irstupid said:
Staude said:
irstupid said:
Torillian said:
spurgeonryan said:
But the main reason they don't give it a 10 is because some of the graphics could have been re-done better! They did not do any tweeks to the music (although I believe it comes with the soundtrack?). IGN...it was a 10 back in 1998, now it is better, but you reduced the score? What else am I missing people, other than it is basically the same game on a new system. Remember some people have not seen it. You wouldn't give Star Wars a A- just because it was re-release with new scenes would you? Let's have a 17 year old who did not play the original rate this game and see what happens.
http://ds.ign.com/articles/117/1177020p1.html
|
I'm a big proponent of the idea that a 10 in 1998 wouldn't necessarily be a 10 in 2011. Gaming has changed and evolved since then and standards have moved forward. Similar to how a late port usually gets a lower metacritic score even if it's only a few months old it seems that the remake didn't improve enough to make up the difference that 13 years has made to industry standards. I'd have to play it myself to see if I agree.
|
i'm in the exact opposite boat. take away todays pretty graphics and see how they do
there have been soo many great games i have played this gen that have less than par graphics and they got horrible reviews and there have been even more shitty games that i have played that had amazing graphics and good scores.
It seems a game gets docked a bunch for its graphics in reviews, yet doesn't get docked for bugs or gliches. They just go "hope an update fixes this later" its like wtf
|
you realize that more powerful hardware allows for improvement in all aspects of the game, and not just the visuals right ?
A more direct reply to your statement.. Concider that a game from 1996 released today the exact same. The controls would be slammed, the AI would be slammed... It would be called a relic, under developed as the game today are amongst and competing with games in the same genre that have been developed much further... Even if the original game was the starting point of their development. If it had'nt been made before, didn't have a popular char.. It would get slammed in reviews.
|
read a recent interview on ocarina of time and found something interesting stated. basically the z targeting works that when you have them targeting then that enemy ONLY attacks you and theother wait there turn.
to me that sounds like the recent assassins creed games and many others where the enemies all WAIT their turn to fight or fight you one on one. doesn't sound like the ai in recent games is much better.
i know witcher 2 they all attack at once and due to this i have seen more than enough of people complainig about how its too hard and they should be liek assassins creed. very sad
|
You can easily emulate weaker hardware on more powerful hardware.. While I do believe multiple enemies can attack you in assassins creed, I've only played the first one so I'm not entirely sure.
That doesn't make it good AI though.
An example of good AI is the enemies in killzone 2, they don't just follow the usual fps enemy script. They adapt compared to you. You can't pull that AI off in the same way with weak hardware.
I'm not saying that all new games have great AI, i'm just saying the hardware gives them the opportunity to have create better AI. It's still completely up to the individual developer to actually do it.
Another example is the friendly AI in uncharted. One of the things that really stood out to me in the first uncharted, was how the AI partner adapted to the enviroment and to both you and the enemies, picking up weapons, moving from cover to cover, not getting in your way and actually giving you the feeling they were competent and helping you. :P
Ofcourse the more powerful hardware allows dynamic systems which allows for more immersion, but that's partially besides the point i'm trying to make here, since we all know that.. It's that the more powerful hardware is a tool to allow the developer to make a better game in all aspects.
