From the Halo: reach thread I sparked this great idea.

Lets debate upon current or old topics in the video game industry that have affected or will affect us later. What mistakes were made and what companies did right.

I think that video games causing violence is an overused debate though. Since I can remember I killed enemies in Super Mario by jumping on their heads.

Video games can make you smart on strategies XD learn this from playing starcraft , warcraft and red alert

i like this :3

Video games is a great way to relax..there's a con tho..it keeps us inactive.. which happens to me alot..i don't blame it tho..cause i love Video Games .wow.

@Lale: What lol.

Video Games test many things, like reaction times, multitasking, problem solving, how fast you can calculate things, and memorization.

Games that fit these categories:

FPS games (CS, CoD, Quake, etc), RTS games (Warcraft, Starcraft, and even Chess), games from Brain Age to the Zelda series, they all help us in ways that will benefit us in the future.

But all good things always come with negatives. But I won't speak the negatives, because I like playing games.

snypershot wrote:From the Halo: reach thread I sparked this great idea.

Lets debate upon current or old topics in the video game industry that have affected or will affect us later. What mistakes were made and what companies did right.

I think that video games causing violence is an overused debate though. Since I can remember I killed enemies in Super Mario by jumping on their heads.

^^ I don't think Mario is a good example of video game violence lol. IMO it's usually FPSs like Doom, Counterstrike and most recently Medal of Honour and Call of Duty that often gets blamed for video game related violence.

Are video games a form of art? The University of Calgary seems to think so.

http://www.1up.com/news/university-calgary-adds-videogames-library

Oops lol, missread the whole thing, now ontopic:

After playing RTS a lot I can tell i think things twice before I do them, just in case to prevent maybe something wrong happening I dont know xD

I do believe video games are a way of art, it takes a group of people thinking about the story line, how to play it, what to put in it and what not.

snypershot wrote:Are video games a form of art? The University of Calgary seems to think so.

Ah funny you should bring that up, California doesn't think so anymore...

Currently California is in debate with the ESA, ongoing actually, about regulating title sales/rentals... The main issue at hand involves minors and M+ rated titles, then everything else happens afterwords... Of course gaming falls into the 1st Amendment of free speech, expression, etc., but California thinks gaming is in violation of it and should fall into a different category than "art" or what not...

I've only heard bits and pieces of this since it was pushed back into our minds, but with the Supreme Court trial coming November, inevitably the topic sprouted up again... I'm actually getting caught up with everything, so don't take my words as absolute just yet...

The ESA website is here if you want to follow the legal docs presented so far, http://theesa.com/policy/scotus.asp, but simply put that if the Bill passes to regulate M rated games to minors, it will cause a flux in the gaming world...

How? Well instead of being reprimanded verbally or whatever, you could be convicted a felon because THAT is now illegal... So M rated games will be treated like cigarettes, alcohol, porn, etc., which is a hassle that some distributors don't want in their venues... Ironically, they'll have to conform some way if they want the games, that is, if the game companies produce them anymore... "Geez, you know what kind of badass you'll be when you tell your prison inmate that you're doing time for selling a M rated title to a minor? Very hardcore..." HA HA! Yeah you can say "Well check ID's more closely", but the risk for the venues is entirely different than personal conflicts...

But no worries, last time I was informed of this topic, a majority of the voting parties were against the ban, so there's a good chance this won't even be an issue... LOVE THE 1st AMENDMENT!!!

So my debate: None, California is run by a bunch of bigots... HA HA!

Plutonium wrote:@Lale: What lol.

Video Games test many things, like reaction times, multitasking, problem solving, how fast you can calculate things, and memorization.

Games that fit these categories:

FPS games (CS, CoD, Quake, etc), RTS games (Warcraft, Starcraft, and even Chess), games from Brain Age to the Zelda series, they all help us in ways that will benefit us in the future.

But all good things always come with negatives. But I won't speak the negatives, because I like playing games.

