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

Forums - Gaming - Why have so many franchises went awful, last generation?

I have to agree with Gballzack about Tomb Raider. I used to call it Snooze Raider. The game was boring. I was extremely disappointed. I knew the game was going down hill when they switched Lara's design from the female Indiana Jones look to the Hooters girl with guns look. The only Tomb Raider game I liked was Tomb Raider Legend. It reminded me of Prince of Persia from a gameplay standpoint.



Around the Network
shams said:

Don't agree on Donkey Kong. Jungle Beat was an awesome game, albiet very unusual - thanks to the control system. The game itself is fantastic.

DK64 was an abomination. I did play/finish it, but it almost drove me crazy. Talk about a collect-a-thon. Its BK's poor brother.

...

I have another game to add to the list - and its a biggie... ZELDA.

As much as I enjoyed Twilight, it has almost completely LOST the essense that Zelda made famous, and was so much fun.

The core essence of Zelda - IMO - is all about exploration, item discovery, using items to open new branches, and becoming more powerful - so that you can actually ENTER new areas (without dying instantly).

Twilight lost this essence in several ways. Exploration was almost completely story driven, not item driven. Apart from (the now expected, and non-challenging) blowing up of rocks - it had almost no item driven exploration.

The places the game did have it, were not only built into the story - most of them were essential routes you had to follow to advance the story. The player is being led by the hand - there is minimal challenge relating to actually having to explore AND be creative.

Another whinge of mine - money. In all of the previous (console) Zelda titles, money becomes almost irrelevant (after a while). There is nothing useful to buy - why buy bombs when you can get them so easily? How about arrows? In all of Ocarinna, Wind Waker & Twilight - by the time I got near the end of the game, I couldn't care less about money. In Zelda 1 money is essential - you need to buy potions, and its useful to be able to buy bombs when needed. No freebies. In Twilight, not only could I score potions/healing at will - you barely need them... ever!

Which all leads to the difficulty level. When the game loses all difficulty, it becomes another type of game. You simply play it to see the story, and keep going until the end. This is one reason why length of the titles are so important (this is similar to the FF titles IMO, except they can be a LOT harder - esp. with bosses).

...

My wish? Take the essence of Zelda 1 / 2, mix it with Link to the Past, and give me a REAL console version of Zelda (I don't even care if its a 2D title with a 3D engine...). It doesn't have to be long - but it DOES need to be hard. It does need a severe thinking process re: exploration and items - you need to use all of your items to advance regularly.

Add experience points (Zelda II), add magic points, learning of spells, lots of sword moves (that are not trivial to pull off!), difficult field enemies, important items that cost a LOT of money, etc.....................

(I've had my whinge - curious to know if anyone agrees me with, or if they think I am insane!). 


That's not what the reviews say...



Twilight Princess is definitely my Favorite Zelda. I'm really enjoying the game right now. Of course it's not the old Zelda. I'm glad it's not. I dislike when a series doesn't evolve at all. I've gotten tired of the Dynasty Warrior Clones.



Tag: Hawk - Reluctant Dark Messiah (provided by fkusumot)

I thought DK: Jungle Beat was one of the best games of the last generation. Led the way to the wii, with the innovative control system being so much fun. Donkey Kong 64 was just a nicely done, but largely unimaginative 3-D platformer.



Is Donkey Kong Jungle Beat really that good? Hmmm... I guess I could try it out. It got pretty good reviews. Not as good as Donkey Kong 64's, but still got reviews around 80% (anything less than 80%, I consider mediocre, or bad). Apparently, it doesn't have Rare's touch, and it's a 2D game, when it should have been a 3D game. Donkey Kong 64 was pretty imaginative, and it wasn't all about the items. There were many mini games, and other things, too. I thought it was fun. Also, Donkey Kong Jungle Beat isn't really a true sequal to Donkey Kong 64.



Around the Network
a.l.e.x59 said:
Is Donkey Kong Jungle Beat really that good? Hmmm... I guess I could try it out. It got pretty good reviews. Not as good as Donkey Kong 64's, but still got reviews around 80% (anything less than 80%, I consider mediocre, or bad). Apparently, it doesn't have Rare's touch, and it's a 2D game, when it should have been a 3D game. Donkey Kong 64 was pretty imaginative, and it wasn't all about the items. There were many mini games, and other things, too. I thought it was fun. Also, Donkey Kong Jungle Beat isn't really a true sequal to Donkey Kong 64.

Yeah, it's a good game. Donkey Kong doesn't suck, it went in a different direction, and the Starfox games are getting batter(but it needs to become an in house game again)

 I think it is the developers fault. First, Sonic needs to just stay 2D. Those games are still good.

The one I'm mad about is Final fantasy. Basiclly, Square is whoring out the franchise. Maybe becuase they spend soo long on the game and sales aren't as good as they use to be. Really, how many games do we need for 7. Not only that, but there will be about 7 games for FF13.



First thread has been updated. Let me know if it needs some editing.



a.l.e.x59 said:
No... It's because people have forgotten about the Playstation 1 days!!! I loved the Playstation 1 much better than the Playstation 2! I don't know why, but I just do. Playstation 2 is extremely mediocre for me. There are some fun games, but most of my better memories are with the original Playstation, when it comes to Sony consoles.
Ditto

 



Ditto is a Pokemon.



a.l.e.x59 said:
Is Donkey Kong Jungle Beat really that good? Hmmm... I guess I could try it out. It got pretty good reviews. Not as good as Donkey Kong 64's, but still got reviews around 80% (anything less than 80%, I consider mediocre, or bad). Apparently, it doesn't have Rare's touch, and it's a 2D game, when it should have been a 3D game. Donkey Kong 64 was pretty imaginative, and it wasn't all about the items. There were many mini games, and other things, too. I thought it was fun. Also, Donkey Kong Jungle Beat isn't really a true sequal to Donkey Kong 64.

Probably my most fun game on GC.  Too short, but excellent stuff when you get into the combos.  I really liked it being 2D too.

 Along with pikmin, virtualy the only really interesting game on GC.