Should Nintendo double down on working with "AA" studios

[Mr Puggsly]

Pemalite said:

Mr Puggsly said:

They all aged badly? No. Its also possible some games had good ideas but the overall execution was poor, those are the games that aged badly.

Some of those games you mentioned are actually still enjoyable. I mean Halo 1, Halo 2, Halo Wars, Gears 1 are still good games I've played in the past few years via remasters or BC. Halo 1 and Halo 2 still have active MP in MCC.

Now you are starting to understand subjectivity. In short... You don't get it both ways.

Halo 1 and 2 remasters bring the games forwards significantly in the visual department, the older games are still an eyesore.
Halo 1 and 2 in MCC have a non-existent Multiplayer population in Oceania... And the original servers for Halo 2 are long gone... And the MCC collection has been a buggy mess from the very beginning anyway, only now is the effort being put in to rectify all it's problems.

Gears 1 just looks like an excessive brown crushed mess with way to much bloom, it's clunky and terrible to play next to something like Gears 5.

Halo Wars today has no one playing it on PC, Xbox 360 or Xbox One, it's slow, it's clunky... And if you were to compare such an RTS against what the PC outputs today, it doesn't even have allot of depth to the gameplay.

In short, they were all amazing games on release, but comparing them to more modern titles, they certainly fall short... Thus there is a definite need to judge said titles within an appropriate context and that is the era they released in, the hardware they released on and the other available games at the time... And the same goes for the RARE Nintendo 64 games.

Mr Puggsly said:

I think FF games generally aged fine because the core gameplay is just a standard JRPG.

Some aged better than others. I can't play Final Fantasy 7, it's just to much of an eyesore and the controls feel clunky... I don't mind Final Fantasy 8, but even that shares some of the same issues, but it's less pronounced as they baked pre-rendered FMV into many parts of the game... On PC it's less of an issue, but the pre-rendered backgrounds just don't upscale well, hence the use of mods.

Mr Puggsly said:

I always hated the tank control of RE games, but I think people enjoyed the games outside of that.

I loved Resident Evil 5, thought that was a blast... And thoroughly loved Resident Evil 1 on the PS1 back in the day, but can't stand it today.

Mr Puggsly said:

NES games are an era people have mixed feelings about. I feel like 16-bit games get more praise and rightfully so.

Even many 16-bit SNES games are pretty terrible when judged next to more modern titles... Take StarFox for instance.

The main reason why 16-bit platforms seem "better" is mostly down to the art assets that were employed, plus gameplay wasn't as slow and clunky like most 8-bit platforms... Super Metroid is far more responsive and fluid than Metroid and visually they are leagues apart, you actually know which area you are in on the SNES.

Mr Puggsly said:

CoD1 is not a great game to revisit, but I feel CoD2 and 3 are okay. These are all just gallery shooters.

Nah. I think the cutoff point is Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, it pushed the franchise and gameplay forwards significantly, it's also when the franchise really took off.

Mr Puggsly said:

I never spent much time with Gran Turismo. Goldeneye on an actual N64 has terrible controls and performance, but would be enjoyable if they remastered it like Perfect Dark on 360. On side note those PS1 Medal of Honor games were surprisingly good when I tried them on PSP in recent years.

Perfect Dark on the Xbox 360 was a good nostalgia trip, but games have pushed forwards from it in the gameplay department, many mechanics (I.E. No jump) is pretty cringe worthy.
And whilst the Xbox 360 variant steps it up in the visual department, it's still a far cry from a 7th gen, heck even a 6th gen title in the looks department.

But back in the day it was industry leading in the visual department, hence it needs to be judged by what was available at the time.

No, Halo 1 and 2 don't actually look bad. I would argue they've aged better than most 6th gen games. I don't want to elaborate too much on why people actually prefer classic graphics over the remaster graphics, but classic graphics are fine even in glorious 4K.

MCC's muliplayer has been fixed for like a year now. Regardless, the MP was tolerable even before the major fixes and its still active.

I actually like the visuals in Gears 1. It has a more gritty presentation than future releases starting with 3. The remaster was basically updated graphics and it reviewed well. On a side note, you ever played Fable Anniversary? The original game actually looked better.

I haven't checked Halo Wars online population recently, but it was still active when I played over a year ago. It also sold very well on Steam, it has 89% positive reviews there.

I'm not even sure why we are having this debate. People are excited about MCC coming to PC. Halo Wars did well on PC. Gears 1 would also do well if it were suddenly added to Steam. These are all games that have aged well.

Many N64 games aged worse, but they are older, experimental games relatively speaking.

I'm looking at PS1 era FF games for their core gameplay. Not the presentation. Problems aside, I still think they aged well.

For me the tank controls of RE was always a deal breaker. The first game I really played in the series was actually RE5 on 360 and then RE4 on a Gamecube.

In regard to our 8 bit and 16 bit discussion. I'll start by saying most games on most platforms were shit until around the 7th gen where quality of the average game quality became higher. Although, the Wii had a ton of shit.

Even without comparing assets, the gameplay of 16 bit over 8 bit just became more refined. Much of that is because of a specs increase, but also time had passed and developers were making more complex and refined games. Even some of the later NES stuff was much more impressive than early content.

If I were to create a list of the best shooters ever, CoD1, 2, 3 or 4 wouldn't be in it. I think they're all okay games, but nothing special. I don't see them as worth revisiting because the gameplay is simplistic and story isn't engaging (maybe BLOPS1 and 2 for story). I almost see them as sports games, maybe just go play the newest one if you are there for MP. Although, Infinite Warfare had a great campaign.

I see Perfect Dark and Goldeneye as interesting games for level design really, it was also interesting for shooters to feel like you're controlling a person versus a floating camera. They aren't linear experiences like many modern games, you can make mistakes that fails a mission, so that makes them unique still. But if you're struggling with the controls and the performance is dog shit like on N64, it pulls you out of the experience. Hence, the core games aged well but sometimes need newer hardware to fix the controls and performance.

Edit: I didn't even respond to the Oceania MP thing. All I can say is... USA, USA, USA!