Josh H

I guess it just depends on what you like when forming your opinion on a systems line-up.

I don't like PC type games (FPS, american style RPGs, RTS), most racing games, or the Sega games that are coming to the X-box (JSF, Shenmue II) so it's line-up doens't appeal to me.

The Gamecube is the best fit for me because I love their first and second party franchises and they're getting all the big sports games and Resident Evil so I'm all set.

The PS2 would be my second system if I had the money because their are a number of exclusives that I'd like to have (Maximo, GTA3, GT3, Jak and Daxter, FFX, MGS2, Devil May Cry, etc.)
However, factually, the PS2 is the only system that offers something for everyone at the moment.

However, you can take a factual look at the line-ups, on the future and the horizon.

The X-box is catering to the PC Gamer and niche dreamcast crowds that bought a DC for the quirky titles like Jet Grind Radio and Shenmue, while the GCN is catering to the "kiddy" crowd.

If either system wants to make even a half decent attempt to catch the PS2, they need to expand their line-up to cover more genres. The X-box needs some platformers, some traditional RPGs, etc. The Gamecube needs some "mature" games (Resident Evil and Eternal Darkness is a good start, but no where near enough), some FPS's and some traditional RPGs.

Looking at the Gamecube and X-box line-ups objectively (putting personal genre preferences aside) they're about equal. Neither one is very good from the stand point of offering something for everyone like the PS2 does.

Subjectively, (with my genre preferences) I think the Gamecubes is great and the X-box's sucks. I have and love Rogue Leader, Wave Race, Smash Bros: Melee, Super Monkey Ball, Tony Hawk 3, Madden 2002, and NBA Street. Of those 4 are exclusive. As for upcoming games this year I can't wait for Star Fox, Mario, Zelda, Resident Evil and Metroid, and will be keeping an eye on Eternal Darkness and Turok.

On the X-box Halo is the only game out or announced that I really want, and even it isn't a must buy as I don't like FPS all that much. But of course we know almost nothing about what MS has up their sleeves for E3, where Nintendo has already released a bunch of info on most of their upcoming games.

But again, that's just my opinion and arguing opinions is pretty silly. Different strokes for different folks. Taking opinions out of it, both the GCN and X-box line-up are equally lacking in terms of variety when compared to the PS2 line-up, they're just lacking in different areas.

Stoolie

Hardware issues. Does this mean more trouble for X-box. I'm not getting into the silly debate (I'm happy with my Gamecube and PS2, and would like to play the Xbox for a while before I form any real opinions), but it does seem like Xbox is fighting an uphill battle in Japan.

http://gamespot.com/gamespot/stories...852421,00.html

stoolie

Groucho

What's interesting is that both consoles are missing elements that the other console has, and they are both fighting for 2nd and 3rd place against the Sony.

I wouldn't be surprised if in the next generation Microsoft and Nintendo joined forces. Microsoft largely on the hardware side, Nintendo on the software side (and developing a compatable next generation Gameboy alongside). This would be quite a powerhouse...if they could convince Sega to develop exclusively for them, you'd have a very interesting two console war.

One of the NOA execs has just defected to Microsoft, so who knows?

ipkevin

Does anyone have system sales figures for the last few years? I I recall reading in Next Gen magazine a couple of years ago that the North American videogame market had become bigger than the Japanese one. I wonder if X-Box will become have a reverse PC Engine situation. ie, Popular enough in America to survive, but pretty much dead in Japan.

Incidentally, you guys realise that first person viewpoint games encompass many genres, right? It's just a way of presenting the action. If you're gonna start lumping them all together, you may as well as start railing against those "stupid" games that use polygons.

Josh H

Um everyone, as far as I know, has used the abbreviation FPS which stands for First Person Shooter, one genre of game that uses a first person perspective.

ipkevin

Well, statements such as:

suggest that FPS is being used as a catch-all term for any first person game that has any action elements. Either that, or they've never bothered to take a more than cursory glance at PC or American games, in which case I don't see how they can make such sweeping declarations about them.

Fatman

I just have a question. What's the difference between a US RPG and a Japanese RPG? Can someone give me examples of maybe some computer rpg games or older rpg games.

Josh H

Nope it doesn't suggest that at all. FPS always means first person shooter. Sure PC games and American Developers do more than FPS, RTS, and RPG, but that's just the 3 areas they do the best, and the most often. That's why you see that stereotype against PC games and American Developers. It's the only genres that PC games have an advantage over the consoles. Sure they have a few platformers and fighting games, but nine times out of ten they're better on the Console. Just like nine times out of ten the FPS and RTS games are better on the PC.

