By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Retro Studios and Naughty Dogs

S.T.A.G.E. on 03 June 2013
zorg1000 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
curl-6 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Sure...if you believe Retro has set more standards for themselves than Naughty Dog I leave you to that. Somwhere, someone will believe that as well.

Please have the maturity of respect opinions that differ from your own.


Thats pretty much the same way of saying I respect your opinion. Theres no equality to me between a company that makes new hits and a company that is a sequel factory. Sorry. I will enjoy them as the next guy but I have standards but in my book the team that takes the most risk and succeeds time and time again is the more valuable company. We agree to disagree plain and simple.

I get what ur saying but Metroid Prime was a pretty big risk, Iit was a revival of a series that hadnt released in 8 years and went from 2D side scroller to 3D FPS. If it failed it very possibly would have killed Metroid for good and Nintendo might not have let Retro work on a big game again.


Metroid Prime wasn't a risk, Nintendo knew the shift to FPS was coming after Rare hit it big with Goldeneye. They brought Metroid into the modern era. Samus had a hand thats a gun, I would've thought it would've been a given. Glad it succeeded though. Im going to get some rest. :)



Around the Network
orniletter on 03 June 2013
S.T.A.G.E. said:
curl-6 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Sure...if you believe Retro has set more standards for themselves than Naughty Dog I leave you to that. Somwhere, someone will believe that as well.

Please have the maturity of respect opinions that differ from your own.


Thats pretty much the same way of saying I respect your opinion. Theres no equality to me between a company that makes new hits and a company that is a sequel factory. Sorry. I will enjoy them as the next guy but I have standards but in my book the team that takes the most risk and succeeds time and time again is the more valuable company. We agree to disagree plain and simple.


The risks are...a third-person-cover shooter with cinematic set pieces HIGHLY reminiscent of Tomb Raider...and another third person shooter with a survival horror twist and ZOMBIES...

in contrast to

reimagening an old classic in 3D and adapting and overhauling it to/for the new perspective....yeah, I see no double standards here, Retro clearly are a sequel factory



curl-6 on 03 June 2013
S.T.A.G.E. said:
zorg1000 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
curl-6 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Sure...if you believe Retro has set more standards for themselves than Naughty Dog I leave you to that. Somwhere, someone will believe that as well.

Please have the maturity of respect opinions that differ from your own.


Thats pretty much the same way of saying I respect your opinion. Theres no equality to me between a company that makes new hits and a company that is a sequel factory. Sorry. I will enjoy them as the next guy but I have standards but in my book the team that takes the most risk and succeeds time and time again is the more valuable company. We agree to disagree plain and simple.

I get what ur saying but Metroid Prime was a pretty big risk, Iit was a revival of a series that hadnt released in 8 years and went from 2D side scroller to 3D FPS. If it failed it very possibly would have killed Metroid for good and Nintendo might not have let Retro work on a big game again.


Metroid Prime wasn't a risk, Nintendo knew the shift to FPS was coming after Rare hit it big with Goldeneye. They brought Metroid into the modern era. Samus had a hand thats a gun, I would've thought it would've been a given. Glad it succeeded though. Im going to get some rest. :)

Except they didn't just make Prime an FPS; they specifically avoided standard FPS tropes in order to focus on exploration, environmental interaction, and problem solving.



DieAppleDie on 03 June 2013

ND is like Epic, great tools & engin3s but their games are very basic
MP just smashes anything ND has made, by far



zorg1000 on 03 June 2013
S.T.A.G.E. said:
zorg1000 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
curl-6 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Sure...if you believe Retro has set more standards for themselves than Naughty Dog I leave you to that. Somwhere, someone will believe that as well.

Please have the maturity of respect opinions that differ from your own.


Thats pretty much the same way of saying I respect your opinion. Theres no equality to me between a company that makes new hits and a company that is a sequel factory. Sorry. I will enjoy them as the next guy but I have standards but in my book the team that takes the most risk and succeeds time and time again is the more valuable company. We agree to disagree plain and simple.