Recently some University here in the States conducted a test on it (isn't there always?) proving that... I think it was mainly with FPSs, testing an active gamer on reaction time, decision making, etc., as opposed to a non-gamer... I don't know how it was tested, but the gamer came out on top... HA HA!

hey the debate thread dropped... HA HA! alright here's another one about game remakes... (not including ports)

This topic came up between me and my other buddies when we were talking about the remake of Lufia 2: Rise of the Sinstrals, which is now being re-released as Lufia: Curse of the Sinistrals...

My question is, if you had sentimental ties to a certain game title, are you for or against a remake of the game?

The Lufia series has always been a turn based, classical RPG, but the new version is now an action RPG, overhead platformer (much like the Y's series)... I know they mean well in creating a "new" Lufia game in a different manner, but why not just label it "?Lufia 3?", rather than call it a remake of Lufia 2?...

Seriously, I felt pretty close to the characters and what not, so seeing the "Lufia 2" that I remember oh so dearly, be modernized into a whole different game is not to my liking...

Another example you can take into consideration is the Original Final Fantasy series and their DS counterparts... Good or bad, it's totally up to the consumer, but how do you feel when a gaming company remakes an original into something so drastically different, that it's not even the same game anymore?

So, game remakes, good or bad?

(My answer in short, hate it... Companies should just call it a new title if it's obviously different from the original...)

I recall Crono Trigger being a hot topic for such a long time. Not only are all the original developers and people apart of the original project in different places, they don't want to tarnish the name.

Those remakes are fine to me, since it's just a port...

Ports basically retain about 90% of the original game and the other 10% is just add-ons like new equipment, modified story, tweaked menu, etc.... Much like what happened to Chrono Trigger, Persona, Final Fantasy Tactics...

What's not OK to me is overhauling an original title and still labeling it the same game... If the company took all the time and effort to make the big changes, then they should just go for a clean slate and change the whole storyline and what not...

I was talking with a Natsume rep (Lufia's developing company), about the same subject a couple of months ago and he said, "It's being modernized so that it can utilize today's tech and possibly give the series a fresh start to new gamers.", to which I commented, "But for die hard fans of Lufia 2 itself, it's basically killing a game that the fans once knew about... Slap to the face don't you think?"

HA HA! He agreed with me to some level that titles should be renamed anew if you can't even recognize it from it's original format, but in the end it's the head honcho's that make that call... boo...

and such is life in the video game world. People think that they can make a new game and name it the same experience you had before, when actually, the experience is different from the first one and the game you knew and liked, is now gone.

For me just play the game in the rightway.... because if you play too much you will lost your life.. ending up living in a 3D world XD.... having 3D girlfriends...don't be so addicted just balance it .clap.

war114 wrote:For me just play the game in the rightway.... because if you play too much you will lost your life.. ending up living in a 3D world XD.... having 3D girlfriends...don't be so addicted just balance it .clap.

This is an extreme case though. There was an instance where a man playing everquest died from over playing it. He pretty much lived in the world. Also there was a case of a guy or two playing video games in a cafe in Japan or Korea for over 50 hours. He died as well.

I wouldn't be against the remake, but from your explanation and example, it's not really a remake if they're gonna change that much? People are generally against remakes while game companies continue to churn out remakes just cos the technology back then, and the technology now, is indeed, without a doubt, very different.

Firstly, I think the remakes give a chance to potential newer fans to be introduced to the series, and if they like it enough, hopefully check out the previous titles, and understand why the hardcore fans like it so much. Personally, I only started liking Final Fantasy after I played Crisis Core, which was totally different from the way Final Fantasy games usually are, since FF is turn based while Crisis Core is real-time fighting. I immensely enjoyed the storyline and started playing other older FF titles.

This would be great for games with a huge backlog of series like Dragon Quest, where new gamers are intimidated by the number of Dragon Quest games that are out and are scared or not sure where to start from. However, the original hardcore fans would of course not be in agreement to these remakes since they feel the new fans might not understand the original merit of the game as they do, which can't be helped.