The same goes for American developers. They do platformers, fighters, etc, but the FPS, RTS, etc seems to be the only thing they do consistently better than the Japanese developers.

Grimfarrow

No. FPS = First Person Shooter. And considering that I've played PC games since the heydays of Starflight, M.U.L.E., and King's Quest I, I'd say that I have WAY more than a "cursory glance" at PC games. And the generalization is definitely TRUE, since I don't care much for FIRST-PERSON SHOOTERS, and I WAS speaking about my own preferences. The only one that I finished was Half-Life, and even that was a chore for me (although I've played a bunch, from Counter Strike, Doom, Heretic, Descent, Return to Wolfenstein, etc.)

Comprehension is key here.

AgtFox

*Puts on DA (Devil's Advocate) gear*. With that out of the way, the poster was talking about upcoming games and their PC portness. To some degree these games are a "port" in the fact that there is an X-Box and PC version of the game coming but which one was actually worked on first or which engine does the base game actually come from:

Elder Scrolls: Morrowind
Medal of Honor: Allied Assault
Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic
Duke Nukem Forever (should it EVER come out)
Unreal Championship (built on the Unreal 2 PC engine)

There are more that have not been announced yet more than likely.

*Pulls off DA gear*. And then there are the X-Box exclusives obviously. However they may not be great to everyone. The X-Box has a wide variety of games and I've found that in many cases someones golden egg game is someone else's crap game and vice versa. I have never seen the vastly different opinions on games for a console like I have on the X-Box. For example some people think Wreckless is crap while some think it is the best thing since sliced bread (yes, I'm exaggerating. But you see my point?).

That's all from me and GP don't let this non-game owner bother you .

Tuan Jim

Japanese RPG = Final Fantasy, Xenogears, Dragon Warrior, Chrono Trigger

US RPG = Fallout, Baldurs Gate, Planescape, Elder Scrolls, Betrayal at Krondor

My Generalizations
US RPGs -- Deep, in depth stories, freedom in character development, freedom in movement across world, dialog, very replayable, etc.

Japanese RPGS -- big on eye candy, simple battle systems, limited movement, character development, limited replay value, etc.

That's not to say I don't love sitting down with a Final Fantasy type game every now and then. Heck, right now I'm playing Skies of Arcadia on my friend's dreamcast (Grandia II next). Still, I'd take a Fallout type game over Final Fantasy any day of the week, which is why I'm waiting with bated breath for Morrowind and Project Ego.

Tuan Jim

darkside

I don't fully agree with the RPG comparisions. I've yet to play a US RPG I liked. They have no play value for me much less replay value. Most of you negatives on Japanese RPGs seem to center mostly on Final Fantasy and that is a very small part of the Japanese RPG genre.

Many Rpgs like Chrono Trigger have high replay value through multiple endings and others like Panzer Dragoon Saga have battle systems unmatched by any PC Rpg game. The Strategy RPGs like Shining Force and Ogre Battle are also very deep in gameplay. Many RPGs like the Lunar series have very good stories. Not to mention all the great unique RPGs that are made like Thousand Arms and Paper Mario that can really not be compared to anything else. Not every Japanese RPG is made like Final Fantasy and I do agree that Final Fantasy is not the perfect RPG. Dragon Warrior VII has game play and depth unmatched by any game I've played and it does it with no eye candy. My opinion of course, but I thought the other side of the coin should be mentioned.

ScandalUMD

I wouldn't describe the disparity in quite the same way. I admit, the love stories and sappy songs in the Final Fantasy games can be squirm-worthy, but their tighter control over the story makes for a more cohesive and compelling narrative.

In the American games, you have more of an opportunity to "play a role" in the sense that the story gives you more options. Also, I would not say that the tabletop RPG inspired battle systems frequently seen in American RPGs are necessarily better than the systems in Japanese games. The Final Fantasy games offer some compelling and strategic battles.

The American games can be a lot of fun, and offer a lot in the sense of character customization, but the player's ability to interact with the world is still very limited, because all the other characters are fundamentally limited in how they can respond to the player. Multiplayer RPGs attempt to fix this, but they end up being dominated by players who literally live in the games to the exclusion of all else, and the sense of playing a role is shattered by people who behave badly. These games end up being glorified chat rooms, which is why I look suspiciously at FFIX and the Star Wars RPG.

As for Morrowind, I don't know much about it. Project Ego is the game that just might make me have to buy an XBox, though I expect XBox to cost at least $100 less by the time the game comes out.

