Judging Games

[Rockin' Rollin' Duelist]

Ok, I was asked why I felt the upcoming Mortal Kombat game is crap. I judge games based on a strict guidline of four main standards, Storyline, graphics, selection and gameplay. Let me take the time to explain each and how I view them, and tell why MK9 doesn't fit.

 

 

Storyline

***********

The key element in any and all video gaming. If the game doesn't have a good storyline, it isn't worth buying, much less renting. Whether it be a main storyline focusing on the game, or individual character stories, it is vital.

 

MK9 - The game's time travel storyline is crap. It isn't original and only shows that desperation has set in.

 

Good Example - Castlevania Series. This series brings the Dracula legend into a whole new light, introducing a family of hunters unknown to the world beforehand. It shows Dracula in a new light, and has an interesting, edge of your seat story that never disapoints.

 

 

Graphics

***********

To be classified as a good game, the game MUST have good graphics for the system it is on and the time it is made. Without this core staple, a game cannot begin to hope to be good.

 

MK9 - The graphics are basically a retooled, advanced version of the MK3 ones. For a game being released in this generation, the game should feature high quality 3D graphics, better than Armageddon's.

 

Good Example - Call of Duty series. I may not be a fan of most war based games, but I have to admit that the graphics for the Call of Duty series are amazingly realistic.

 

 

Selection

***********

What are your options? What can you do? Who can you be? Selection is very important in a game, as it focuses on the amount of usable content. When looking at a fighting game, people want a large roster of fighters with a massive collection of moves for each, and unlockables like you wouldn't believe.

 

MK9 - Basing off the first three games, the roster and moves will be severely lowered and made pointless. There won't be as many modes, stages or unlockables, which will cause the game to have very little purpose to it and become old fast.

 

Good Example - Tekken 6. A great roster of amazingly made characters, all with a perfect large move set. The game also has many unlockables and a lot of different ways to play.

 

 

Gameplay

************

A game isn't a game unless it can be played, and the ranking of a game is determined on how well a game can be played.

 

MK9 - Old style controls, not much to it, reptitive and old. This game is so simple, a monkey could play it.

 

Good Example - Assassin's Creed. A highly intricate game in terms of gameplay. Hard to master the controls and even harder to remember how to do everything necessary, making it a challenge which any true gamer would love.

 

 

Now, as I said, these are the ways I judge a game. If you don't agree with me, it's your choice and I won't try to change it. But I will not change my views either, and have always and will always judge games in this way.

[Lonk]

Graphics are overrated. I pick a game hoping it will have good gameplay.

 

End of Story.

[Guest Random Dude]

Gameplay and storyline are what makes up a game, the graphics can be pixelized 2d for all I care as long as the game itself is good and has a good storyline. Selection I only take into account in fighting games.

[Rockin' Rollin' Duelist]

Selection isn't too big in other genres (except maybe RPG's) but I disagree on graphics.

 

In my opinion, graphics are the core of video gaming. Gaming has become as big as it is because of the advancement in technology and the ability to make them look better.

 

Yes, storyline and gameplay are important, but you can't dismiss graphics either. I can't stand playing some of the older games because of how horrible they look, like the first three MK games. I want games like Halo 3, Call of Duty, Soul Calibur 4. Those kind of graphics. Or if the game is handheld, something as good as Pokemon HG & SS in RPG wise. The only game series still going with those horrible graphics that I can stand playing is Megaman. And Megaman 9 and 10 were amazing.

[Flame Dragon]

That is a really stupid thing to say. "graphics are the core of video gaming" what? A game can have graphics that makes everytihng look real but if the game play isn't there it's meaningless. Graphics are simply eye candy that only makes it look nice. Yea, you want games to look nice but if it doesn't it doesn't take a way much from the over all game. I've looked at the games graphics and they look fine.

 

It's shallow to judge people based on looks and the same goes for games cause if you call games with Megaman 9 and 10 level graphics horrible then your missing out on some of the best games ever made.

 

My problem is that your basing your review on a game that won't be out for another year. You can't review a game like that.

 

Your calling the controls, reptitive and old, but 1) how would you know that and 2) does it matter. Mario Galaxy's controls were the same basic ones that were started from the first 3D Mario game and it's one of the best games ever made. If the systems works you don't change. That rule goes for most old, big name series. And speaking from experience a monkey couldn't play any 2D fighter since to play them well you need to memorize what ever character you play button combo and controller stick turns.

 

Next is story. Who cares if the idea is reused. Avatar's plot is very much like Dances with Wolves and yet it is still the top gross film. Hell if the game play is good enough a game doesn't need any story. Look at Mario. And, from what I read, a retelling of the first 3 games seems like it could work as a good plot. you can't review it isnce you have no idea how it's going to work out.

