IT'S ABOUT MOTHERFUCKING TIME

[Herr Matzat]

Nintendo hasn't been good since the SNES, imo.

←

Edited August 19, 2004 by Michael Matzat

[Gongsun Zan]

If by easy to understand you mean done to death a thousand times in countless other mediums, then yes.

I never said all people who play RPGs are stupid. (Which, ironically enough, the top titles are all devoid of roleplaying whatsoever, and in the case of Xenosage, I'm not even sure if I can call it a game [but Xenosaga is badass, so who the fuck cares]), it's just that they appeal heavilly to the mass-moron market, which makes up the most of the PS2's fanbase.

Think about it, other than RPGs, the PS2 has barely anything else BIG to offer, save maybe GTA or Smackdown. While it DOES have a couple (read: one or two) good exclusives like Silent Hill 2, Fatal Frame, Tekken, Disgaea, they're all stuck in genres the general public barely touches.

For multi-platform, I buy X-Box, for better online-play, graphics and because it's 30 dollars cheaper (here, anyway.)

FPS? PC or X-box anyday. (Though Killzone looks good, I admit)

Sports...not with some shitty analog stick.

Seeing as I don't really mark out for RPGs, my PS2 shelf is pretty much devoid of games, save a couple of Survival Horror, Tactics and Romance of the 3 Kingdom stuff. Comparing it to my much larger GCN and X-Box RPGs, libraries, that amounts to pretty much a waste of my money. And it's not even like I'm biased against it. I hated the X-Box at first, but eventually I've come to like it more and more.

Then again, this has gone completely off point.

[Herr Matzat]

i don´t give a fuck about what the publice cares about as long as it gives me the games i want to have, wen it comes to my monney and my plaing needs genneral publice can go to hell as long as i keep getting my games released, wich happens, and it happens mostly on PS2 so thats were i am going, same as i was goin for SNES wen i was still a smal little michael with finaly enough monney to get that good darn thing. - and i see a lot more than one ore two games for PS2 that are must haves fore me and don´t come out for other Consoles (KoC red, KoC Green, KoC 2, Digaea, La Pucelle, Phantome Brave, Star Ocean 3, FPWZ, Unlimited SaGa, the upcomming Shin Megami Tensei titles and so one and so forth) PS2 just has so much stuff that some realy good titles drown in the masses, but if you care about good games and you know what you like you will find the good titles and not only go for the few hyped ones.

I am also one of the Ideots that dossent think high end grafiks are good grafiks, i know several 2d games that kick some XBox/PC games seriusly in the ass even if it is fucking Doom hygo hardcore GFX mega shit 3 just because they deliver in a far better way, wich is what GFX need to do, deliver, not be high end, just deliver. (and yes i am high on retro gaming)

+PS2 has David Lynch Comercial, i buy annything that David Lynch makes adverts for, even the cars if i ever get enough monney What ?! You guys mark for luther rains i do for david lynch, so shut up

[Guest The Survivor]

The GTA series, as well, isn't very innovative. It's highly derivative with low replay value. It's fun, but it's not worth more then a rental. But it's marketted well, and plays to the target group that Nintendo has absolutely ignored.

[Guest Flawless Cowboy]

The GTA series, as well, isn't very innovative. It's highly derivative with low replay value. It's fun, but it's not worth more then a rental. But it's marketted well, and plays to the target group that Nintendo has absolutely ignored.

What?!?! Low replay value? Not very innovative? First, I have both GTA 3 and Vice City and I play them everyday and so do millions of people. So.. it HAS a very HIGH replay value. AND, not very innovative? Damn man, the GTA Series transformed the whole video game business!

←

[Herr Matzat]

well if it is true what they claim (GTA:SA imposible (!!!) to finish the story under 150 houres) you can´t realy say you get annything to short for your monney. I think i got my monneys worth with every GTA by now...

i always prefered plaing GTA on the PC annyway, don´t ask me why i just prevere it.

