yeah well i don't need the credits from culinary ok
But your in lipseys group hes the best teacher man he dont like my hair
Well I feel a lot stupider just by reading these posts
heh, you said "stupider" :v:
[QUOTE=piggycan99;33510041]But your in lipseys group hes the best teacher man he dont like my hair[/QUOTE]
it's k, grace and i both think your hair is cute
(they want to bang you, kyle)
Hey guys, here's a thought:
Every system has their pros and cons. They're all good in their on ways. Each thing has its controls, its communities, and exclusives.
And no, you can't say all Xbox exclusives are bad, because they're not. Halo revolutionized Sci-Fi gaming, and brought a lot of new features to the FPS table. You can't say all Playstation exclusives are bad, because Little Big Planet made completely player made multiplayer content a simple to achieve reality.
Of course, one will always have better computing power (right now, the PC), but that means nothing as opposed to gameplay itself. If you've ever played Space Station 13, you'd understand exactly how it's possible to have immense fun online with minimal processing power.
[QUOTE=wewt!;33510745]heh, you said "stupider" :v:[/QUOTE]
Hey I never noticed!
Oh god its starting
So I have an idea, what if I put my upgraded hammer spring from my Wood Stock M870 inside of my shorty M870, which already gets better power from its short gas line? Stay tuned for answers.
inb4 boom
Dammit.
uh oh
The traded parts are just fine, but now my gas line is refusing to properly connect and is causing a major leak. I might have to do a full gas line replacement, which is a really annoying thing to do, compounded by the fact that I'll have to use hose from something else, like aquarium or car parts.
[QUOTE=No Party Hats;33511351]Halo revolutionized Sci-Fi gaming, and brought a lot of new features to the FPS table. [/QUOTE]
Absolutely false. I can't think of a single feature Halo had that was innovative- what it did was put several then-obscure gameplay concepts together, streamline them, and mix them in with gratuitous ripoffs of Bungie's earlier Marathon franchise to build a successful game. But it was by no means revolutionary, only popular, and there is a significant difference.
[QUOTE=No Party Hats;33511351]because Little Big Planet made completely player made multiplayer content a simple to achieve reality.[/QUOTE]
Predated by Garry's Mod and a few other less-known titles. Not to mention widespread player-made content dates back to the 90s, when maps and mods for games like Doom were commonplace and multiplayer gaming was based largely upon content made by ordinary users. Shareware was at its peak, and anyone could make a map in ten minutes and put it online.
Interesting to note how both games you mention as revolutionary are essentially derivative of concepts that were on PC first.
[QUOTE=No Party Hats;33511351]Of course, one will always have better computing power (right now, the PC), but that means nothing as opposed to gameplay itself. If you've ever played Space Station 13, you'd understand exactly how it's possible to have immense fun online with minimal processing power.[/QUOTE]
That's like arguing that the advancements of CGI in film are meaningless. You don't *need* incredible graphics power to make a good game, but there is literally no disadvantage to having it available if the developer wants to take advantage of it. Avatar wouldn't have been nearly as successful if it came out in the 80s, the technology is a key component of its success. Similarly, Crysis is a game that was popular primarily because of how great it looked. For every Space Station 13, Terraria, or Minecraft, there's a Crysis, Far Cry 2, or Red Orchestra 2 for which the graphics are a significant part of the game's immersion and atmosphere.
Furthermore, PC will always have the most processing power, simply because PCs aren't designed with the purpose of being as cheap as possible. When any console is first released, the price point is similar to a comparable PC- remember when PS3s were close to a grand? That's because they're using the same basic hardware, and consequently their prices drop along the same lines as PC hardware. The only reason you can get a 360 for under $200 now is because they're extremely outdated hardware, extremely limited in programmatic capabilities, and are sold at a loss which is recouped through hideously overpriced online subscriptions and high-priced games.
Mind you, I'm not saying PCs are inherently superior as an overall platform- they're certainly more expensive, less user-friendly, less convenient, and more demanding of an educated consumer. But if you need a computer anyways and are reasonably intelligent, there's no factor that makes a console a superior purchase. For the price of a console + cheap PC, you could get a decent to good PC to run the same games at equal or, more likely, higher settings. And that's not even going into the differences in controls, online architecture, user modification, available memory, online cost, or content delivery models, in all of which the PC is the winner.
