firstly a disclaimer; to all admins, as soon as this spirals into a huge flame war just lock immediately... hell just at the first whiff of one. i want this peaceful
Nintendo, we all know of them... but it finally clicked why they are still in the market. And like Apple have also proved, its LOOKS. But this is from my personal view so if im wrong, well... im wrong to you.
Ill begin with Apple's iPod. This is all from a conversation between me and my tutor about the 'pods. Its all about design. Sure the iPod could have had FM radio, onboard encoding, colour screens. they are Apple they can do anything.
but why?
Why have everything when only the minimal ammount is required? Im breaking from subject but look at Halo, its simplicity boxed. Pick up 2 weapons at a time, melee, 2 grenade types. thats it! There dosnt need anything more, its perfect like that
Talks with fellow clicker and good mate Biax made me realize with TEa its not about how many weapons or features the game has, its about how it plays. Since that talk Progress with TEa speeded up, i stopped making more and more weapons and focused on the game! That week i made 2 levels instead of 2 a week.
Back to Nintendo, the Gamecube is IMO the most beautiful and well designed of all consoles. its contempory with its... well... cube shape. The iPod is the best of the hard drive based MP3 players because its beautiful. Feature-wise its the worst.
Apple is simplisity. it does what it needs to perfectly, as does the Cube. but it may not have hard drives, DVD playing and other features... it just does what it does. and it does it beautifully, yet slightly childishly. Hell if the regular cube came in either white or chrome with some slight modifications it would be a design classic.
Designers and makers alike should just sit back and think about keeping things simple for once. The Gamecube has dots to represent the different controller ports, the PS2 uses numbers *going off top of my head so i may be wrong*. but anyroad dots are stylish whilst numbers died out years ago.
It dosnt even apply just to iPod. the whole Apple system is based around being simple but getting the job done flawlessly.
disregard this as random waffeling if you will, but i do think i have a point.
finally; i love Xbox too, i just think its the ugliest Box next to my beige desktop PC.
Also, Nintendo has this tendancy to make unique games. which are then cloned by every company in existance. I'm a nintendo fan, while they may not have a huge 3rd party support base, their first party games more than make up for it. Hell, if it wern't for all their first party games, the GC probably wouldn't be around anymore.
I have a PS2 and a Gamecube, but I can't remember the last time I played the PS2. It's not really because the quality of the games is better, really, because if I had the same game on both systems, I'm sure I'd rather play it on my Gamecube. I don't really know why, though. I think it may just be because the controller feels more natural to me.
As an uninteresting aside, I always thought they should have made those dots a little different. Like, each slot should have four dots, but port one would have one dot filled in, the second would have two, and so on. I'm very preoccupied.
Anyway, I'm just glad this wasn't a current events/ philosophical debate thread.
I think Nintendo's a lot more dedicated to innovation than you give them credit for being. I mean, think of the number of successful franchises they've created over the years. It's ridiculous. And usually, when they make a new game in a series, they introduce significant changes (Mario Sunshine's water gun, Zelda's cel-shaded graphics, Mario Kart's two-rider system). The changes don't always make the games better, but they're hardly just "making repeats."
You know, of the three, Mario Kart's two-rider system was my least favorite. It only gives each person half as much to do. It's nice to be able to carry two items, but you don't really need two people for that.
Anyway, the point was that they try new things, not that everything they do is wonderful. You take a look at a franchise like Tomb Raider, or Street Fighter, and there's not too much difference between the first one and the five hundredth one.
Simplicity is definitely one of the most important elements to put in a game. If the gameplay is complex and hard to understand, the player will more than likely put the game doewn after 10 seconds.
most of you havnt understood this properly probably because i didnt explain it fully; its not a comparison between the consoles "PS2 is better blah blah", nothing at all like that.
if the iPod looked equally as ugly and was as difficult as its competitors nobody would buy it, but because its simple and beautiful it wins. i saw a link between that and cube, only difference is the competition is more tight with Sony and Microsoft.
>>Yuo won't see street fighter 500, you'll see street fighter 4 ex alpha semitransparent ultra extreme: no preservatives, the new generation strike force: non-fighting edition
Lol, and Ryu will still be there, and he'll still be 18 years old!
Okay, if the iPod is successful because of its looks and its simplicity, and the Gamecube has an edge in looks and simplicity, then why is it also not as successful as the uglier, more complicated consoles?
When Nintendo first unveiled its purple gaming box, I don't think people were universally taken aback with its looks. And I wouldn't say it's the most simple to use. It might be called simple just because it doesn't have extra features like DVD playback, a hard drive, or (much) broadband support, but if you think these are selling points, you're crazy.
Nintendo is still in the market because people like their games. If it weren't for the fact that you have to own one of their consoles in order to play their games, they would sell about 12 Gamecubes and go broke.
Jay! This has always been mmy feeling, not only the nintendo stuff but the TEa bits as well! Game consoles are for games right? Then why the hell do you need a dvd player? It's just asking for trouble!
"shithead, start a flamewar in another topic."
