Sony's first party games - all flash and no substance?

[QUOTE="Mr_Splosher"]

Judging by your sig, anything not "Nintendo" is crap.Mr_Apple_Soup

:shock:

oh no he didn't!

Lulz, he should see mme when I'm taking shots at Mario 64 (which I thought was inferior to Spyro 2). I don't take personal attacks seriously anyway so it doesn't really matter.

[QUOTE="Storm_Marine"]

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

Yes I have, not that you would know. Recreating megaman 2 levels does not make them the same as megaman 2 just like the mario knock off levels suck compared to the real thing. The physics are different as is the gameplay (hell can you even shoot?) and its not designed with Megaman 2 in mind which is why recreation is useless. You'll have to try harder than that.

ActicEdge

Umm...you can, actually.

Hence why I put it in brackets, not sure whether you could. The physics are still different from Megaman however and the gameplay in LBP was never meant to replicate a game like Megaman hence why as I said, recreation is useless and will always be inferior (shooting or no shooting :P)

Megaman, Mario, and recreation of IPs aside. LittleBigPlanet offers a fun and enjoyable experience, which is what gaming is all about. It also happens to be one of the most critically acclaimed games of this gen.

[QUOTE="Mr_Apple_Soup"]

[QUOTE="Mr_Splosher"]

Judging by your sig, anything not "Nintendo" is crap.ActicEdge

:shock:

oh no he didn't!

Lulz, he should see mme when I'm taking shots at Mario 64 (which I thought was inferior to Spyro 2). I don't take personal attacks seriously anyway so it doesn't really matter.

Hey, spyro 2 was a godly game...maybe i'm biased because i only owned a psone (thats not to say i had extensive playtime on n64, SF64 and Paper Mario are two of my favorite games), but crash and spyro kicked the crap out of any platformer on the N64...i hated how "weighty" mario 64 felt. Still a great game in its own right

Naughty and Insomniac know how to deliever :P

and yes, this is irrelivant to the topic ^_^

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="Storm_Marine"]

Umm...you can, actually.

Storm_Marine

Hence why I put it in brackets, not sure whether you could. The physics are still different from Megaman however and the gameplay in LBP was never meant to replicate a game like Megaman hence why as I said, recreation is useless and will always be inferior (shooting or no shooting :P)

Megaman, Mario, and recreation of IPs aside. LittleBigPlanet offers a fun and enjoyable experience, which is what gaming is all about. It also happens to be one of the most critically acclaimed games of this gen.

Who said that I didn't like it or that it was bad? I like this game, I just don't think that it is as mind blowing as the reviews say because I have played NES platformers with better refined mechanics of which got lesser scores or praise. I don't think that that is unreasonable even if it sounds harsh. Anyway, this has nothing to do with the fact that he thought that recreating ****c levels from other games in little big planet makes it on the same field, not even close hell no. I explained why in a fairly reasonable (and short because I doubt people want to here my long winded rant) manner. What is the problem?

I fully agree, TC. The actual gameplay tends to be merely average in Sony's titles, but the voice work/visuals/etc. are always top notch (which makes them above average games in most cases). However, in the future these games will be obselete, unlike a memorable game like SotC or GoW. Next gen we won't think back and say "Killzone 2 was amazing." Without the hype and proficient visuals it will be considered just another run-of-the mill game in its genre.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="Mr_Apple_Soup"]

:shock:

oh no he didn't!

Mr_Apple_Soup

Lulz, he should see mme when I'm taking shots at Mario 64 (which I thought was inferior to Spyro 2). I don't take personal attacks seriously anyway so it doesn't really matter.

Hey, spyro 2 was a godly game...maybe i'm biased because i only owned a psone (thats not to say i had extensive playtime on n64, SF64 and Paper Mario are two of my favorite games), but crash and spyro kicked the crap out of any platformer on the N64...i hated how "weighty" mario 64 felt. Still a great game in its own right

Naughty and Insomniac know how to deliever :P

and yes, this is irrelivant to the topic ^_^

I disagrees with that but I think they are definitely comparable to the N64 ones and are underappreciated. Also, I may be the only Nintendo fan who will tell you he thought SM64 was garbage. I liked Spyro 2 and crash 3 the best. The others weren't anything special too me, (especially crash one which was crap)

[QUOTE="Storm_Marine"]

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

Hence why I put it in brackets, not sure whether you could. The physics are still different from Megaman however and the gameplay in LBP was never meant to replicate a game like Megaman hence why as I said, recreation is useless and will always be inferior (shooting or no shooting :P)

ActicEdge

Megaman, Mario, and recreation of IPs aside. LittleBigPlanet offers a fun and enjoyable experience, which is what gaming is all about. It also happens to be one of the most critically acclaimed games of this gen.

Who said that I didn't like it or that it was bad?

