Gamers Zone

[yimou]

People get so touchy about their age when they turn.....uhhhmmm cannot remember .

 

[catlhere]

I have an Xbox, and the huge clunky controllers sucked, so I had to get the smaller ones which I love.

I love playing Star Wars games, Halo, war games, Madden, and the NBA Live series

I'm also a Virgo, who enjoys long walks on the beach...

As am I! Virgo's unite! lol.

Family Guy FTW!

I have a feeling games are going to get real big again. There's lots of good stuff coming out this year, and it should be a fun time for all! ZeldaGOTY2K6!

 

[LMP]

I think the Xbox 360 is eerily similar to the Sega Dreamcast

and may suffer the same fate...

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

I think the Xbox 360 is eerily similar to the Sega Dreamcast

and may suffer the same fate...

 

[catlhere]

I think the Xbox 360 is eerily similar to the Sega Dreamcast

and may suffer the same fate...

http://www.gamespot.com/news/6141161.html

If the showing here, was anything like Japan where barely half shipped consoles were sold... I may think you're right.

The PS3 will obviously do well, because with such a huge lead on everyone else (GCN~18Mil Xbox~20Mil PS2~90Mil) they are sitting pretty, but then again.. that's what everyone thought about nintendo too. And the Big N's sales of consoles has gone down every generation. =(

Revolution may be the big make or break for Nintendo. Japan will most likely embrace it, because with such a innovative controller and possibilty for weird games, they like to eat that kinda shit up (Nintendogs anyone?) So I think they will once again get a solid 2nd place in Japan, and I think with enough good advertising in the States, they could end up 2nd place over all next gen. Which is SO nice for me!

 

[LMP]

I saw an article with about 20 shocking similarities between the two

Both came out before their respective competition

Both were a very huge step up from previous systems

Both had technical problems because of rushed release

Both were the highest priced consoles of the time

but the Dreamcast was always completely wicked IMO and the Xbox360 is amazing, too. When I get money, I'm buying a 360 this year

 

[unforgettableFOXfire]

I don't know if I speak for all gamers when I say this... but for the love of all that is good: let me at least get some frickin use out of my console before you make me replace it. I loved my Nintendo, and my Super Nintendo, and my N64 for many, many years once I bought them before new systems came out. Each upgrade wasn't a marginal one, but a shockingly beautiful and impressive one. 8-bit, 16-bit, 32-bit, 64-bit... You went from 2-d side-scrollers, to 3/4 overhead 3rd person, to 1st person 3d, to fully interactive 1st person or 3rd person, etc... that was opening doors... we're not opening doors anymore, cause they're aren't a lot of doors left to open. I'm not going to spend $350 on a new system that I'll only get 2 years of use out of before the jerks try to make me replace it.

What are we getting out of new consoles now? Are the Xbox and the PS2 are not that old and outdated and behind in technology as to necessitate the 360 and the PS2? If you're just going to be rehashing a lot of games anyway, why would I buy a new system to play something I already am? Making a sequel or something for a game doesn't necessitate a new system to accompany it as far as I'm concerned; I think you only saturate the market and devalue the consoles themselves by only making them very slight improvements on the old one. That's where we're at, I think. We're at the stage where we're making marginal improvements in graphics, without sufficiently improving any other aspects (online gameplay, maybe, except people have been doing that with pcs for years, I don't 'need' a console for that).

Who cares if the new box can more realistically render fog effects or improved physics engine for more realistic blood splatter? Make a game worth playing. That's more important to me than fog-effects or realistically rendered shadow. I had no problem with 'shadows' being a small dark circle on the ground underneath the character just to indicate lighting in the environment... I don't really need to spend $350 so you can give me slightly better reflections and somewhat more realistic lighting effects.

Gaming hasn't ever really been about visual realism anyway, gaming is about the experience and, dare I say, knowing departures from reality. Mario wasn't great because he was a plumber seeking his princess (although the simple premise is usually superior to overly complex and contrite ones). Mario was great because of the pits of oblivion, and the hammer throwing turtles in armor, fire-breathing lizards, people who are partly mushroom, and being able to smash bricks with your face.