As an aside, as a game developer, I really hate programming for the 360 architecture. XNA makes it a bit easier but trying to port a game project written in straight-up C++ over to the 360 is a godawful mess of re-writing higher-level function calls into low-level assembly. That low-level optimization is the only reason console games run acceptably on their hardware at all.
Of course, the concept of Dual Wielding any sort of small arms and regenerating shields partnered with a normal health system was done before? I haven't heard of really any games that did those things before Halo 2, if you'd care to provide examples I'd be inclined to agree.
Also, for every Space Station there's a Crysis (Aka a game that relied on its visuals to become popular), for every Terraria there's a Far Cry 2 (Another game that was pretty bad apart from some decently good looking effects), and for every Minecraft there's a RO2 (I haven't played this yet, but judging from RO1, I'm going to agree with you here).
Also, Little Big Planet made it the simplest thing for Player Made Multiplayer Content to be created. It's probably the easiest system I've seen, and is actually really fucking diverse. I agree that Doom and Garry's Mod made it easy, but it's definitively not simple for anyone just to pick them up and almost instantly make content.
max payne did dual wielding before halo 1 even came out
I did dual wielding in pong before max payne.
[QUOTE=No Party Hats;33512523]Of course, the concept of Dual Wielding any sort of small arms and regenerating shields partnered with a normal health system was done before? I haven't heard of really any games that did those things before Halo 2, if you'd care to provide examples I'd be inclined to agree. [/QUOTE]
Faceball 2000 had regenerating health back in 1991, as did System Shock (1994) and Deus Ex (2000) to a degree through their healing mechanic. Those are just two I can immediately think of. Granted, neither have both regenerating health and 'standard' health, but considering how quickly the non-regenerating portion was dropped by the wayside I don't think it's significant. Dual wielding has been done in a number of games. However, what's important is that the original Halo didn't feature dual wielding- hence my comment that it was streamlined and derivative, not innovative.
Console games have tended to have fewer unique, experimental games and more formulaic blockbusters, simply because it's more expensive to develop for consoles and so the indie community (responsible for many innovations in gameplay- for example, Narbacular Drop) is much smaller.
I'm talking about the series as a whole. You can't deny that Sci-Fi FPS's would be a LOT different without those games.
Oh, forgot Max Payne had regenerating health combined with non-regeneration- you regenerated when very low on health, then had to find health packs. So essentially a reverse of the Halo system, but the same mechanic.
PC>PS3>Wii>Xbox
Wrong yet again, my son! PC>Gamecube>All those other systems
[QUOTE=No Party Hats;33512688]I'm talking about the series as a whole. You can't deny that Sci-Fi FPS's would be a LOT different without those games.[/QUOTE]
Sure. I never said they weren't influential or popular. But they weren't [i]innovative[/i] and there's an important difference. They're familiar ground, re-using existing concepts and putting them together. But that's still essentially stagnation, and it certainly didn't 'revolutionize sci-fi gaming' nor had it 'brought a lot of new features to the FPS table'. It was, for the longest time, the Michael Bay of the gaming industry- very cool, very explosive and awesome, but ultimately unoriginal. Games like that are fun, but they don't take the industry anywhere. The majority of innovation has always been on PC.
Well it certainly was Revolutionary. I was off when I said it was Innovative, but Revolutionary is slightly different. It's not like the French revolution made France something completely new, it just changed some of the old power so that it could work better in the future.
party hats, youre dumb.
party.
kill you are selve
[QUOTE=No Party Hats;33512890]Well it certainly was Revolutionary.[/QUOTE]
Revolutionary implies it broke some sort of status quo. A game that uses exclusively concepts seen before and plays more or less like every other FPS isn't revolutionary.
(Also, you should re-read your history, the French Revolution was a [i]massive[/i] shift in European politics and paved the way for socially-collective nationalism in an era where countries were still clinging to the old privatized government- there's a reason a monarch was reinstated when Napoleon was ousted by the collective power of the rest of the continent)
[QUOTE=No Party Hats;33512863]Wrong yet again, my son! PC>Gamecube>All those other systems[/QUOTE]
GameCube is awesome.
[QUOTE=No Party Hats;33512863]Wrong yet again, my son! PC>Gamecube>All those other systems[/QUOTE] PC>Wii(don't need a GameCube for GameCube)>All those other systems.
and then you guys neglected the N64
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.