I don't know, maybe the guy deleted his post. ;)

I like this game, I just don't think that it is as mind blowing as the reviews say

because I have played NES platformers with better refined mechanics of which got lesser scores or praise.

Ah, but those NES platformers didn't have a vast level creation mode, or online 4 player mulitplayer, or an fairly advanced physics system, or tons of DLC, etc? Did they now?

I don't think that that is unreasonable even if it sounds harsh. Anyway, this has nothing to do with the fact that he thought that recreating ****c levels from other games in little big planet makes it on the same field, not even close hell no. I explained why in a fairly reasonable (and short because I doubt people want to here my long winded rant) manner. What is the problem?

You say that LBP is inferior to Mario and Megaman. And then I saw your sig.Mr_Splosher

Which has what to do with our original discussion?

[QUOTE="Mr_Apple_Soup"]

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

Lulz, he should see mme when I'm taking shots at Mario 64 (which I thought was inferior to Spyro 2). I don't take personal attacks seriously anyway so it doesn't really matter.

ActicEdge

Hey, spyro 2 was a godly game...maybe i'm biased because i only owned a psone (thats not to say i had extensive playtime on n64, SF64 and Paper Mario are two of my favorite games), but crash and spyro kicked the crap out of any platformer on the N64...i hated how "weighty" mario 64 felt. Still a great game in its own right

Naughty and Insomniac know how to deliever :P

and yes, this is irrelivant to the topic ^_^

I disagrees with that but I think they are definitely comparable to the N64 ones and are underappreciated. Also, I may be the only Nintendo fan who will tell you he thought SM64 was garbage. I liked Spyro 2 and crash 3 the best. The others weren't anything special too me, (especially crash one which was crap)

yeah, probably where my "haven't owned a N64" bit drags me down

allow me to correct myself: Crash and Spyro were better then any N64 platformer I have played

You say that LBP is inferior to Mario and Megaman. And then I saw your sig.Mr_Splosher

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="Storm_Marine"]

Megaman, Mario, and recreation of IPs aside. LittleBigPlanet offers a fun and enjoyable experience, which is what gaming is all about. It also happens to be one of the most critically acclaimed games of this gen.

Storm_Marine

Who said that I didn't like it or that it was bad?

I don't know, maybe the guy deleted his post. ;)

I like this game, I just don't think that it is as mind blowing as the reviews say

because I have played NES platformers with better refined mechanics of which got lesser scores or praise.

Ah, but those ****c platformers didn't have a vast level creation mode, or online 4 player mulitplayer, or many other things. Did they now?

I don't think that that is unreasonable even if it sounds harsh. Anyway, this has nothing to do with the fact that he thought that recreating ****c levels from other games in little big planet makes it on the same field, not even close hell no. I explained why in a fairly reasonable (and short because I doubt people want to here my long winded rant) manner. What is the problem?

You deleted your posts? I haven't deleted anything, I've got nothing to hide, if I don't like it I don't like it, why would I hide that. Do you even have any proof I deleted my post (no because I haven't deleted anything)

For point 2, vast level creation doesn't do it for me if the core gameplay is inferior. Nothing that can be created will ever reach the levels of those games so why would it matter if millions are available to me? Online 4 player is fun, but it doesn't do it for me going back to the fact that I don't think the gameplay holds up (or is even close) to those games. Being fun and being legendary are 2 different things and when these games on severly underpowered hardware run circles around LBP in the most important aspect to a platformer, level design and platforming/gameplay the extras don't really do it for me. I have no problems saying that those games are superior to LBP in everything that is not technical regardless of age.

oh and on the physics (which hurt the game more than help) and the DLC read what I just typed.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="Mr_Apple_Soup"]

Hey, spyro 2 was a godly game...maybe i'm biased because i only owned a psone (thats not to say i had extensive playtime on n64, SF64 and Paper Mario are two of my favorite games), but crash and spyro kicked the crap out of any platformer on the N64...i hated how "weighty" mario 64 felt. Still a great game in its own right

Naughty and Insomniac know how to deliever :P

and yes, this is irrelivant to the topic ^_^

Mr_Apple_Soup

I disagrees with that but I think they are definitely comparable to the N64 ones and are underappreciated. Also, I may be the only Nintendo fan who will tell you he thought SM64 was garbage. I liked Spyro 2 and crash 3 the best. The others weren't anything special too me, (especially crash one which was crap)

yeah, probably where my "haven't owned a N64" bit drags me down

allow me to correct myself: Crash and Spyro were better then any N64 platformer I have played

Well I can't really argue with that, it is your taste afterall :P

[QUOTE="Storm_Marine"]

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

Who said that I didn't like it or that it was bad?

