On Jan 7, 10:24 am, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jan 6, 9:44 pm, Zee <no_...@nowhere.net> wrote:
>
> > Nick Soapdish, Jr. wrote:
> > >> My hyperbole aside, the video game industry was pretty much dominated
> > >> by Nintendo at the time Sony stepped in with the PlayStation and made
> > >> games "cool" again. A lot of gamers were deserting because Nintendo
> > >> was too focused on family friendly games and Sega was losing steam.
>
> > > Well, the SuperNES still had some nice, violent games like Contra 3
> > > and Castlevania 4, so I don't think you had the single-minded focus on
> > > "family" games yet until later in the N64 era.
>
> > Not to mention Super Metroid, non-Zelda RPGs like Chrono Trigger, FF 2&3, and
> > Secret of Mana, and then all the cross-platform games like Street Fighter,
> > Madden, NBA Jam, etc...SNES had a ton of good, "adult" games.
>
> It's all in the perception.
>
> Super Metroid, while a decidedly "core" game, *looked* like a kiddie
> game. Bright colors, shooting colorful aliens with laser beams,
> relatively simple graphical design... gamers who entered high school,
> college, the real world, etc. wanted games with more "mature" themes
> (as if a game had to have hookers or blood to be mature).
>
> As far as Zelda (not an RPG) comparisons with Square's work, Zelda is
> no more "kiddie" than anything Square put out. Final Fantasy, Chrono
> Trigger, Secret of Mana, etc. all looked like Zelda games. Many gamers
> just got tired of playing with these cutesy little characters.

I disagree with your definition of "family friendly" or "kiddie" in
this situation. At that point, _all_ games had that similar kind of
bright colors/simple design, because of the technology. And when I
was in college in the early '90s, no one was complaining about things
being too "kiddie" in games in general. When I think of Nintendo's
"family friendly" direction, we're talking about Nintendo almost
_exclusively_ relying on party-oriented games and "ultra" cutesy
games, with simpler controls.


>
> Madden and other similar sports simulation games were good but the
> limitations of sprite-based 2D graphics and accompanying viewpoints
> took their toll.
>
> And NBA Jam is hardly an "adult" sports game.
>
>
>
>
>
> > >> I'm going even as far back as the PlayStation, though. The PlayStation
> > >> 2 built off the incredible success of the PlayStation, which, as I
> > >> said above, reinvented video games for more mature audiences. We would
> > >> never have seen GTA on a console, Ratchet & Clank, Devil May Cry, God
> > >> of War, etc. were it not for the PlayStation.
>
> > > My personal feeling on the original Playstation (and the Saturn as
> > > well) is that 3D wasn't quite ready for prime-time.  The controls were
> > > clunky, and the graphics were eye-bleedingly bad.  Also, I wasn't a
> > > huge fan of the fighting games and survival horror titles that seemed
> > > to get the most press at the time.  Sure there were some bona fide
> > > classics (Final Fantasy 7, Metal Gear Solid, Spyro, Crash Bandicoot,
> > > Symphony of the Night),
>
> > GT 1 & 2, Tekken 3, Wipeout XL -- the list goes on and on...  :-)
>
> > > and I also understand that there were
> > > necessary growing pains while the transition to 3D was
> > > underway........but I don't feel 3D gaming was truly underway as a
> > > polished form of entertainment until the PS2 era.
>
> > Maybe not polished, but definitely underway with titles like MGS.
>
> > I think NES, SNES, PS1, and PS2 all had huge impacts on the future of console
> > gaming during their respective times. (Heck, you could even go back to the 2600
> > if you want.) It's hard to say which one was "more important" because they all
> > built on their predecessors (though I guess the 2D-->3D movement is often seen
> > as the major milestone for modern gaming).
>
> Well, of course, every system has some sort of impact on the general
> concept of video games. I was more referring to the PlayStation and
> PlayStation 2's impact on the perception and popularity of video
> games. Sony did their own sort of "blue ocean strategy" by targeting
> people who had the admittedly wrong impression that video games were
> just 2D Mario and Donkey Kong games.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I still feel the interaction of control of onscreen action and a
needed degree of graphical "smoothness", which both are huge factors
in a game fully succeeding as entertainment, didn't reach the level it
had to be at until last generation. The best games of the PS1
generation succeeded _in spite_ of the hardware.

On Jan 9, 11:50 am, "Nick Soapdish, Jr." <JGordon...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Jan 7, 10:24 am, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 6, 9:44 pm, Zee <no_...@nowhere.net> wrote:
>
> > > Nick Soapdish, Jr. wrote:
> > > >> My hyperbole aside, the video game industry was pretty much dominated
> > > >> by Nintendo at the time Sony stepped in with the PlayStation and made
> > > >> games "cool" again. A lot of gamers were deserting because Nintendo
> > > >> was too focused on family friendly games and Sega was losing steam..
>
> > > > Well, the SuperNES still had some nice, violent games like Contra 3
> > > > and Castlevania 4, so I don't think you had the single-minded focuson
> > > > "family" games yet until later in the N64 era.
>
> > > Not to mention Super Metroid, non-Zelda RPGs like Chrono Trigger, FF 2&3, and
> > > Secret of Mana, and then all the cross-platform games like Street Fighter,
> > > Madden, NBA Jam, etc...SNES had a ton of good, "adult" games.
>
> > It's all in the perception.
>
> > Super Metroid, while a decidedly "core" game, *looked* like a kiddie
> > game. Bright colors, shooting colorful aliens with laser beams,
> > relatively simple graphical design... gamers who entered high school,
> > college, the real world, etc. wanted games with more "mature" themes
> > (as if a game had to have hookers or blood to be mature).
>
> > As far as Zelda (not an RPG) comparisons with Square's work, Zelda is
> > no more "kiddie" than anything Square put out. Final Fantasy, Chrono
> > Trigger, Secret of Mana, etc. all looked like Zelda games. Many gamers
> > just got tired of playing with these cutesy little characters.
>
> I disagree with your definition of "family friendly" or "kiddie" in
> this situation.  At that point, _all_ games had that similar kind of
> bright colors/simple design, because of the technology.

Not at all.

Yes, games were limited by technology, but that didn't mean they all
had to use super saturated primary colors and "cutesy" character
designs. Look at the visuals of the SNES Final Fantasy games, Chrono
Trigger, Zelda, Mario, Secret of Mana, etc. and then compare them to
games like Mortal Kombat, Killer Instinct, Alien 3, Alien vs Predator,
any other Capcom fighting or action side scrolling game, etc.

They *could* have employed a different graphic style but *chose* to
stick with the cutesier designs because earlier on that was the
perception of the video game market. The problem for Nintendo
ultimately was that while they kept thinking everyone should pull a
Michael Jackson or Peter Pan, the companies making its games realized
that most of their growing fans were clamoring for more mature themes
and style than a bright colorful fat plumber or an ape in a tie.

Nintendo's direction with the Super Nintendo towards the latter half
of the system's life sent a clear message to both gamers and
developers that Nintendo was always going to treat all of its gamers,
regardless of their age, the same.

> And when I
> was in college in the early '90s, no one was complaining about things
> being too "kiddie" in games in general.

Then you, like Zee, are seeing things from a different perspective.
I'm not talking at all about the earlier years of the Super Nintendo.
I'm talking about the second half of the system's life, during *my*
college years. My first year in college, 1993, which was the system's
second year on the market in the States, it was still "cool." Quickly,
though, I started seeing a LOT of people deciding that the SNES just
wasn't cool enough anymore. Arcade games? Sure. But the "cartoony"
graphics and the limited breadth of genres, with too much focus on
kiddie licenses, kiddie art styles, etc. were just not interesting to
a lot of people anymore.

> When I think of Nintendo's
> "family friendly" direction, we're talking about Nintendo almost
> _exclusively_ relying on party-oriented games and "ultra" cutesy
> games, with simpler controls.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Madden and other similar sports simulation games were good but the
> > limitations of sprite-based 2D graphics and accompanying viewpoints
> > took their toll.
>
> > And NBA Jam is hardly an "adult" sports game.
>
> > > >> I'm going even as far back as the PlayStation, though. The PlayStation
> > > >> 2 built off the incredible success of the PlayStation, which, as I
> > > >> said above, reinvented video games for more mature audiences. We would
> > > >> never have seen GTA on a console, Ratchet & Clank, Devil May Cry, God
> > > >> of War, etc. were it not for the PlayStation.
>
> > > > My personal feeling on the original Playstation (and the Saturn as
> > > > well) is that 3D wasn't quite ready for prime-time.  The controlswere
> > > > clunky, and the graphics were eye-bleedingly bad.  Also, I wasn'ta
> > > > huge fan of the fighting games and survival horror titles that seemed
> > > > to get the most press at the time.  Sure there were some bona fide
> > > > classics (Final Fantasy 7, Metal Gear Solid, Spyro, Crash Bandicoot,
> > > > Symphony of the Night),
>
> > > GT 1 & 2, Tekken 3, Wipeout XL -- the list goes on and on...  :-)
>
> > > > and I also understand that there were
> > > > necessary growing pains while the transition to 3D was
> > > > underway........but I don't feel 3D gaming was truly underway as a
> > > > polished form of entertainment until the PS2 era.
>
> > > Maybe not polished, but definitely underway with titles like MGS.
>
> > > I think NES, SNES, PS1, and PS2 all had huge impacts on the future ofconsole
> > > gaming during their respective times. (Heck, you could even go back to the 2600
> > > if you want.) It's hard to say which one was "more important" becausethey all
> > > built on their predecessors (though I guess the 2D-->3D movement is often seen
> > > as the major milestone for modern gaming).
>
> > Well, of course, every system has some sort of impact on the general
> > concept of video games. I was more referring to the PlayStation and
> > PlayStation 2's impact on the perception and popularity of video
> > games. Sony did their own sort of "blue ocean strategy" by targeting
> > people who had the admittedly wrong impression that video games were
> > just 2D Mario and Donkey Kong games.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> I still feel the interaction of control of onscreen action and a
> needed degree of graphical "smoothness", which both are huge factors
> in a game fully succeeding as entertainment, didn't reach the level it
> had to be at until last generation.  The best games of the PS1
> generation succeeded _in spite_ of the hardware.

On Jan 9, 12:19 pm, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jan 9, 11:50 am, "Nick Soapdish, Jr." <JGordon...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 7, 10:24 am, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 6, 9:44 pm, Zee <no_...@nowhere.net> wrote:
>
> > > > Nick Soapdish, Jr. wrote:
> > > > >> My hyperbole aside, the video game industry was pretty much dominated
> > > > >> by Nintendo at the time Sony stepped in with the PlayStation andmade
> > > > >> games "cool" again. A lot of gamers were deserting because Nintendo
> > > > >> was too focused on family friendly games and Sega was losing steam.
>
> > > > > Well, the SuperNES still had some nice, violent games like Contra3
> > > > > and Castlevania 4, so I don't think you had the single-minded focus on
> > > > > "family" games yet until later in the N64 era.
>
> > > > Not to mention Super Metroid, non-Zelda RPGs like Chrono Trigger, FF 2&3, and
> > > > Secret of Mana, and then all the cross-platform games like Street Fighter,
> > > > Madden, NBA Jam, etc...SNES had a ton of good, "adult" games.
>
> > > It's all in the perception.
>
> > > Super Metroid, while a decidedly "core" game, *looked* like a kiddie
> > > game. Bright colors, shooting colorful aliens with laser beams,
> > > relatively simple graphical design... gamers who entered high school,
> > > college, the real world, etc. wanted games with more "mature" themes
> > > (as if a game had to have hookers or blood to be mature).
>
> > > As far as Zelda (not an RPG) comparisons with Square's work, Zelda is
> > > no more "kiddie" than anything Square put out. Final Fantasy, Chrono
> > > Trigger, Secret of Mana, etc. all looked like Zelda games. Many gamers
> > > just got tired of playing with these cutesy little characters.
>
> > I disagree with your definition of "family friendly" or "kiddie" in
> > this situation.  At that point, _all_ games had that similar kind of
> > bright colors/simple design, because of the technology.
>
> Not at all.
>
> Yes, games were limited by technology, but that didn't mean they all
> had to use super saturated primary colors and "cutesy" character
> designs. Look at the visuals of the SNES Final Fantasy games, Chrono
> Trigger, Zelda, Mario, Secret of Mana, etc. and then compare them to
> games like Mortal Kombat, Killer Instinct, Alien 3, Alien vs Predator,
> any other Capcom fighting or action side scrolling game, etc.
>

I think the difference was not as great as you perceive it, although
you do make a point. The thing is that those isometric adventure
games were pretty much all limited by how much room the character
could take up on the screen, which I think players at the time
accepted. I still think it was only later on that there was a
conscious choice to skew younger, when you see how limited the N-64's
genre selection was, notwithstanding Goldeneye/Perfect Dark.

