|
Post by necromaniac on Feb 17, 2007 14:12:58 GMT -5
I didn't see Bangai-O mentioned. How is that game? It's ace. Get it. If not your cup of tea, sell it at the same price you bought it. One of Treasures top 5.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2007 15:05:47 GMT -5
I didn't see Bangai-O mentioned. How is that game? It's ace. Get it. If not your cup of tea, sell it at the same price you bought it. One of Treasures top 5. I am in utter concurrence with necromaniac here. Why does Bangai-O rule? Well... the main reason is because... just imagine four hundred missiles all exploding out of your little mech guy, all honed onto a single target and ready to completely wipe them off the map. Or, alternatively, four hundred lasers shooting out like a holy starburst and purifying the screen of all the unholy offenders. The first time it happens, you'll be completely blown away, and it won't get old for the hundred times or so after it. ;D For other reasons, it has forty-four levels, the control is quite fine (you can shoot in eight directions while moving around by pressing buttons in their respective directions, kinda like Smash TV), it gets pretty challenging at times, and to top it all off, the game is completely freaking nonsensical and there's a lot of poorly-translated dialogue that is nigh-impossible to comprehend... but that's just a little addition to the charm. Granted, the DC does have its fair share of chrap, and Japan definitely got the better end of it (like they did with the Saturn ), but... well, I always thought that every system had a great amount of crap, even moreso than good games. Of course, crap is subjective and in the eye of the beholder, but I thought the DC had a pretty good run. We probably would have received much better games if the run had lasted longer, but it's still one of the most beloved systems out there.
|
|
|
Post by Neo Rasa on Feb 17, 2007 15:27:29 GMT -5
The N64 version is better.
|
|
|
Post by dartagnan1803 on Feb 17, 2007 18:16:35 GMT -5
^ no it isn't The only thing about it that can be mistaken as better would be the control scheme (which is replecated rather well with ABXY mode in the DC edition).
Hell, even the game's staff says the DC game is better.
Part of the reason could be that they reward destruction in the DC game by charging your special meter that way rather than with fruit in the N64 edition. Besides, I'd rather not shell out extra cash for the N64 editon when the DC game is cheaper (combined with the fact that the N64 isn't really worth getting since it's library is limited to about 20 worthwhile games tops).
phew. . . [/tangent]
|
|
|
Post by kal on Feb 17, 2007 19:00:22 GMT -5
I have Evil Twin, it's unfortunate that it's rather interesting Alice in Wonderland demonic addition style is ruined by confusing level layout and dull gameplay (for the most part).
|
|
|
Post by michiyoyoshiku on Feb 17, 2007 19:16:45 GMT -5
yeah Bangai-o is insane I haven't beaten it but I am pretty far. I used that all Gophar code with in the game and had a blast...literally.
the Saturn has been reincarnated.......as something called the PS3
|
|
|
Post by YourAverageJoe on Feb 17, 2007 19:27:04 GMT -5
Let's just hope there'll be a Dreamcast-like PS4
|
|
|
Post by michiyoyoshiku on Feb 17, 2007 20:48:37 GMT -5
Let's just hope there'll be a Dreamcast-like PS4 the 360 is white and has a circle logo....and tends to die for no reason just like the dreamcast
|
|
|
Post by dartagnan1803 on Feb 18, 2007 2:46:51 GMT -5
the Saturn has been reincarnated.......as something called the PS3 I would have smote you for grievously insulting the Saturn, but I'm sure it was unintentional
|
|
|
Post by akumajobelmont on Feb 18, 2007 11:10:48 GMT -5
the Saturn has been reincarnated.......as something called the PS3 I would have smote you for grievously insulting the Saturn, but I'm sure it was unintentional I was thinking the exact same thing. I was gonna reply, but meh...
|
|
|
Post by YourAverageJoe on Feb 18, 2007 13:01:16 GMT -5
Even though the Saturn had awesome games, the general concept was very much like the PS3, no denying that.
|
|
|
Post by ahnslaught on Feb 18, 2007 14:22:32 GMT -5
How is the general concept of the Saturn like the PS3? Maybe I'm missing some other angle that you're referring to (and if I am, please let me know), but that statement is completely off in my mind as it relates to the history of the system or the games available, at least this early in the game.
