Thank you Sony for not ruining the PS4!

[The Ghost of RubangB]

Rpruett said:

Xeta said:

Rpruett, graphics is not quantifiable unless you look at the specific elements that make it up. Does Crysis have a consistently higher polygon count/frame rate/resolution than Goldeneye? Yes, and that's quantifiable fact. Does Crysis have more detailed textures? Yes, and that is also quantifiable fact. Is Crysis more visually appealing than Goldeneye? To many it probably is, but there will be people who for various reasons will prefer Goldeneye (for instance, people who dislike realism).

You are basing your arguments on assumptions that are actually unsound. Just like a higher polygon count does not ensure a game is more visually appealing than one with lower (as in, for everyone or even most people), high critical acclaim does not make a game "better" for everyone or even most people. Also, you seem to be confused as to what an "opinion" is. An opinion is, according to Merriam Webster Online Dictionary:

1 a: a view, judgment, or appraisal formed in the mind about a particular matter b: approval , esteem

2 a: belief stronger than impression and less strong than positive knowledge b: a generally held view

3 a: a formal expression of judgment or advice by an expert b: the formal expression (as by a judge, court, or referee) of the legal reasons and principles upon which a legal decision is based

Nowhere in there is it said that opinions should, or even CAN, be proven with facts. In fact, since an opinion is "less strong than positive knowledge", as soon as you start searching for definitive truths you aren't dealing with opinions anymore. I ask that you at least stop asking for people to "prove their opinions" since that is ludicrous.

I'm searching for someone that is being remotely realistic and objective in a conversation not completely blind.  LIke I said,  I could make ludicrous arguments like Goldeneye > Crysis.  I don't need definite truths,  I'm just looking for some objectivity. No one is right or wrong with their opinion.

However, it's clear that in a majority of people's opinions the PS2 had a better lineup in it's first 27 months than the Nintendo Wii has.  Including professionals of the industry.

Do you actually believe that game reviewers are "professionals of the industry"?  It's just a bunch of uneducated bloggers getting tons of free swag and gawking at polygon-boobies, telling me what they like, but that has no effect whatsoever on what I like.  These "professionals" are the same uneducated morons claiming GTA4 has "Oscar-worthy dialogue."  I really hope that your preferences aren't determined by Metacritic scores and graphics.

Their review scores are opinions, just like ours, and do not get to be used to support any sort of truth.  All that Metacritic review scores prove is the preferences for a very small group of game reviewers.  At Metacritic, the top 2 PS2 games (tied at 97) are Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 3 and GTA 3.  Tony Hawk only had 34 reviews and GTA 3 only had 56 reviews.  I'd rather trust one person with similar tastes (saying something like "If you like X and Y, you'll love Z") than trust 34 people with different tastes (telling me what is the best and what is the sux).  Since I prefer Katamari way more than either Tony Hawk or GTA, does that mean that my opinion is somehow wrong because 34 jackasses on the internet thinking Tony Hawk is better somehow makes that "a qualitative truth"? 

 

Rpruett said:

The Ghost of RubangB said:

Rpruett said:

Soriku said:

Rpruett said:

Khuutra said:
Wait wait wait wait wait.

"Innovation has been primarily driven by graphics"?

Are you trying to imply that the biggest innovation of the past fifteen years, which was the movement into three dimensional gameplay, was driven by graphics?

 

Yes. The progression of graphics, moved onward to the 3d model from the original 2d model.

 

That's one of many innovations that's happened in 15 years. What you're saying is that the jump from 2D to 3D is the only innovation...at least that's what I'm getting. And that's wrong.

I can't think of a bigger one.  Can you?

An N64 joystick?  Well I ask you this....Where on earth did the need for a joystick arise?  I mean why on earth would you need a joystick for a 2d game?

So you could move in more than 4 or 8 directions, and thanks to pressure-sensitive tilting in all directions, you could have much more control over speed as well.  It would have been very helpful in Robotron or Smash TV back in the day.  If you've played those games and then played Geometry Wars, you can tell how much an analog joystick really helps 2-D games.

I got every single star in Mario 64 with a joystick, and again in Mario 64 DS, with the D-Pad.

 

And yeah, it helps in 3-D games too, but I was answering your last question.

If you could ONLY have one innovation, would it be 3-D graphics without analog joysticks, or would it be analog joysticks without 3-D graphics?  Let's pretend we're in 1995, so we don't have 3-D motion sensing controls yet.