> They *could* have employed a different graphic style but *chose* to
> stick with the cutesier designs because earlier on that was the
> perception of the video game market. The problem for Nintendo
> ultimately was that while they kept thinking everyone should pull a
> Michael Jackson or Peter Pan, the companies making its games realized
> that most of their growing fans were clamoring for more mature themes
> and style than a bright colorful fat plumber or an ape in a tie.
>
> Nintendo's direction with the Super Nintendo towards the latter half
> of the system's life sent a clear message to both gamers and
> developers that Nintendo was always going to treat all of its gamers,
> regardless of their age, the same.
>
> > And when I
> > was in college in the early '90s, no one was complaining about things
> > being too "kiddie" in games in general.
>
> Then you, like Zee, are seeing things from a different perspective.
> I'm not talking at all about the earlier years of the Super Nintendo.
> I'm talking about the second half of the system's life, during *my*
> college years. My first year in college, 1993, which was the system's
> second year on the market in the States, it was still "cool." Quickly,
> though, I started seeing a LOT of people deciding that the SNES just
> wasn't cool enough anymore. Arcade games? Sure. But the "cartoony"
> graphics and the limited breadth of genres, with too much focus on
> kiddie licenses, kiddie art styles, etc. were just not interesting to
> a lot of people anymore.
>

Well, perhaps it was a question of timing (first half vs. second half
of the SNES's life). I do remember people still having plenty of fun
with games like Sonic.

>
>
> > When I think of Nintendo's
> > "family friendly" direction, we're talking about Nintendo almost
> > _exclusively_ relying on party-oriented games and "ultra" cutesy
> > games, with simpler controls.
>
> > > Madden and other similar sports simulation games were good but the
> > > limitations of sprite-based 2D graphics and accompanying viewpoints
> > > took their toll.
>
> > > And NBA Jam is hardly an "adult" sports game.
>
> > > > >> I'm going even as far back as the PlayStation, though. The PlayStation
> > > > >> 2 built off the incredible success of the PlayStation, which, asI
> > > > >> said above, reinvented video games for more mature audiences. Wewould
> > > > >> never have seen GTA on a console, Ratchet & Clank, Devil May Cry, God
> > > > >> of War, etc. were it not for the PlayStation.
>
> > > > > My personal feeling on the original Playstation (and the Saturn as
> > > > > well) is that 3D wasn't quite ready for prime-time.  The controls were
> > > > > clunky, and the graphics were eye-bleedingly bad.  Also, I wasn't a
> > > > > huge fan of the fighting games and survival horror titles that seemed
> > > > > to get the most press at the time.  Sure there were some bona fide
> > > > > classics (Final Fantasy 7, Metal Gear Solid, Spyro, Crash Bandicoot,
> > > > > Symphony of the Night),
>
> > > > GT 1 & 2, Tekken 3, Wipeout XL -- the list goes on and on...  :-)
>
> > > > > and I also understand that there were
> > > > > necessary growing pains while the transition to 3D was
> > > > > underway........but I don't feel 3D gaming was truly underway as a
> > > > > polished form of entertainment until the PS2 era.
>
> > > > Maybe not polished, but definitely underway with titles like MGS.
>
> > > > I think NES, SNES, PS1, and PS2 all had huge impacts on the future of console
> > > > gaming during their respective times. (Heck, you could even go backto the 2600
> > > > if you want.) It's hard to say which one was "more important" because they all
> > > > built on their predecessors (though I guess the 2D-->3D movement isoften seen
> > > > as the major milestone for modern gaming).
>
> > > Well, of course, every system has some sort of impact on the general
> > > concept of video games. I was more referring to the PlayStation and
> > > PlayStation 2's impact on the perception and popularity of video
> > > games. Sony did their own sort of "blue ocean strategy" by targeting
> > > people who had the admittedly wrong impression that video games were
> > > just 2D Mario and Donkey Kong games.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > I still feel the interaction of control of onscreen action and a
> > needed degree of graphical "smoothness", which both are huge factors
> > in a game fully succeeding as entertainment, didn't reach the level it
> > had to be at until last generation.  The best games of the PS1
> > generation succeeded _in spite_ of the hardware.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

On Jan 10, 12:34 pm, "Nick Soapdish, Jr." <JGordon...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Jan 9, 12:19 pm, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 9, 11:50 am, "Nick Soapdish, Jr." <JGordon...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 7, 10:24 am, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 6, 9:44 pm, Zee <no_...@nowhere.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > Nick Soapdish, Jr. wrote:
> > > > > >> My hyperbole aside, the video game industry was pretty much dominated
> > > > > >> by Nintendo at the time Sony stepped in with the PlayStation and made
> > > > > >> games "cool" again. A lot of gamers were deserting because Nintendo
> > > > > >> was too focused on family friendly games and Sega was losing steam.
>
> > > > > > Well, the SuperNES still had some nice, violent games like Contra 3
> > > > > > and Castlevania 4, so I don't think you had the single-minded focus on
> > > > > > "family" games yet until later in the N64 era.
>
> > > > > Not to mention Super Metroid, non-Zelda RPGs like Chrono Trigger,FF 2&3, and
> > > > > Secret of Mana, and then all the cross-platform games like StreetFighter,
> > > > > Madden, NBA Jam, etc...SNES had a ton of good, "adult" games.
>
> > > > It's all in the perception.
>
> > > > Super Metroid, while a decidedly "core" game, *looked* like a kiddie
> > > > game. Bright colors, shooting colorful aliens with laser beams,
> > > > relatively simple graphical design... gamers who entered high school,
> > > > college, the real world, etc. wanted games with more "mature" themes
> > > > (as if a game had to have hookers or blood to be mature).
>
> > > > As far as Zelda (not an RPG) comparisons with Square's work, Zelda is
> > > > no more "kiddie" than anything Square put out. Final Fantasy, Chrono
> > > > Trigger, Secret of Mana, etc. all looked like Zelda games. Many gamers
> > > > just got tired of playing with these cutesy little characters.
>
> > > I disagree with your definition of "family friendly" or "kiddie" in
> > > this situation.  At that point, _all_ games had that similar kind of
> > > bright colors/simple design, because of the technology.
>
> > Not at all.
>
> > Yes, games were limited by technology, but that didn't mean they all
> > had to use super saturated primary colors and "cutesy" character
> > designs. Look at the visuals of the SNES Final Fantasy games, Chrono
> > Trigger, Zelda, Mario, Secret of Mana, etc. and then compare them to
> > games like Mortal Kombat, Killer Instinct, Alien 3, Alien vs Predator,
> > any other Capcom fighting or action side scrolling game, etc.
>
> I think the difference was not as great as you perceive it, although
> you do make a point.  The thing is that those isometric adventure
> games were pretty much all limited by how much room the character
> could take up on the screen, which I think players at the time
> accepted.  I still think it was only later on that there was a
> conscious choice to skew younger, when you see how limited the N-64's
> genre selection was, notwithstanding Goldeneye/Perfect Dark.
>
>
>
>
>
> > They *could* have employed a different graphic style but *chose* to
> > stick with the cutesier designs because earlier on that was the
> > perception of the video game market. The problem for Nintendo
> > ultimately was that while they kept thinking everyone should pull a
> > Michael Jackson or Peter Pan, the companies making its games realized
> > that most of their growing fans were clamoring for more mature themes
> > and style than a bright colorful fat plumber or an ape in a tie.
>
> > Nintendo's direction with the Super Nintendo towards the latter half
> > of the system's life sent a clear message to both gamers and
> > developers that Nintendo was always going to treat all of its gamers,
> > regardless of their age, the same.
>
> > > And when I
> > > was in college in the early '90s, no one was complaining about things
> > > being too "kiddie" in games in general.
>
> > Then you, like Zee, are seeing things from a different perspective.
> > I'm not talking at all about the earlier years of the Super Nintendo.
> > I'm talking about the second half of the system's life, during *my*
> > college years. My first year in college, 1993, which was the system's
> > second year on the market in the States, it was still "cool." Quickly,
> > though, I started seeing a LOT of people deciding that the SNES just
> > wasn't cool enough anymore. Arcade games? Sure. But the "cartoony"
> > graphics and the limited breadth of genres, with too much focus on
> > kiddie licenses, kiddie art styles, etc. were just not interesting to
> > a lot of people anymore.
>
> Well, perhaps it was a question of timing (first half vs. second half
> of the SNES's life).  I do remember people still having plenty of fun
> with games like Sonic.
>
>
>
>
>
> > > When I think of Nintendo's
> > > "family friendly" direction, we're talking about Nintendo almost
> > > _exclusively_ relying on party-oriented games and "ultra" cutesy
> > > games, with simpler controls.
>
> > > > Madden and other similar sports simulation games were good but the
> > > > limitations of sprite-based 2D graphics and accompanying viewpoints
> > > > took their toll.
>
> > > > And NBA Jam is hardly an "adult" sports game.
>
> > > > > >> I'm going even as far back as the PlayStation, though. The PlayStation
> > > > > >> 2 built off the incredible success of the PlayStation, which, as I
> > > > > >> said above, reinvented video games for more mature audiences. We would
> > > > > >> never have seen GTA on a console, Ratchet & Clank, Devil May Cry, God
> > > > > >> of War, etc. were it not for the PlayStation.
>
> > > > > > My personal feeling on the original Playstation (and the Saturnas
> > > > > > well) is that 3D wasn't quite ready for prime-time.  The controls were
> > > > > > clunky, and the graphics were eye-bleedingly bad.  Also, I wasn't a
> > > > > > huge fan of the fighting games and survival horror titles that seemed
> > > > > > to get the most press at the time.  Sure there were some bonafide
> > > > > > classics (Final Fantasy 7, Metal Gear Solid, Spyro, Crash Bandicoot,
> > > > > > Symphony of the Night),
>
> > > > > GT 1 & 2, Tekken 3, Wipeout XL -- the list goes on and on...  :-)
>
> > > > > > and I also understand that there were
> > > > > > necessary growing pains while the transition to 3D was
> > > > > > underway........but I don't feel 3D gaming was truly underway as a
> > > > > > polished form of entertainment until the PS2 era.
>
> > > > > Maybe not polished, but definitely underway with titles like MGS.
>
> > > > > I think NES, SNES, PS1, and PS2 all had huge impacts on the future of console
> > > > > gaming during their respective times. (Heck, you could even go back to the 2600
> > > > > if you want.) It's hard to say which one was "more important" because they all
> > > > > built on their predecessors (though I guess the 2D-->3D movement is often seen
> > > > > as the major milestone for modern gaming).
>
> > > > Well, of course, every system has some sort of impact on the general
> > > > concept of video games. I was more referring to the PlayStation and
> > > > PlayStation 2's impact on the perception and popularity of video
> > > > games. Sony did their own sort of "blue ocean strategy" by targeting
> > > > people who had the admittedly wrong impression that video games were
> > > > just 2D Mario and Donkey Kong games.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > I still feel the interaction of control of onscreen action and a
> > > needed degree of graphical "smoothness", which both are huge factors
> > > in a game fully succeeding as entertainment, didn't reach the level it
> > > had to be at until last generation.  The best games of the PS1
> > > generation succeeded _in spite_ of the hardware.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Sonic was SEGA genesis which I still have to this day found my old
genesis in my Grandparents garage when they passed away.