 

And you can't say ANYTHING about the games selection since it isn't even out. All we know is that the final game will have around 26 characters which is a decent size list.

[Godot]

Graphics

***********

To be classified as a good game' date=' the game MUST have good graphics for the system it is on and the time it is made. Without this core staple, a game cannot begin to hope to be good.

[/quote']

 

Mega Man 1-6/9-10 have bad graphics, but are epic as hell.

[Twig]

Kindly read this whole thread.

 

Also, the Mario series have been using the same storyline over and over again, but it's still fun. There's a different rating system for every genre. Example: The storyline in an RPG might be important, but it's not really important in racing games.

[Headmaster Monokuma]

Graphics

***********

To be classified as a good game' date=' the game MUST have good graphics for the system it is on and the time it is made. Without this core staple, a game cannot begin to hope to be good.[/b']

 

Incorrect. Look at a certain game called Super Mario World. Sure, it has decent graphics, but they certainly aren't the best ever, and yet, it's still one of the best SNES games. Kirby Super Star, once again, decent graphics, not the best, and it's an epic game.

 

 

Gameplay

************

A game isn't a game unless it can be played' date=' and the ranking of a game is determined on how well a game can be played.

 

MK9 - Old style controls, not much to it, reptitive and old. This game is so simple, a monkey could play it.

 

Good Example - Assassin's Creed. A highly intricate game in terms of gameplay. Hard to master the controls and even harder to remember how to do everything necessary, making it a challenge which any true gamer would love.

[/quote']

 

This is the core of the game. If you can't control it, then it doesn't matter how good it looks. Second, simpler controls are often just as good, if not better, then complex. I personally don't want to spend days trying to memorize the games controls. Why do you think the Legend of Zelda, Mario, Super Smash Bros., and before you say that's Nintendo, Oblivion The Elder Scrolls are so much fun? Because it doesn't take days or weeks to learn the controls. A few minutes, and you're ready to go.

[Rockin' Rollin' Duelist]

Ok, everyone is citing examples of these older games like Zelda, Mario and Megaman. Maybe I didn't explain well enough, and I'm sorry.

 

I don't like it when new games are released with old graphics. Back when those games came out, it was fine because those were the graphics of the day. But if a new Zelda game were released with the same style of graphics as Majora's MAsk (the best Zelda game), then I wouldn't want it. I want to see new games have the biggest and best graphics possible. Twilight Princess was amazing.

 

Now, I do like Megaman 9/10, and they're the exception to this.

 

As for judging the new MK before it comes out, yes I think I can. Selection is horrible. Only 26 kharacters? That's not right. Some of the better kharacters are the newer ones, like Bo Rai Cho or Taven.

 

Graphics for MK9 to be around the same level as Deadly Alliance is a shame to video gaming. The graphics should be twice as good as Armageddon's at least.

 

Storyline is literally the most important part of any game (except those not meant to have a storyline). It should tell a new tale, something fresh and exciting. Like when Deadly Alliance came out and they killed off Liu Kang. The main kharacter of the MK franchise was killed off just like that. It's different and makes people want to see more. If you do the same storyline over and over, it gets repetitive and boring. Even the Mario games have different storylines nearly every time. (Oh, and Galaxy sucked, my opinion)

 

As for Gameplay, that's also big. It's not the most important though. I've played the Virtua Fighter games and have never been able to figure out the controls, even after looking at move lists. I basically do nothing but button mash because of the hard controls, and it's hard to fight with the more realistic fighting. Yet, it's one of the best fighting games out there, even though gameplay is bad. But you can also turn it around and look at Legend of Zelda Wind Waker. Amazing gameplay and controls. Horrible game overall. Windwaker ruined Zelda as we know it, yet the gameplay was fantastic.

 

I am very strict on how I view games. I take video gaming very seriously and try to enter tournaments whenever possible. I don't like it when games don't show off the current technlogy available.

[Godot]

I don't like it when new games are released with old graphics.

 

Mega Man 9/Mega Man 10.

[Toffee.]

I dont usually "judge" games until after I played it for a bit and/or it fits the things I like.

Gotcha force is a game of toy robots(this includes spaceships and transformers) that shoot the crap out of eachother, while collectiong them to add to your team.

 

Its like a Transformers+Pokemon+Starfox+massive explosions ftw sort of game.

 

Graphics

***********

To be classified as a good game' date=' the game MUST have good graphics for the system it is on and the time it is made. Without this core staple, a game cannot begin to hope to be good.

[/quote']

 

Mega Man 1-6/9-10 have bad graphics, but are epic as hell.

 

7 and 8 were epic too, right?

AND THE X SERIES IS TEH BEST.