I don't know, maybe the guy deleted his post. ;)

I like this game, I just don't think that it is as mind blowing as the reviews say

because I have played NES platformers with better refined mechanics of which got lesser scores or praise.

Ah, but those ****c platformers didn't have a vast level creation mode, or online 4 player mulitplayer, or many other things. Did they now?

I don't think that that is unreasonable even if it sounds harsh. Anyway, this has nothing to do with the fact that he thought that recreating ****c levels from other games in little big planet makes it on the same field, not even close hell no. I explained why in a fairly reasonable (and short because I doubt people want to here my long winded rant) manner. What is the problem?

ActicEdge

You deleted your posts? I haven't deleted anything, I've got nothing to hide, if I don't like it I don't like it, why would I hide that. Do you even have any proof I deleted my post (no because I haven't deleted anything)

What. Are you talking about? :|

For point 2, vast level creation doesn't do it for me if the core gameplay is inferior. Nothing that can be created will ever reach the levels of those games so why would it matter if millions are available to me? Online 4 player is fun, but it doesn't do it for me going back to the fact that I don't think the gameplay holds up (or is even close) to those games. Being fun and being legendary are 2 different things and when these games on severly underpowered hardware run circles around LBP in the most important aspect to a platformer, level design and platforming/gameplay the extras don't really do it for me. I have no problems saying that those games are superior to LBP in everything that is not technical regardless of age.

At this point we have to just agree to disagree.Personally, I find there's more to LBP (and platformers in general) than just it's basic jumpingplatforming mechanics.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="Storm_Marine"]

Storm_Marine

You deleted your posts? I haven't deleted anything, I've got nothing to hide, if I don't like it I don't like it, why would I hide that. Do you even have any proof I deleted my post (no because I haven't deleted anything)

What. Are you talking about? :|

For point 2, vast level creation doesn't do it for me if the core gameplay is inferior. Nothing that can be created will ever reach the levels of those games so why would it matter if millions are available to me? Online 4 player is fun, but it doesn't do it for me going back to the fact that I don't think the gameplay holds up (or is even close) to those games. Being fun and being legendary are 2 different things and when these games on severly underpowered hardware run circles around LBP in the most important aspect to a platformer, level design and platforming/gameplay the extras don't really do it for me. I have no problems saying that those games are superior to LBP in everything that is not technical regardless of age.

At this point we have to just agree to disagree.Personally, I find there's more to LBP (and platformers in general) than just it's basic jumpingplatforming mechanics.

The first point was I thought you inferred I deleted my post.

Anyway, I explained why I thought LBP was inferior so I am interested in seeing why you think there is more to it. No one I ever approach about this actually gives me a good reason when I ask them about what exactly makes LBP so amazing.

Oh and no where in my post did I say that all there is to platformers is the jumping/platforming mechanic. There is much more but if that mechanic isn't up to snuff, nothing else can save your game. That mechanic holds the whole genre together and getting it wrong hurts a game really badly.

Alright, I can agree that Sony first party games lack longlivety in that people tend to move on to the next great game instead of stying with the same game year after year.

The same can easily be said about both Nintendo and Microsoft first party games too though.

How much are people talking about?

Banjo 3
Project Gotham Racing 3, 4
Viva Pinata
Viva Pinata 2
Blue Dragon
Perfect Dark Z
Kameo
N3

Or?

Super Mario Galaxy
Mario kart Wii
Super Paper Mario
Metriod Prime 3
Animal Crossing
Wario Land: Shake it
Warioware Wii

[QUOTE="Storm_Marine"]

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

You deleted your posts? I haven't deleted anything, I've got nothing to hide, if I don't like it I don't like it, why would I hide that. Do you even have any proof I deleted my post (no because I haven't deleted anything)

What. Are you talking about? :|

For point 2, vast level creation doesn't do it for me if the core gameplay is inferior. Nothing that can be created will ever reach the levels of those games so why would it matter if millions are available to me? Online 4 player is fun, but it doesn't do it for me going back to the fact that I don't think the gameplay holds up (or is even close) to those games. Being fun and being legendary are 2 different things and when these games on severly underpowered hardware run circles around LBP in the most important aspect to a platformer, level design and platforming/gameplay the extras don't really do it for me. I have no problems saying that those games are superior to LBP in everything that is not technical regardless of age.

At this point we have to just agree to disagree.Personally, I find there's more to LBP (and platformers in general) than just it's basic jumpingplatforming mechanics.

ActicEdge

The first point was I thought you inferred I deleted my post.

Anyway, I explained why I thought LBP was inferior so I am interested in seeing why you think there is more to it. No one I ever approach about this actually gives me a good reason when I ask them about what exactly makes LBP so amazing.

This thread seems to be full of falsely assumed-to-be implications, etc.