On Jan 10, 1:16 pm, AGENT47 <ks...@4email.net> wrote:
> On Jan 10, 12:34 pm, "Nick Soapdish, Jr." <JGordon...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 9, 12:19 pm, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 9, 11:50 am, "Nick Soapdish, Jr." <JGordon...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 7, 10:24 am, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jan 6, 9:44 pm, Zee <no_...@nowhere.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Nick Soapdish, Jr. wrote:
> > > > > > >> My hyperbole aside, the video game industry was pretty much dominated
> > > > > > >> by Nintendo at the time Sony stepped in with the PlayStationand made
> > > > > > >> games "cool" again. A lot of gamers were deserting because Nintendo
> > > > > > >> was too focused on family friendly games and Sega was losingsteam.
>
> > > > > > > Well, the SuperNES still had some nice, violent games like Contra 3
> > > > > > > and Castlevania 4, so I don't think you had the single-mindedfocus on
> > > > > > > "family" games yet until later in the N64 era.
>
> > > > > > Not to mention Super Metroid, non-Zelda RPGs like Chrono Trigger, FF 2&3, and
> > > > > > Secret of Mana, and then all the cross-platform games like Street Fighter,
> > > > > > Madden, NBA Jam, etc...SNES had a ton of good, "adult" games.
>
> > > > > It's all in the perception.
>
> > > > > Super Metroid, while a decidedly "core" game, *looked* like a kiddie
> > > > > game. Bright colors, shooting colorful aliens with laser beams,
> > > > > relatively simple graphical design... gamers who entered high school,
> > > > > college, the real world, etc. wanted games with more "mature" themes
> > > > > (as if a game had to have hookers or blood to be mature).
>
> > > > > As far as Zelda (not an RPG) comparisons with Square's work, Zelda is
> > > > > no more "kiddie" than anything Square put out. Final Fantasy, Chrono
> > > > > Trigger, Secret of Mana, etc. all looked like Zelda games. Many gamers
> > > > > just got tired of playing with these cutesy little characters.
>
> > > > I disagree with your definition of "family friendly" or "kiddie" in
> > > > this situation.  At that point, _all_ games had that similar kindof
> > > > bright colors/simple design, because of the technology.
>
> > > Not at all.
>
> > > Yes, games were limited by technology, but that didn't mean they all
> > > had to use super saturated primary colors and "cutesy" character
> > > designs. Look at the visuals of the SNES Final Fantasy games, Chrono
> > > Trigger, Zelda, Mario, Secret of Mana, etc. and then compare them to
> > > games like Mortal Kombat, Killer Instinct, Alien 3, Alien vs Predator,
> > > any other Capcom fighting or action side scrolling game, etc.
>
> > I think the difference was not as great as you perceive it, although
> > you do make a point.  The thing is that those isometric adventure
> > games were pretty much all limited by how much room the character
> > could take up on the screen, which I think players at the time
> > accepted.  I still think it was only later on that there was a
> > conscious choice to skew younger, when you see how limited the N-64's
> > genre selection was, notwithstanding Goldeneye/Perfect Dark.
>
> > > They *could* have employed a different graphic style but *chose* to
> > > stick with the cutesier designs because earlier on that was the
> > > perception of the video game market. The problem for Nintendo
> > > ultimately was that while they kept thinking everyone should pull a
> > > Michael Jackson or Peter Pan, the companies making its games realized
> > > that most of their growing fans were clamoring for more mature themes
> > > and style than a bright colorful fat plumber or an ape in a tie.
>
> > > Nintendo's direction with the Super Nintendo towards the latter half
> > > of the system's life sent a clear message to both gamers and
> > > developers that Nintendo was always going to treat all of its gamers,
> > > regardless of their age, the same.
>
> > > > And when I
> > > > was in college in the early '90s, no one was complaining about things
> > > > being too "kiddie" in games in general.
>
> > > Then you, like Zee, are seeing things from a different perspective.
> > > I'm not talking at all about the earlier years of the Super Nintendo.
> > > I'm talking about the second half of the system's life, during *my*
> > > college years. My first year in college, 1993, which was the system's
> > > second year on the market in the States, it was still "cool." Quickly,
> > > though, I started seeing a LOT of people deciding that the SNES just
> > > wasn't cool enough anymore. Arcade games? Sure. But the "cartoony"
> > > graphics and the limited breadth of genres, with too much focus on
> > > kiddie licenses, kiddie art styles, etc. were just not interesting to
> > > a lot of people anymore.
>
> > Well, perhaps it was a question of timing (first half vs. second half
> > of the SNES's life).  I do remember people still having plenty of fun
> > with games like Sonic.
>
> > > > When I think of Nintendo's
> > > > "family friendly" direction, we're talking about Nintendo almost
> > > > _exclusively_ relying on party-oriented games and "ultra" cutesy
> > > > games, with simpler controls.
>
> > > > > Madden and other similar sports simulation games were good but the
> > > > > limitations of sprite-based 2D graphics and accompanying viewpoints
> > > > > took their toll.
>
> > > > > And NBA Jam is hardly an "adult" sports game.
>
> > > > > > >> I'm going even as far back as the PlayStation, though. The PlayStation
> > > > > > >> 2 built off the incredible success of the PlayStation, which, as I
> > > > > > >> said above, reinvented video games for more mature audiences.. We would
> > > > > > >> never have seen GTA on a console, Ratchet & Clank, Devil MayCry, God
> > > > > > >> of War, etc. were it not for the PlayStation.
>
> > > > > > > My personal feeling on the original Playstation (and the Saturn as
> > > > > > > well) is that 3D wasn't quite ready for prime-time.  The controls were
> > > > > > > clunky, and the graphics were eye-bleedingly bad.  Also, I wasn't a
> > > > > > > huge fan of the fighting games and survival horror titles that seemed
> > > > > > > to get the most press at the time.  Sure there were some bona fide
> > > > > > > classics (Final Fantasy 7, Metal Gear Solid, Spyro, Crash Bandicoot,
> > > > > > > Symphony of the Night),
>
> > > > > > GT 1 & 2, Tekken 3, Wipeout XL -- the list goes on and on...  :-)
>
> > > > > > > and I also understand that there were
> > > > > > > necessary growing pains while the transition to 3D was
> > > > > > > underway........but I don't feel 3D gaming was truly underwayas a
> > > > > > > polished form of entertainment until the PS2 era.
>
> > > > > > Maybe not polished, but definitely underway with titles like MGS.
>
> > > > > > I think NES, SNES, PS1, and PS2 all had huge impacts on the future of console
> > > > > > gaming during their respective times. (Heck, you could even go back to the 2600
> > > > > > if you want.) It's hard to say which one was "more important" because they all
> > > > > > built on their predecessors (though I guess the 2D-->3D movement is often seen
> > > > > > as the major milestone for modern gaming).
>
> > > > > Well, of course, every system has some sort of impact on the general
> > > > > concept of video games. I was more referring to the PlayStation and
> > > > > PlayStation 2's impact on the perception and popularity of video
> > > > > games. Sony did their own sort of "blue ocean strategy" by targeting
> > > > > people who had the admittedly wrong impression that video games were
> > > > > just 2D Mario and Donkey Kong games.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > I still feel the interaction of control of onscreen action and a
> > > > needed degree of graphical "smoothness", which both are huge factors
> > > > in a game fully succeeding as entertainment, didn't reach the levelit
> > > > had to be at until last generation.  The best games of the PS1
> > > > generation succeeded _in spite_ of the hardware.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Sonic was SEGA genesis which I still have to this day found my old
> genesis in my Grandparents garage when they passed away.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Yeah, I know, but since Sonic is one of those games that people
associate with the "kiddie" image in gaming....

>
> Yes, games were limited by technology, but that didn't mean they all
> had to use super saturated primary colors and "cutesy" character
> designs. Look at the visuals of the SNES Final Fantasy games, Chrono
> Trigger, Zelda, Mario, Secret of Mana, etc. and then compare them to
> games like Mortal Kombat, Killer Instinct, Alien 3, Alien vs Predator,
> any other Capcom fighting or action side scrolling game, etc.
>
>

The point here was well made in the games you chose. The SNES games
were well done, extremely good games that could be played by most all
players.

The others you mentioned were not that good and limited in appeal.

I don't see Nintendo having done anything to alienate there audience
in the slightest. In fact they are the one video game company that
consistently tried to please the largest audience and because they do
games they consistently did.

Sony and Microsoft jumped into the gaming much much later and they had
to pull the "look we are edgy and more adult card" to get there foot
in the door.

All Nintendo had to do was what they always do put out great games
that people actually want to play.

The proof is right now. Far from being behind in the times Nintendo's
motion control system the Wii has sold incredibly well. It has a
strong gaming library for all ages and Sony and Microsoft(who both
balked at motion controls and said it was gimmicky) are now clamouring
to get there motion controls out to the consumer.

So just as they try and catch up Nintendo already has a significant
lead.

Wii, DS, Gameboy..rumble, motion controls, d-pad, shoulder buttons,
trigger, analog stick you can look to Nintendo first to give you the
latest innovations in gaming.

On Jan 10, 12:34 pm, "Nick Soapdish, Jr." <JGordon...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Jan 9, 12:19 pm, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 9, 11:50 am, "Nick Soapdish, Jr." <JGordon...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 7, 10:24 am, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 6, 9:44 pm, Zee <no_...@nowhere.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > Nick Soapdish, Jr. wrote:
> > > > > >> My hyperbole aside, the video game industry was pretty much dominated
> > > > > >> by Nintendo at the time Sony stepped in with the PlayStation and made
> > > > > >> games "cool" again. A lot of gamers were deserting because Nintendo
> > > > > >> was too focused on family friendly games and Sega was losing steam.
>
> > > > > > Well, the SuperNES still had some nice, violent games like Contra 3
> > > > > > and Castlevania 4, so I don't think you had the single-minded focus on
> > > > > > "family" games yet until later in the N64 era.
>
> > > > > Not to mention Super Metroid, non-Zelda RPGs like Chrono Trigger,FF 2&3, and
> > > > > Secret of Mana, and then all the cross-platform games like StreetFighter,
> > > > > Madden, NBA Jam, etc...SNES had a ton of good, "adult" games.
>
> > > > It's all in the perception.
>
> > > > Super Metroid, while a decidedly "core" game, *looked* like a kiddie
> > > > game. Bright colors, shooting colorful aliens with laser beams,
> > > > relatively simple graphical design... gamers who entered high school,
> > > > college, the real world, etc. wanted games with more "mature" themes
> > > > (as if a game had to have hookers or blood to be mature).
>
> > > > As far as Zelda (not an RPG) comparisons with Square's work, Zelda is
> > > > no more "kiddie" than anything Square put out. Final Fantasy, Chrono
> > > > Trigger, Secret of Mana, etc. all looked like Zelda games. Many gamers
> > > > just got tired of playing with these cutesy little characters.
>
> > > I disagree with your definition of "family friendly" or "kiddie" in
> > > this situation.  At that point, _all_ games had that similar kind of
> > > bright colors/simple design, because of the technology.
>
> > Not at all.
>
> > Yes, games were limited by technology, but that didn't mean they all
> > had to use super saturated primary colors and "cutesy" character
> > designs. Look at the visuals of the SNES Final Fantasy games, Chrono
> > Trigger, Zelda, Mario, Secret of Mana, etc. and then compare them to
> > games like Mortal Kombat, Killer Instinct, Alien 3, Alien vs Predator,
> > any other Capcom fighting or action side scrolling game, etc.
>
> I think the difference was not as great as you perceive it, although
> you do make a point.  The thing is that those isometric adventure
> games were pretty much all limited by how much room the character
> could take up on the screen, which I think players at the time
> accepted.  I still think it was only later on that there was a
> conscious choice to skew younger, when you see how limited the N-64's
> genre selection was, notwithstanding Goldeneye/Perfect Dark.

No, it was most definitely in the Super Nintendo era. As I clarified
elsewhere, it wasn't the entire span of the Super Nintendo's lifetime
but the latter half of it. Games like Metroid, Castlevania, Contra,
etc. were all in the first half of the system's life. During the last
few years (I'm talking 1995-7 because I don't count 1998-9 when the
SNES was still being manufactured but few companies made games anymore
and Nintendo wasn't one of them), the major releases were all heavily
skewed towards a "family friendly" theme - movie tie-ins, games with
cutesy graphics and/or games based on children's properties.

The Nintendo 64 was certainly a slap in the face to hardcore fans but
the last few years of the SNES were the hand rearing back and getting
ready to smack.