I posted a few days ago about Medal of Honor. If given the choice to kill Nazis in Medal of Honor or in Castle Wolfenstein, my choice is Wolfenstein. I mean, come on: Cyborg Hitler, people. Cyborg. Hitler. What isn't great about that? The gamer knows they aren't killing the real Hitler anyway. Besides, who wants to shoot some regular old tired dude twice to beat the game when they can spend 10 minutes battling it out against a mechanically enhanced furher who will crush humanity with his zombie supermen if you don't make his chest explode with your gatling gun?

Gamers know that what they're doing isn't real. I prefer to play a game that's engaging, not necessarily fluffy and nice to look at. Nice to look at doesn't hurt, but if you give me improved graphics without improved gameplay, you're wasting both my time and yours. Less 'realistic wave effects and cloud reflections' on my virtual water, and more decent plots and premises. The experience (for me, anyway) lies in playability, and not in appearance.

 

[RavenBlue]

^ My thoughts exactly, well said

 

[hedgehog]

I don't know if I speak for all gamers when I say this... but for the love of all that is good: let me at least get some frickin use out of my console before you make me replace it. I loved my Nintendo, and my Super Nintendo, and my N64 for many, many years once I bought them before new systems came out. Each upgrade wasn't a marginal one, but a shockingly beautiful and impressive one. 8-bit, 16-bit, 32-bit, 64-bit... You went from 2-d side-scrollers, to 3/4 overhead 3rd person, to 1st person 3d, to fully interactive 1st person or 3rd person, etc... that was opening doors... we're not opening doors anymore, cause they're aren't a lot of doors left to open. I'm not going to spend $350 on a new system that I'll only get 2 years of use out of before the jerks try to make me replace it.

What are we getting out of new consoles now? Are the Xbox and the PS2 are not that old and outdated and behind in technology as to necessitate the 360 and the PS2? If you're just going to be rehashing a lot of games anyway, why would I buy a new system to play something I already am? Making a sequel or something for a game doesn't necessitate a new system to accompany it as far as I'm concerned; I think you only saturate the market and devalue the consoles themselves by only making them very slight improvements on the old one. That's where we're at, I think. We're at the stage where we're making marginal improvements in graphics, without sufficiently improving any other aspects (online gameplay, maybe, except people have been doing that with pcs for years, I don't 'need' a console for that).

Who cares if the new box can more realistically render fog effects or improved physics engine for more realistic blood splatter? Make a game worth playing. That's more important to me than fog-effects or realistically rendered shadow. I had no problem with 'shadows' being a small dark circle on the ground underneath the character just to indicate lighting in the environment... I don't really need to spend $350 so you can give me slightly better reflections and somewhat more realistic lighting effects.

Gaming hasn't ever really been about visual realism anyway, gaming is about the experience and, dare I say, knowing departures from reality. Mario wasn't great because he was a plumber seeking his princess (although the simple premise is usually superior to overly complex and contrite ones). Mario was great because of the pits of oblivion, and the hammer throwing turtles in armor, fire-breathing lizards, people who are partly mushroom, and being able to smash bricks with your face.

I posted a few days ago about Medal of Honor. If given the choice to kill Nazis in Medal of Honor or in Castle Wolfenstein, my choice is Wolfenstein. I mean, come on: Cyborg Hitler, people. Cyborg. Hitler. What isn't great about that? The gamer knows they aren't killing the real Hitler anyway. Besides, who wants to shoot some regular old tired dude twice to beat the game when they can spend 10 minutes battling it out against a mechanically enhanced furher who will crush humanity with his zombie supermen if you don't make his chest explode with your gatling gun?

Gamers know that what they're doing isn't real. I prefer to play a game that's engaging, not necessarily fluffy and nice to look at. Nice to look at doesn't hurt, but if you give me improved graphics without improved gameplay, you're wasting both my time and yours. Less 'realistic wave effects and cloud reflections' on my virtual water, and more decent plots and premises. The experience (for me, anyway) lies in playability, and not in appearance.

Excellent post, pretty much sums up whats wrong with computer games today.