I get what ur saying but Metroid Prime was a pretty big risk, Iit was a revival of a series that hadnt released in 8 years and went from 2D side scroller to 3D FPS. If it failed it very possibly would have killed Metroid for good and Nintendo might not have let Retro work on a big game again.


Metroid Prime wasn't a risk, Nintendo knew the shift to FPS was coming after Rare hit it big with Goldeneye. They brought Metroid into the modern era. Samus had a hand thats a gun, I would've thought it would've been a given. Glad it succeeded though. Im going to get some rest. :)

Well in ur opinion what was so risky about Naughty Dog games? Crash was a mascot platformer, basically Sonys answer to Sonic/Mario/DKC.

Jak was also a mascot platformer could be described as the next logical step forward from the many N64 collectathons. Jak 2 just added in elements of Ratchet & Clank.

Uncharted Is also primarily a platformer that is a mix of Tomb Raider and Prince of Persia. The Last of Us

is a zombie game in an industry filled with zombie games.

 

 

Im not bashing these games, I have enjoyed every Naughty Dog ggame ive played but I dont see how its taken huge risks.

 



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

Around the Network
farlaff on 03 June 2013
S.T.A.G.E. said:
Retro is great but they are nothing compared to what Rare meant to Nintendo in its hey-day. Naughty Dog has been pumping out hits for Sony since the mid-late 90's.


I have not read the whole thread, but I have to agree with this. Rare changed the gaming world (console-wise) back in the 64 days.



My 1000th post: https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9368779

Cheebee on 03 June 2013
zorg1000 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:


Metroid Prime wasn't a risk, Nintendo knew the shift to FPS was coming after Rare hit it big with Goldeneye. They brought Metroid into the modern era. Samus had a hand thats a gun, I would've thought it would've been a given. Glad it succeeded though. Im going to get some rest. :)

Well in ur opinion what was so risky about Naughty Dog games? Crash was a mascot platformer, basically Sonys answer to Sonic/Mario/DKC.

Jak was also a mascot platformer could be described as the next logical step forward from the many N64 collectathons. Jak 2 just added in elements of Ratchet & Clank.

Uncharted Is also primarily a platformer that is a mix of Tomb Raider and Prince of Persia. The Last of Us

is a zombie game in an industry filled with zombie games.

 

 

Im not bashing these games, I have enjoyed every Naughty Dog ggame ive played but I dont see how its taken huge risks.

 

 

I agree. Also, ND have been pumping out sequels a ton. Didn't they just make 3 Uncharteds in the span of a few years? If anything, they're more deserving of being labeled 'sequel factory' than Retro. That's not to say ND's games aren't great.



Nintendo Network ID: Cheebee   3DS Code: 2320 - 6113 - 9046

 

JWeinCom on 03 June 2013
Dr.Grass said:
JWeinCom said:
 

"When it comes to impressing, doing the same thing has diminishing returns.  It doesn't matter if something is refined or improved if it is still very similar to the original.  The 'WOW' factor dies off.  If you had said Uncharted 3 you still wouldn't have a good point, but at least you would have gave a example that almost applied to yourself.  Uncharted 3 is a better game than Uncharted 2, it refined a lot of mechanics and set pieces and generally improved the game, especially for the multiplayer which is a major part of the two games.  But it was not as impressive as Uncharted 2, Uncharted 2 didn't just refine Uncharted 1, it came out leaps and bounds better, UC1 didn't even have multiplayer."

*SNIP*

Just a HEADS UP.

If you want people to read what you wrote, use bold and underscore on the quoted parts so that it's actually readable. I really wanted to read your comment (I love when people quote each other with retorts).

But it's just impossible cause nothing stands out.

Fair enough.  I'll do that in the future.



Daisuke72 on 03 June 2013
zorg1000 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
zorg1000 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:
curl-6 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:

Sure...if you believe Retro has set more standards for themselves than Naughty Dog I leave you to that. Somwhere, someone will believe that as well.

Please have the maturity of respect opinions that differ from your own.


Thats pretty much the same way of saying I respect your opinion. Theres no equality to me between a company that makes new hits and a company that is a sequel factory. Sorry. I will enjoy them as the next guy but I have standards but in my book the team that takes the most risk and succeeds time and time again is the more valuable company. We agree to disagree plain and simple.