As to why I like LBP. Well, I love playing the amazingly creative user-levels online, I like fooling around with the level creator myself, and I like just sitting down and playing the game with other people. (Whether they're sitting right next to me, or just a PSN friend)

That kind of stuff. It's just fun.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="Storm_Marine"]

Storm_Marine

The first point was I thought you inferred I deleted my post.

Anyway, I explained why I thought LBP was inferior so I am interested in seeing why you think there is more to it. No one I ever approach about this actually gives me a good reason when I ask them about what exactly makes LBP so amazing.

This thread seems to be full of falsely assumed-to-be implications, etc.

As to why I like LBP. Well, I love playing the amazingly creative user-levels online, I like fooling around with the level creator myself, and I like just sitting down and playing the game with other people. (Whether they're sitting right next to me, or just a PSN friend)

That kind of stuff. It's just fun.

Okay, I am sorry I misinterpreted your post, I really don't have any clue what you meant by that satement.

Anyway, I think all those thing in LBP are great, however, I think that there is far more to the core of a platformer than this jump/platforming mechanics you inferred I cared about.There is much more but if that mechanic isn't up to snuff, nothing else can save your game. That mechanic holds the whole genre together and getting it wrong hurts a game really badly. I personally feel that LBP didn't get it right. When I analyze a platformer, the fluff like music, graphics, online, DLC, difficulty all comes second to 3 main things. Level design, platforming mechanic and creativity of design.. I think these are extremely linked and messing one up mess them all up. I think the platfroming mechanic in LBP cripples it severely from achieving anything other than an average platformer with someexcellent features. It is definitely fun though, hence why I like it but still that does not excuse the flaws it has which in my opinion should have kept it from scoring so high.

Fun is only part of an evaluation for me (though it is what I game for I still have to be objective otherwise all it comes down to is IMO like statements.)

[QUOTE="Storm_Marine"]

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

The first point was I thought you inferred I deleted my post.

Anyway, I explained why I thought LBP was inferior so I am interested in seeing why you think there is more to it. No one I ever approach about this actually gives me a good reason when I ask them about what exactly makes LBP so amazing.

ActicEdge

This thread seems to be full of falsely assumed-to-be implications, etc.

As to why I like LBP. Well, I love playing the amazingly creative user-levels online, I like fooling around with the level creator myself, and I like just sitting down and playing the game with other people. (Whether they're sitting right next to me, or just a PSN friend)

That kind of stuff. It's just fun.

Okay, I am sorry I misinterpreted your post, I really don't have any clue what you meant by that satement.

Anyway, I think all those thing in LBP are great, however, I think that there is far more to the core of a platformer than this jump/platforming mechanics you inferred I cared about.There is much more but if that mechanic isn't up to snuff, nothing else can save your game. That mechanic holds the whole genre together and getting it wrong hurts a game really badly. I personally feel that LBP didn't get it right. When I analyze a platformer, the fluff like music, graphics, online, DLC, difficulty all comes second to 3 main things. Level design, platforming mechanic and creativity of design.. I think these are extremely linked and messing one up mess them all up. I think the platfroming mechanic in LBP cripples it severely from achieving anything other than an average platformer with someexcellent features. It is definitely fun though, hence why I like it but still that does not excuse the flaws it has which in my opinion should have kept it from scoring so high.

Fun is only part of an evaluation for me (though it is what I game for I still have to be objective otherwise all it comes down to is IMO like statements.)

Therefore we must agree to disagree. Because, yes, I disagree with most of the above. Not all of it, but most.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="Storm_Marine"]

This thread seems to be full of falsely assumed-to-be implications, etc.

As to why I like LBP. Well, I love playing the amazingly creative user-levels online, I like fooling around with the level creator myself, and I like just sitting down and playing the game with other people. (Whether they're sitting right next to me, or just a PSN friend)

That kind of stuff. It's just fun.

Storm_Marine

Okay, I am sorry I misinterpreted your post, I really don't have any clue what you meant by that satement.

Anyway, I think all those thing in LBP are great, however, I think that there is far more to the core of a platformer than this jump/platforming mechanics you inferred I cared about.There is much more but if that mechanic isn't up to snuff, nothing else can save your game. That mechanic holds the whole genre together and getting it wrong hurts a game really badly. I personally feel that LBP didn't get it right. When I analyze a platformer, the fluff like music, graphics, online, DLC, difficulty all comes second to 3 main things. Level design, platforming mechanic and creativity of design.. I think these are extremely linked and messing one up mess them all up. I think the platfroming mechanic in LBP cripples it severely from achieving anything other than an average platformer with someexcellent features. It is definitely fun though, hence why I like it but still that does not excuse the flaws it has which in my opinion should have kept it from scoring so high.

Fun is only part of an evaluation for me (though it is what I game for I still have to be objective otherwise all it comes down to is IMO like statements.)

