Oh Dear Fucking God, Sonic MMORPG.

[Green Gibbon!]

I forgot. Games are only good if they are obscure and Japanese.

Don't know about that, but I do know they're not good if they're generic cut & paste military-themed shooters with static character design, monochromatic art, banal repetitive settings, and evident lack of any thought or creativity put into story, setting, or mechanics. If it moves, shoot it, but good luck identifying one gray texture map from the next. It takes more than guns to make a game.

[Delphine]

WHAT YOU SAY

[chriscaffee]

I wish I could make all those judgments after seeing a two minute trailer.

[Green Gibbon!]

It's not hard to spot creativity, or to at least discern between creativity and banality. Besides, you seem to be an avid fan of sweeping generalizations, so I was only playing your game.

[chriscaffee]

Well it may not be creative (but what game that falls into a well-established genre is?) but it sure looks like fun to me.

[Esrever]

It looks fun to me, too. More specifically, it looks like the same fun I was having eight years ago. I don't know, Chris... I can't get excited about these games anymore. They can be a lot of fun to play, but they sem so interchangeable that there just isn't any real point to anticipating one individually. If someone puts it in front of me I'm sure I'll enjoy it but I can't imagine missing it if it was gone.

[chriscaffee]

I never said I was thrilled. I just said it looked kind of cool. I'm not anticipating it in any sense of the word. More than likely I will not own a PS3 anyway and will never play it.

[Popcorn]

I'm with Gibbon on this one. I like it when I'm with Gibbon because arguing against anyone else is easy.

The Killzone 2 demo looked really cool to me, except for the fact that the first game sucked outrageously and this one doesn't seem to be anything more interesting than the first except for the fantastic technology on offer. As a demonstration of the technology we'll supposedly be playing with in the future, it was excitement.

But I can say with some depresed honesty that the two games I'm most looking forward to most at the moment-- passing their rivals by quite a considerably vast degree-- are Okami and Shadow of the Colossus. There's nothing else I can name at the moment that I would call genuinely exciting to me.

I am, however, not totally against the propogation of sequels. If enjoy something the first time around, I'm generally up for some more of it in the future; the problem is that a straight sequel rarely extends past light entertainment for me. I can't get excited over a game unless it looks like I can do something really new in it. I adored Viewtiful Joe but I haven't even bothered to finish the sequel, and I've spent less than half an hour with Devil May Cry 3 since I picked it up two weeks ago.

I still think Zelda looks pretty cool, though.

[Baba O'Reily]

Well, would you prefer your games with innovation or would you prefer your games to be rehashes, but excellent rehashes?
I know, I know, you want excellent innovation, but you can't get both right now. Pick one or the other.

[Neo Yi]

I don't mind innovative games. Hell, I wish more games were innovative or unique or something different altogether then piles of endless sequels, but to me, I can't help it when I'm bedazzled by the next Final Fantasy, Kingdom Hearts, Crash Bandicoot, or whatever Mario is up to today. Perhaps it's because I either grew up with the series or I thought the first game was superly fun.

So, in the end, I guess it all matters down to whether I'll have fun with the game or not, whether it's something innovative or just a plain sequel.
~Neo

[Ngangbius]

It all comes down if the game looks fun to play and if I actually enjoy it while playing it whether it is new and/or innovative IP or part of an established franchise. Though even new IPs doesn't automatically means it will actually be a good or better game than ones based on a mainstream franchise. I mean, I though Billy Hatcher was an interesting game, but when I actually played it it gave me a headache and bored me to tears. Heck, I'm really interested in Chulip, but there is a chance that the game could be awful to play at the end of the day(and not just because of the modified graphics for a North American audience).

See, but I think Okami looks amazing. Wanda to Kyozou looks amazing. I also want to play Odama, Bumpy Trot, Homeland, and even Zettai Zetsumei 2. It's all this mainstream franchise dreck, this Mario Croquet Metal Gear Plasma, Grand Theft Halo Final Fantasy Yoshi Pokemon Redux 6 bullshit I think is a crock.

I'll remember the last part of this statement, if you ever decide to play Grandia III. ;)

[Green Gibbon!]

This isn't just a matter of sequels vs original titles, it's a matter of creativite thinking versus thoughtless rehashing. When a sequel is made, it's for one of two reasons: 1) the creators thought there was some new ground to cover with the same formula and perhaps build upon the original to offer an all-round better experience (it does occasionally happen), or 2) some marketing bigwig noticed that the last Shinobi May Cry sold really well, so of course another needs to be made, regardless of whether or not it should be made. Is it a sequel, or is it a chunk of half-baked kibble tossed to fan dogs to make another 2 billion dollars?

It's an especially bad problem in the game industry, because unlike other media, game sequels usually sell more than their predecessors. Games stop being games when they become "franchises". It stifles creative thinking and new ideas, and the problem is getting out-of-hand, moreso than it's ever been before.

As for Grandia 3, I don't think it looks that hot. I really like the character design, which seems to be truer to the spirit of the original, but other than that, it just looks like a slight alteration of the Grandia 2 engine. I was really hoping for something new, but as I think I said in a previous thread, I apparently need to stop hoping for that.

[Squirrelknight]

Heck, I'm really interested in Chulip, but there is a chance that the game could be awful to play at the end of the day(and not just because of the modified graphics for a North American audience).

