and in this thread we stumble on the delusion that when a game has a good story or is cinematic it automatically means it doesnt have good gameplay.
Snoopy said:
Thats why I said for the most part. Halo, Gears, Forza, Killer Instinct, Sunset, Halo Wars, State of Decay, Ect all usually aim for gameplay over cinematic experiences. |
Halo and gears do have cinematics that try to be impressive. So I wouldnt put them on the list. They also aim to be visually impressive.
| bananaking21 said: and in this thread we stumble on the delusion that when a game has a good story or is cinematic it automatically means it doesnt have good gameplay. |
And this.
Games should have both great gameplay and great cinematic feels too.
Nintendo has always been focusing on gameplay instead of any other things. Just look at the N64 or Gamecube: there are almost no loading times in any games and many games run at 60 fps. This kind of plug and play policy is still very important for them, even with the Switch. You barely have to download patches nor install games before you can play them.
Nintendo focuses on Gameplay.
Microsoft focuses on Online Multiplayer experiences.
Sony focuses on Singleplayer experiences.
I wouldn't say Microsoft is like Nintendo at all.
Mar1217 said:
Surprised you would say that, I remember the series being more balanced in terms of gameplay/story elements. |
The gameplay is good (not great but good) but I don't buy a new Ratchet and Clank game just for it's gameplay anymore since it's litteraly the same every entry. I do buy new Ratchet and Clank titles for the universes, stories and fair enough shooting aliens with way too big weapons. But the reason why I still love the series is mainly because of the new universes and planets I can explore and to see how the story goes from there (and thetypical humor). Those are the values I come to love off the series, although gamelay has to be at least on a certain level of quality otherwise it annoys me.
Please excuse my (probally) poor grammar
PotentHerbs said:
Original developers is not one person. MS first party offerings for three gens have been poor. That's the bigger picture the majority of XOne users here ignore. Forza has been their only internal project that has reached commercial + critical success. Gears + Halo are bought & so is Minecraft. So basically, three of the biggest IP's MS own, do not originate from their internal studios. The same can't be said about Sony or Nintendo. Also, before the "Sony bought __________ so doesn't that count as third party?" rebuttal comes around, Sony Japan, PD, Santa Monica, Sony London, GG, among closed studios like Zipper, had critical + commercial successes, and they were all internally constructed studios. Even for the 360 the majority of criticially praised (*timed) + successful exclusives were third party: Halo, Gears, ME, Bioshock, L4D, Fable. MS, without third party exclusives, just don't have an appealing exclusive lineup, for any gen they've competed in. |
I don't think you know much of MS history to write a single paragraph. Halo is a FPS because of Microsoft, not Bungie.
Sony became relevant in the scene because of Final Fantasy and other third party exclusive games. It's not only because of their first party like Nintendo.
Lmao this thread, Minecraft is first party to Sony, TLG is a sequel, XCX is a new Ip lol.
I could swear Gears of War intents too play as a sci-fi flick, perhaps even Halo to a part.
duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363
Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994
Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."
coolbeans said:
OP wrong listing that too. Seems more beneficial to convo if correcting 1st mistake then adding another. Even if considering 1st AND those nebulous 2nd party type deals, QB's a clear outlier compared to the rest of their owned franchises. |
It's not a mistake. As far as I know, Microsoft owns both IP, they're both first party games.
If it's the same like Nintendo why would they cancel Scale-bound??????
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