Therefore we must agree to disagree. Because, yes, I disagree with most of the above. Not all of it, but most.

And I want you to explain why. Whenever I put heat on someone to explain themselves after I do, they just say we'll agree to disagree. Can I get a general reason why you disagree with this?

[QUOTE="Storm_Marine"]

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

Okay, I am sorry I misinterpreted your post, I really don't have any clue what you meant by that satement.

Anyway, I think all those thing in LBP are great, however, I think that there is far more to the core of a platformer than this jump/platforming mechanics you inferred I cared about.There is much more but if that mechanic isn't up to snuff, nothing else can save your game. That mechanic holds the whole genre together and getting it wrong hurts a game really badly. I personally feel that LBP didn't get it right. When I analyze a platformer, the fluff like music, graphics, online, DLC, difficulty all comes second to 3 main things. Level design, platforming mechanic and creativity of design.. I think these are extremely linked and messing one up mess them all up. I think the platfroming mechanic in LBP cripples it severely from achieving anything other than an average platformer with someexcellent features. It is definitely fun though, hence why I like it but still that does not excuse the flaws it has which in my opinion should have kept it from scoring so high.

Fun is only part of an evaluation for me (though it is what I game for I still have to be objective otherwise all it comes down to is IMO like statements.)

ActicEdge

Therefore we must agree to disagree. Because, yes, I disagree with most of the above. Not all of it, but most.

And I want you to explain why. Whenever I put heat on someone to explain themselves after I do, they just say we'll agree to disagree. Can I get a general reason why you disagree with this?

Long story short, I disagree with your opinion that the platforming in LBP is not up to snuff. It's not incredible, revolutionary, andwhatever. But's good enough, and I don't think it lags down the rest of the game in any way.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="Storm_Marine"]

Therefore we must agree to disagree. Because, yes, I disagree with most of the above. Not all of it, but most.

Storm_Marine

And I want you to explain why. Whenever I put heat on someone to explain themselves after I do, they just say we'll agree to disagree. Can I get a general reason why you disagree with this?

Long story short, I disagree with your opinion that the platforming in LBP is not up to snuff. It's not incredible, revolutionary, andwhatever. But's good enough, and I don't think it lags down the rest of the game in any way.

The up to snuff comment was in general, not for LBP specifically. I still think its has average platforming and that hurts it but its not broken like say Sonic 06. The platforming is good enough for it to be fun so its not like I think its a disaster or anything, just a crippling aspect to the rest of the game. Anyway, thanks for the response at the very least, nice debating with someone who doesn't run :)

[QUOTE="Storm_Marine"]

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

And I want you to explain why. Whenever I put heat on someone to explain themselves after I do, they just say we'll agree to disagree. Can I get a general reason why you disagree with this?

ActicEdge

Long story short, I disagree with your opinion that the platforming in LBP is not up to snuff. It's not incredible, revolutionary, andwhatever. But's good enough, and I don't think it lags down the rest of the game in any way.

The up to snuff comment was in general, not for LBP specifically. I still think its has average platforming and that hurts it but its not broken like say Sonic 06. The platforming is good enough for it to be fun so its not like I think its a disaster or anything, just a crippling aspect to the rest of the game. Anyway, thanks for the response at the very least, nice debating with someone who doesn't run :)

You're umm...you're welcome.

[QUOTE="Bread_or_Decide"] Heavenly Sword is a game that dropped off the radar. No sequel. Marginal interest when released. Uncharted is already above and beyond it seeing as the sequel comes out this fall. Ratchet and Clank is already a classic game franchise. Ninja-Hippo

The latest R&C game was an expansion, not a seperate game. That is why it was available on PSN. You need the original game to play it.

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"][QUOTE="Bread_or_Decide"] Heavenly Sword is a game that dropped off the radar. No sequel. Marginal interest when released. Uncharted is already above and beyond it seeing as the sequel comes out this fall. Ratchet and Clank is already a classic game franchise. ZIMdoom

The latest R&C game was an expansion, not a seperate game. That is why it was available on PSN. You need the original game to play it.

No you don't.

And it was meant to be a bridge between Tools of Destruction and the upcoming A Crack in Time.

[QUOTE="Storm_Marine"]

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

Okay, I am sorry I misinterpreted your post, I really don't have any clue what you meant by that satement.

Anyway, I think all those thing in LBP are great, however, I think that there is far more to the core of a platformer than this jump/platforming mechanics you inferred I cared about.There is much more but if that mechanic isn't up to snuff, nothing else can save your game. That mechanic holds the whole genre together and getting it wrong hurts a game really badly. I personally feel that LBP didn't get it right. When I analyze a platformer, the fluff like music, graphics, online, DLC, difficulty all comes second to 3 main things. Level design, platforming mechanic and creativity of design.. I think these are extremely linked and messing one up mess them all up. I think the platfroming mechanic in LBP cripples it severely from achieving anything other than an average platformer with someexcellent features. It is definitely fun though, hence why I like it but still that does not excuse the flaws it has which in my opinion should have kept it from scoring so high.