Another example of a game that went through drastic changes is the Sonic series. I used to be a big fan of Sonic, first game I ever played was Sonic 3 on the Sega console. I've watched more and more characters get introduced, sonic going into 3D platforming, the weird decisions to milk the sonic franchise like Sonic Unleashed and Shadow the hedgehog's weird "bad-ass hedgehog" game. Now Sega, after being whined at, has decided to make Sonic 4 back to the original 2D platformer Sonic once was. I guess I ought to be happy for it, but I must say, that was a pretty lame move from Sega, and I'm more excited for Sonic Colours, a sonic game coming out on Wii that's 3D, cos it sticks to the element of speed and fast-paced gameplay. So I guess remakes give a chance for the game developers to try something new, and if the sales indicate the fans aren't liking it, they can always go back to making titles for their hardcore fans.

So basically I'm saying remakes are the results of developers trying something new for their game(since they were the ones who CREATED the original game in the first place and reserve the right to change it however they want to), and it may be either good or bad. I'd say you try it out for yourself, it might actually be an improvement, but if you think they're just in it to hook a larger target audience and ignore the hardcore fans, there's always the option of not buying the game =).

/endrant. Phew. Up to you if you wanna read my LONG post xD. Hope it helps. Unless I got the meaning of remakes wrong O_O.

^ HA HA! Yeah I read it all, but there's no right or wrong answer in debating so you're right on the money...

Remakes due to advancing technology is fine with me... Such as Final Fantasy 7, it would be great if they updated the graphics to PS3 standards and brushed up the storyline to match with the rest of the series... But lets say they remade Final Fantasy 7 today, exact same story/characters/etc. with PS3 standards, in the style of Crisis Core, then hardcore fans would be like "WTF?!"

It's those type of "remakes" that make my heart sink... HA HA! Like you said, it's not a remake anymore if it goes beyond that... Companies call it a remake of a game, but it's totally butchered from what it was, so they should put the extra effort into making a separate unique title instead of relying on an already built foundation...

But on Dragon Quest, they better stay away from it... If i ever have to fight a slime in realtime, I'm crying afterwards... HA HA!

snypershot wrote:and such is life in the video game world. People think that they can make a new game and name it the same experience you had before, when actually, the experience is different from the first one and the game you knew and liked, is now gone.

Ditto on that!

Game developers don't always know what the fans want. They may think that a remake of a game might be cool to them, since they might have ideas or get excited by the new technology. I don't blame them if they're trying a new direction for the game. Like I said, the sales will indicate whether taking that risk was worth it. So the best the fans can do is to choose to buy the game or not. But in some cases, fans of the series will buy any game of a title or series blindly. That's kinda the reason why franchises or series get milked and there have been lesser new titles recently =(. Also, some companies (Activision*cough*) don't care about gamers at all =(

Anyway yea, they really should consider who theyre making the games for and give titles appropriately so hardcore fans don't have to put up with the original titles getting "makeovers". And FF7 in Crisis Core style would be weird.

^ Activision? Are you talking about CoD or their falling out with Infinity Ward? Because with Black Ops, THERE'S ZOMBIES AGAIN!!!... Then as we all know, the elusive releases of DLC almost every friggin day... bleh...

But I agree with everything you're saying, I'm actually in gripes with specific remakes...

If they remake Dragon Warrior/Quest 1 into an action RPG, using the same storyline/characters/etc., I would be awfully mad...

If they remade the series into an action RPG, without taking any reference to past releases, then I'd be just as mad but understandable to their decision to try something new... Hence, Dragon Quest Swords for the Wii, I was cool with it since they didn't try to say it was Dragon Quest 1/8/etc., but I would have threw my shoe at the wall if they did... HA HA!

I think it would be safer to just make a new series, instead of risking tarnishing a well established series by remaking, experimenting, etc.... Kinda like Blue Dragon and Dragon Quest... *thumbs up!*

So agreed that remakes are good (or bad), as long as they have no association to past titles... Personally that is... HA HA!

...

Man Nif, is your room full of games too? HA! If I stacked all my games side-by-side, it could go on for about a mile... heh, OK maybe not that much, but you get the picture...