[SeanDMan]

What?!?! Low replay value? Not very innovative? First, I have both GTA 3 and Vice City and I play them everyday and so do millions of people. So.. it HAS a very HIGH replay value. AND, not very innovative? Damn man, the GTA Series transformed the whole video game business!

←

Cut me a line, too.

Wow you play it everyday. AND THUS IT IS FULL OF REPLAY VALUE. Or maybe it's just the same shit over and over again and you play it because you are a stupid corporate whore who is easily amused? I know which one I'm voting for. :thumbsup: Come on man, you play the game once, you do the missions of which there are about 8 different types and then they just change the nationalities and names of the bad guys, then what can you do? Randomly run people over, do stupid car jumps, fuck hookers? The game is one giant novelty act, it's just a game of crash TV, oh look, hookers, once you grow up you'll see that too.

And innovative? Driver was innovative, it was a pinnacle game for the Playstation, mission based driving and organized crime, sound familar? Yes, GTA was doing it on the Super Nintendo and the PC but Driver brought it into the next generation, GTA did force changes to the genre, it introduced walking into video games ( ), but it didn't create the genre, nor did it revolutionize it. Driver had all the fundamentals, GTA marketted hard a liscensed sounctrack and really pushed hard the violence, but the gameplay wasn't revolutionary, it was gimmicky. It also helped that Driver had some horrible bugs that killed off the franchise and that GTA has better graphics (OMG HOOD RELFECTION!), it's marketted to a stupider audience, and they bought it.

GTA 2 was much better as a depth game, and Matzat I prefer playing them on PC too, Multiplayer saves what is for me a mediocre game.

[Smeagol]

Honestly, I'd have to agree that GTA games have good replay value. I wouldn't go so far as to say that I play it every day, but I do find it fun to simply drive fast, get my wanted level up, and see how long I can run from the cops before dying/getting arrested.

[Guest The Survivor]

What?!?! Low replay value? Not very innovative? First, I have both GTA 3 and Vice City and I play them everyday and so do millions of people. So.. it HAS a very HIGH replay value. AND, not very innovative? Damn man, the GTA Series transformed the whole video game business!

←

Cut me a line, too.

Wow you play it everyday. AND THUS IT IS FULL OF REPLAY VALUE. Or maybe it's just the same shit over and over again and you play it because you are a stupid corporate whore who is easily amused? I know which one I'm voting for. :thumbsup: Come on man, you play the game once, you do the missions of which there are about 8 different types and then they just change the nationalities and names of the bad guys, then what can you do? Randomly run people over, do stupid car jumps, fuck hookers? The game is one giant novelty act, it's just a game of crash TV, oh look, hookers, once you grow up you'll see that too.

And innovative? Driver was innovative, it was a pinnacle game for the Playstation, mission based driving and organized crime, sound familar? Yes, GTA was doing it on the Super Nintendo and the PC but Driver brought it into the next generation, GTA did force changes to the genre, it introduced walking into video games ( ), but it didn't create the genre, nor did it revolutionize it. Driver had all the fundamentals, GTA marketted hard a liscensed sounctrack and really pushed hard the violence, but the gameplay wasn't revolutionary, it was gimmicky. It also helped that Driver had some horrible bugs that killed off the franchise and that GTA has better graphics (OMG HOOD RELFECTION!), it's marketted to a stupider audience, and they bought it.

GTA 2 was much better as a depth game, and Matzat I prefer playing them on PC too, Multiplayer saves what is for me a mediocre game.

←

[SeanDMan]

Your only point of GTA's innovation was it's freedom, well, let me go back to my old faithful, Fallout. Released in 1997 (2 years before Grand Theft Auto 2, I'd like to add), it's got a hell of a lot more freedom then GTA, GTA even if it lets you wander around, still has a linear storyline, you do the missions, blah. Play Fallout. Get a mission, don't like it? Kill the idiot who gave it to you. You say...

There's no other game that can compare to GTA in FREEDOM. You can do whatever you want in the game, kill people, fuck whores, be a police man, etc...