Fun is only part of an evaluation for me (though it is what I game for I still have to be objective otherwise all it comes down to is IMO like statements.)

ActicEdge

Therefore we must agree to disagree. Because, yes, I disagree with most of the above. Not all of it, but most.

And I want you to explain why. Whenever I put heat on someone to explain themselves after I do, they just say we'll agree to disagree. Can I get a general reason why you disagree with this?

[QUOTE="Ninja-Hippo"][QUOTE="Bread_or_Decide"] Heavenly Sword is a game that dropped off the radar. No sequel. Marginal interest when released. Uncharted is already above and beyond it seeing as the sequel comes out this fall. Ratchet and Clank is already a classic game franchise. ZIMdoom

The latest R&C game was an expansion, not a seperate game. That is why it was available on PSN. You need the original game to play it.

[QUOTE="Storm_Marine"]

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

Okay, I am sorry I misinterpreted your post, I really don't have any clue what you meant by that satement.

Anyway, I think all those thing in LBP are great, however, I think that there is far more to the core of a platformer than this jump/platforming mechanics you inferred I cared about.There is much more but if that mechanic isn't up to snuff, nothing else can save your game. That mechanic holds the whole genre together and getting it wrong hurts a game really badly. I personally feel that LBP didn't get it right. When I analyze a platformer, the fluff like music, graphics, online, DLC, difficulty all comes second to 3 main things. Level design, platforming mechanic and creativity of design.. I think these are extremely linked and messing one up mess them all up. I think the platfroming mechanic in LBP cripples it severely from achieving anything other than an average platformer with someexcellent features. It is definitely fun though, hence why I like it but still that does not excuse the flaws it has which in my opinion should have kept it from scoring so high.

Fun is only part of an evaluation for me (though it is what I game for I still have to be objective otherwise all it comes down to is IMO like statements.)

Therefore we must agree to disagree. Because, yes, I disagree with most of the above. Not all of it, but most.

And I want you to explain why. Whenever I put heat on someone to explain themselves after I do, they just say we'll agree to disagree. Can I get a general reason why you disagree with this?

Pedantic much? :P Point still stands.Ninja-Hippo

[QUOTE="GabeNewellsPie"]

Like I've said before-the fact Sony are ramping up first party development is commendable,but none of their games bar GT and possibly GOW hold any interest in the wider gaming community.

Like you pointed out the buzz for the likes of KZ2 has pretty much died out,after like 2 months of release.(This was a game in development for the best part of a half-decade.)

I like the fact Sony are doing what they are doing,but they are failing at it imo,and its a strategy thats surely unsustainable when you take into account the losses SCE are incurring due to the PS3 and when you consider the wider economic sitiuation.

PoppaGamer

Gears received and maintained buzz and hype with a 360 install base of about 1/3 of what the PS3 enjoys today...

Just saying.

[QUOTE="ActicEdge"]

[QUOTE="Storm_Marine"]

Therefore we must agree to disagree. Because, yes, I disagree with most of the above. Not all of it, but most.

exiledsnake

And I want you to explain why. Whenever I put heat on someone to explain themselves after I do, they just say we'll agree to disagree. Can I get a general reason why you disagree with this?

I really didn't like the mechanic. I understand why its there but it doesn't make for an interesting platforming experience in my opiinion which is why I think it cripple the gameplay at lengths. Anyway, I appreciate your input.

Lol how many times is geow2 mentioned tc?irish4eva

Gears 2 sold 5 million though.

Will Killzone 2?

[QUOTE="PoppaGamer"][QUOTE="GabeNewellsPie"]

Like I've said before-the fact Sony are ramping up first party development is commendable,but none of their games bar GT and possibly GOW hold any interest in the wider gaming community.

Like you pointed out the buzz for the likes of KZ2 has pretty much died out,after like 2 months of release.(This was a game in development for the best part of a half-decade.)

I like the fact Sony are doing what they are doing,but they are failing at it imo,and its a strategy thats surely unsustainable when you take into account the losses SCE are incurring due to the PS3 and when you consider the wider economic sitiuation.

TBoogy

Gears received and maintained buzz and hype with a 360 install base of about 1/3 of what the PS3 enjoys today...

Just saying.

It seems to me that Sony's games just dont hold any interest in either System wars or the gaming community as a whole. If we take Killzone 2, easily the biggest blockbuster to hit the PS3 this year, and it's all but dead in just a couple of months. Halo 3 tops the Live chartsweek after week and is still discussed here pretty much daily, yet Killzone 2 appears to have had it's brief flash in the pan and then faded away in no time at all. I think this is because the game's graphics were its selling point. Once you'd seen it in action, admired the pretty effects and grown accustomed to them, there just isn't that much else to get you excited about the game.