Oh man, just one more rant? Are you a fan of Parasite Eve? Now that's a series that needs to stop being remade over and over, I want the original PE1 battle system back... But like you said, maybe I'll end up liking PE3?

I never got a chance to play Parasite Eve. Back i the day i regulated myself when playing games. So I rarely played M rated stuff. Now I feel like am old enough to handle it, I feel like i missed out on some great games.

@big Nah, my parents arent a big fan of me getting games, so I only got a few and the rest i got... using other methods. But since I'm 18 now, I get more freedom and stuff, but I still gotta wait till after exams before I can really get into gaming. I satisfy my gaming needs by visiting Kotaku everyday so I can keep up with game titles etc. About Parasite Eve, never tried it =(.

And don't worry about ranting. This is a debates thread, and we need rants for debate 'fuel' haha.

Oh man, you guys have to try Parasite Eve, actually buy if you can... PE1 is a very good game, great story, good battle mechanics, everything... It deviated a little in PE2 on every category, so it's not as good as the original... (The Resident Evil influence swept the world at that time, so Squaresoft sort of bandwagoned it... heh...)

PE1 is a pretty smart game, so you have to brush up on your biology terms to really immerse yourself in it, but it's overall enjoyable regardless... I actually prefer it over the Final Fantasy series because it's a little brainy, but because of that very reason, it became a cult classic instead of going mainstream...

With PE3, from what I saw in the E3 footage, the game system switched to an FPS type, sorta like Dirge of Cerberus, rather than the original RPG platform that it's known for ... I can't say I'm happy or mad since I kinda liked DoC, but it's a really big change in gameplay...

A SquareEnix rep stated that the PE series was all about the combat system, so it will be forever changing on every title release... But boo, that makes it sound like it's the guinea pig series for the company... *sigh*

Aya Brea for the win!

Games that are too adult for their own good...

The Shin Megami Tensei series. My favorite gaming series, over weeks of time spent playing the game. I feel some of the monsters are a little "strange" so to speak. Seeing a demon with a horn attached to a certain area of his body as an enemy is strange, but having him in my party is a little worse. Sure the game is Rated M for mature, but at what point is a game going past the limit of M.

Oh man, there's so many TV shows that are "kid approved" but there's so many hidden jokes and spoofs that only adults would get... Spongebob and Chowder are on top of the few... HA!

As for gaming, I would like to mention the Metal Gear Solid series... MGS1 and the Metal Gear series is totally fine, but as soon as it hit PS2, the adult humor and jokes became more apparent and as part of the series, with more and more sexual allure to every title released in the series... Some of it is hidden and some are out in the open, but you know what the developers had in mind... heh...

I think the best moment in the series ever is the streaking segment with Raiden in MGS2... HILARIOUS! Rated M, but it still caught me off guard... HA HA!

snypershot wrote:Games that are too adult for their own good...

The Shin Megami Tensei series. My favorite gaming series, over weeks of time spent playing the game. I feel some of the monsters are a little "strange" so to speak. Seeing a demon with a horn attached to a certain area of his body as an enemy is strange, but having him in my party is a little worse. Sure the game is Rated M for mature, but at what point is a game going past the limit of M.

It can only get more open since times are forever changing and the mass majority of people aren't being offended as easily anymore... I thought "Nocturne" was pretty controversial because you kill God, but with games like Fallout, Dead Rising, Nintendogs (HA!), etc., anything and everything is becoming a norm and morality isn't an issue anymore... Depending on the person that is... Japan has a whole different mindset about what's a norm to society standards, so with the US and the rest of the world waiting on their creations, the ESRB is also waiting to censor what's not acceptable to our (US) standards...

But likewise, everything and anything is being approved these days, so who knows what we'll see next... "I'm pretty sure if they make Dead or Alive Xtreme 3 HD, it's coming to the States without a problem..."