> > They *could* have employed a different graphic style but *chose* to
> > stick with the cutesier designs because earlier on that was the
> > perception of the video game market. The problem for Nintendo
> > ultimately was that while they kept thinking everyone should pull a
> > Michael Jackson or Peter Pan, the companies making its games realized
> > that most of their growing fans were clamoring for more mature themes
> > and style than a bright colorful fat plumber or an ape in a tie.
>
> > Nintendo's direction with the Super Nintendo towards the latter half
> > of the system's life sent a clear message to both gamers and
> > developers that Nintendo was always going to treat all of its gamers,
> > regardless of their age, the same.
>
> > > And when I
> > > was in college in the early '90s, no one was complaining about things
> > > being too "kiddie" in games in general.
>
> > Then you, like Zee, are seeing things from a different perspective.
> > I'm not talking at all about the earlier years of the Super Nintendo.
> > I'm talking about the second half of the system's life, during *my*
> > college years. My first year in college, 1993, which was the system's
> > second year on the market in the States, it was still "cool." Quickly,
> > though, I started seeing a LOT of people deciding that the SNES just
> > wasn't cool enough anymore. Arcade games? Sure. But the "cartoony"
> > graphics and the limited breadth of genres, with too much focus on
> > kiddie licenses, kiddie art styles, etc. were just not interesting to
> > a lot of people anymore.
>
> Well, perhaps it was a question of timing (first half vs. second half
> of the SNES's life).  I do remember people still having plenty of fun
> with games like Sonic.

Sonic on the Sega Genesis or Sonic on the Sega Saturn? Ironically,
Sonic was Sega's attempt at doing what Sony did, which was to steal
market share by citing how "kiddie" the Nintendo platform was. And it
worked for a couple of years as the Genesis was the system of choice
in the 16-bit market early on. Nintendo was of course able to change
all that when they got into the market but unfortunately were not able
to do the same thing with the Nintendo 64.

Anyways, the last Sonic game of the 16-bit era came in 1994 when
gamers were still fawning over the SNES.

> > > When I think of Nintendo's
> > > "family friendly" direction, we're talking about Nintendo almost
> > > _exclusively_ relying on party-oriented games and "ultra" cutesy
> > > games, with simpler controls.
>
> > > > Madden and other similar sports simulation games were good but the
> > > > limitations of sprite-based 2D graphics and accompanying viewpoints
> > > > took their toll.
>
> > > > And NBA Jam is hardly an "adult" sports game.
>
> > > > > >> I'm going even as far back as the PlayStation, though. The PlayStation
> > > > > >> 2 built off the incredible success of the PlayStation, which, as I
> > > > > >> said above, reinvented video games for more mature audiences. We would
> > > > > >> never have seen GTA on a console, Ratchet & Clank, Devil May Cry, God
> > > > > >> of War, etc. were it not for the PlayStation.
>
> > > > > > My personal feeling on the original Playstation (and the Saturnas
> > > > > > well) is that 3D wasn't quite ready for prime-time.  The controls were
> > > > > > clunky, and the graphics were eye-bleedingly bad.  Also, I wasn't a
> > > > > > huge fan of the fighting games and survival horror titles that seemed
> > > > > > to get the most press at the time.  Sure there were some bonafide
> > > > > > classics (Final Fantasy 7, Metal Gear Solid, Spyro, Crash Bandicoot,
> > > > > > Symphony of the Night),
>
> > > > > GT 1 & 2, Tekken 3, Wipeout XL -- the list goes on and on...  :-)
>
> > > > > > and I also understand that there were
> > > > > > necessary growing pains while the transition to 3D was
> > > > > > underway........but I don't feel 3D gaming was truly underway as a
> > > > > > polished form of entertainment until the PS2 era.
>
> > > > > Maybe not polished, but definitely underway with titles like MGS.
>
> > > > > I think NES, SNES, PS1, and PS2 all had huge impacts on the future of console
> > > > > gaming during their respective times. (Heck, you could even go back to the 2600
> > > > > if you want.) It's hard to say which one was "more important" because they all
> > > > > built on their predecessors (though I guess the 2D-->3D movement is often seen
> > > > > as the major milestone for modern gaming).
>
> > > > Well, of course, every system has some sort of impact on the general
> > > > concept of video games. I was more referring to the PlayStation and
> > > > PlayStation 2's impact on the perception and popularity of video
> > > > games. Sony did their own sort of "blue ocean strategy" by targeting
> > > > people who had the admittedly wrong impression that video games were
> > > > just 2D Mario and Donkey Kong games.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > I still feel the interaction of control of onscreen action and a
> > > needed degree of graphical "smoothness", which both are huge factors
> > > in a game fully succeeding as entertainment, didn't reach the level it
> > > had to be at until last generation.  The best games of the PS1
> > > generation succeeded _in spite_ of the hardware.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -

On Jan 11, 3:57 am, argento32 <aaronpyn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Yes, games were limited by technology, but that didn't mean they all
> > had to use super saturated primary colors and "cutesy" character
> > designs. Look at the visuals of the SNES Final Fantasy games, Chrono
> > Trigger, Zelda, Mario, Secret of Mana, etc. and then compare them to
> > games like Mortal Kombat, Killer Instinct, Alien 3, Alien vs Predator,
> > any other Capcom fighting or action side scrolling game, etc.
>
> The point here was well made in the games you chose. The SNES games
> were well done, extremely good games that could be played by most all
> players.

Just because a game *can* be played by most all players doesn't mean
all those players will want to.

> The others you mentioned were not that good and limited in appeal.
>
> I don't see Nintendo having done anything to alienate there audience
> in the slightest. In fact they are the one video game company that
> consistently tried to please the largest audience and because they do
> games they consistently did.

If by "there audience" you mean the Nintendo loyalists who stuck with
them through the Nintendo 64 and the GameCube - in other words, people
like me - then I'm in agreement with you. I'm one of the rare gamers
who enjoys not only the "edgier," "more mature" games found on the
Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 but also the "pure fun" games that only
Nintendo can produce.

On the other hand, most gamers developed a taste for the "more mature"
themes and technology that the PlayStation and Saturn offered and gave
up on Nintendo's "wholesome," "family friendly" mission.

You're looking at things from a slightly wrong angle. Nintendo didn't
try to please the largest audience - they tried to make their games
accessible to everyone, but like I said above, just because a gamer
*can* play a game doesn't mean that they will. Games like Mario,
Zelda, etc. lost their appeal to many gamers who felt the Nintendo
line-up was stagnant and stuck in a time period when they were younger
and liked those kinds of games.

> Sony and Microsoft jumped into the gaming much much later and they had
> to pull the "look we are edgy and more adult card" to get there foot
> in the door.

And it worked like a charm, at least for Sony. The PlayStation crushed
the Super Nintendo *and* the Saturn and then proceeded to dominate the
Nintendo 64 as well. Things didn't get any better for Nintendo in the
following generation where the GameCube, alongside newcomer Microsoft,
was thrashed by the PlayStation 2.

> All Nintendo had to do was what they always do put out great games
> that people actually want to play.

You seem to have glossed over the entire fifth and sixth generation of
consoles. Neither the Nintendo 64 nor GameCube came anywhere near
first place in their generations. Nintendo was certainly not leading
the industry in any way, shape or form in the decade from 1996 to
2006. Sure, they played to "their audience" but nobody else. People
had long given up on Nintendo as a viable video game company because
they seemed trapped in the past.

> The proof is right now. Far from being behind in the times Nintendo's
> motion control system the Wii has sold incredibly well. It has a
> strong gaming library for all ages and Sony and Microsoft(who both
> balked at motion controls and said it was gimmicky) are now clamouring
> to get there motion controls out to the consumer.
>
> So just as they try and catch up Nintendo already has a significant
> lead.

LOL

You seem to have a very distorted view of reality, my friend. You act
as if Nintendo has been successful from SNES all the way up to now,
completely ignoring the debacles of the Nintendo 64 and the GameCube.
Nintendo's recent success is due to some very smart business
decisions, specifically the strategy of targeting children, people who
gave up on gaming entirely after the SNES, people who have never
played video games, and people who are just casual gamers (as in
Bejeweled, Tetris, Diner Dash, etc.).

They don't compete in the "traditional gamers" space because they have
no shot... they can't possibly beat Microsoft or Sony at that game.
They succeeded this generation because they *created* a new market -
they're not worried about the "traditional" video game market and
instead are focused on pushing this totally new territory.

> Wii, DS, Gameboy..rumble, motion controls, d-pad, shoulder buttons,
> trigger, analog stick you can look to Nintendo first to give you the
> latest innovations in gaming.

I don't disagree here... except when it comes to the actual media on
which games came. Another big contributing factor to Nintendo's
downfall was their refusal to adopt an optical format for the Nintendo
64.

On Jan 11, 2:11 pm, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I don't disagree here... except when it comes to the actual media on
> which games came. Another big contributing factor to Nintendo's
> downfall was their refusal to adopt an optical format for the Nintendo
> 64.

Who knows how today's gaming landscape would look if the Nintendo /
Sony developed optical drive deal actually came to fruition. Maybe
not much different, the Wii would still be whooping tail and the PS
and Xbox probably would have never been made.

On Jan 11, 3:06 pm, Eman <supreme.evolution...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 11, 2:11 pm, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > I don't disagree here... except when it comes to the actual media on
> > which games came. Another big contributing factor to Nintendo's
> > downfall was their refusal to adopt an optical format for the Nintendo
> > 64.
>
> Who knows how today's gaming landscape would look if the Nintendo /
> Sony developed optical drive deal actually came to fruition. Maybe
> not much different, the Wii would still be whooping tail and the PS
> and Xbox probably would have never been made.

a) Sony would have had no need to create their own standalone console
because they would have had ownership rights of any and all games made
in the SNES-CD format. This is the reason why Nintendo cancelled their
partnership with Sony, leading Sony to develop their own console,
weather an infringement suit from Nintendo, who owned the name "Play
Station," make a truce with Nintendo whereby the "Play Station" would
have an SNES port for cartridges, then decide to ditch the big N and
change the name to "PlayStation."

b) The Saturn would still have bombed (which it did in our history
because of mismanagement by the executives, building on the loss of
trust from the developers and consumers after how they mishandled the
end of the Genesis).

c) The Dreamcast would still have bombed for the same reasons it did.

d) Microsoft still would have seen the opening for a third console and
may have seen it earlier since it would have been Nintendo/Sony
against Sega. In fact, I think that Microsoft would have been in an
even better position than it is today since it would have been
Microsoft who was able to step in and "bump up the age group on video
games" instead of Sony, who would have been relying on Nintendo and
their publishers to do all the development work.

On Jan 11, 4:11 pm, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jan 11, 3:57 am, argento32 <aaronpyn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Yes, games were limited by technology, but that didn't mean they all
> > > had to use super saturated primary colors and "cutesy" character
> > > designs. Look at the visuals of the SNES Final Fantasy games, Chrono
> > > Trigger, Zelda, Mario, Secret of Mana, etc. and then compare them to
> > > games like Mortal Kombat, Killer Instinct, Alien 3, Alien vs Predator,
> > > any other Capcom fighting or action side scrolling game, etc.
>
> > The point here was well made in the games you chose. The SNES games
> > were well done, extremely good games that could be played by most all
> > players.
>
> Just because a game *can* be played by most all players doesn't mean
> all those players will want to.
>
> > The others you mentioned were not that good and limited in appeal.
>
> > I don't see Nintendo having done anything to alienate there audience
> > in the slightest. In fact they are the one video game company that
> > consistently tried to please the largest audience and because they do
> > games they consistently did.
>
> If by "there audience" you mean the Nintendo loyalists who stuck with
> them through the Nintendo 64 and the GameCube - in other words, people
> like me - then I'm in agreement with you. I'm one of the rare gamers
> who enjoys not only the "edgier," "more mature" games found on the
> Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 but also the "pure fun" games that only
> Nintendo can produce.
>
> On the other hand, most gamers developed a taste for the "more mature"
> themes and technology that the PlayStation and Saturn offered and gave
> up on Nintendo's "wholesome," "family friendly" mission.
>
> You're looking at things from a slightly wrong angle. Nintendo didn't
> try to please the largest audience - they tried to make their games
> accessible to everyone, but like I said above, just because a gamer
> *can* play a game doesn't mean that they will. Games like Mario,
> Zelda, etc. lost their appeal to many gamers who felt the Nintendo
> line-up was stagnant and stuck in a time period when they were younger
> and liked those kinds of games.
>
> > Sony and Microsoft jumped into the gaming much much later and they had
> > to pull the "look we are edgy and more adult card" to get there foot
> > in the door.
>
> And it worked like a charm, at least for Sony. The PlayStation crushed
> the Super Nintendo *and* the Saturn and then proceeded to dominate the
> Nintendo 64 as well. Things didn't get any better for Nintendo in the
> following generation where the GameCube, alongside newcomer Microsoft,
> was thrashed by the PlayStation 2.
>
> > All Nintendo had to do was what they always do put out great games
> > that people actually want to play.
>
> You seem to have glossed over the entire fifth and sixth generation of
> consoles. Neither the Nintendo 64 nor GameCube came anywhere near
> first place in their generations. Nintendo was certainly not leading
> the industry in any way, shape or form in the decade from 1996 to
> 2006. Sure, they played to "their audience" but nobody else. People
> had long given up on Nintendo as a viable video game company because
> they seemed trapped in the past.
>
> > The proof is right now. Far from being behind in the times Nintendo's
> > motion control system the Wii has sold incredibly well. It has a
> > strong gaming library for all ages and Sony and Microsoft(who both
> > balked at motion controls and said it was gimmicky) are now clamouring
> > to get there motion controls out to the consumer.
>
> > So just as they try and catch up Nintendo already has a significant
> > lead.
>
> LOL
>
> You seem to have a very distorted view of reality, my friend. You act
> as if Nintendo has been successful from SNES all the way up to now,
> completely ignoring the debacles of the Nintendo 64 and the GameCube.
> Nintendo's recent success is due to some very smart business
> decisions, specifically the strategy of targeting children, people who
> gave up on gaming entirely after the SNES, people who have never
> played video games, and people who are just casual gamers (as in
> Bejeweled, Tetris, Diner Dash, etc.).
>
> They don't compete in the "traditional gamers" space because they have
> no shot... they can't possibly beat Microsoft or Sony at that game.
> They succeeded this generation because they *created* a new market -
> they're not worried about the "traditional" video game market and
> instead are focused on pushing this totally new territory.
>
> > Wii, DS, Gameboy..rumble, motion controls, d-pad, shoulder buttons,
> > trigger, analog stick you can look to Nintendo first to give you the
> > latest innovations in gaming.
>
> I don't disagree here... except when it comes to the actual media on
> which games came. Another big contributing factor to Nintendo's
> downfall was their refusal to adopt an optical format for the Nintendo
> 64.

