The cartoon history of the universe-
May 28, 2001 - Chris Jones
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed
within this column are those of the participants and the
moderator, and do not necessarily reflect those of the
GIA. There is coarse language and potentially offensive
material afoot.
"Are you the future, man?" "No. I wouldn't count on that. I have too many pieces missing."
Don't say we didn't warn you.
Who the fuck is Chris Jones?
He's just this guy, you know?
Onward.
| Scatological morality |
| Chris, Chris!!
I know there is, like, zero interest in this game here at The GIA, but you
as a professional gaming journalist are obligated to at least try to answer
this question:
WHEN is Black & White going to be released for the PS2?
I know the DC port was cancelled, but I've heard exactly NOTHING about the
PS2 version. Was anything revealed at E3? And why don't you guys have a
preview? Somebody fall asleep at the switch, or what?
CherryScorn, who *knows* that the port is probably gonna suck, but doesn't
care, because it's the only way she'll ever get to play Black & White
|
Erm... don't have a precise release date, but "soon". It was playable on the PSX at E3, at a booth towards the front of one of the more more obscure halls. The graphics looked rough, but the gameplay was more or less intact. Before the end of the year, I'd guess, but don't have much of a net connection at the moment so I can't tell you more than that.
As for why we don't cover it - we do, but the DC version got canned, and we're working on a PS2 preview.
| Matt Blackie's reinforcements |
| Okay. Now I know everybody had already beaten this topic to death with a blunt object, but since everybody's saying their piece, I may as well add mine.
I believe it was Socrates who said that humans are social beings. What does this have to do with a consoles failure? Simple: Word of mouth. let me explain. Why did the Dreamcast "fail?" Bad games? Absolutely not. Horrible marketing? The commercials I saw rivaled just about everything Sony or Nintendo could put out. Why then, with great games and superb marketing, could such a console failure?
The answer is simple: Because people already made up their mind about it before it even hit the market. Yes, the cries of "Yeah right, remember the 32X?", "The Saturn sucked." and "Screw Sega" could be heard throughout the land. People saw the playstation one's success, and the Saturn's failure, and naturally assumed the PS2 would once again, blow Sega out of the water. What makes me even angrier, is that the majority of the people who bashed Sega and praised Sony hadn't even played EITHER system.
This is why the X-Box too, shall fail. Suppose before the launch, a miracle happens and several amazing looking games that play great are announced for the system. It would probably still fail, because people don't trust Microsoft, constantly badmouth everything under the sun for it, and generally pass this information on to others, who will also be swayed into buying a PS2 or Gamecube.
At the risk of sounding like a hypocrite, do I think the X-box will fail? Yes. Because of bad games? Not necessarily. IT will fail because everyone has already made up their minds about it, without playing a single game for it. (Except for the E3 showgoers, of course.) Personally, I am looking forward to the Gameboy Advance. What I dub "The 16 bit era" was probably my personal favorite time to be a gamer, and this will be a rebirth of that era. Although there are many remakes of old classics, mark my words: The original games they make for it will be astounding, although I must admit, I am personally inclined to hope for Seiken Densetsu 3 on that sucker. How about a Gamecube? Definitely. Call me a simpleton, but the announcement of a new Zelda game is all they had to do to get my purchase. How about a PS2? Will I buy one? Somewhere down the road, sure. By the time MGS2 is out, HOPEFULLY the price will go down as well, and I'll make my move.
Anyway, I probably won't buy an X-Box. But when it appears in a kiosk at my local Electronics Boutique, I'll be sure to see for myself if the public is correct. Or, Square could announce a Final Fantasy game for it, and I think we'd all change our minds.
~ Matt "Screw you Sega bashers, I'm gonna go play Guilty Gear X" Gburek
|
This letter kind of strikes at the heart of what the GIA is, because what you say is largely true, and this site and others like it are what persuade people to make up their minds one way or another. The question is, how big a deal is this, when all's said and done?