Uh, not exactly.

Kill people? Yeah, Fallout's got that.

Fuck whores? Yeah, Fallout's got that.

Be a police man? Yeah, Fallout's got that.

Fallout lets you do anything GTA can, join the mafia, run people down, and it's got some things GTA can't touch.

In GTA, can you...

make a man dig his own grave ("There are two kinds of people in the world, Lloyd, those with loaded guns, and those who dig. Get digging.") and then throw a landmine on his head?

sell your friends and entire cities into slavery?

set a man on fire and enjoy watching him dance around in agony as he is burnt to death?

do drugs, and SELL drugs?

set off an A-Bomb in Los Angeles?

Yeah, so your freedom point is rebuked, GTA isn't innovative, it's derivative. It's more free then Driver, sure, but it's by no means the standard bearer when it comes to freedom in video games. Every company wants to make a GTA because IT SELLS, not because it innovated the industry, there are lots of games that innovate the industry but don't sell, Silent Storm, Extreme Paintball, some good some bad, but unless they sell truckloads, no one rips them off. It's not a fact that it revolutionized the industry, it marketted concepts existing on PC games to the stupider console audience, in that sense of the narrow definition of the industry, it was "REVOLUTIONARY", again, it's still a mind-numbingly repetitive overproduced piece of garbage.

Edited August 20, 2004 by SeanDMan

[Herr Matzat]

for me GTA was something new wen it came out the first time that i have never seen before, and to me it started of a new gnere that got copyed with games like the gateway (ore whatever it was called) and Driver stuff. I don´t realy care about fucking whores and selling drugs wen it comes to something being inovatife, GTA just was something new as a whole package that took the world with a hugh impacked that is still holding on untill today (even with people not knowing the old games)

if you want to be nittpicky about smal crap like being able to fuck whores ore so you most likly could take the inovativety out of every game, what the fuck has fallout don that wassent don in several other RPGs, you could level up before, you had skills before, heck the compleed system was "stolen" from a pen and paper game, how uninovative i can´t belive you like it

GTA as the whole packeg is just something you up to today you cannot find in manny other games and that is only don in a good way in the GTA games, they might be of differenct qualety in the series but still each gta > annything that tryed to copy the packeg of a game that GTA introduced to this world.

There are a lot games that are BY FARE more garbage because of points that have nothing todo with personal tast, you cannot say GTA is buggy ore horribley coded in annywy, so you don´t like it because it´s not your kind of game. There is no reason to not be alowed to be able to have fun with thes games.... unlike driver and the gateway crap.

Edited August 20, 2004 by Michael Matzat

[SeanDMan]

if you want to be nittpicky about smal crap like being able to fuck whores ore so you most likly could take the inovativety out of every game, what the fuck has fallout don that wassent don in several other RPGs, you could level up before, you had skills before, heck the compleed system was "stolen" from a pen and paper game, how uninovative i can´t belive you like it

←

What did GTA have that set it apart?

They said freedom. It had been in other games.

They said driving. It's bene in other games.

Mature content, and so on, and so on.

If you want to be nitpicky, then there are no "original" games. What does KOC have that other games don't have? Wrestling? OMG WAIT.

GTA was the whole package is just something you can't find in any games. So was the Fifth Element, it didn't make it any good.

And I preferred True Crime to GTA, the ability to change the storylines with your actions (OMG) made it a superior game, and it was rediculously over the top in it's violence which makes it fun and enjoyable.

Edit:

There are a lot games that are BY FARE more garbage because of points that have nothing todo with personal tast, you cannot say GTA is buggy ore horribley coded in annywy, so you don´t like it because it´s not your kind of game. There is no reason to not be alowed to be able to have fun with thes games.... unlike driver and the gateway crap.

You're right, it might be fun. But it's derivative, has low replay value, and is marketted to an audience with the combined intelligence of Droppytop. It's not worth more then a rental, because once you beat it once, it's just mindlessly repitative, let's drive over people, why not just play Carmegeddon?

