[QUOTE="awssk8er716"]
[QUOTE="VauxhalI"]
As I look closer at the three consoles dominating the market these days, I've realized that the Ps3 and XBOX360's library is pretty much bland rehasings of previous games on the Ps1 and Ps2. They survive solely offf dark action-adventure button mashers and FPSs with awesome graphics. This wouldn't really be a problem if they added some variety, or changed up some of the game mechanics, but it seems like they are totatlly killing gameplay in favor of graphics... and I know that the gamespot.com forums don't repersent all of the gaming community, but even outside of gamespot people seem to judge these new games solely on the graphics and not on the gameplay. This is not just the Ps3's fault, but the XBOX360's as well. To me, this is utterly mindless; aesthetics can only take you so far. Also, most of the FPSs out these days don't even have split-screen, and if anyone has ever played a decent FPS with a good friend on split-screen then they know how awesome that can be.
Arbiterisl33t69
I 100% agree with this part.
First of all, I don't like the typical FPS. Second of all, I'm tired of the "Dark" theme like you said, like Killzone 2.
Also, yes, you are right. Many, but not all 360 and PS3 rated M games are mindless, just shooting and killing stuff. That's why almost all teenagers like the 360/PS3 over the PS3. They just want to turn on the game, and kill stuff with guns with no thought.
It's stupid how split-screen is never put in FPS's anymore. As much as I HATE FPS's with a standard controller, games like Halo 2 are fun with friends split-screen, but I found unbearably boring online.
And, graphics are way overrated. I prefer many versions of PS3/Wii multiplats on my Wii.
What exactly IS a "typical" FPS? Aren't all FPS first-person shooters? You do know there are fps with variety in them such as Borderlands and Bioshock..right? Oh yes, TC, I completely agree, it's completely impossible for games on the 360 and PS3 to have good gameplay, the devs must only work on the graphics because as we all know great graphics are hard to pull off in those consoles :|
The reason sheep such as awsk8r and TC think graphics are overrated is because the Wii can't handle HD graphics and power. And why is it sheep think graphics only make up the visuals of the game? Have you heard of frame rate or physics or technical power in a game? If you sheep really think graphics could not matter any less, how about you play a game with 5fps and see how you enjoy it..
The graphics kings thread are overrated, though, as well as judging a game on its graphics alone, but what's with the mindset all sheep have that is A GAME CANNOT HAVE GREAT GAMEPLAY AND PULL OFF GREAT GRAPHICS AS WELL, IT'S EITHER ONE OR THE OTHER?
A non-typical FPS is Red Steel 2. Yes, it's first person view, and you can shoot, but it's nothing like Halo, Call of Duty... ect. And yes, I do realize there are different types of FPS's like Borderlands. I wouldn't include Borderlands as a typical FPS.
For the second part, may I correct you that my name is "awssk8er", and why would I think graphics are overrated for that reason? I have a gaming PC and a PS3. Ucharted 2 is one of my favorite games this generation, but for the gameplay. I could careless if it was in SD. I realize other things go into power, but I'm talking about the raw visuals. I would much rather have a game with SD graphics that runs well than have Crysis graphics with 5 FPS. In system wars, when people compare graphics of a game, they use screenshots. Not videos.
What?... I think I just said one of my favorite games this generation is Uncharted 2.
Log in to comment