[Headmaster Monokuma]

But you can also turn it around and look at Legend of Zelda Wind Waker. Amazing gameplay and controls. Horrible game overall. Windwaker ruined Zelda as we know it' date=' yet the gameplay was fantastic.

[/quote']

 

You can stop right there. WindWaker itself did not suck. It did something new relatively well. Sure, Tingle is a big bite on the butt, but the game itself was good. And no, it didn't ruin Zelda as we know it, that honor belongs to Phantom Hourglass, and even it wasn't too bad.

 

Games don't need to look like Okami to be able to stand up with other games. Simple graphics work well, and New Super Mario Bros. Wii shows that. Simple graphics, great game. You can't say that not having cutting edge graphics make the game bad, it's the controls that truly matter. There is a Super Mario World hack that shows this. Azura Chaotic. At least, something like that. It looks wonderful, great graphics, but they altered the controls so much that it isn't as fun anymore.

 

I do agree with Majora's Mask being the best Zelda game though, so I'll give you that.

[Flame Dragon]

Ok' date=' everyone is citing examples of these older games like Zelda, Mario and Megaman. Maybe I didn't explain well enough, and I'm sorry.

 

I don't like it when new games are released with old graphics. Back when those games came out, it was fine because those were the graphics of the day. But if a new Zelda game were released with the same style of graphics as Majora's MAsk (the best Zelda game), then I wouldn't want it. I want to see new games have the biggest and best graphics possible. Twilight Princess was amazing.

[b']What games have graphics like old games unless their going for that feel. FYI the best Zelda game is OoT.[/b]

 

Now, I do like Megaman 9/10, and they're the exception to this.

Please name other games that look like old games >_>.

 

As for judging the new MK before it comes out, yes I think I can. Selection is horrible. Only 26 kharacters? That's not right. Some of the better kharacters are the newer ones, like Bo Rai Cho or Taven.

Yes it is. 26 characters is a lot. Melee had the same number and that is one of the best fighting games ever made. Brawl has 35, several of which are copies of other characters making it less. Street Fighter 4 has 25. It's not the number but the quality. And how can you say they won't be in the game. Also the older characters are the classic ones and better known ones.

 

Graphics for MK9 to be around the same level as Deadly Alliance is a shame to video gaming. The graphics should be twice as good as Armageddon's at least.

You telling me

This =

This.

What? Not only those graphics are perfectly fine, but your stupid to think the two are the same.

 

Storyline is literally the most important part of any game (except those not meant to have a storyline). It should tell a new tale, something fresh and exciting. Like when Deadly Alliance came out and they killed off Liu Kang. The main kharacter of the MK franchise was killed off just like that. It's different and makes people want to see more. If you do the same storyline over and over, it gets repetitive and boring. Even the Mario games have different storylines nearly every time. (Oh, and Galaxy sucked, my opinion)

A game doesn't need a big plot twist to be good. Also when has MK ever done a look back? I can't fine any. The main Mario games have had the same basic plot every time. Even the RPGs center around saving Peach. You really need to stop tihnking with your ass. I'm sorry but BOTH Galaxy games are ranked as number 2 and 3 in terms of reviews. Only OoT is higher. So yea, it's your opinion, but it means crap when only 1 person thinks it out of 100.

 

O, fun fact, fighting games are the type of games that have little need for any real story. Hell you can sell any of the CoD games with out a story mode and I'll put money on them doing just as well.

As for Gameplay, that's also big. It's not the most important though. I've played the Virtua Fighter games and have never been able to figure out the controls, even after looking at move lists. I basically do nothing but button mash because of the hard controls, and it's hard to fight with the more realistic fighting. Yet, it's one of the best fighting games out there, even though gameplay is bad. But you can also turn it around and look at Legend of Zelda Wind Waker. Amazing gameplay and controls. Horrible game overall. Windwaker ruined Zelda as we know it, yet the gameplay was fantastic.

How is game play not the most important? Please tell me. If the game play is bad the game is bad. The game play makes the game because it's the set up for how you play it. Thats why it's called GAMEPLAY >_>. How is Virtua Fighter one of the best Fighting games? The reviews for it are not good. People like it even less.

 

I'm going to call you an idiot again. WW has a an average review rating of 9.5 and the general people give it a 8.7 so again 1% of people think it's a horrible game and who cares about them.

 

I am sorry for calling you and idiot so many times but you really are not using your brain

[Sixty]

But you can also turn it around and look at Legend of Zelda Wind Waker. Amazing gameplay and controls. Horrible game overall. Windwaker ruined Zelda as we know it' date='[/s'] yet the gameplay was fantastic.

 

You pretty much ruined your own argument.

 

har har.

[Twig]

Ok' date=' everyone is citing examples of these older games like Zelda, Mario and Megaman. Maybe I didn't explain well enough, and I'm sorry.

 

I don't like it when new games are released with old graphics.

 

[b']I have to agree. New games should have graphics that are decent for the system it's on, but it doesn't have to be super amazing. The PS3 and XBOX360 have better graphics than Wii, but Wii has sold more if not equal than the PS3 and XBOX360.[/b]

 

Back when those games came out, it was fine because those were the graphics of the day. But if a new Zelda game were released with the same style of graphics as Majora's MAsk (the best Zelda game), then I wouldn't want it. I want to see new games have the biggest and best graphics possible. Twilight Princess was amazing.

 

Let me ask you something. Which is a better video game? A game with amazing graphics but horrible gameplay, or a game with okay graphics with amazing gameplay?

 

Now, I do like Megaman 9/10, and they're the exception to this.

 

As for judging the new MK before it comes out, yes I think I can. Selection is horrible. Only 26 kharacters? That's not right. Some of the better kharacters are the newer ones, like Bo Rai Cho or Taven.

 

Graphics for MK9 to be around the same level as Deadly Alliance is a shame to video gaming. The graphics should be twice as good as Armageddon's at least.

 

I don't know much about MK, so I can't say anything.

 

Storyline is literally the most important part of any game (except those not meant to have a storyline). It should tell a new tale, something fresh and exciting. Like when Deadly Alliance came out and they killed off Liu Kang. The main kharacter of the MK franchise was killed off just like that. It's different and makes people want to see more. If you do the same storyline over and over, it gets repetitive and boring. Even the Mario games have different storylines nearly every time. (Oh, and Galaxy sucked, my opinion)

 

As far as I know, Mario has had the same storyline except if you include the spinoffs. Bowser kidnaps Peach. Mario goes and saves Peach.

 

As for Gameplay, that's also big. It's not the most important though. I've played the Virtua Fighter games and have never been able to figure out the controls, even after looking at move lists. I basically do nothing but button mash because of the hard controls, and it's hard to fight with the more realistic fighting. Yet, it's one of the best fighting games out there, even though gameplay is bad. But you can also turn it around and look at Legend of Zelda Wind Waker. Amazing gameplay and controls. Horrible game overall. Windwaker ruined Zelda as we know it, yet the gameplay was fantastic.

 

The gameplay is the most important part! The gameplay is the part where you actually get to interact with the game! Take out the graphics, that's fine! As long as everything looks fine! Take out the story, that's fine! I don't buy video games so I can watch movies! Take out the gameplay, and what do you have? Nothing! It wouldn't be called a game without the gameplay.

 

I am very strict on how I view games. I take video gaming very seriously and try to enter tournaments whenever possible. I don't like it when games don't show off the current technlogy available.

 

So whenever a game gets old, you start to hate it? While you just throw away your old games, true gamers treasure them and play them time to time even if it's old. In fact, in youtube, many do LP's of old games.

 

What matters is how much you're having fun. As long as you're having fun, the graphics and maybe the story doesn't matter.

[Rockin' Rollin' Duelist]

Everyone has their opinions. This is mine.

 

I like it that you're all sticking up for your beliefs on the matter, but you can't make me think any different. Nothing you could possibly say could make me change my mind.

 

Wind Waker was a horrible game, as was the two others that were made the same way.

 

And those screenshots posted of the MK9 proves my point that the graphics are horrible for a game coming out in 2010.

 

Also, I don't look at how games are rated by people, game magazines or whatever. I go based on what I have seen or played. It's like Avatar having huge box office success but being a horrible movie.

 

It's all about making it look good before relase and when it comes out it can't live up to the standards that people were expecting.

[Sixty]

Gee whiz, I'm sure you'll hate the new Zelda game that's coming out, since it has cel-shading too. :/

[Flame Dragon]

I like it that you're all sticking up for your beliefs on the matter' date=' but you can't make me think any different. Nothing you could possibly say could make me change my mind.

[b']Yes you can, the fact that you haven't tried to defend your opinion just means you can't. When your argument is poor it becomes other people jobs to make you start thinking.[/b]

 

And those screenshots posted of the MK9 proves my point that the graphics are horrible for a game coming out in 2010.

How are those graphics bad? They look perfectly fine to me and 99% of other people. And compaired to other fighting games, Street Fighter IV looks just as good.

 

Also, I don't look at how games are rated by people, game magazines or whatever. I go based on what I have seen or played. It's like Avatar having huge box office success but being a horrible movie.

You should because it normally does speak for how good the game is. If 99% of people like it it's a good game

 

And now I'm locking this. I was going to lock it when I first posted, but since I wanted to how it turned out I didn't. Now that I have I'm happy.

 

Lock

 

My reason was what I said in my first post. You can't review a game that isn't out when 3/4 of your reivew is based on stuff that you can only fully get when you've played the game.