The_Joker_Product said:
The multiplayer experience on the DS is nothing compared to the PS3/Xbox. Pokemon...really? ive played DS games online, its not the same as you playing a game with a dozen people while talking to people on headsets which happens commonly or going through a storymode of a game with your friend who you can invite along. Lairs controls sucked because of the sixaxis which was a failed idea that pretty much nobody uses now, it was also a very early game. Goldeneye only came out last year and its controls still suck, ive had the Wii for a few years now so im not new to it either. Its no wonder these FPS games dont sell on the Wii. Its no surprise Pokemon doesnt have a greater score, the games have barely changed at all. Its pretty much the same game but with worse looking character designs. The original Pokemon Red had great character designs, the ones in the newer games are just plain awful, the ones in your signature prove that completely. |
Correct me if i'm wrong, but aren't there very few games on PS3 and 360 that allow you to do that, instead of relying on alternative co-op modes? Then again, DS has some examples like that as well, mainly Dragon Quest IX. It's one thing playing a 6 hour co-op mode and an another entire different thing to play a +100 hour RPG with a friend and that's only counting the main story and not the extra dungeons and DLC content.
Odd, Wii users mostly don't complain about the controls of Goldeneye and most FPS's on the Wii. It's mostly non-Wii users or people that are accostumed to the setups of PS3 and 360 that do, which says a lot. Lair is an example of crappy controls by design flaw not because people find it crappy because it's different from what they are used to.
Actually, the best designs are from the Gold/Silver era, but I digress. A formula doesn't need to be changed if it works and if the fanbase and critical peer review agrees with it. That's why every new iteration of Zelda, which is basically the same as the previous one, still gets ravishing reviews, because the formula is good.
Alas a lot of games this generation, under the cover of different names and IPs, use basically rehashed formulas from one another. I don't see how is that different from Game Freak using their own formula (instead of copying from another), from doing the same and still keep their fanbase happy.
Take for example Skyrim. Do you know what is the single difference from Arena and Daggerfall? It's better First Person View implementation. Other than that, if you go to the core of every Elder Scrolls game, they're pretty much the same and I don't see anyone complaining now do I? Heck, the biggest changes in the series were implemented on Daggerfall. But again, what I've learned this generation is that a lot of people are newcomers to Bethesda and ES games (started with Oblivion), so they're kinda oblivious to how similar the new games are to the past ones, be it for the record of glitchiness of their games or how Skyrim is the most stable release Bethesda ever made.
You can't have one measuring stick for one game and have a different for another. Not only is that not fair, it's biased, untrue, unprofessional (for the critical reviewers who do that, and unfortunately they're in the majority) and simply goes against anything a gamer should do.
Current PC Build
CPU - i7 8700K 3.7 GHz (4.7 GHz turbo) 6 cores OC'd to 5.2 GHz with Watercooling (Hydro Series H110i) | MB - Gigabyte Z370 HD3P ATX | Gigabyte GTX 1080ti Gaming OC BLACK 11G (1657 MHz Boost Core / 11010 MHz Memory) | RAM - Corsair DIMM 32GB DDR4, 2400 MHz | PSU - Corsair CX650M (80+ Bronze) 650W | Audio - Asus Essence STX II 7.1 | Monitor - Samsung U28E590D 4K UHD, Freesync, 1 ms, 60 Hz, 28"







