Epiphany: This gen games are completely Soul less.

After owning all three consoles since there launch.

I've reverted back to playing MGS1 on the PS3 with 1080p Upscaling.

Playing Rallisport Challenge 2 on my Xbox 1.

And Street Fighter 3: Third Strike on XBL. 

This gen feels so cold and devoid of fun. 

No, the Soul series is still alive; Soulcalibur Legends is in development for the Wii right now.

...Yeah, I know what you meant, I just wanted to show you that by capitalizing a single word, the entire meaning of a sentence can be changed. Watch your spelling next time.

I've always felt it was best to judge a generation of consoles within 6 months of launch. As we all know the launch games usually are the best representation of the games that will follow.

 

I've always felt it was best to judge a generation of consoles within 6 months of launch. As we all know the launch games usually are the best representation of the games that will follow.

:?yomi_basic

6 months??  Wow that's a bit premature IMO.....I would give them at least a year to two years to even begin to show what is to come later on, as a generation's lifespan usually spans 3-4 years at best for most consoles.  Although with Sony saying the PS3's lifespan will last 10 years(I sincerely hope not, for other systems will by then be leaps and bounds past them in terms of techology), I would still give them the benefit of the doubt for 3 years to be able to fully exploit what the PS3 can do when fully realized. 

Most hardware is overshadowed by new hardware anyways when the old ones are just starting to reach their prime.

[QUOTE="yomi_basic"]

I've always felt it was best to judge a generation of consoles within 6 months of launch. As we all know the launch games usually are the best representation of the games that will follow.

:?Rekunta

6 months?? Wow that's a bit premature IMO.....I would give them at least a year to two years to even begin to show what is to come later on, as a generation's lifespan usually spans 3-4 years at best for most consoles.

Umm, I think your sarcasm detector is on the blink... 

[QUOTE="Rekunta"][QUOTE="yomi_basic"]

I've always felt it was best to judge a generation of consoles within 6 months of launch. As we all know the launch games usually are the best representation of the games that will follow.

:?PhoenixMDK

6 months?? Wow that's a bit premature IMO.....I would give them at least a year to two years to even begin to show what is to come later on, as a generation's lifespan usually spans 3-4 years at best for most consoles.

Umm, I think your sarcasm detector is on the blink... 

DAMNIT!  I hate when that happens.  I'm such a tool. :cry:

[QUOTE="PhoenixMDK"][QUOTE="Rekunta"][QUOTE="yomi_basic"]

I've always felt it was best to judge a generation of consoles within 6 months of launch. As we all know the launch games usually are the best representation of the games that will follow.

:?Rekunta

6 months?? Wow that's a bit premature IMO.....I would give them at least a year to two years to even begin to show what is to come later on, as a generation's lifespan usually spans 3-4 years at best for most consoles.

Umm, I think your sarcasm detector is on the blink...

DAMNIT! I hate when that happens. I'm such a tool. :cry:

So when that happens you start to hate? ;P

[QUOTE="Rekunta"][QUOTE="PhoenixMDK"][QUOTE="Rekunta"][QUOTE="yomi_basic"]

I've always felt it was best to judge a generation of consoles within 6 months of launch. As we all know the launch games usually are the best representation of the games that will follow.

:?Epoq

6 months?? Wow that's a bit premature IMO.....I would give them at least a year to two years to even begin to show what is to come later on, as a generation's lifespan usually spans 3-4 years at best for most consoles.

Umm, I think your sarcasm detector is on the blink...

DAMNIT! I hate when that happens. I'm such a tool. :cry:

So when that happens you start to hate? ;P

After owning all three consoles since there launch.

I've reverted back to playing MGS1 on the PS3 with 1080p Upscaling.

Playing Rallisport Challenge 2 on my Xbox 1.

And Street Fighter 3: Third Strike on XBL. 

This gen feels so cold and devoid of fun. 

SpecialForcesOp

What must a game have in order to "have soul"?

[QUOTE="SpecialForcesOp"]

After owning all three consoles since there launch.

I've reverted back to playing MGS1 on the PS3 with 1080p Upscaling.

Playing Rallisport Challenge 2 on my Xbox 1.

And Street Fighter 3: Third Strike on XBL.

This gen feels so cold and devoid of fun.

Angry_Beaver

What must a game have in order to "have soul"?

Or when I get so comfortable in the game world that I can spend hours just walking around trying out stuff I normally wouldn't where it a soul-less game.

I don't know. OP what do you mean? 

[QUOTE="Epoq"][QUOTE="Rekunta"][QUOTE="PhoenixMDK"][QUOTE="Rekunta"][QUOTE="yomi_basic"]

I've always felt it was best to judge a generation of consoles within 6 months of launch. As we all know the launch games usually are the best representation of the games that will follow.