I definitely understand that the n64 and gamecube didnt do as well as
they should have but i don't see it as Nintendo's downfall at all.
Like you I did stick with Nintendo sure i had the other systems to but
to me Nintendo has always had more pure gaming.

I preferred the imagination used for a game like Zelda or Mario(though
wasnt the biggest Super Mario Sunshine fan sadly)

I guess I am weird that way when everyone wanted the next shooter
clone or yet another skateboarding games I was more impressed with the
Nintendo games. Hell they even put out the best versions of Resident
Evil 4.

Ya know i am probably alone on this but i miss the old carts.

On Jan 11, 12:56 pm, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jan 10, 12:34 pm, "Nick Soapdish, Jr." <JGordon...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 9, 12:19 pm, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 9, 11:50 am, "Nick Soapdish, Jr." <JGordon...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 7, 10:24 am, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jan 6, 9:44 pm, Zee <no_...@nowhere.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Nick Soapdish, Jr. wrote:
> > > > > > >> My hyperbole aside, the video game industry was pretty much dominated
> > > > > > >> by Nintendo at the time Sony stepped in with the PlayStationand made
> > > > > > >> games "cool" again. A lot of gamers were deserting because Nintendo
> > > > > > >> was too focused on family friendly games and Sega was losingsteam.
>
> > > > > > > Well, the SuperNES still had some nice, violent games like Contra 3
> > > > > > > and Castlevania 4, so I don't think you had the single-mindedfocus on
> > > > > > > "family" games yet until later in the N64 era.
>
> > > > > > Not to mention Super Metroid, non-Zelda RPGs like Chrono Trigger, FF 2&3, and
> > > > > > Secret of Mana, and then all the cross-platform games like Street Fighter,
> > > > > > Madden, NBA Jam, etc...SNES had a ton of good, "adult" games.
>
> > > > > It's all in the perception.
>
> > > > > Super Metroid, while a decidedly "core" game, *looked* like a kiddie
> > > > > game. Bright colors, shooting colorful aliens with laser beams,
> > > > > relatively simple graphical design... gamers who entered high school,
> > > > > college, the real world, etc. wanted games with more "mature" themes
> > > > > (as if a game had to have hookers or blood to be mature).
>
> > > > > As far as Zelda (not an RPG) comparisons with Square's work, Zelda is
> > > > > no more "kiddie" than anything Square put out. Final Fantasy, Chrono
> > > > > Trigger, Secret of Mana, etc. all looked like Zelda games. Many gamers
> > > > > just got tired of playing with these cutesy little characters.
>
> > > > I disagree with your definition of "family friendly" or "kiddie" in
> > > > this situation.  At that point, _all_ games had that similar kindof
> > > > bright colors/simple design, because of the technology.
>
> > > Not at all.
>
> > > Yes, games were limited by technology, but that didn't mean they all
> > > had to use super saturated primary colors and "cutesy" character
> > > designs. Look at the visuals of the SNES Final Fantasy games, Chrono
> > > Trigger, Zelda, Mario, Secret of Mana, etc. and then compare them to
> > > games like Mortal Kombat, Killer Instinct, Alien 3, Alien vs Predator,
> > > any other Capcom fighting or action side scrolling game, etc.
>
> > I think the difference was not as great as you perceive it, although
> > you do make a point.  The thing is that those isometric adventure
> > games were pretty much all limited by how much room the character
> > could take up on the screen, which I think players at the time
> > accepted.  I still think it was only later on that there was a
> > conscious choice to skew younger, when you see how limited the N-64's
> > genre selection was, notwithstanding Goldeneye/Perfect Dark.
>
> No, it was most definitely in the Super Nintendo era. As I clarified
> elsewhere, it wasn't the entire span of the Super Nintendo's lifetime
> but the latter half of it. Games like Metroid, Castlevania, Contra,
> etc. were all in the first half of the system's life. During the last
> few years (I'm talking 1995-7 because I don't count 1998-9 when the
> SNES was still being manufactured but few companies made games anymore
> and Nintendo wasn't one of them), the major releases were all heavily
> skewed towards a "family friendly" theme - movie tie-ins, games with
> cutesy graphics and/or games based on children's properties.
>
> The Nintendo 64 was certainly a slap in the face to hardcore fans but
> the last few years of the SNES were the hand rearing back and getting
> ready to smack.
>
>
>
>
>
> > > They *could* have employed a different graphic style but *chose* to
> > > stick with the cutesier designs because earlier on that was the
> > > perception of the video game market. The problem for Nintendo
> > > ultimately was that while they kept thinking everyone should pull a
> > > Michael Jackson or Peter Pan, the companies making its games realized
> > > that most of their growing fans were clamoring for more mature themes
> > > and style than a bright colorful fat plumber or an ape in a tie.
>
> > > Nintendo's direction with the Super Nintendo towards the latter half
> > > of the system's life sent a clear message to both gamers and
> > > developers that Nintendo was always going to treat all of its gamers,
> > > regardless of their age, the same.
>
> > > > And when I
> > > > was in college in the early '90s, no one was complaining about things
> > > > being too "kiddie" in games in general.
>
> > > Then you, like Zee, are seeing things from a different perspective.
> > > I'm not talking at all about the earlier years of the Super Nintendo.
> > > I'm talking about the second half of the system's life, during *my*
> > > college years. My first year in college, 1993, which was the system's
> > > second year on the market in the States, it was still "cool." Quickly,
> > > though, I started seeing a LOT of people deciding that the SNES just
> > > wasn't cool enough anymore. Arcade games? Sure. But the "cartoony"
> > > graphics and the limited breadth of genres, with too much focus on
> > > kiddie licenses, kiddie art styles, etc. were just not interesting to
> > > a lot of people anymore.
>
> > Well, perhaps it was a question of timing (first half vs. second half
> > of the SNES's life).  I do remember people still having plenty of fun
> > with games like Sonic.
>
> Sonic on the Sega Genesis or Sonic on the Sega Saturn?

The only new Sonic on the Saturn was that crappy Sonic racing game
(Sonic R?). Not a good sign when they couldn't get a proper entry for
their flagship title out for the new console.

>Ironically,
> Sonic was Sega's attempt at doing what Sony did, which was to steal
> market share by citing how "kiddie" the Nintendo platform was. And it
> worked for a couple of years as the Genesis was the system of choice
> in the 16-bit market early on. Nintendo was of course able to change
> all that when they got into the market but unfortunately were not able
> to do the same thing with the Nintendo 64.
>
> Anyways, the last Sonic game of the 16-bit era came in 1994 when
> gamers were still fawning over the SNES.
>
>
>
> > > > When I think of Nintendo's
> > > > "family friendly" direction, we're talking about Nintendo almost
> > > > _exclusively_ relying on party-oriented games and "ultra" cutesy
> > > > games, with simpler controls.
>
> > > > > Madden and other similar sports simulation games were good but the
> > > > > limitations of sprite-based 2D graphics and accompanying viewpoints
> > > > > took their toll.
>
> > > > > And NBA Jam is hardly an "adult" sports game.
>
> > > > > > >> I'm going even as far back as the PlayStation, though. The PlayStation
> > > > > > >> 2 built off the incredible success of the PlayStation, which, as I
> > > > > > >> said above, reinvented video games for more mature audiences.. We would
> > > > > > >> never have seen GTA on a console, Ratchet & Clank, Devil MayCry, God
> > > > > > >> of War, etc. were it not for the PlayStation.
>
> > > > > > > My personal feeling on the original Playstation (and the Saturn as
> > > > > > > well) is that 3D wasn't quite ready for prime-time.  The controls were
> > > > > > > clunky, and the graphics were eye-bleedingly bad.  Also, I wasn't a
> > > > > > > huge fan of the fighting games and survival horror titles that seemed
> > > > > > > to get the most press at the time.  Sure there were some bona fide
> > > > > > > classics (Final Fantasy 7, Metal Gear Solid, Spyro, Crash Bandicoot,
> > > > > > > Symphony of the Night),
>
> > > > > > GT 1 & 2, Tekken 3, Wipeout XL -- the list goes on and on...  :-)
>
> > > > > > > and I also understand that there were
> > > > > > > necessary growing pains while the transition to 3D was
> > > > > > > underway........but I don't feel 3D gaming was truly underwayas a
> > > > > > > polished form of entertainment until the PS2 era.
>
> > > > > > Maybe not polished, but definitely underway with titles like MGS.
>
> > > > > > I think NES, SNES, PS1, and PS2 all had huge impacts on the future of console
> > > > > > gaming during their respective times. (Heck, you could even go back to the 2600
> > > > > > if you want.) It's hard to say which one was "more important" because they all
> > > > > > built on their predecessors (though I guess the 2D-->3D movement is often seen
> > > > > > as the major milestone for modern gaming).
>
> > > > > Well, of course, every system has some sort of impact on the general
> > > > > concept of video games. I was more referring to the PlayStation and
> > > > > PlayStation 2's impact on the perception and popularity of video
> > > > > games. Sony did their own sort of "blue ocean strategy" by targeting
> > > > > people who had the admittedly wrong impression that video games were
> > > > > just 2D Mario and Donkey Kong games.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > I still feel the interaction of control of onscreen action and a
> > > > needed degree of graphical "smoothness", which both are huge factors
> > > > in a game fully succeeding as entertainment, didn't reach the levelit
> > > > had to be at until last generation.  The best games of the PS1
> > > > generation succeeded _in spite_ of the hardware.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