Same with games like Ratchet and Clank and Uncharted. Decent enough gameplay, but real emphasis on the visuals. I think this approach adds up to generally dull games in the long-term. Take a movie like Wanted. Visually striking, and pretty fun while you're watching it, but once you're done it's completely forgettable. You dont want to go see it again. You dont want to go talk about it.

Take Little Big Planet - remember how that game was going to rule the world? What happened? It fizzled out in a matter of weeks.

I think Sony are trying to hard to convince gamers that their system is the 'premium' piece of tech by investing so much in graphics and effects, often at the behest of truly outstanding gameplay. So long as it looks fantastic, and plays competently enough, they seem happy to release the game, and people want something more than that.

Ninja-Hippo

Any you say? ANY? okey tell me how did you figure this out?

And what Uncharted 2 imply to you? it is the sequel for a successful game that people talk about to this day, thats why they are making a sequel, can't say the same thing for Too human.I will eat some diamonds if Uncharted 2 is not on the top 10 list in GT's most anticipated E3 games, it's already on the top 10 list for this year's most wanted games on another website,thats how much enthusiastic people are going for Uncharted, more than your example which is Mass Effect, according to this source.

Also this past week or so there was a KZ2 thread about getting the GOTY, again what do you expect for people in SW and the whole mediato do? talk about the game 24/365 to make it a global saturation and the international enthusiastic game of the year?

And KZ2 vs Halo 3, are you serious or what? that comparison alone is fishy, a game that sold almost 10M to a game that sold less than 1.5M? it's a no brainer that more people would talk about and play Halo 3, a defining shooter franchise against a sequel to one of the most average shooters that barely is standing on it's own legs now and establishing itself slowly, even after all the success and redeeming this title brought it is still getting bashed for no reason in this very thread too, some people in this thread say that it died and nobody, NOBODY is interested after 2 months of release, ridiculous if you ask me.

This is called your own opinion that alot of people disagree with, get a PS3, play the game then maybe you would get a different impression about the game.

I totally disagree because I watched the movie three times and I enjoyed it every time I watched it, omg opinions, it's all about the opinions :o

Yea I think you are right, LBP would have been miss world if it sold more copies, popularity contests were always the defining topic for great games.

Sony is convincing me more than MS or Nintendo with their first party games, I have low standards maybe thats the reason, I mean I love graphics but I don't love gameplay.

The fact that you singled out Sony's first party is very shameful, I guess you tried to be original.

Btw, one last thing.

Games with only flash but no substance from Sony's first party you mentioned are.

Uncharted - 88%.

Killzone 2 - 91%.

LBP - 95%.

R&C : TOD - 89%.

No substance at all.

I hope I understood you well.

Haze, your post gave me a seizure.

Haze, your post gave me a seizure.

OldSkoolGamer04

[QUOTE="OldSkoolGamer04"]

Haze, your post gave me a seizure.

HAZE-Unit

Hah. Now I'm hungry.

And so I'm on topic, I feel that a bulk of the games across the 360 and PS3 suffer this problem, which is why I'm now Wii only. I feel that the quality Wii titles (yes, they're out there) do offer that staying power that the others don't. When the copy of SMG that I ordered comes in, it'll be my 3rd playthrough (I had it and sold it a year ago). Games like No More Heroes and even Mario Kart Wii have held my interest much better than MGS 4, Killzone 2, and GeOW 2 - all games that I've played and have had the chance to play again.

And as for the consensus that MGS 4 is the one Sony title that is above this issue, I have to disagree tremendously. I'm a huge Metal Gear fan, and I liked 4, but to me it's nothing more than a huge technical workhorse that emphasizes the wrong areas. Other than the first two acts, I found nothing about it particularly gripping.

i don't agree with you. uncharted and littlebigplant have fantastic gameplay. killzone 2 has more emphasis on graphics, but that doesnt mean the gameplay is bad(although it could be a little better).

and what does disscussion have anything to do with how good/bad a game is? i guess it would be more likely to be talked about if its good, but thats no way to measure games.

I refuse to read this entire thread of inane bantering about what defines what in regards to this thread. However what I got from the original post, is that in Hippo's opinion when people years from now are discussing this gen, he doesn't believe that many of Sony's exclusive PS3 games will be remembered as classics. He thinks it is because the developers put more emphasis on graphics then gameplay.

Then everyone tried to crucify him, and turn it into MS vs Sony round 37982378932. Am I right?