Edited August 20, 2004 by SeanDMan

[Herr Matzat]

you have ben nitpicking, i said GTA is something that has not been don before in a packeg like it was don with GTA one, therfore it is new, it is special, it (still) is something were you have no real alternative outside of the series if you want to play a game that alowes you to have all this stuff in a storyline. You started being nit üpicky and calling uop stuff were you need to buy 10 other games to have al that stuff somehow . . . i have no idea why you atack me (KoC) for holding aghainst you that you are to nitpicky . . .

True Crim sucked, hard. Also, there have been like a million games were the story changes based on your actions. Why don´t you buy them to get that ? And play the next nascare game for the driving part ? Because you like it more packed together in one game. And thats what i am saing all the time. . . .

Carmeeddon

Edited August 20, 2004 by Michael Matzat

[SeanDMan]

you have ben nitpicking, i said GTA is something that has not been don before in a packeg like it was don with GTA one, therfore it is new, it is special, it (still) is something were you have no real alternative outside of the series if you want to play a game that alowes you to have all this stuff in a storyline. You started being nit üpicky and calling uop stuff were you need to buy 10 other games to have al that stuff somehow . . . i have no idea why you atack me (KoC) for holding aghainst you that you are to nitpicky . . .

←

Your saying it was something new because it wasn't like GTA 1?

true crim sucked, hard.

How so.

And you're pretty nitpicky yourself Matzat. :thumbsup:

Edit:

Also, there have been like a million games were the story changes based on your actions. Why don´t you buy them to get that ? And play the next nascare game for the driving part ? Because you like it more packed together in one game. And thats what i am saing all the time. . . .

Errrr... yeah, I dunno about you, but I can't even afford the bandwidth I use to aquire games, forget buy them every month. If I want a game I pick up a game I will like and that will last, I DID NOT BUY True Crime, on the other hand I did buy GTA 3, but it has almost no replay value, I didn't even bother to buy Vice City as I beat it on a 3 day rental.

Edited August 20, 2004 by SeanDMan

[Herr Matzat]

Your saying it was something new because it wasn't like GTA 1?

[SeanDMan]

Your saying it was something new because it wasn't like GTA 1?

i talked about GTA the series not GTA one the game, and i am pritty shure that is not lost in anny bad spelling ore gramma on my part. :-/

←

Okay no I just reread your post, I misunderstood, my fault. While it is innovative in that it's the only game to jam everything in that package, it's not the first game with that package, nor is it the first game that had what it jammed in there, I call that deritive, if you call that innovative, it's a difference of opinion, although as usual I'm right.

[Herr Matzat]

although as usual I'm right.

[SeanDMan]

i should selöl you to the russians so they can use you to take down america

←

"There are no Americans in Moscow, who said that? They're crazy! We have beat the infidels back at the border, there are no Americans in Moscow!"

*loud banging at the door, muffled shouting*

"This is the United States Army! All filthy pinkos are ordered to come out with your hands up!"

*shifty glance*

"Well I have to go, I am having dinner with Comrade Putin, but rememeber there are no infidels in Moscow! FOR MOTHER RUSSIA! aw fuck I'm hosed FOR THE HOMELAND!"

Edited August 20, 2004 by SeanDMan

[apsham]

When the Nintendo 64 was out, I believe i'd never fully like Sony and their Playstation line. But today, I only love the Nintendo corporation for about... two things. Earthbound and Super Smash Bros. Melee, that may change soon however, as i'm feeling bored and there's currently nothing new out, so i'm going to head out and pick up a shitload of cheap Nintendo 64 used games.

Nothing beats the Playstation 2 right now in my mind however. Most games that are really good on the Gamecube are also available on the Playstation 2, WITH better graphics and gameplay.

[Gongsun Zan]

But your point is moot considering those very same games are ALSO on the X-Box, with *gasp* even better graphics!

Or at least, that's what they tell me. Personally, I can never spot the difference.

Edited August 21, 2004 by Gongsun Zan