On Jan 11, 7:26 pm, "Nick Soapdish, Jr." <JGordon...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Jan 11, 12:56 pm, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 10, 12:34 pm, "Nick Soapdish, Jr." <JGordon...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 9, 12:19 pm, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 9, 11:50 am, "Nick Soapdish, Jr." <JGordon...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jan 7, 10:24 am, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Jan 6, 9:44 pm, Zee <no_...@nowhere.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Nick Soapdish, Jr. wrote:
> > > > > > > >> My hyperbole aside, the video game industry was pretty much dominated
> > > > > > > >> by Nintendo at the time Sony stepped in with the PlayStation and made
> > > > > > > >> games "cool" again. A lot of gamers were deserting becauseNintendo
> > > > > > > >> was too focused on family friendly games and Sega was losing steam.
>
> > > > > > > > Well, the SuperNES still had some nice, violent games like Contra 3
> > > > > > > > and Castlevania 4, so I don't think you had the single-minded focus on
> > > > > > > > "family" games yet until later in the N64 era.
>
> > > > > > > Not to mention Super Metroid, non-Zelda RPGs like Chrono Trigger, FF 2&3, and
> > > > > > > Secret of Mana, and then all the cross-platform games like Street Fighter,
> > > > > > > Madden, NBA Jam, etc...SNES had a ton of good, "adult" games.
>
> > > > > > It's all in the perception.
>
> > > > > > Super Metroid, while a decidedly "core" game, *looked* like a kiddie
> > > > > > game. Bright colors, shooting colorful aliens with laser beams,
> > > > > > relatively simple graphical design... gamers who entered high school,
> > > > > > college, the real world, etc. wanted games with more "mature" themes
> > > > > > (as if a game had to have hookers or blood to be mature).
>
> > > > > > As far as Zelda (not an RPG) comparisons with Square's work, Zelda is
> > > > > > no more "kiddie" than anything Square put out. Final Fantasy, Chrono
> > > > > > Trigger, Secret of Mana, etc. all looked like Zelda games. Manygamers
> > > > > > just got tired of playing with these cutesy little characters.
>
> > > > > I disagree with your definition of "family friendly" or "kiddie" in
> > > > > this situation.  At that point, _all_ games had that similar kind of
> > > > > bright colors/simple design, because of the technology.
>
> > > > Not at all.
>
> > > > Yes, games were limited by technology, but that didn't mean they all
> > > > had to use super saturated primary colors and "cutesy" character
> > > > designs. Look at the visuals of the SNES Final Fantasy games, Chrono
> > > > Trigger, Zelda, Mario, Secret of Mana, etc. and then compare them to
> > > > games like Mortal Kombat, Killer Instinct, Alien 3, Alien vs Predator,
> > > > any other Capcom fighting or action side scrolling game, etc.
>
> > > I think the difference was not as great as you perceive it, although
> > > you do make a point.  The thing is that those isometric adventure
> > > games were pretty much all limited by how much room the character
> > > could take up on the screen, which I think players at the time
> > > accepted.  I still think it was only later on that there was a
> > > conscious choice to skew younger, when you see how limited the N-64's
> > > genre selection was, notwithstanding Goldeneye/Perfect Dark.
>
> > No, it was most definitely in the Super Nintendo era. As I clarified
> > elsewhere, it wasn't the entire span of the Super Nintendo's lifetime
> > but the latter half of it. Games like Metroid, Castlevania, Contra,
> > etc. were all in the first half of the system's life. During the last
> > few years (I'm talking 1995-7 because I don't count 1998-9 when the
> > SNES was still being manufactured but few companies made games anymore
> > and Nintendo wasn't one of them), the major releases were all heavily
> > skewed towards a "family friendly" theme - movie tie-ins, games with
> > cutesy graphics and/or games based on children's properties.
>
> > The Nintendo 64 was certainly a slap in the face to hardcore fans but
> > the last few years of the SNES were the hand rearing back and getting
> > ready to smack.
>
> > > > They *could* have employed a different graphic style but *chose* to
> > > > stick with the cutesier designs because earlier on that was the
> > > > perception of the video game market. The problem for Nintendo
> > > > ultimately was that while they kept thinking everyone should pull a
> > > > Michael Jackson or Peter Pan, the companies making its games realized
> > > > that most of their growing fans were clamoring for more mature themes
> > > > and style than a bright colorful fat plumber or an ape in a tie.
>
> > > > Nintendo's direction with the Super Nintendo towards the latter half
> > > > of the system's life sent a clear message to both gamers and
> > > > developers that Nintendo was always going to treat all of its gamers,
> > > > regardless of their age, the same.
>
> > > > > And when I
> > > > > was in college in the early '90s, no one was complaining about things
> > > > > being too "kiddie" in games in general.
>
> > > > Then you, like Zee, are seeing things from a different perspective.
> > > > I'm not talking at all about the earlier years of the Super Nintendo.
> > > > I'm talking about the second half of the system's life, during *my*
> > > > college years. My first year in college, 1993, which was the system's
> > > > second year on the market in the States, it was still "cool." Quickly,
> > > > though, I started seeing a LOT of people deciding that the SNES just
> > > > wasn't cool enough anymore. Arcade games? Sure. But the "cartoony"
> > > > graphics and the limited breadth of genres, with too much focus on
> > > > kiddie licenses, kiddie art styles, etc. were just not interesting to
> > > > a lot of people anymore.
>
> > > Well, perhaps it was a question of timing (first half vs. second half
> > > of the SNES's life).  I do remember people still having plenty of fun
> > > with games like Sonic.
>
> > Sonic on the Sega Genesis or Sonic on the Sega Saturn?
>
> The only new Sonic on the Saturn was that crappy Sonic racing game
> (Sonic R?).  Not a good sign when they couldn't get a proper entry for
> their flagship title out for the new console.

You don't count Knuckles' Chaotix and Sonic 3D Blast? Both came out
before the Sonic Racing game.

> >Ironically,
> > Sonic was Sega's attempt at doing what Sony did, which was to steal
> > market share by citing how "kiddie" the Nintendo platform was. And it
> > worked for a couple of years as the Genesis was the system of choice
> > in the 16-bit market early on. Nintendo was of course able to change
> > all that when they got into the market but unfortunately were not able
> > to do the same thing with the Nintendo 64.
>
> > Anyways, the last Sonic game of the 16-bit era came in 1994 when
> > gamers were still fawning over the SNES.
>
> > > > > When I think of Nintendo's
> > > > > "family friendly" direction, we're talking about Nintendo almost
> > > > > _exclusively_ relying on party-oriented games and "ultra" cutesy
> > > > > games, with simpler controls.
>
> > > > > > Madden and other similar sports simulation games were good but the
> > > > > > limitations of sprite-based 2D graphics and accompanying viewpoints
> > > > > > took their toll.
>
> > > > > > And NBA Jam is hardly an "adult" sports game.
>
> > > > > > > >> I'm going even as far back as the PlayStation, though. ThePlayStation
> > > > > > > >> 2 built off the incredible success of the PlayStation, which, as I
> > > > > > > >> said above, reinvented video games for more mature audiences. We would
> > > > > > > >> never have seen GTA on a console, Ratchet & Clank, Devil May Cry, God
> > > > > > > >> of War, etc. were it not for the PlayStation.
>
> > > > > > > > My personal feeling on the original Playstation (and the Saturn as
> > > > > > > > well) is that 3D wasn't quite ready for prime-time.  The controls were
> > > > > > > > clunky, and the graphics were eye-bleedingly bad.  Also, I wasn't a
> > > > > > > > huge fan of the fighting games and survival horror titles that seemed
> > > > > > > > to get the most press at the time.  Sure there were some bona fide
> > > > > > > > classics (Final Fantasy 7, Metal Gear Solid, Spyro, Crash Bandicoot,
> > > > > > > > Symphony of the Night),
>
> > > > > > > GT 1 & 2, Tekken 3, Wipeout XL -- the list goes on and on...  :-)
>
> > > > > > > > and I also understand that there were
> > > > > > > > necessary growing pains while the transition to 3D was
> > > > > > > > underway........but I don't feel 3D gaming was truly underway as a
> > > > > > > > polished form of entertainment until the PS2 era.
>
> > > > > > > Maybe not polished, but definitely underway with titles like MGS.
>
> > > > > > > I think NES, SNES, PS1, and PS2 all had huge impacts on the future of console
> > > > > > > gaming during their respective times. (Heck, you could even go back to the 2600
> > > > > > > if you want.) It's hard to say which one was "more important"because they all
> > > > > > > built on their predecessors (though I guess the 2D-->3D movement is often seen
> > > > > > > as the major milestone for modern gaming).
>
> > > > > > Well, of course, every system has some sort of impact on the general
> > > > > > concept of video games. I was more referring to the PlayStationand
> > > > > > PlayStation 2's impact on the perception and popularity of video
> > > > > > games. Sony did their own sort of "blue ocean strategy" by targeting
> > > > > > people who had the admittedly wrong impression that video gameswere
> > > > > > just 2D Mario and Donkey Kong games.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > I still feel the interaction of control of onscreen action and a
> > > > > needed degree of graphical "smoothness", which both are huge factors
> > > > > in a game fully succeeding as entertainment, didn't reach the level it
> > > > > had to be at until last generation.  The best games of the PS1
> > > > > generation succeeded _in spite_ of the hardware.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -

On Jan 11, 5:51 pm, argento32 <aaronpyn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 11, 4:11 pm, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Jan 11, 3:57 am, argento32 <aaronpyn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Yes, games were limited by technology, but that didn't mean they all
> > > > had to use super saturated primary colors and "cutesy" character
> > > > designs. Look at the visuals of the SNES Final Fantasy games, Chrono
> > > > Trigger, Zelda, Mario, Secret of Mana, etc. and then compare them to
> > > > games like Mortal Kombat, Killer Instinct, Alien 3, Alien vs Predator,
> > > > any other Capcom fighting or action side scrolling game, etc.
>
> > > The point here was well made in the games you chose. The SNES games
> > > were well done, extremely good games that could be played by most all
> > > players.
>
> > Just because a game *can* be played by most all players doesn't mean
> > all those players will want to.
>
> > > The others you mentioned were not that good and limited in appeal.
>
> > > I don't see Nintendo having done anything to alienate there audience
> > > in the slightest. In fact they are the one video game company that
> > > consistently tried to please the largest audience and because they do
> > > games they consistently did.
>
> > If by "there audience" you mean the Nintendo loyalists who stuck with
> > them through the Nintendo 64 and the GameCube - in other words, people
> > like me - then I'm in agreement with you. I'm one of the rare gamers
> > who enjoys not only the "edgier," "more mature" games found on the
> > Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 but also the "pure fun" games that only
> > Nintendo can produce.
>
> > On the other hand, most gamers developed a taste for the "more mature"
> > themes and technology that the PlayStation and Saturn offered and gave
> > up on Nintendo's "wholesome," "family friendly" mission.
>
> > You're looking at things from a slightly wrong angle. Nintendo didn't
> > try to please the largest audience - they tried to make their games
> > accessible to everyone, but like I said above, just because a gamer
> > *can* play a game doesn't mean that they will. Games like Mario,
> > Zelda, etc. lost their appeal to many gamers who felt the Nintendo
> > line-up was stagnant and stuck in a time period when they were younger
> > and liked those kinds of games.
>
> > > Sony and Microsoft jumped into the gaming much much later and they had
> > > to pull the "look we are edgy and more adult card" to get there foot
> > > in the door.
>
> > And it worked like a charm, at least for Sony. The PlayStation crushed
> > the Super Nintendo *and* the Saturn and then proceeded to dominate the
> > Nintendo 64 as well. Things didn't get any better for Nintendo in the
> > following generation where the GameCube, alongside newcomer Microsoft,
> > was thrashed by the PlayStation 2.
>
> > > All Nintendo had to do was what they always do put out great games
> > > that people actually want to play.
>
> > You seem to have glossed over the entire fifth and sixth generation of
> > consoles. Neither the Nintendo 64 nor GameCube came anywhere near
> > first place in their generations. Nintendo was certainly not leading
> > the industry in any way, shape or form in the decade from 1996 to
> > 2006. Sure, they played to "their audience" but nobody else. People
> > had long given up on Nintendo as a viable video game company because
> > they seemed trapped in the past.
>
> > > The proof is right now. Far from being behind in the times Nintendo's
> > > motion control system the Wii has sold incredibly well. It has a
> > > strong gaming library for all ages and Sony and Microsoft(who both
> > > balked at motion controls and said it was gimmicky) are now clamouring
> > > to get there motion controls out to the consumer.
>
> > > So just as they try and catch up Nintendo already has a significant
> > > lead.
>
> > LOL
>
> > You seem to have a very distorted view of reality, my friend. You act
> > as if Nintendo has been successful from SNES all the way up to now,
> > completely ignoring the debacles of the Nintendo 64 and the GameCube.
> > Nintendo's recent success is due to some very smart business
> > decisions, specifically the strategy of targeting children, people who
> > gave up on gaming entirely after the SNES, people who have never
> > played video games, and people who are just casual gamers (as in
> > Bejeweled, Tetris, Diner Dash, etc.).
>
> > They don't compete in the "traditional gamers" space because they have
> > no shot... they can't possibly beat Microsoft or Sony at that game.
> > They succeeded this generation because they *created* a new market -
> > they're not worried about the "traditional" video game market and
> > instead are focused on pushing this totally new territory.
>
> > > Wii, DS, Gameboy..rumble, motion controls, d-pad, shoulder buttons,
> > > trigger, analog stick you can look to Nintendo first to give you the
> > > latest innovations in gaming.
>
> > I don't disagree here... except when it comes to the actual media on
> > which games came. Another big contributing factor to Nintendo's
> > downfall was their refusal to adopt an optical format for the Nintendo
> > 64.
>
> I definitely understand that the n64 and gamecube didnt do as well as
> they should have but i don't see it as Nintendo's downfall at all.
> Like you I did stick with Nintendo sure i had the other systems to but
> to me Nintendo has always had more pure gaming.