As I know it, Saturn as we know (and love?) it was put together very quickly in response to the specs of the PS1, which seriously overshadowed the planned to successor to the Genesis/Mega Drive. Because of that, they quickly put together off the shelf parts to create the multi-processor behemoth known as the Saturn, which resulted in a system that didn't quite have the 3d capabilities of the PS1, but was much more suitable for the 2d titles the Saturn was so famous for.
The PS3, on the other hand, was planned from the get-go to be a complicated, powerful machine. The only similiarity I see between this and the Saturn is the claimed difficulty in developing for the system. It's still got plenty of support from consumers and developers, and great titles which may have broad appeal (Motorstorm, Resistance, etc.) are starting to come out unlike the Saturn, which had games like Panzer Dragoon at its launch. Now, I'm not knocking PD; in fact, it's my favorite series of all time, but I'm the first to admit that a rail shooter with dragons isn't really a mass appeal game.
As much as people put the PS3 down now, it's undeniable that it's much, much more popular than the Saturn was at its launch - remember, Saturn launched with many retailers not knowing of it until the E3 anouncement, and resulted in what is the worst launch in the history of consoles, at least for the major players.
Further, the PS3, for all its faults, is trying to deliver cutting edge features like Bluray for its high price. The Saturn, however, was a gaming console plain and simple, and charged a very high price ($400) even after Sony announced the PS1 would be $100 cheaper.
Again, I'm probably missing an angle you guys are thinking about, but please let me know.
|
|
|
Post by YourAverageJoe on Feb 18, 2007 15:11:40 GMT -5
First there's the power over soul philosophy, which you already covered, high price for its time, which you covered again, and although the Saturn wasn't a media center you've got to remember that the Xbox and later the PSP were the first ones to successfully get that down, so playing CDs was pretty much every feature needed as secondary functions. After that, there's the low market share, I hear Sony was aiming for that one, since they thought they were introducing their idea of quality instead of quantity, and the fact that they're advertising the PS3 as their reach out to the Hardcore Gamer; even though the Saturn wasn't intended as such, that's what it ended up to be.
|
|
|
Post by ahnslaught on Feb 18, 2007 16:32:25 GMT -5
I don't really understand your reasons still - the points you bring up show how little they share in common.
Power over soul...what does that mean? Basically every hardware maker with the exception of Nintendo lately goes for the best tech it can get for the time, within certain cost restrictions. Soul is determined by the games, not the system. This is more an argument I see in cars or something, but not in game consoles. BTW, xbox only got the media extender thing right only through mods; it was crap otherwise - maybe a better jukebox than PS2, but nothing more. I actually see 360 as the very first successful media box.
Yes, I covered the high price for its time; however, I also mentioned that Saturn did nothing else, just like other consoles out and upcoming back then, whereas PS3 does come with extras which can justify its higher price tag.
Sony aiming for low market share? That makes little sense to me as well - why would a company make a game console (which depends on sales of games to bring in the money) just to appeal to a small crowd? Further, you can't talk of low market share at this point, only three months into the console's life, and have it mean very much.
Anyway, back on topic, being an arcade game fan, I actually think the DC has a great ratio of quality to crap games. Yes, their 3d action/platformer games kinda suck now because of better controls, the dual analog standard, and simple evolution, but their arcade games were second to none, and they had plenty of those.
|
|
|
Post by michiyoyoshiku on Feb 18, 2007 16:40:46 GMT -5
They're both follow ups to insanely popular groundbreaking systems........that are impossible to develop for.
that's what I ment by my remark.
|
|