You've heard Drew and I say that the Gamecube succeeded where the X-Box failed, but we were at the show and played the systems first hand, so presumably we're entitled to our opinions. The rest of the site presents info about what was at the show, and there may be some bias in the writing, but by and large the facts get reported. And those facts are what people use to make up their minds about games and systems, which would seem to be a legitimate way to arrive at an opinion - since most people can't go to E3, they go by what they know of the show. Perhaps it would be more fair to give all games and systems an equal chance and only judge them after playing them firsthand, but that requires more effort than most people have time for. Games are a hobby, and when a hobby becomes more about work than about enjoyment, you've got a problem.
Above all, I think I can dispel the notion that the X-Box is doomed because everyone else is going along with the crowd. By this point I have a fair amount of firsthand experience with gamers and how they think - they're very likely to come to the same conclusions given the same starting information, but they're strongly disinclined to take anyone's word but their own about what's good or not. (And they're quite vocal in telling you what their opinion is.) The failure of the Dreamcast was a bad thing, but sad to say, it had more to do with how well the public was informed (that the PS2 was right around the corner) than how little it was informed (about how much arse the system kicked.)
| Odd game, odd box, odd world |
| oooh, you're Darkman right?
or are you the Matrix?
With all the talk of second party Nintendo titles, and how Eternal Darkness
will be so nifty, is there any word on Too Human? I vaguely recall a mention
of Silicon Knights beginning the GC transition of this vaporware enigma way
back when SK switched flags. Any idea on what's up? I'm hesitant to say it
could be their answer to Metal Gear, but at least it looked pretty damn
cool.
And as prone as I am to laugh at the X-Box, why haven't I heard any mention
of what is (in my opinion) the only interesting looking X-Box exclusive:
Oddworld 3- Munch's Odyssey. Admittedly I know very little of how they're
altering the engine to factor in an extra dimension, but having extensively
played the first two titles I can say that they rocked bigtime. Even if all
they did was rip off Prince of Persia and throw in a few extra bells and
whistles, they did it with atmosphere and style. Actually, I'm surprised
y'all don't cover the Oddworld games. I'd call 'em a cross between adventure
and puzzle, and either way it should fit your agenda.
Still, that said, I'd rather give constant road head to my brother's grimy
old Gameboy than buy that Gates backed claptrap that licks my nutsack.
-Ted Copulate,
formerly known as Sickpigman
|
Silicon Knights was in evidence at E3, in that one of their developers was shown in a video clip at the Nintendo press conference talking about how great the GC was to develop for, but nothing was said about Too Human. I'm fairly certain it's coming, but not as a launch or near-launch Gamecube title.
Munch, along with Halo, were the two major flagship titles of the X-Box. And truthfully, while neither one rocked my world the way I was hoping, neither one was that bad either. Munch's Oddessey reminded me of Pikmin as much as anything - both had similar follow-the-leader dynamics, and odd graphical themes. Pikmin got a lot more press because it was a Miyamoto game on a hot new system, but as far as actual gameplay's concerned, Munch may meet or even exceed Pikmin.
| Community matters |
| The argument always used by someone who supports Nintendo is the following:
real gamers don't need blood and guts or complex story lines, they need fun
and innovative gameplay. That isn't really the case with Nintendo, the
case with Nintendo is that most every single game on the console line is
designed with a type of gamer in mind: socially minded gamers.
If you really look at it, Nintendo hasn't been offering kid oriented games,
but socially oriented games. Mario Party, Super Smash Brothers, Star Wars
Episode 1 Racer, Pokemon Stadium, Dr.Mario, and Pokemon Puzzle Challenge.
The games do have light hearted, innocent styles,, but the main feature is
the ability to play with three other people.
Beyond those games, there aren't many one or two player experiences on the
N64. From what I know, people who bought Playstation, PS2, and Dreamcast are
the types of gamers who play alone or with just one other person. Dreamcast
did have 4 control ports, and a few multiplayer games, but it never made
that the main feature of its console or its game line. Playstation, still
sticks to 2 control pads, and still offers more solid 1-2 player games than
any other console. Nintendo fails to do this, with one exception: the
Gameboy.