The only SMT game I tried was the online one, I forget what it's called, but I liked it. I was 16 or 17 at the time (haha I wasn't supposed to play it then xD). Sure, some of the monsters take some getting used to, but they have some gems like Jack Frost (which I find strangely adorable). Perhaps its just the artist expressing his or her creativity, or maybe he's just a pervert, who knows. I think since the game really is about Demons, the artist deliberately made some of them kind of disgusting or disturbing. Judging by how popular SMT is (well how popular I think it is anyway), I'd say as long as a game is fun, people have a higher level of tolerance for these things. But, of course, there are games where M-rated stuff is added seemingly for no reason -.- (I'm looking at you Dragon Age). Thankfully, these stuff is usually optional. I agree with big about the different mindset thing. You'll be surprised at what the Japanese find normal, and what the Westerners find normal.

So anyway, an issue I find kinda annoying is people branding games as clones. In my opinion, you can only produce so many games and come up with so many game ideas before there will be overlaps with other games. There shouldn't be anything wrong with picking up some features from another game that work or are more effective at something. I was thinking about this when I was reading Kotaku during the Tokyo Game Show period, and there was an announcement for a hack-n-slash game called Asura's Wrath. I don't want to take up too much space on this page so I'll just post the link to the trailer instead of embedding it, hope you don't mind. (Warning, kind of gory and plenty of over-the-top action : here .)

So yea, watching the trailer, I'm sure you might be reminded a little bit of God of War, especially during the quick-time events requiring you to press certain buttons and stuff. When I read about this on kotaku, in the comments section, a lot of people simply wrote it off as a "god-of-war clone". I'm sure you're also familiar with MMORPG games that have been called "WoW rip-offs". I've never played a God of War game (sadly), but I've seen my friends play and though I do see the similarities, I'm still more interested in this game than in GoW (maybe 'cos I love Capcom games xD). The art looks nice to me, and it looks pretty hilarious thanks to the over-exaggerated aggression (and screaming).

Of course, I'm not supporting game developers churning out the same type of game for the next few years (that would suck), and ignoring innovation (which is one of the factors driving the video game economy).

So, yea, what do you think of people labelling other games as clones or rip-offs?

The majority of gamers are just too harsh when they label a game a rip-off or some other such name, but that will forever be a typical term to describe games these days...

It was the same when the first trailers of Bayonetta debuted and a lot of people on the IGN forums were saying that it was just another God of War, but with a female... Funny thing is that Devil May Cry never came up... Why? Indeed that DMC made an impact when it first came out, but the following releases weren't as popular, so the series became a shadow to God of War... Ironic, but if you tell any GoW fan to compare it to DMC, he'll defend GoW more so over DMC, but DMC made the gametype famous worldwide...

As history goes... Before DMC, there was Soul Reaver... Before Soul Reaver there was Perfect Weapon, and so forth... So everything is a rip-off, but gamers won't acknowledge any title as a prime unless if it's a mainstream favorite amongst the masses... So then any 2d side scrolling game who's protagonist has a whip as a weapon, will always be referred to as a Castlevania rip-off, any game that's an FPS with an armored hero fighting off a horde of aliens will be a Halo rip-off, etc...

So it depends on the person to label a game a rip-off or not... If he's one of the masses, then he'll be biased... I personally think of every game as unique and I'll compare games with similar styles just to get my point across, but I won't label anything a rip-off unless if there's apparent similarities from one title to the next...

Just like when Street Fighter 2 came out in the arcades and then World Heroes 2 came out shortly after... Art of Fighting took most of the heat as being a Street Fighter rip-off, but WH2 had way WAY more similar features... HA HA! Hanzo and Fuma were just feudal version of Ken and Ryu... (Dragon Uppercut=Dragon Wave, Hadoken=Lightning/Cyclone Slash, Hurricane Kick=Ninja Whirlwind/Buzzsaw)... HA HA!

So in final, people who label games as rip-offs do bug me a bit too... Comparing is alright, but to label a game as a dominate reference is doodoo...

Alan Wake. Would you compare/label it a rip-off it to Resident Evil or Silent Hill?... Or are they all rip-off of the Original Alone in the Dark that came out on the PC decades ago?