In the past, each new console offered new gaming experiences aswell as improved graphics.
All I expect from the PS3's and XBox360 as far as gameplay is concerned is "more of the same", so why should I bother buying these consoles?
After all, what gaming experiences did the Gamecube, PS2 and Xbox offer that the PS1 and N64 didn't do before (and did better, IMO)?
IMO, as far as playability goes, most of the big games for the PS1 and N64 were far superior to thier visually-tarted-up Xbox and PS2 clones... I remember being blown away by the likes of Goldeneye, Super Mario 64 and Final Fantasy VII - I can't imagine getting anywhere near as much value and entertainment out of Xbox or PS2 releases as I got from games like them.

I expect that future releases in the video games industry will be graphically spectacular, but playability (THE most important part of a video game) will continue to be poor.
I expect nothing more than more identical first/ third person shooters, extremely boring and unimaginative RPG's and more rubbish Super Mario 64 clones... and the critics will all hail them as "revolutionary" whilst the creators of these games are laughing all the way to the bank.

As said before, Im quite happy to stick with my old Super Nintendo, Playstation 1 and N64 than waste my money on the predictable, overrated stuff that comes out these days.

 

[catlhere]

Smart choice to stick with your SNES and Playstation and N64.

I think the big problem today is that alot of what we older gamers (not even really that old) grew up on, relied more on the actual gameplay to attract fans, and thus the game industry grew when new, innovative games came out. Developers had to work with shitty graphics and therefore needed to focus on the gameplay even more so. So we got games that may have looked terrible, but it had no effect because we just loved to play them so damn much. It was about the GAMES not the glitz and glam. Video Games have lost that today, but why, is still kinda up in the air.

It could be that now and days, things are geared towards the youth obviously. I really don't think 30 year olds are buying 50 Cent Bulletproof, ya know? It's all about finding what the "kids" these days like, and what they like is the most crude violent and simplistic games ever created. They (developers) know that what sells, is what the kids know they shouldn't be playing or look cool playing, so out come 90% of video games today being about either A) Generic Sports Title B) Generic Racing Game with lots of crashes C) War game D)Shoot em up. That's it. Yes, you still get really unique titles that should be praised to hell and back (Katamari Damacy is cooky, Okami is looking good, Pikmin is underrated) But by in large, the games that get the most publicity are the same things. Look at some of the games that were pushed the most, and sold the most this last generation and see if you can spot a trend: Halo, GTA, God Of War. What do they have in common. Oh yeah, a typical "badass" character that all teenagers think are cool, goes around killing things with guns and swords, etc.

That's what is flying off the shelves and companies know this. Does this mean, they aren't good games? No, of course not. Some of the typical games now and days actually get pulled off very well. The problem is though, how much is too much of the "popular" genre. Do we really think that a game with a hidden sex mini game is benificial to the industry (hot coffee) Do we really need Dead Or Alive Beach VolleyBall. Do we need to have a game like manhunt's and true crime's, which have no point except to basically be a cool bloody and gore-filled action fest? Well obviously casual gamers today feel they do, because those titles rake in the dough.

But I don't think it would have to be this way, if companies would put forth the initiative to advertise something else. They just want to go with the sure fire million seller, so we'll continue to get Madden 2020 with no changes except beter graphics. We'll get Generic WWII Shooter #12 where you have to stop the Nazis on Normandy. Because that's what they push. If companies advertised alot of different styles, I'm positive those would sell. Did a game like Phoenix Wright get alot of press? No of course not, which is why it wasn't popular. It was an incredibly unique and well put together game, but... it was a game about being a Lawyer, solving trials. Would a company believe a game like that appeals to the masses, no. which is why it will sit on the shelves, and yet another copy of SpiderMan 2 will be sold.

I don't want to offend anyone who may enjoy the Xbox/Microsoft combo the most, but I really think they are what's wrong with todays industry. I mean for God sakes, they debuted the system on an MTV show. That's the audience their after. They want to be "cool" and "urban." They know nothing about what is good for the gaming industry, only what to do to sell and make money. I would go as far as to say the only thing good that Microsoft has contributed to this generation in gaming is a very well made Online experience (Xbox Live), which should be looked at for reference in the future. But other than that, I really hope the 360 fails because I can't stand that the gaming community is going to become the PC community with minor upgrades every 2 years, and nothing innovative or new to show for it and every console being bundled with Mariah's new album.