By using language like that you may soon aggravate a flamewar yourself.
id hug you teapot if you wernt just a figmemt of my imagination.
sorry for the typo, what i meant about TEa was usually i made 1 level in 2 weeks, now im doing 2 levels in 1 week. hell even more than that. At first i was obsessed with adding as many game modes and secrets but i just thought "why?" and it all became crystal clear... keep it simple stupid
i have to agree that simplicity is the most frequent winner, best selling game ever that doesnt suck imo Tetris (may be actual best seller if you include all its original states, like spectrum pc and so on) why? because the rules can be explained in a sentance, the controls in another. and anyone can play it, and play it well. the best tetris player i know is my nan (age 60) and she really kicks ass at it. then there is doctor mario, same again. "destroy the germs will the pills mario chucks to win. Same colour pills as the bug you are trying to kill. D-pad moves you left and right, a and b buttons to rotate the pills" that's three sentances you say, but that is because it is a less simple game, and coincidentally it isnt quite as good as tetris is.
new games are just old games squared making them mostly 3d or just too damn complicated, its the old sayings, style over substance, and a nice quote from oscar wilde "why insult some-one with style when you can insult someone with substance?" sony tried to out style nintendo, and microsoft tried to outstlye them, who wins in the opinion of the sort of gamer who can see a game for what it is truely made of? nintendo. substance wins again. Now dont take this as insulting all games on the x-box and ps2 because that would be stupid, i know that there are plenty of games on both that are great, but for being a video games console, the gamecube.... well its the best at it. its not pretending to be a dvd player, or a pc, because what would the point be? if you want a dvd player you buy one etc. plus sony and M$ dont seem to want to make their own games.
just thought you all might like to hear that for some reason... thanks jay for finally saying what ive been thinking for some time
Twas brillig, and the slivey toves
Did gyre and gimble in the wabe,
All mimsy were the borogroves,
And the momewraths outgrabe.
Im sorry Jay, but after reading your long post, I realize: The IPOD has shitty reviews, my brother tried the 40gb model, and it didn't compare to a bargain-bin 64mb mp3 player. Overall, its a crappy music device... So... What I'm getting is: that you bought it, because it looked pretty. If so, your a freaking moron. On the rest of your topic: Gamecube isn't as popular as before because the generation of children are (amazingly) more mature then before, A kid would probably know how to hack a computer by the time we were youngin's and they would most likely be more interested in Farcry, or UT 2k4. Gamecube doesn't have a big line of mature games, as we all know, and most of the teen+ games are 3rd party games. Thus Gamecube was targeted with an ever-changing audience in mind, which is probably why they are scrambling to get more RE games ported to GB. In my mind, it's all about what Im going to STILL be getting 1 year after I bought a thing. Not how pretty it looks at its current state.
Edited by the Author.
"Everytime you use Kazaa, a metallica band member dies a little."
Quote Jonathon Smeby.
"Gamecube doesn't have a big line of mature games, as we all know, and most of the teen+ games are 3rd party games."
WELL ETCHY! It really depends how you define "mature" games and "mature gamers". In my opinion, a mature gamer is someone, like Jay, who has come to the realisation that games are games, not the package they come in.
I would consider an immature gamer to be someone who won't by nintendo games because they are too "kiddy" or because their friends will laught at them. A collection of ultra-violent and ultra-realistic games usually signifies to me an immature gamer.
I once wrote an article about reality in games, an article I am currently rewriting. It was about whether or not games really need to have a story, or depict real tings. Truly great gameplay shouldn't need any of these things, purely great gameplay should drive the gamer through it's gameplay alone.
In summing up, a game is its gameplay, not its themes or special features.
People dont buy a console because of its looks, they buy it because of the games on it. all the extras like "DVD Players" arent needed, its supposed to be a Gaming Console not a friggin "Home Theater system".
i bought my GameCube not because of its sweeto design, but because i owned previous nintendo consoles and i always loved most of there games like Zelda, Mario e.t.c
Echisketch you obviously dont read music, computer, gadget...etc magazines. Computer Active has had the wee 15gb iPod in its top music player category since its release, T3 mentions iPod every other page with rave reviews. maybe its different where your from? but in the UK its extremely popular, especially among audiophiles for the beautiful sound quality.
staying on topic; Simplicity is good but so is depth. and yet again Damien M you read my mind. People who say games are kiddish are the immature ones. my girlfriend had a good point when she said that "people who claim to be mature are usually immature" and are probably just people who have a permenant opinion no matter what. If your easily impressed by explosions and violence then it shows a primitive love for something barbaric, something which we grew out of after being monkies. I have just as much fun playing GTA or Splinter Cell as i do playing Windwaker and Mario Sunshine.
What would tetris be like with realistic gravity? it would open up discussions about the material, size and density of the blocks, against air resitance... who needs that when some nicely shaped blocks trickle down from above? I dont think we're gonna hit a perfect answer for gameplay keys and the perfect formula, there probably never will be one.
Advertisement
Post Reply
Edited by the Author.