If I am correct then I don't think he is entirely wrong. Heavenly Sword will not be remembered 20 years from now. Motostorm 2 wont. MGS4 will. etc. You could apply this to the 360 as well. Halo 3 will be remembered as a classic. Crackdown will not.

Is this a matter of graphics over gameplay? I have no idea. Hippo thinks it is though, and right or wrong he is entitled to that opinion.

That being said the Wii and 360 and PC all have plenty of good games that won't stand the test of time as well. Perhaps had he not specified PS3 this thread would not have become a **** storm so fast. Then again on SW I'm sure it would have.....

Every PS3 exclusive ive palyed is sick and ive played them all. Infamous is going to be off the chain.djsifer01

Ch-yeaaaah booiiiiii!

I almost regret selling my PS3 before getting a chance to play it.

[QUOTE="HAZE-Unit"][QUOTE="OldSkoolGamer04"]

Haze, your post gave me a seizure.

Hah. Now I'm hungry.

And so I'm on topic, I feel that a bulk of the games across the 360 and PS3 suffer this problem, which is why I'm now Wii only. I feel that the quality Wii titles (yes, they're out there) do offer that staying power that the others don't. When the copy of SMG that I ordered comes in, it'll be my 3rd playthrough (I had it and sold it a year ago). Games like No More Heroes and even Mario Kart Wii have held my interest much better than MGS 4, Killzone 2, and GeOW 2 - all games that I've played and have had the chance to play again.

And as for the consensus that MGS 4 is the one Sony title that is above this issue, I have to disagree tremendously. I'm a huge Metal Gear fan, and I liked 4, but to me it's nothing more than a huge technical workhorse that emphasizes the wrong areas. Other than the first two acts, I found nothing about it particularly gripping.

Every PS3 exclusive ive palyed is sick and ive played them all. Infamous is going to be off the chain.djsifer01

[QUOTE="OldSkoolGamer04"]

[QUOTE="HAZE-Unit"] It's called the skittles quote :PHAZE-Unit

Hah. Now I'm hungry.

And so I'm on topic, I feel that a bulk of the games across the 360 and PS3 suffer this problem, which is why I'm now Wii only. I feel that the quality Wii titles (yes, they're out there) do offer that staying power that the others don't. When the copy of SMG that I ordered comes in, it'll be my 3rd playthrough (I had it and sold it a year ago). Games like No More Heroes and even Mario Kart Wii have held my interest much better than MGS 4, Killzone 2, and GeOW 2 - all games that I've played and have had the chance to play again.

And as for the consensus that MGS 4 is the one Sony title that is above this issue, I have to disagree tremendously. I'm a huge Metal Gear fan, and I liked 4, but to me it's nothing more than a huge technical workhorse that emphasizes the wrong areas. Other than the first two acts, I found nothing about it particularly gripping.

Fair enough. It really is a good game. I just think my expectations were too high. Awesome ending though. ;)

I refuse to read this entire thread of inane bantering about what defines what in regards to this thread. However what I got from the original post, is that in Hippo's opinion when people years from now are discussing this gen, he doesn't believe that many of Sony's exclusive PS3 games will be remembered as classics. He thinks it is because the developers put more emphasis on graphics then gameplay.

Then everyone tried to crucify him, and turn it into MS vs Sony round 37982378932. Am I right?

If I am correct then I don't think he is entirely wrong. Heavenly Sword will not be remembered 20 years from now. Motostorm 2 wont. MGS4 will. etc. You could apply this to the 360 as well. Halo 3 will be remembered as a classic. Crackdown will not.

Is this a matter of graphics over gameplay? I have no idea. Hippo thinks it is though, and right or wrong he is entitled to that opinion.

That being said the Wii and 360 and PC all have plenty of good games that won't stand the test of time as well. Perhaps had he not specified PS3 this thread would not have become a **** storm so fast. Then again on SW I'm sure it would have.....

Metalscarz

[QUOTE="HAZE-Unit"][QUOTE="OldSkoolGamer04"]

Hah. Now I'm hungry.

And so I'm on topic, I feel that a bulk of the games across the 360 and PS3 suffer this problem, which is why I'm now Wii only. I feel that the quality Wii titles (yes, they're out there) do offer that staying power that the others don't. When the copy of SMG that I ordered comes in, it'll be my 3rd playthrough (I had it and sold it a year ago). Games like No More Heroes and even Mario Kart Wii have held my interest much better than MGS 4, Killzone 2, and GeOW 2 - all games that I've played and have had the chance to play again.

And as for the consensus that MGS 4 is the one Sony title that is above this issue, I have to disagree tremendously. I'm a huge Metal Gear fan, and I liked 4, but to me it's nothing more than a huge technical workhorse that emphasizes the wrong areas. Other than the first two acts, I found nothing about it particularly gripping.

Fair enough. It really is a good game. I just think my expectations were too high. Awesome ending though. ;)