Molyneux has a reputation for ambitious projects, and Project Ego certainly is one, however Black and White was pushed back nearly a year and a half from its original release date, and, in the end, shipped without many of the features originally planned because they were impractical to implement. My reservation is that Molyneux will shift development back to the PC from the XBox when the next generation of video cards offers a great deal of new features, and his game is starting to look dated.

Project Ego promises to be an enthralling game that offers the players to shape the world around them in ways never before imagined. We'll see how robust it actually is when it comes out, but I have high hopes for the game.

Tuan Jim

IMO, that sounds like a description of a Japanese RPG. I've never had an option in any of the games I've played (beyond the occasional 1/2 choice questions like in Skies of Arcadia) to respond to characters using different dialog options. None of the Japanese games I've played have ever allowed any real sense of interaction with the world aside from little games here and there and whatnot. Not the same sense of setting and mood. I've never played a game that let me choose what to say (out of 5 or 6 answers multiple times in each conversation) where the NPCs react differently with each response (also dependent on stats) and change the course of the game. IMO, I like having the freedom of a turn-based, hex-based combat grid, rather than one where battlefield position means little or nothing. Personally I guess I prefer the whole "tabletop" derived system of battle where standing closer with a gun gives me a better chance of hitting, much less dealing damage to an enemy than standing a long way away.

Incidentally, although I don't play it anymore (mostly time concerns), I'll never forget some of those moments in Asheron's Call. Walking up to a hilltop overlooking an ocean cliff -- watching the sunset. The total interaction and setting there -- regardless of the crappy graphics -- is really something I'm not sure I'd be able to find anywhere else. Course I play MMORPG's more for the exploring (solo) than the socializing anyways. That's one big world and if you see it in the distance, you can get there (with some exceptions).

Tuan Jim

ipkevin

You completely missed my point.

I *know* what the FPS acronym stands for. What I'm saying is they *excel* at more than just FPS, RTS, and RPG genres. Specifically, that there are first person viewpoint games which are neither shooters nor RPGs, yet which are popular and have been consistently produced by American/PC developers for years. But which of FPS, RTS, or RPG do they fall into?

SO, (here comes my point) when someone comments that US/PC developers generally only do well in those 3 genres, I have to wonder: Has that person just rolled all those various first person games into the FPS term? (very common in my experience) Or is he just so out of touch and/or desperate to have things fit his worldview that he'll ignore entire genres to do so?

And if someone is going to try to tell me the likes of Deus Ex, System Shock 2, Thief 2, and Wheel of Time are all just first person shooters, then Resident Evil, Metal Gear Solid and Sonic are all the same, just 3D platformers and this discussion should end so we can all go back to our fairytale mushroom lands.



Incidentally, I'd argue that 3rd person 3D games (adventure, action, what have you) are just as popular and widely-made in the West as they are in the East. Pioneering PC games like Alone in the Dark and Tomb Raider were as groundbreaking as Metal Gear Solid. I really don't understand why the PC/Western influence on these types of games isn't as widely recognized...

ipkevin

Indeed it is, so please see my above post and begin comprehending.

Tuan Jim

Yep, Alone in the Dark was THE first Survival Horror game. Too bad the controls are so bad for 4. I might still pick it up at gogamer (under $10 now IIRC).

Tuan Jim

Grimfarrow

I'm not sure you even understood what you wrote.

The games you mentioned as "not fitting into FPS standards", like Thief and System Shock 2, are owned by me. And yes, I like them a lot. But they are NOT THE NORM. In fact, THEY ARE NOT FPS. They are more like RPGs than shooters.

They are exceptions to the No One Lives Forever 2, Aliens vs. Predator 2, Return to Castle Wonlfenstein, Serious Sam 2, Medal of Honor, Jedi Knight 2, Soldier of Fortune 2, Duke Nuken Forever, Unreal 2, ad nauseum. I don't have any interest in any of them. If you *cannot* understand such a simplistic idea, I don't know what you can do.

When great companies like Looking Glass and Sir-Tech can't survive, it's time for me to forget about PC gaming.

jeffdsmith

Interesting point.

keithf25

Alone in the dark was made by the French, and Tomb Raider was made by Core Designs, (simultaneously on the PC and PSX) who are English. In my post, I was specifically stating that US PC developers mostly excel at FPSs, RTS, and RPG games. Most of the current XBox support is from American PC developers. If we are going to split 'western developers' into US and European groups, I would rank European developers over American in overall quality.

darkside

Rare alone proves this.