Sony and Nintendo I still think have faith in progress. In moving games forward. I think there's really good titles coming out for each company. I also think that Nintendo is doing the right thing choosing to take a chance on such a shocking controller and method of playing games. It's very hard to make new trends in the industry (Virtual Boy=Flop) but Nintendo seems to be able to make huge leaps for gamers. Rumble features, shoulder buttons, light guns, analogue sticks. Some of it has been invented before by other companies, but Nintendo made each a standard and perfected them, and if anyone can push games out of a stagnant state, its N. The only problem is that N relies too much on their niche fanbase. They don't get their name out enough anymore. I'm happy with what they have done with the DS though and their WiFi Connection, I think it's a good step forward. It's getting the word out that hey, Nintendo may not have #1 spot in the world, but they are GAINING market share. their handheld thats been out for over a year is actulaly outselling the debut of the Xbox360 (fact, one week DS even went to almost 500k, looking to break 1 million sales in a month) so this is a great sign that Nintendo is on its way back to prosperity.

Hopefully the gaming world will start trying to be unique again. I feel they have lost alot of what made them great, and thats sad. But I don't think I will lose faith. there's still alot of life left in the industry, and this next generation will be spectacular.

 

[hedgehog]

Smart choice to stick with your SNES and Playstation and N64.

I think the big problem today is that alot of what we older gamers (not even really that old) grew up on, relied more on the actual gameplay to attract fans, and thus the game industry grew when new, innovative games came out. Developers had to work with shitty graphics and therefore needed to focus on the gameplay even more so. So we got games that may have looked terrible, but it had no effect because we just loved to play them so damn much. It was about the GAMES not the glitz and glam. Video Games have lost that today, but why, is still kinda up in the air.

It could be that now and days, things are geared towards the youth obviously. I really don't think 30 year olds are buying 50 Cent Bulletproof, ya know? It's all about finding what the "kids" these days like, and what they like is the most crude violent and simplistic games ever created. They (developers) know that what sells, is what the kids know they shouldn't be playing or look cool playing, so out come 90% of video games today being about either A) Generic Sports Title B) Generic Racing Game with lots of crashes C) War game D)Shoot em up. That's it. Yes, you still get really unique titles that should be praised to hell and back (Katamari Damacy is cooky, Okami is looking good, Pikmin is underrated) But by in large, the games that get the most publicity are the same things. Look at some of the games that were pushed the most, and sold the most this last generation and see if you can spot a trend: Halo, GTA, God Of War. What do they have in common. Oh yeah, a typical "badass" character that all teenagers think are cool, goes around killing things with guns and swords, etc.

That's what is flying off the shelves and companies know this. Does this mean, they aren't good games? No, of course not. Some of the typical games now and days actually get pulled off very well. The problem is though, how much is too much of the "popular" genre. Do we really think that a game with a hidden sex mini game is benificial to the industry (hot coffee) Do we really need Dead Or Alive Beach VolleyBall. Do we need to have a game like manhunt's and true crime's, which have no point except to basically be a cool bloody and gore-filled action fest? Well obviously casual gamers today feel they do, because those titles rake in the dough.

But I don't think it would have to be this way, if companies would put forth the initiative to advertise something else. They just want to go with the sure fire million seller, so we'll continue to get Madden 2020 with no changes except beter graphics. We'll get Generic WWII Shooter #12 where you have to stop the Nazis on Normandy. Because that's what they push. If companies advertised alot of different styles, I'm positive those would sell. Did a game like Phoenix Wright get alot of press? No of course not, which is why it wasn't popular. It was an incredibly unique and well put together game, but... it was a game about being a Lawyer, solving trials. Would a company believe a game like that appeals to the masses, no. which is why it will sit on the shelves, and yet another copy of SpiderMan 2 will be sold.

I don't want to offend anyone who may enjoy the Xbox/Microsoft combo the most, but I really think they are what's wrong with todays industry. I mean for God sakes, they debuted the system on an MTV show. That's the audience their after. They want to be "cool" and "urban." They know nothing about what is good for the gaming industry, only what to do to sell and make money. I would go as far as to say the only thing good that Microsoft has contributed to this generation in gaming is a very well made Online experience (Xbox Live), which should be looked at for reference in the future. But other than that, I really hope the 360 fails because I can't stand that the gaming community is going to become the PC community with minor upgrades every 2 years, and nothing innovative or new to show for it and every console being bundled with Mariah's new album.

