did you find out the word counts on our posts so fast!?

 

[Amir0x]

Just edited it for bullet points and what not.
How did you find out the word counts on our posts so fast!?

Pasted them into Microsoft Word when i saw they looked so similar in size. I was curious to see how close in size they were

 

[Tony HoTT]

MGS2 was definitely the first game to show off the PS2 generation. I remember buying Zone of Enders just for the goddamn demo!

 

[Ranger X]

:lol @ Amirox

You usually think about this sort of things? This is very out of the blue. and funny

 

[Amir0x]

:lol @ Amirox

You usually think about this sort of things? This is very out of the blue. and funny

Yes, I do often think of weird things that just pop into my head. Like, sometimes I wonder that if I am like ten seconds too slow off a green light if my delay will cause the car behind me to be ten seconds late on the way to his job. And those ten seconds will cause him to be hit by another car and die before he arrives to work.

 

[Gattsu25]

nah, 10 seconds too slow off a green light is simply a bat to the face

aka, reading your posts in this thread give the impression that you've never played a GTA game for more than a few minutes (of solely beating down hookers) or that you're just acting like a dipshit to horde attention

edit: holy shit...forgot that this is a DS vs PSP thread :lol

 

[Ignatz Mouse]

From DS vs PSP

to

PS2 Launch Library

to

Amir0x's OCD

to

...?

 

[Amir0x]

From DS vs PSP

to

PS2 Launch Library

to

The merits of GTA

to

Amir0x's OCD

to

...?

Fix'd

 

[akascream]

nah, 10 seconds too slow off a green light is simply a bat to the face

aka, reading your posts in this thread give the impression that you've never played a GTA game for more than a few minutes (of solely beating down hookers) or that you're just acting like a dipshit to horde attention

edit: holy shit...forgot that this is a DS vs PSP thread :lol

Nope, never played it. I've watched little cousins beat hookers and snipe civilians from rooftops while giggling like little schoolgirls though. They'll play that shit for hours. The game is shit, as shown by your overly defensive response to a negative opinion concerning it. Lol, calling names? You'd get along with my cousins. They are 11-13.