Whatever happened to Chulip? I remember seeing it on a few release schedules awhile ago and then it disappeared. Same with Wild Arms: Alter Code F.

Anyway, sequels aren't all that bad, as sometimes a company can innovate within the limits of a "franchise". Resident Evil 4 is a good example of this, and it comes from Capcom of all places, the company that pretty much invented rehashed sequel games. Yeah, it took them awhile to make any changes to the established formula, but the results speak for themselves.

[Ngangbius]

Whatever happened to Chulip? I remember seeing it on a few release schedules awhile ago and then it disappeared. Same with Wild Arms: Alter Code F.

Both titles are supposedly being released sometime this summer or fall.

[Double-S-]

RE4 was pretty much a completely different game from the others in the series. And it happened to be good. It's one of the very, very few examples of a static series (gameplay-wise) being turned new and fresh.

Anyways, I played Killzone, which sucked, and the Killzone 2 trailer, even though it wasn't even the real game, looked like nothing more than a prettier version of the original, with the same linear level design and stuff. And that's what most sequels are right now - better looking, a couple extra moves/weapons/somethings. I don't feel the need to play these games. Splinter Cell's an example of this, as I wanted to play the first one badly (and did), then I really didn't care too much about the sequels except for the multiplayer and coop bits (because those were new, innovative, and fun).

Quite frankly, absolutely nothing right now grabs my interest any more than mildly. It's boring and disappointing.

[Neo Yi]

It all comes down if the game looks fun to play and if I actually enjoy it while playing it whether it is new and/or innovative IP or part of an established franchise. Though even new IPs doesn't automatically means it will actually be a good or better game than ones based on a mainstream franchise. I mean, I though Billy Hatcher was an interesting game, but when I actually played it it gave me a headache and bored me to tears. Heck, I'm really interested in Chulip, but there is a chance that the game could be awful to play at the end of the day(and not just because of the modified graphics for a North American audience).

I don't think all innovative games are good. Some I played were pretty durn bad or at least uninteresting and boring in some way. I agree with you in that in the end, it all matters on how much fun I have. I'll like a game whether it brings something new to the table or not, but only if I have fun.
~Neo

[Green Gibbon!]

· <-- the point                                                                                                                                       You guys --> ·


So how... how is the weather over there?

[Dark Crow]

It sounds to me that you just hate sequels purely because they are sequels that do little to nothing for the enhancement of the core game, despite how good or much fun the end product is overall. I guess that also means it would be impossible for you to get excited over that Katamari sequel Gibbon, considering how it looks to play exactly the same as the original game save having more stuff to pickup and the additional 2 player modes.

[Delphine]

It sounds to me that you just hate sequels purely because they are sequels that do little to nothing for the enhancement of the core game, despite how good or much fun the end product is overall. I guess that also means it would be impossible for you to get excited over that Katamari sequel Gibbon, considering how it looks to play exactly the same as the original game save having more stuff to pickup and the additional 2 player modes.

...

This isn't just a matter of sequels vs original titles, it's a matter of creativite thinking versus thoughtless rehashing. When a sequel is made, it's for one of two reasons: 1) <b>the creators thought there was some new ground to cover with the same formula and perhaps build upon the original to offer an all-round better experience</b> (it does occasionally happen), or 2) some marketing bigwig noticed that the last Shinobi May Cry sold really well, so of course another needs to be made, regardless of whether or not it should be made. Is it a sequel, or is it a chunk of half-baked kibble tossed to fan dogs to make another 2 billion dollars?

Good job on that reading comprehension, Dark Crow.

[Green Gibbon!]

It sounds to me that you just hate sequels purely because they are sequels that do little to nothing for the enhancement of the core game, despite how good or much fun the end product is overall.

Well, I'm not simple-minded enough to be entertained by the same trick over and over and over again, regardless of how cool I thought it was the first time. Much less the same trick that's advertised as "new" trick, and then they try to sell it to me.

You're also right about Katamari 2, though... I really don't care. The first one is excellent, and I think the formula is spent. Sometimes (in fact, most of the time) once is enough.

[Rom]

What do you guys think about Spartan: Total Warrior and Virtua Tennis, out of interest? Or Full Auto?

(Sorry if I've missed discussion of these somewhere else...)

[Squirrelknight]

I'm not even vaguely interested by those games... Out of the three of those, Spartan probably has the most potential, but I liked it better when it was called Dynasty Warriors.

Speaking of Dynasty Warriors, has anyone played the fifth one? I heard they added tigers. Not sure how many tigers participated in ancient Chinese combat, but hey, tigers added to anything equals a good time.

Err, anyway, while we're on the topic of games no one cares about, is anyone else interested in Atelier Iris or Stella Deus? They're pretty much the only recent releases I would pay full price for.

[Rom]

Snigger

I'm not gonna start preaching like a firm's boy, but I will say, having played Spartan, it ain't no Dynasty Warriors. Once you've played it the comparison seems a little stretched, it plays very differently.

But then I spose you'll have to take my word for that...

Virtua Tennis though? You didn't like that on DC??

[Omni Hunter]

VT wasn't even close to appealing on the DC, then again I do hate sports games but there were many other games with more appeal.
In Chu Chu Rocket the idea was simple and new which made it popular but to be honest Virtua Tennis, to me, was yet another tennis game.

[j-man]

I love Virtua Tennis. It's the only incarnation of the infernal game that I can stand.