Sony and Nintendo I still think have faith in progress. In moving games forward. I think there's really good titles coming out for each company. I also think that Nintendo is doing the right thing choosing to take a chance on such a shocking controller and method of playing games. It's very hard to make new trends in the industry (Virtual Boy=Flop) but Nintendo seems to be able to make huge leaps for gamers. Rumble features, shoulder buttons, light guns, analogue sticks. Some of it has been invented before by other companies, but Nintendo made each a standard and perfected them, and if anyone can push games out of a stagnant state, its N. The only problem is that N relies too much on their niche fanbase. They don't get their name out enough anymore. I'm happy with what they have done with the DS though and their WiFi Connection, I think it's a good step forward. It's getting the word out that hey, Nintendo may not have #1 spot in the world, but they are GAINING market share. their handheld thats been out for over a year is actulaly outselling the debut of the Xbox360 (fact, one week DS even went to almost 500k, looking to break 1 million sales in a month) so this is a great sign that Nintendo is on its way back to prosperity.

Hopefully the gaming world will start trying to be unique again. I feel they have lost alot of what made them great, and thats sad. But I don't think I will lose faith. there's still alot of life left in the industry, and this next generation will be spectacular.

A lot of good points made there about why the industry is so poor, they are mostly made to appeal to the mindless violence loving teenage masses and not the gamer searching for high standards of playability in their games.

However, I fail to see how Microsofts Xbox is any worse than Sony's PS2, Im certain the games on the new Playstations and Xboxes will be identical to the kind of games released on the current consoles.
Nintendos Gamecube was dissapointing as, unlike the NES, SNES and N64, no progress was made gameplay wise but, to be fair, at least Nintendo look like trying to be different (my cousin has one of those DS, looks interesting I have to say)... hopefully Nintendos new console won't follow the same path which the Xbox360 and Playstation 3 will inevitablely go down.
In the unlikely event I do buy a new console, it will more than likely be Nintendo.

Unfortunately, I cannot agree about the next generation of consoles being "spectacular", the gaming industry is in a very bad state and won't get better anytime soon (actually, is it just me or is entertainment in general going down the toilet these days? Music/ radio and TV seems to be going downhill too... Boooo! Bring back the 90's! )

I think the fact that there is such a thing as a "50 Cent" video game is proof enough that computer games are going downhill.

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

Do we really need Dead Or Alive Beach VolleyBall.

is it bad that i own this?

you guys have all pretty much summed up why i wasn't standing in line at midnight to get an xbox 360 and why i won't be doing that for the other new ones coming out. i may get one, but i don't know. like everyone's said, the consoles that have come out in years past have always been a new generation. they were drastically different and better in technology and made older consoles look like crap. really, i don't see much difference in how things look on the new consoles as compared to their current counterparts. and to spend so much money to replace something when you don't really need to is really ludicrous.

i might get an xbox 360 only because i don't have an xbox anymore, but not until the price drops and not until i find out if the xbox games i own can be played on it. anything else, i don't know. i like to have the latest technology in things but on the other hand, i'm not rich and i don't like buying new things unless i think it's a good investment. if i have to skip buying a console and hold out until some real progress has been made, then so be it.

 

[catlhere]

Well I think all 3 companies aren't living up to their potential. I'm a huge N fanboy, but even I can see that Nintendo needs to turn its act around. It can't keep relying on old standbys. Just like Xbox and PS2 cant. Pretty soon the GTAs/Halos/Zeldas may get tiring. Although it doesnt look that way now.

PS2 isn't off the hook, and I didn't want it to seem like Microsoft is the evil villian, because Sony has it's flaws too. They have some shoddy hardware issues. And the PSP is just a portable movie player, which no one really needs. I have yet to see a game that everyone can enjoy on it, save for usless ports (which, since GTA: LCS is going to Ps2, isnt even that big a deal anymore) And their spokesman saying "we're trying to take handheld gaming out of the ghetto." Wait... what? what ghetto. the gameboy is like one of the greatest gaming machines ever created, console or not. So I guess my beef with Sony would be their smugness. Kutaragi (sp.) saying "Our ideal is for consumers to think to themselves, 'OK, I'll work more hours and buy it. (Ps3)' We want people to feel that they want it, no matter what." I mean, is he serious. Why would you make a console that requires someone to work more hours to buy it? It's even estimated that they will actually STILL be losing profit on each PS3 sold. It's just insane how they are heading into next gen

that doesn't mean Nintendo gets off the hook either. they have really bummed me out. I actually enjoyed the GCN alot. But I mean, no DVD playback, no online except for a few games? What is their deal, they always seem to be behind in the times. And now they say that they wont support HD on the revolution. thats fine because HD isnt the standard yet, but really, why take the chance? if it came down to the games only, nintendo would win hands down, they have up and down, the best back catelogue and new franchises of the industry, but its about more than that. its about how much you're offering to the buyer. and nintendo always falls short in that deparment. their consoles always seem like the little brother of the main one. I'm worried the Rev wil be the same way. Hopefully not.

And i guess i may be jumping the gun on saying it will be "spectacular" but i do think it is going to be Revolutionary (pun, intended) The MGS4 trailer is incredible, and if thats what the PS3 can do, as a gamer, im excited. If Super Smash Bros is going to be a launch title and also Online capable. as a gamer, im VERY excited! I think we'll be fine this year. And if all else fails, we can always hook up the old good shit again.

 

[LMP]

We don't NEED Dead or Alive Volleyball

but it would be fun to have

 

[Canadiens1131]

We don't NEED Dead or Alive Volleyball

but it would be fun to have

Let me just pull this pillow over my lap...

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

Let me just pull this pillow over my lap...

 

[TheQuiet1]

i might get an xbox 360 only because i don't have an xbox anymore, but not until the price drops

That's really my problem with this whole industry- by the time a console drops to anything approaching a reasonable price it becomes obsolete by the next gen console and within a year the games for it are become increasingly hard to find.

As for the general state of the gaming industry...I think with certain genres there were significant improvements being made in terms of gameplay (The PS2 MoH games are a huge leap on the PSone ones, for example) but that's the problem, PS2 games only seemed to improve on PSone gameplay (as you'd expect); there was no real improvement in games as the console aged IMHO. Think about the blocky 3D graphics the PSone had on its release and compare it to what it had at its finish. You can't see that same progression with PS2 games, either in terms of graphics or gameplay.

The other major problem is the heavy focus on certain genres. There have been 'different' games on the PS2 ('A Dog's Life', a really cool RPG that I can't remeber the name of where you built your own world...etc) but the vast majority of games belonged to one of only a few genres. Which is great if you love FPS but not so good if you like, I dunno, platformers (In fact, the PS2 oversaw the deathknell of Crash and Spyro).

Basically I think the PS2 had a lot more potential than was actually fully explored by game developers and with the PS3 due out that potential will probably never be explored now as they turn their attention to the new console.

Am surprised about the XBox 360 reaction in the USA and Japan though, you can't get one for love nor money here.

 

[For Honor]

........... do you guys think I should retire my controllers and hang up the game playing?

I am almost compelled to do so, but maybe I'm just going about it in the wrong way these days.


DOA vollyball was an interesting game, for a while.

 

[Canadiens1131]

I've recently discovered the wonderful of emulators. Been geeking out on old SNES games like NHL 94, Super Mario All-Stars, and Star Fox all week.

Some of my favourite music has to be old videogame themes, hehe.

F-Zero

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

That's really my problem with this whole industry- by the time a console drops to anything approaching a reasonable price it becomes obsolete by the next gen console and within a year the games for it are become increasingly hard to find.

yep, exactly. i've got my xbox games so you'd think it'd make more sense for me to get an xbox, right? i mean, now that the xbox 360 is out, they're going to be really cheap. i can get a used one still under warranty so if something breaks, i'm okay.

but what if any new games interest me? i'm screwed. i'll have to get an xbox 360 and the cycle will repeat all over again in another few years. and i don't want my television to be overtaken by video game consoles.