If Gameboy is so successful, it's because it offers a solid one player
experience, but a social aspect as well. Take for example any version of
Pokemon; I can easily play it alone, but if I ever find someone who plays it
as well, or I convince a friend to get it: the game expands even further.
And even with the multiplayer experience, I still have to spend time alone
training monsters so I don't lose my battles.
Unless Nintendo can offer games that focus on one player, or make games that
give both equal one player or multiplayer experiences like Half Life or
Pokemon: they'll always have a very hard time attracting lots of gamers. At
least the ones that are not socially blessed with three close friends or
have enough money to spend $80 on 4 control pads, and I bet there are a lot
of gamers like that.
-
Areku
|
I think you're bending the facts to where you want to go - the N64 evolved into a party game system, but there are plenty of titles throughout its lifespan that have been great one-player games (Mario 64 and the two Zeldas among them) and more importantly, when the system came out it wasn't really perceived or packaged as a party game system. That only happened as it became clear that the really great solo titles were coming out on the PSX, and that most N64s were only being used for long multiplayer sessions of Mario Kart or Goldeneye. The PSX likewise has a fair number of good multiplayer games, although you'll rarely hear about them on this site, and sad to say, I've played very little but multiplayer games on my Dreamcast.
As for what Nintendo will be doing with the Gamecube, fear not - E3 showed a solid mix of single player and multiplayer games alike... tilted more towards single player, if anything. Whether it'll stay that way is anybody's guess, but right now the GC looks a lot more like the SNES than the N64.
| Snake'll kick your ass for calling him immature |
| I am so bored with this whole 'kiddy' or 'mature' debate. As if any games are mature, when you think about it. I mean, what is so mature about MGS anyway. You play a secret agent, infiltrating a secret terrorist base. The storyline, praised universally by the gaming press, is something that wouldnt be out of place in a jean claude van damme film.
I think its time we get past these stupid and ultimately pointless arguments. They are not doing the video game market any good and just show how immature and juveanile most of these 'mature' gamers are.
By the way, I cant wait for game cube and think its going to kick X-box's face in.
-David W
|
Oddly enough, other letter writers tried to go the opposite direction by claiming that the N64 had plenty of adult titles. Both arguments seem off base to me - the N64 did have plenty of blood and guts titles, especially early on, but only a handful were really shocking and adult - Conker's BFD is all that comes to mind. Games that weren't overly violent but were complex and thematically serious, like Ogre Battle 64, were also in short supply. In comparison, MGS (especially in the "bad" ending) is far more dramatic than most games on the N64 ever got close to (Van Damme film my ass!) and the PSX boasted a fair number of titles I'd want to keep well away from children, like Silent Hill. The mature debate looks to be a moot point with the Gamecube, true, but it's a legit distinction as far as the N64's concerned.
| Money money money money... money! |
| Dear Chris,
How's the GIA's financial situation these days? I've been clicking those damned ad banners every single time I leave the site. Are we in the black yet?
Lord Pendragon
|
First off, we hugely appreciate everyone who's been clicking on banners, and we even more hugely appreciate everyone who's sent in money via the Amazon system. Thank you thank you thank you. More than that I don't know I can say, except that we will be offering t-shirts sometime in the near future, and are looking for other ways to expend revenue besides. That picture Drew put up yesterday was actually a design submission, and while I'd like to hold off on publicly identifying the creator until all the designs have been judged, I would like to thank him publicly for coming up with such a kick ass logo.
Closing Comments:
I've said my piece on the matter, but I'd like to hear your thoughts on Matt Gburek's letter. Is the gaming public as a whole too easily swayed by public opinion, or are the decisions it ends up making fair and just? Drop me a line, and come back tomorrow.
-Chris Jones, neural multitasker
|