I get what ur saying but Metroid Prime was a pretty big risk, Iit was a revival of a series that hadnt released in 8 years and went from 2D side scroller to 3D FPS. If it failed it very possibly would have killed Metroid for good and Nintendo might not have let Retro work on a big game again.


Metroid Prime wasn't a risk, Nintendo knew the shift to FPS was coming after Rare hit it big with Goldeneye. They brought Metroid into the modern era. Samus had a hand thats a gun, I would've thought it would've been a given. Glad it succeeded though. Im going to get some rest. :)

Well in ur opinion what was so risky about Naughty Dog games? Crash was a mascot platformer, basically Sonys answer to Sonic/Mario/DKC.

Jak was also a mascot platformer could be described as the next logical step forward from the many N64 collectathons. Jak 2 just added in elements of Ratchet & Clank.

Uncharted Is also primarily a platformer that is a mix of Tomb Raider and Prince of Persia. The Last of Us

is a zombie game in an industry filled with zombie games.

 

 

Im not bashing these games, I have enjoyed every Naughty Dog ggame ive played but I dont see how its taken huge risks.

 

 


What did they do Risky? They made new IP's every generation, leaving behind their old critically acclaimed and mass selling IP's, crash bandicoot has sold over 25M copies and they left behind for Jak which also sold pretty well and went with Uncharted. That's pretty much unheard of, dropping a franchise that was as popular as Crash in place of a new IP, that's a pretty huge financial risk, one that you don't see from other studios, who simply milk their franchises and bring sequels across generations until they eventually die out. 

 

Retro took a well known IP and added their own twist to it, and did the same with DK. While these games are amazing, they aren't really taking risks, for instance Crash Bandicoot wrath of the cortex was TRASH compared to Naughty Dog's Crash games, and yet it sold almost 6 Million copies alone, which is more than the Metroid Prime sales, this simply goes to show that by taking a popular IP alone grants sales, so I don't know where the risk was in remaking Metroid and DK games. 

 

Also consider that while Uncharted has its similarities to Tomb Raider, that upon release the Tomb aider games weren't selling very well and they're also all kinds of different, and The Last Of Us isn't like any zombie game we've seen so far. While I agree both are top-notch studios it's simply absurd to say that Naughty Dog hasn't taken bigger risks than Metro. 



S.T.A.G.E. on 03 June 2013
Cheebee said:
zorg1000 said:
S.T.A.G.E. said:


Metroid Prime wasn't a risk, Nintendo knew the shift to FPS was coming after Rare hit it big with Goldeneye. They brought Metroid into the modern era. Samus had a hand thats a gun, I would've thought it would've been a given. Glad it succeeded though. Im going to get some rest. :)

Well in ur opinion what was so risky about Naughty Dog games? Crash was a mascot platformer, basically Sonys answer to Sonic/Mario/DKC.

Jak was also a mascot platformer could be described as the next logical step forward from the many N64 collectathons. Jak 2 just added in elements of Ratchet & Clank.

Uncharted Is also primarily a platformer that is a mix of Tomb Raider and Prince of Persia. The Last of Us

is a zombie game in an industry filled with zombie games.

 

 

Im not bashing these games, I have enjoyed every Naughty Dog ggame ive played but I dont see how its taken huge risks.

 

 

I agree. Also, ND have been pumping out sequels a ton. Didn't they just make 3 Uncharteds in the span of a few years? If anything, they're more deserving of being labeled 'sequel factory' than Retro. That's not to say ND's games aren't great.


You guys are encouragable. Naughty Dog adapted to the two year developmebt cycle of the generation which is why the games arent as rich. When you have graphics intensive games they need at least three years of development if you want depth. Luckily for Naughty Dog they revolutionalized narrative based linear games, which they did in spades. If you've seen the last of us its a totally different feeling than Uncharted with a deeper plot and meaning. A totally different tone and difficulty. Naughty Dogs games are great, they are just for a different type of gamer who now demands storylines and character development in the mechanics as the fuel for why you fight and game.