I've recently discovered the wonderful of emulators. Been geeking out on old SNES games like NHL 94, Super Mario All-Stars, and Star Fox all week.

emulators

 

[catlhere]

Emulators ARE incredibly

Someone posted a Mario one.
Here's one for all you Legend Of Zelda
They have a forum and FAQ if anyone has trouble playing the games.
HAVE FUN!

http://www.zeldaclassic.com/

 

[daafish]

Here's a little video I found on another website. I heard it was rather old but still interesting to watch. Super Mario 64 completed in 16 minutes? Real or fake?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6493722340610946105

 

[hiphop]

Here's a little video I found on another website. I heard it was rather old but still interesting to watch. Super Mario 64 completed in 16 minutes? Real or fake?

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6493722340610946105

daafish

where have you been!!

 

[catlhere]

Ok well now that the Super Mario 64 speed run has been posted. I'll share one of the most frighteningly amazing performances of video game skill I've ever seen. Behold Super Mario Bros. 3 in 11 minutes.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7928820320977921267&q=mario+3

 

[TheQuiet1]

*I'm not letting this thread die, I know!*

11 minutes!!? It's taking me over 11 years! Speaking of NES, I found this: http://www.flashplayer.com/games/the8bitwizard.html

I scrapped just over half marks...not sure whether this is a good thing or not...

 

[RavenBlue]

I can't imagine getting through Mario 3 in 11 minutes. If you used the warp whistles.. I can see you getting to World eight probably in half an hour. But then you won't have many items.. and as we all know. World 8 in Mario 3 is.. very, very hard!

Now for an embarassing fact, I've never beat Mario 1. And I can't work on it as our SNES crapped out last year(was using All-stars). Looking around for a replacement as there are so many great games on that system.. and you can get them pretty cheap now ton the other hand I've beaten Super Mario World more times than I can count. I've gone through Mario 64 as well, but haven't collected all the stars. I remember reading somewhere that if you bounce off the castle walls and the green side that you can get up on the roof of the castle, and apparently, Yoshi is up there. Well let me tell you.... I tried this quite a few times and never made it to the roof. Anyone here ever try?

 

[unforgettableFOXfire]

If I recall, Raven, Yoshi is on the roof but using wall-jumps to get up there is nigh impossible. If I recall, there's a cannon outside the castle somewhere that you have to activate and then you can shoot yourself up there... but I haven't played through the game in years, so my memory is a little sketchy.

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

Emulators ARE incredibly

Someone posted a Mario one.
Here's one for all you Legend Of Zelda
They have a forum and FAQ if anyone has trouble playing the games.
HAVE FUN!

http://www.zeldaclassic.com/

how could i have missed this before! thanks!

I can't imagine getting through Mario 3 in 11 minutes. If you used the warp whistles.. I can see you getting to World eight probably in half an hour. But then you won't have many items.. and as we all know. World 8 in Mario 3 is.. very, very hard!

god, tell me about it. i knew how to get all the warp whistles and i always did but my god...world 8 made me cry back in the day i think finally at one point i did manage to beat that game as a kid. i know a couple years ago when i hooked up my nintendo i beat mario 1 and 3 (come to think of it, i don't know if i ever did get mario 2 - i got it for my gba and i thought it kinda sucked) but world 8 on mario 3 was just as hard as i remembered it being.

Now for an embarassing fact, I've never beat Mario 1.

i remember it was kinda difficult to make it past all the umm...stuff bowser was throwing (it's been a while since i've played. i forget what he throws in 8-4. fire? those spikey things?) but if you can navigate it past it and either jump over bowser when he's on the ground or run under him when he jumps (this was always my strategy at least, hehe) then you win

 

[catlhere]

1, Bowser throws hammers if i remember correctly.

2. I beat mario 1, and i agree that its most likely the hardest one of the bunch. mario 2 is pretty difficult at times, but the warps help alot.

3. most of these time attacks for games are probably tool-assisted. i dont see how anyone could want to go through 3 1/2 mins of stress without making a mistake. if u screw up once, youd go crazy and shoot someone. so they probably use a tool to help them play the game frame by frame, those exist. kinda cheap, but hey, still fun to watch the end where he jumps on the bombs over and over to get lives. genious.

4. Mega Man X Collection just came out, go buy it. its good. if you like MM that is.

 

[KhanadaRhodes]

1, Bowser throws hammers if i remember correctly.

2. I beat mario 1, and i agree that its most likely the hardest one of the bunch. mario 2 is pretty difficult at times, but the warps help alot.

ooh, i see

i thought mario 3 was harder but mario 2 just sucks