:?Rekunta

6 months?? Wow that's a bit premature IMO.....I would give them at least a year to two years to even begin to show what is to come later on, as a generation's lifespan usually spans 3-4 years at best for most consoles.

Umm, I think your sarcasm detector is on the blink...

DAMNIT! I hate when that happens. I'm such a tool. :cry:

So when that happens you start to hate? ;P

:lol:

Is a soul in a game the same as a ghost in a cyborg shell?

LETS GET PHILOSOPHICAL! 

I realize gamers are fickle, but damn. Can we wait until every console this gen has been out for at least a year before declaring the great decline of gaming?:?MarcusAntonius

in the Doomsayer's Handbook of making gaming declarations, a year is 8 months too late... the accepted window is 3 weeks to 4 months to make claims like a system is dead, a game bombed, this gen sucks...

[QUOTE="MarcusAntonius"]I realize gamers are fickle, but damn. Can we wait until every console this gen has been out for at least a year before declaring the great decline of gaming?:?smerlus

in the Doomsayer's Handbook of making gaming declarations, a year is 8 months too late... the accepted window is 3 weeks to 4 months to make claims like a system is dead, a game bombed, this gen sucks...

Actually, for games, the accepted timeframe is 4 months before its release date.

If by soul he means that innovative spark that reminds us of why we love games, I can understand that - but it's only because so much has already been done by this point, and alot of the great games of this gen have been pretty "safe" - ie. gritty shooters, high fantasy rpg, zelda formula, etc.

However as mentioned above it's extremely early on in the console cycles for all 3 to criticize developers for this. There's already a handful of titles due in the near future that will most likely begin to fill the void in question: Bioshock, Little Big Planet, Spore, Super Mario Galaxy, and so forth.

I do think whether or not a game has soul is entirely subjective, and a game can be great fun and a lasting, worthwile experience without having that magical quality to it. But remember Okami, Shadow of the Colossus, Katamari Damacy and Odin Sphere weren't even on the radar during the early years of the PS2. And like you mentioned, if you really are truly bored with this generation so far, there's always plenty of older games to relive and catch up on while waiting for something new that hits the same spot.

I'm a fan of EA, so soul and innovation is not my cup of tea. Seriously though, if a developer makes my favorite series too different I stop playing it... unless I consider it to be an actual improvement and just not different for the sake of being different. I prefer the slow evolution of tried and test gameplay ideas most of the time.Idonomeus

But if the changes are only incremental why not patch the old game or release an expansion rather than charging people for a whole new game. That's what particularly irritates me about sports franchises that charge full price for updating a database of names once a year (yes, I'm aware there are other changes too, but most tend to be negligable).

[QUOTE="Idonomeus"]I'm a fan of EA, so soul and innovation is not my cup of tea. Seriously though, if a developer makes my favorite series too different I stop playing it... unless I consider it to be an actual improvement and just not different for the sake of being different. I prefer the slow evolution of tried and test gameplay ideas most of the time.PhoenixMDK

But if the changes are only incremental why not patch the old game or release an expansion rather than charging people for a whole new game. That's what particularly irritates me about sports franchises that charge full price for updating a database of names once a year (yes, I'm aware there are other changes too, but most tend to be negligable).

Giving a years worth of development time away for free doesn't sound like a good business practise to me but if a company could do that and stay profitable I would be all for it. Anyway I don't see the problem. If you really want the new game buy it and if you think the updates aren't worth the cost only buy them every 3 years or however long you think it is before the improvements become worth it.

[QUOTE="PhoenixMDK"]

[QUOTE="Idonomeus"]I'm a fan of EA, so soul and innovation is not my cup of tea. Seriously though, if a developer makes my favorite series too different I stop playing it... unless I consider it to be an actual improvement and just not different for the sake of being different. I prefer the slow evolution of tried and test gameplay ideas most of the time.Idonomeus

But if the changes are only incremental why not patch the old game or release an expansion rather than charging people for a whole new game. That's what particularly irritates me about sports franchises that charge full price for updating a database of names once a year (yes, I'm aware there are other changes too, but most tend to be negligable).

Giving a years worth of development time away for free doesn't sound like a good business practise to me but if a company could do that and stay profitable I would be all for it. Anyway I don't see the problem. If you really want the new game buy it and if you think the updates aren't worth the cost only buy them every 3 years or however long you think it is before the improvements become worth it.

He's got a point because if you really just wanted to make the trades yourself, the game lets you so you can have an up to date roster... it's just that people don't mind paying $60 for a game like Madden and the such because they get a ton of playtime out of it.

My brother is a huge fan and he'll spend multiple seasons... probably over 500 hours playing the game offline and online, single player or MP... when you think about it, that's more gameplay than  90% of games that come out today have.