I guess it depends on what you think "downfall" means.

I look at Nintendo as the pioneer and leader of the video games
industry after the crash that ended the Atari and Intellivion's time
in this world. They innovated with the NES and the SNES and ruled
living rooms worldwide for a good decade (and for a kid, as I was at
10 years old when the NES first hit U.S. shores, that's a LONG time).

I consider the transitional period around the mid-90s Nintendo's
"downfall" because their arrogant refusal to change with the times and
adapt to the changing needs of fans who had outgrown Mario, Zelda,
"cutesy" graphics, "family friendly" themes, etc. resulted in them
hanging onto a distant second place only because the idiots in control
of Sega f***ed things up, and then falling into an even more distant
third place in the following generation to a point where many of the
people who loved Nintendo growing up now ridiculed it for its "kiddie"
presence.

Of course, personally, I didn't care so much. I bought a Nintendo 64
shortly after launch, never owned a Saturn and bought a PlayStation
for the sole purpose of playing Resident Evil 2 (and later 3, of
course). I was almost exclusively a Nintendo gamer until the Xbox came
out and didn't own a PlayStation system until this generation when I
bought both the PS3 and the PS2.

> I preferred the imagination used for a game like Zelda or Mario(though
> wasnt the biggest Super Mario Sunshine fan sadly)

I love the creativity that goes into most of Nintendo's titles. Their
games are ones that only they could make - others try to copy the
formula but always fail because there's just something about that
Nintendo kind of imagination, quality, etc.

I actually loved Super Mario Sunshine. It's the only Mario game I
fully and absolutely completed (got every single blue coin). I could
never bring myself to finish Super Mario 64 because the camera
controls were so horrid.

> I guess I am weird that way when everyone wanted the next shooter
> clone or yet another skateboarding games I was more impressed with the
> Nintendo games. Hell they even put out the best versions of Resident
> Evil 4.

Not according to, well, pretty much everyone else. Resident Evil 4
actually started out as a GameCube exclusive but Capcom later realized
that the market just wasn't there with the GameCube (***downfall***)
and so ported the game to the PlayStation 2. The port was done so well
that few gamers or reviewers thought ill of it - in fact, it has
better graphics, better display (progressive scan and true widescreen
as opposed to the letterboxing of the GameCube version), controls just
as well, and has additional content and gameplay that makes it a much
stronger package.

Of course, GameCube had it first. ;-)

> Ya know i am probably alone on this but i miss the old carts.

As do I. I still fire up my Nintendo 64 and SNES every so often. I
don't have many games left as I sold most off on eBay, but I still
have some good times with them. I even have a redesigned SNES that I
got relatively unused on eBay ages ago and the top loading NES from a
retro gaming website that has long since closed down. Not too many NES
games but some good ones - The Adventures of Little Nemo, Chip 'n'
Dale's Rescue Rangers to name a few.

On Jan 12, 10:16 am, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jan 11, 7:26 pm, "Nick Soapdish, Jr." <JGordon...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 11, 12:56 pm, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 10, 12:34 pm, "Nick Soapdish, Jr." <JGordon...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 9, 12:19 pm, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jan 9, 11:50 am, "Nick Soapdish, Jr." <JGordon...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Jan 7, 10:24 am, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On Jan 6, 9:44 pm, Zee <no_...@nowhere.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > Nick Soapdish, Jr. wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> My hyperbole aside, the video game industry was pretty much dominated
> > > > > > > > >> by Nintendo at the time Sony stepped in with the PlayStation and made
> > > > > > > > >> games "cool" again. A lot of gamers were deserting because Nintendo
> > > > > > > > >> was too focused on family friendly games and Sega was losing steam.
>
> > > > > > > > > Well, the SuperNES still had some nice, violent games like Contra 3
> > > > > > > > > and Castlevania 4, so I don't think you had the single-minded focus on
> > > > > > > > > "family" games yet until later in the N64 era.
>
> > > > > > > > Not to mention Super Metroid, non-Zelda RPGs like Chrono Trigger, FF 2&3, and
> > > > > > > > Secret of Mana, and then all the cross-platform games like Street Fighter,
> > > > > > > > Madden, NBA Jam, etc...SNES had a ton of good, "adult" games.
>
> > > > > > > It's all in the perception.
>
> > > > > > > Super Metroid, while a decidedly "core" game, *looked* like akiddie
> > > > > > > game. Bright colors, shooting colorful aliens with laser beams,
> > > > > > > relatively simple graphical design... gamers who entered highschool,
> > > > > > > college, the real world, etc. wanted games with more "mature"themes
> > > > > > > (as if a game had to have hookers or blood to be mature).
>
> > > > > > > As far as Zelda (not an RPG) comparisons with Square's work, Zelda is
> > > > > > > no more "kiddie" than anything Square put out. Final Fantasy,Chrono
> > > > > > > Trigger, Secret of Mana, etc. all looked like Zelda games. Many gamers
> > > > > > > just got tired of playing with these cutesy little characters..
>
> > > > > > I disagree with your definition of "family friendly" or "kiddie" in
> > > > > > this situation.  At that point, _all_ games had that similar kind of
> > > > > > bright colors/simple design, because of the technology.
>
> > > > > Not at all.
>
> > > > > Yes, games were limited by technology, but that didn't mean they all
> > > > > had to use super saturated primary colors and "cutesy" character
> > > > > designs. Look at the visuals of the SNES Final Fantasy games, Chrono
> > > > > Trigger, Zelda, Mario, Secret of Mana, etc. and then compare themto
> > > > > games like Mortal Kombat, Killer Instinct, Alien 3, Alien vs Predator,
> > > > > any other Capcom fighting or action side scrolling game, etc.
>
> > > > I think the difference was not as great as you perceive it, although
> > > > you do make a point.  The thing is that those isometric adventure
> > > > games were pretty much all limited by how much room the character
> > > > could take up on the screen, which I think players at the time
> > > > accepted.  I still think it was only later on that there was a
> > > > conscious choice to skew younger, when you see how limited the N-64's
> > > > genre selection was, notwithstanding Goldeneye/Perfect Dark.
>
> > > No, it was most definitely in the Super Nintendo era. As I clarified
> > > elsewhere, it wasn't the entire span of the Super Nintendo's lifetime
> > > but the latter half of it. Games like Metroid, Castlevania, Contra,
> > > etc. were all in the first half of the system's life. During the last
> > > few years (I'm talking 1995-7 because I don't count 1998-9 when the
> > > SNES was still being manufactured but few companies made games anymore
> > > and Nintendo wasn't one of them), the major releases were all heavily
> > > skewed towards a "family friendly" theme - movie tie-ins, games with
> > > cutesy graphics and/or games based on children's properties.
>
> > > The Nintendo 64 was certainly a slap in the face to hardcore fans but
> > > the last few years of the SNES were the hand rearing back and getting
> > > ready to smack.
>
> > > > > They *could* have employed a different graphic style but *chose* to
> > > > > stick with the cutesier designs because earlier on that was the
> > > > > perception of the video game market. The problem for Nintendo
> > > > > ultimately was that while they kept thinking everyone should pulla
> > > > > Michael Jackson or Peter Pan, the companies making its games realized
> > > > > that most of their growing fans were clamoring for more mature themes
> > > > > and style than a bright colorful fat plumber or an ape in a tie.
>
> > > > > Nintendo's direction with the Super Nintendo towards the latter half
> > > > > of the system's life sent a clear message to both gamers and
> > > > > developers that Nintendo was always going to treat all of its gamers,
> > > > > regardless of their age, the same.
>
> > > > > > And when I
> > > > > > was in college in the early '90s, no one was complaining about things
> > > > > > being too "kiddie" in games in general.
>
> > > > > Then you, like Zee, are seeing things from a different perspective.
> > > > > I'm not talking at all about the earlier years of the Super Nintendo.
> > > > > I'm talking about the second half of the system's life, during *my*
> > > > > college years. My first year in college, 1993, which was the system's
> > > > > second year on the market in the States, it was still "cool." Quickly,
> > > > > though, I started seeing a LOT of people deciding that the SNES just
> > > > > wasn't cool enough anymore. Arcade games? Sure. But the "cartoony"
> > > > > graphics and the limited breadth of genres, with too much focus on
> > > > > kiddie licenses, kiddie art styles, etc. were just not interesting to
> > > > > a lot of people anymore.
>
> > > > Well, perhaps it was a question of timing (first half vs. second half
> > > > of the SNES's life).  I do remember people still having plenty offun
> > > > with games like Sonic.
>
> > > Sonic on the Sega Genesis or Sonic on the Sega Saturn?
>
> > The only new Sonic on the Saturn was that crappy Sonic racing game
> > (Sonic R?).  Not a good sign when they couldn't get a proper entry for
> > their flagship title out for the new console.
>
> You don't count Knuckles' Chaotix and Sonic 3D Blast? Both came out
> before the Sonic Racing game.

They weren't on the Sega Saturn, though. Chaotix was a 32X add-on
game, and 3D Blast was the Genesis. As far as I remember, Sonic R was
the only Sonic game for the Saturn, and it's not even considered a
full-on main entry in the series. One of the big things about Sonic
Adventure was that it was the first "main sequence" Sonic games in 4
years.

One of the biggest disappointments for old-school Sega and Nintendo
fans is how the Sonic & Mario "partnership" was squandered on a stupid
Olympic license cash-in. A full-on platformer with both characters
used for different sections would've been a great idea, but
instead............

> >Ironically,
> > > Sonic was Sega's attempt at doing what Sony did, which was to steal
> > > market share by citing how "kiddie" the Nintendo platform was. And it
> > > worked for a couple of years as the Genesis was the system of choice
> > > in the 16-bit market early on. Nintendo was of course able to change
> > > all that when they got into the market but unfortunately were not able
> > > to do the same thing with the Nintendo 64.
>
> > > Anyways, the last Sonic game of the 16-bit era came in 1994 when
> > > gamers were still fawning over the SNES.
>
> > > > > > When I think of Nintendo's
> > > > > > "family friendly" direction, we're talking about Nintendo almost
> > > > > > _exclusively_ relying on party-oriented games and "ultra" cutesy
> > > > > > games, with simpler controls.
>
> > > > > > > Madden and other similar sports simulation games were good but the
> > > > > > > limitations of sprite-based 2D graphics and accompanying viewpoints
> > > > > > > took their toll.
>
> > > > > > > And NBA Jam is hardly an "adult" sports game.
>
> > > > > > > > >> I'm going even as far back as the PlayStation, though. The PlayStation
> > > > > > > > >> 2 built off the incredible success of the PlayStation, which, as I
> > > > > > > > >> said above, reinvented video games for more mature audiences. We would
> > > > > > > > >> never have seen GTA on a console, Ratchet & Clank, DevilMay Cry, God
> > > > > > > > >> of War, etc. were it not for the PlayStation.
>
> > > > > > > > > My personal feeling on the original Playstation (and the Saturn as
> > > > > > > > > well) is that 3D wasn't quite ready for prime-time.  The controls were
> > > > > > > > > clunky, and the graphics were eye-bleedingly bad.  Also, I wasn't a
> > > > > > > > > huge fan of the fighting games and survival horror titlesthat seemed
> > > > > > > > > to get the most press at the time.  Sure there were some bona fide
> > > > > > > > > classics (Final Fantasy 7, Metal Gear Solid, Spyro, CrashBandicoot,
> > > > > > > > > Symphony of the Night),
>
> > > > > > > > GT 1 & 2, Tekken 3, Wipeout XL -- the list goes on and on....  :-)
>
> > > > > > > > > and I also understand that there were
> > > > > > > > > necessary growing pains while the transition to 3D was
> > > > > > > > > underway........but I don't feel 3D gaming was truly underway as a
> > > > > > > > > polished form of entertainment until the PS2 era.
>
> > > > > > > > Maybe not polished, but definitely underway with titles like MGS.
>
> > > > > > > > I think NES, SNES, PS1, and PS2 all had huge impacts on thefuture of console
> > > > > > > > gaming during their respective times. (Heck, you could evengo back to the 2600
> > > > > > > > if you want.) It's hard to say which one was "more important" because they all
> > > > > > > > built on their predecessors (though I guess the 2D-->3D movement is often seen
> > > > > > > > as the major milestone for modern gaming).
>
> > > > > > > Well, of course, every system has some sort of impact on the general
> > > > > > > concept of video games. I was more referring to the PlayStation and
> > > > > > > PlayStation 2's impact on the perception and popularity of video
> > > > > > > games. Sony did their own sort of "blue ocean strategy" by targeting
> > > > > > > people who had the admittedly wrong impression that video games were
> > > > > > > just 2D Mario and Donkey Kong games.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > > I still feel the interaction of control of onscreen action and a
> > > > > > needed degree of graphical "smoothness", which both are huge factors
> > > > > > in a game fully succeeding as entertainment, didn't reach the level it
> > > > > > had to be at until last generation.  The best games of the PS1
> > > > > > generation succeeded _in spite_ of the hardware.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -

On Jan 12, 7:18 pm, "Nick Soapdish, Jr." <JGordon...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Jan 12, 10:16 am, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Jan 11, 7:26 pm, "Nick Soapdish, Jr." <JGordon...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 11, 12:56 pm, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jan 10, 12:34 pm, "Nick Soapdish, Jr." <JGordon...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jan 9, 12:19 pm, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Jan 9, 11:50 am, "Nick Soapdish, Jr." <JGordon...@aol.com>wrote:
>
> > > > > > > On Jan 7, 10:24 am, The alMIGHTY N <natle...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > On Jan 6, 9:44 pm, Zee <no_...@nowhere.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > Nick Soapdish, Jr. wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >> My hyperbole aside, the video game industry was prettymuch dominated
> > > > > > > > > >> by Nintendo at the time Sony stepped in with the PlayStation and made
> > > > > > > > > >> games "cool" again. A lot of gamers were deserting because Nintendo
> > > > > > > > > >> was too focused on family friendly games and Sega was losing steam.
>
> > > > > > > > > > Well, the SuperNES still had some nice, violent games like Contra 3
> > > > > > > > > > and Castlevania 4, so I don't think you had the single-minded focus on
> > > > > > > > > > "family" games yet until later in the N64 era.
>
> > > > > > > > > Not to mention Super Metroid, non-Zelda RPGs like Chrono Trigger, FF 2&3, and
> > > > > > > > > Secret of Mana, and then all the cross-platform games like Street Fighter,
> > > > > > > > > Madden, NBA Jam, etc...SNES had a ton of good, "adult" games.
>
> > > > > > > > It's all in the perception.
>
> > > > > > > > Super Metroid, while a decidedly "core" game, *looked* likea kiddie
> > > > > > > > game. Bright colors, shooting colorful aliens with laser beams,
> > > > > > > > relatively simple graphical design... gamers who entered high school,
> > > > > > > > college, the real world, etc. wanted games with more "mature" themes
> > > > > > > > (as if a game had to have hookers or blood to be mature).
>
> > > > > > > > As far as Zelda (not an RPG) comparisons with Square's work, Zelda is
> > > > > > > > no more "kiddie" than anything Square put out. Final Fantasy, Chrono
> > > > > > > > Trigger, Secret of Mana, etc. all looked like Zelda games. Many gamers
> > > > > > > > just got tired of playing with these cutesy little characters.
>
> > > > > > > I disagree with your definition of "family friendly" or "kiddie" in
> > > > > > > this situation.  At that point, _all_ games had that similar kind of
> > > > > > > bright colors/simple design, because of the technology.
>
> > > > > > Not at all.
>
> > > > > > Yes, games were limited by technology, but that didn't mean they all
> > > > > > had to use super saturated primary colors and "cutesy" character
> > > > > > designs. Look at the visuals of the SNES Final Fantasy games, Chrono
> > > > > > Trigger, Zelda, Mario, Secret of Mana, etc. and then compare them to
> > > > > > games like Mortal Kombat, Killer Instinct, Alien 3, Alien vs Predator,
> > > > > > any other Capcom fighting or action side scrolling game, etc.
>
> > > > > I think the difference was not as great as you perceive it, although
> > > > > you do make a point.  The thing is that those isometric adventure
> > > > > games were pretty much all limited by how much room the character
> > > > > could take up on the screen, which I think players at the time
> > > > > accepted.  I still think it was only later on that there was a
> > > > > conscious choice to skew younger, when you see how limited the N-64's
> > > > > genre selection was, notwithstanding Goldeneye/Perfect Dark.
>
> > > > No, it was most definitely in the Super Nintendo era. As I clarified
> > > > elsewhere, it wasn't the entire span of the Super Nintendo's lifetime
> > > > but the latter half of it. Games like Metroid, Castlevania, Contra,
> > > > etc. were all in the first half of the system's life. During the last
> > > > few years (I'm talking 1995-7 because I don't count 1998-9 when the
> > > > SNES was still being manufactured but few companies made games anymore
> > > > and Nintendo wasn't one of them), the major releases were all heavily
> > > > skewed towards a "family friendly" theme - movie tie-ins, games with
> > > > cutesy graphics and/or games based on children's properties.
>
> > > > The Nintendo 64 was certainly a slap in the face to hardcore fans but
> > > > the last few years of the SNES were the hand rearing back and getting
> > > > ready to smack.
>
> > > > > > They *could* have employed a different graphic style but *chose* to
> > > > > > stick with the cutesier designs because earlier on that was the
> > > > > > perception of the video game market. The problem for Nintendo
> > > > > > ultimately was that while they kept thinking everyone should pull a
> > > > > > Michael Jackson or Peter Pan, the companies making its games realized
> > > > > > that most of their growing fans were clamoring for more mature themes
> > > > > > and style than a bright colorful fat plumber or an ape in a tie..
>
> > > > > > Nintendo's direction with the Super Nintendo towards the latterhalf
> > > > > > of the system's life sent a clear message to both gamers and
> > > > > > developers that Nintendo was always going to treat all of its gamers,
> > > > > > regardless of their age, the same.
>
> > > > > > > And when I
> > > > > > > was in college in the early '90s, no one was complaining about things
> > > > > > > being too "kiddie" in games in general.
>
> > > > > > Then you, like Zee, are seeing things from a different perspective.
> > > > > > I'm not talking at all about the earlier years of the Super Nintendo.
> > > > > > I'm talking about the second half of the system's life, during *my*
> > > > > > college years. My first year in college, 1993, which was the system's
> > > > > > second year on the market in the States, it was still "cool." Quickly,
> > > > > > though, I started seeing a LOT of people deciding that the SNESjust
> > > > > > wasn't cool enough anymore. Arcade games? Sure. But the "cartoony"
> > > > > > graphics and the limited breadth of genres, with too much focuson
> > > > > > kiddie licenses, kiddie art styles, etc. were just not interesting to
> > > > > > a lot of people anymore.
>
> > > > > Well, perhaps it was a question of timing (first half vs. second half
> > > > > of the SNES's life).  I do remember people still having plenty of fun
> > > > > with games like Sonic.
>
> > > > Sonic on the Sega Genesis or Sonic on the Sega Saturn?
>
> > > The only new Sonic on the Saturn was that crappy Sonic racing game
> > > (Sonic R?).  Not a good sign when they couldn't get a proper entry for
> > > their flagship title out for the new console.
>
> > You don't count Knuckles' Chaotix and Sonic 3D Blast? Both came out
> > before the Sonic Racing game.
>
> They weren't on the Sega Saturn, though.  Chaotix was a 32X add-on
> game, and 3D Blast was the Genesis.

You're right that Chaotix was a 32X game (forgot about that add-on)
but I know 3D Blast was released on both the Genesis *and* the Saturn.

> As far as I remember, Sonic R was
> the only Sonic game for the Saturn, and it's not even considered a
> full-on main entry in the series.  One of the big things about Sonic
> Adventure was that it was the first "main sequence" Sonic games in 4
> years.
>
> One of the biggest disappointments for old-school Sega and Nintendo
> fans is how the Sonic & Mario "partnership" was squandered on a stupid
> Olympic license cash-in.  A full-on platformer with both characters
> used for different sections would've been a great idea, but
> instead............

I'm very much in agreement with you here. I was never a fan of Sonic's
but was able to recognize what a massive waste it was to have the
first cross-over be some half-assed sports-esque title. A dual
platformer would have been an interesting concept...

> >Ironically,
> > > > Sonic was Sega's attempt at doing what Sony did, which was to steal
> > > > market share by citing how "kiddie" the Nintendo platform was. And it
> > > > worked for a couple of years as the Genesis was the system of choice
> > > > in the 16-bit market early on. Nintendo was of course able to change
> > > > all that when they got into the market but unfortunately were not able
> > > > to do the same thing with the Nintendo 64.
>
> > > > Anyways, the last Sonic game of the 16-bit era came in 1994 when
> > > > gamers were still fawning over the SNES.
>
> > > > > > > When I think of Nintendo's
> > > > > > > "family friendly" direction, we're talking about Nintendo almost
> > > > > > > _exclusively_ relying on party-oriented games and "ultra" cutesy
> > > > > > > games, with simpler controls.
>
> > > > > > > > Madden and other similar sports simulation games were good but the
> > > > > > > > limitations of sprite-based 2D graphics and accompanying viewpoints
> > > > > > > > took their toll.
>
> > > > > > > > And NBA Jam is hardly an "adult" sports game.
>
> > > > > > > > > >> I'm going even as far back as the PlayStation, though.The PlayStation
> > > > > > > > > >> 2 built off the incredible success of the PlayStation,which, as I
> > > > > > > > > >> said above, reinvented video games for more mature audiences. We would
> > > > > > > > > >> never have seen GTA on a console, Ratchet & Clank, Devil May Cry, God
> > > > > > > > > >> of War, etc. were it not for the PlayStation.
>
> > > > > > > > > > My personal feeling on the original Playstation (and the Saturn as
> > > > > > > > > > well) is that 3D wasn't quite ready for prime-time.  The controls were
> > > > > > > > > > clunky, and the graphics were eye-bleedingly bad.  Also, I wasn't a
> > > > > > > > > > huge fan of the fighting games and survival horror titles that seemed
> > > > > > > > > > to get the most press at the time.  Sure there were some bona fide
> > > > > > > > > > classics (Final Fantasy 7, Metal Gear Solid, Spyro, Crash Bandicoot,
> > > > > > > > > > Symphony of the Night),
>
> > > > > > > > > GT 1 & 2, Tekken 3, Wipeout XL -- the list goes on and on....  :-)
>
> > > > > > > > > > and I also understand that there were
> > > > > > > > > > necessary growing pains while the transition to 3D was
> > > > > > > > > > underway........but I don't feel 3D gaming was truly underway as a
> > > > > > > > > > polished form of entertainment until the PS2 era.
>
> > > > > > > > > Maybe not polished, but definitely underway with titles like MGS.
>
> > > > > > > > > I think NES, SNES, PS1, and PS2 all had huge impacts on the future of console
> > > > > > > > > gaming during their respective times. (Heck, you could even go back to the 2600
> > > > > > > > > if you want.) It's hard to say which one was "more important" because they all
> > > > > > > > > built on their predecessors (though I guess the 2D-->3D movement is often seen
> > > > > > > > > as the major milestone for modern gaming).
>
> > > > > > > > Well, of course, every system has some sort of impact on the general
> > > > > > > > concept of video games. I was more referring to the PlayStation and
> > > > > > > > PlayStation 2's impact on the perception and popularity of video
> > > > > > > > games. Sony did their own sort of "blue ocean strategy" by targeting
> > > > > > > > people who had the admittedly wrong impression that video games were
> > > > > > > > just 2D Mario and Donkey Kong games.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > I still feel the interaction of control of onscreen action and a
> > > > > > > needed degree of graphical "smoothness", which both are huge factors
> > > > > > > in a game fully succeeding as entertainment, didn't reach thelevel it
> > > > > > > had to be at until last generation.  The best games of the PS1
> > > > > > > generation succeeded _in spite_ of the hardware.- Hide quotedtext -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -