Right now i'm playing Final Fantasy Tactics (PS1) and FFT Advance (GBA), Perfect Dark (N64) and Beyond Good and Evil (Got the GC one, thanks to Ryan).
I totally agree with the letter to fanboys, i'm the type of person that cheers for every football team. I have no favorite director either; I drink every type of coffee in every way possible since I dont have a favorite way of drinking it and I never buy clothes based on whether I like it or not; I just buy all of them. I smoke every brand of cigarettes and I have never had a favorite composer.
I live on a higher plane than fanboys where I make sure that I never develop a specific taste or have a personal identity since hobbies in reality, as we all know, have nothing to do with personal taste or identity. We should love every game and be excited about every company. I mean, what's the difference between a game produced by Nintendo or one produced by EA? Nothing, they might as well be the same companies. In fact, since everything in the market is so similar (and since we're smart and dont have a favorite anything) all of the companies should combine in to one and make every game a multiple engine action adventure fighter puzzler racing FPS flight sim MMORPG - That way, when i'm older I can look back and see how wonderful my hobby was because I never developed any sense of what I like and what I want to spend my money on.
this new 'anti fanboy' mentality is retarded. I hate EA because they suck and everyone knows it. Yes, some games slip by like Beyond and Evil but the other 99% lick wang. The PS1 and PS2 are the most horrible hardware designs in history which means they malfunction if you look at them funny and what the hell is up with the 3 different ways to turn the system on? I play a shit ton of video games to find what I like and after playing for 22 years on every system that has hit the market it turns out that Nintendo makes my favorite games; Fucking sue me.
I almost agreed with you there until you went sarcastic lazy.
Perhaps you misunderstand.
The idea isn't to like EVERYTHING equally, but to ignore brand and ONLY go on personal taste.
Basically, the idea is to avoid being endoctrined by any company and use rational thought to decide on things. That is to say, when a company does something stupid, be fully willing to call them on it. When you were wrong, be willing to accept it when presented with sufficient evidence.
Basically, you seem to assume that the position is one of "never ever have an opinion ever". Rather, it's that the way some people form their opinions is fundamentally flawed (and it IS) and they need to learn basic logical concepts that transcend through EVERYTHING they will EVER think. And yes, the methods of logic themselves are not above question, but the problem lies in that in order to show the superiority of a new logical method which leads to much better accuracy in discerning systems that accuratly describe reality, they would need to be tested BY those methods.
I USED to be a fanboy. Ryan can certainy attest to this, as we butted heads when he himself was a fanboy. Nowadays, my fanboyism has faded. I still rate Nintendo on the top of my lit of developers and my GameCube game collection is far larger than my PS2 one. Although now I enjoy my PS2 just as much as my GC and the one game I can safely estimate I have played for the longest cumulative amount of time is on the PS2 (Final Fantasy X).
Looking back, my closed-mindedness was foolish and even borderline insane, but that was just how I felt. Luckily, I eventually came to my senses to become, simply, a gamer.
You're not getting it lazy.
There's nothing wrong with liking the kind of games Nintendo makes more than other companies. That's not a fanboy. A fanboy is someone who can
ONLY like games released for their console of choice and then goes on to deride games released for the other systems and anyone who plays them. We're talking about the kind of people where if "Game X" came out for their system they would call it the best game ever but if it came out on "System Y" they wouldn't even give it a chance, maybe play it for 10 minutes and decide it's crap and not worth their time.
Tell me, is behaviour like this not immature and idiotic:
Quote:It makes perfect sense to insult a company's lineup one moment and at the same time hope that company will go third party and develop for your console the next.
Quote:A sequel on another console is a "rehash," while a sequel on your console is not; in fact, it's highly anticipated.
Quote:Innovation is what it's called when your console has a unique feature. Otherwise, it's called a gimmick.
So you see there's nothing wrong with liking Nintendo more than the other videogame companies because you prefer the type of games they make.
* It is however immature to mock and deride someone because they chose a different system than you. There's nothing wrong with mocking and deriding someone who exhibits this kind of behaviour themselves though, they deserve it. :D
*Though I do suspect that at least part of the reason you prefer Nintendo is because of an emotional attachment to the company that formed early on and helped shape your taste in videogames.
But that's not what these anti-fanboys are saying. They say love everything, hate nothing. If I say I love Nintendo games I get branded a fanboy. When I got pissed off that MGS is 3 hours long I was branded a fanboy. This anti-fanboy mentality is forming because of one major reason. For the first time since, hmm, forever? There are 3 successful systems on the market. It's not Nintendo Vs. Sega or Nintendo Vs. Sony, it's 3 systems playing king of the hill. When it was N64 Vs. PS2 Vs. Dreamcast the DC took a major spill at the starting gate, it was like the universe couldn't deal with 3 major consoles at once and removed Segas. The XBox, for some reason beyond my grasp has actually stayed in the running and gained ground. Dont tell me it's because of online games because only 15% of console gamers (something like 50% to 60% for PC) play online (in the US). I'll have to go dig around for the numbers but if you took the number of XBox owners (USA) and the number of people who use XBox Live (USA) you end up with a 7% margin of people in the united states who play online with their XBox. They still keep gaining ground though regardless of the fact that we're talking about a system with 5 exclusive games out of its entire library.
PS2 I can understand, cheaper, more games (more genres), higher installed user base from PS1 (making transition to new hardware easier) topped with the cool factor and killer ads. Whoopay, it makes a hell of alot more sense than the XBox still floating around.
Wow ranted.
It makes perfect sense to insult a company's lineup one moment and at the same time hope that company will go third party and develop for your console the next.
Weren't you the one bitching the most when some sports God was traded to some other team? I dont follow sports at all but you were pissed about it because you wanted him to be on 'your' team, but after you calmed down you finally realized that "he sucked anyway." I'm not saying you're wrong or anything, but yes, it makes perfect sense to get angry at a company for not releasing Burnout 3 or Revenge on other consoles and call them idiots for doing so.
A sequel on another console is a "rehash," while a sequel on your console is not; in fact, it's highly anticipated.
A sequel to Harry Potter: Adventures in Harmionie's Budding Bush should not be anticipated as much as a new Zelda or FF game. although.... I would actually really like.... anticipate...... nevermind.
Innovation is what it's called when your console has a unique feature. Otherwise, it's called a gimmick.
This is directly talking about the Eye Toy. The Eye Toy is a gimmick like it or not it's not even a damn game much less a collection of mini games like Wario Ware but atleast you get the satisfaction of playing old school games on the latter. The Power Glove was a gimmick, the E-Reader is a gimmick and the Eye Toy is the definition of gimmick. The only innovative things this past generation were XBox's Live! and Nintendo's handheld to console hookups and wireless RF controllers. Everything else was a God damn gimmick until someone makes a worthwhile leap in to using those gimmick's in cohesive gameplay or hardware builds.
YEAH, TAKE IT, TAKE IT ALL, PAIN, IN YOUR FACE and other things that involve me holding down shift, etc.
lazyfatbum Wrote:But that's not what these anti-fanboys are saying. They say love everything, hate nothing.
Nobody is saying that!
What they're saying is do not judge a game by the console it's on, judge the game by it's own merits.
Quote:Weren't you the one bitching the most when some sports God was traded to some other team? I dont follow sports at all but you were pissed about it because you wanted him to be on 'your' team, but after you calmed down you finally realized that "he sucked anyway."
I don't follow sports. I couldn't ever get into it because
I don't care who wins! :D I never formed an emotional attachment to any team.
Quote:I'm not saying you're wrong or anything, but yes, it makes perfect sense to get angry at a company for not releasing Burnout 3 or Revenge on other consoles and call them idiots for doing so.
But that point seemed directly aimed at people who one moment talk about how much Nintendo games suck and the next talk about how they want Nintendo to go third-party and develop for their console.
Quote:A sequel to Harry Potter: Adventures in Harmionie's Budding Bush should not be anticipated as much as a new Zelda or FF game. although.... I would actually really like.... anticipate...... nevermind.
But it's not
just the bad games that get slammed as being "rehashes". It's any sequel that's not on the fanboys console of choice.
Quote:This is directly talking about the Eye Toy.
Really? The first thing I thought of was the Nintendo DS. So many people have slammed it as being merely a gimmick.
Any of these examples could of been from fanboys of any of the current consoles. (Well except for the third-party one) I've seen pretty much all of these examples at one time or another.
It's not [Insert console here] fans that are the problem. It's people who take it to the next level. These people believe that liking their console of choice isn't enough, they must also hate any other current console, it's games and it's fans. And in trying to "prove" their system is the best they create some of the most idiotic and sometimes very amusing "debates" on the internet.
I will say now that my favorite series of games, if I had to pick, would be Zelda. I've always been much more drawn into the latest game in that series than whatever else I may like at the time. I do think Nintendo is one of the best game deveopers of all time. However, I reached that decision based not on them simply BEING Nintendo, but on the fact that I like their games. Since I used the latter, it lets me enjoy all sorts of games for other systems, that is, if they are in fact something I would enjoy.
That's not to say that brand name is not an indicator of quality at all. If a company gives nothing but gems, then it is reasonable to expect the next game they produce to also be a gem and really look forward to it (Rare, Blizzard). However, the important thing is that the fact that games in the past have been great should not BLIND you to when all of a sudden that changes. A skeptical attitude is to always pay attention to any new data presented and change your views according to the data, rather than "changing the data" (as if that's possible) to fit your views. So, if all of a sudden a company like Rare releases Star Fox Adventures and it is lackluster, then they can no longer be considered a company that ALWAYS produces awesome games. Rather, they must now be viewed as a company that MOSTLY produces awesome games, except that last one. (Of course since tastes are subjective, some may have truly loved SFA, and more power to them, I'm just saying be honest with yourself.)
Basically I'm stating common sense we already know. So, no big deal.
Also, it's never a good idea to out and out villafy a company without some evidence to show they really ARE evil.
There's a basic ethical rule of thumb to follow. Never assume malicious intent so long as accident is still a viable alternative. By that, if a company produces a flawed product, do not assume they were actually intent on releasing a flawed device knowingly until you actually have sufficient evidence to make it unreasonable to believe otherwise. Fanboys, as generally defined, fail to do this. They see every single thing done by "the enemy" as a sign of their evil, even though in fact they have no evidence to show they really were being malicious. They believe already that the company is evil and so when that company screws up, they believe they have the proof right there. There is a serious logical flaw there of course.
Smoke-X Wrote:Nobody is saying that! What they're saying is do not judge a game by the console it's on, judge the game by it's own merits.
But I should be excited by all sequels? I should never expect a certain company to produce a certain quality game? You're saying it's wrong for me to hate a company or hate a game?
I do see your point though but then that destroys the entire scope of the conversation as Nintendo develops games and hardware. While Sony and MS develop games internaly they are far and few between and usually nothing to write home about. That isn't opinion; Most if not all SCEA or MS developed games, even if good in premise, are loaded with flaws be it gameplay mechanics or just quality in coding. These aren't my words, it's IGN's, EGM's, etc. who consistently rate Sony and MS internally developed games at below average scores with the occasional gem (God of War) that still isn't up to par with say Capcom, Square or Nintendo.
Sony and MS get a + 1 for their effort but it's still a borderline useless operation. When you think hardware and software developer the only thing that comes to mind that doesn't make you wince is Nintendo. Taking that, you shouldn't produce a mentality of "We should judge games based on the game's alone and not which platform it's on." Companies know this and that's why they bid for exclusives or internally develop.
It's obvious that being a out-right fanboy is stupid but being an anti-fanboy is just as dumb. Of course you will always play one side, of course you will always pray for the home team and hope the visiting team loses, it's called having a sense of identity and having fun with how you enjoy your hobby. Ultimately what games you play are the direct result of what system you own and regardless of personal opinion no one on earth has the money AND time to play every current gen game on every current gen system on the market; It's a rediculous notion. If you take game playing seriously as a hobby you have to apply your time and money to one current gen system, anything else is just taking a break from your main console and game of choice. trying to blanket the entire current gen spectrum you would end up playing dozens of games a month and never fully enjoying any of them. Does that make sense?
In this hobby, you have to settle in to one console and of course because of that everyone thinks they picked the 'right console' to grab hold of and this eventually leads to debates and arguments over which console which is the best based on dozens of varying factors when all it comes down to is that Nintendo is the best - always will be and everything else is dog shit.
*dances*
You assume I actually do root for the "home team".
However, the thing is, ratings from IGN or whoever are just opinions. Opinions some people are paid to write, but still just opinions. So, in the end no, I wouldn't say that you can ever establish as fact such things as that. I'm not saying it's wrong to have an opinion, I'm just saying that it's not scientifically testable.
It's testicle and i'll prove it.
It's the only "official" gauge we have when it comes to passing judgement on video games and hardware (unfortunately). The good news is that there's different flavors of websites, you'd get a more in-depth review of RE4, for example, at a high-class survival horror based website than you would at IGN... usually. At the very least, th specific sites can gauge a game with an eye at its genre, unlike IGN which reviews all games/all systems.
Having said that, it still stands that reviews of internally developed Sony and MS games are akin to used toilet paper.
Well when it comes to hardware, you can make actual scientific tests on the capabilities of it and get all the data you need. Now, if two different pieces of hardware you are compairing each have distinct features, then it comes down to which feature you yourself prefer, and the science is gone. But, usually in the case of something like a video card the numbers will tell you exactly what the stats are. From there, you can go with the standard preference for the one that has better stats. If you prefer hardware with worse stats, I can't think of a single scientific reason to say that's a bad thing, but I can say with evidence that yes, it does perform more slowly than the other one. All things being equal, this one isn't equal.
And IGN are shit for reviews.
1.0 - 8.9: Crap
9.0 - 9.6: Good
9.7 - 10: Great
A lot of the Sony's first and second parties games aren't too great, but Mark of Kri was pretty good and ICO was amazing. Plus, there's Shadow of the Colosus coming out in September.
I don't think it really matters how good Sony's first party efforts are when they get the majority of 3rd party games. If a great game were 1st party rather than 3rd would that somehow make it a better game? That said the quality of their internal output has increased greatly since the PSX era.
You dont understand my point, Nintendo is the only company that consistently generates high quality hardware and software. 2 games from Sony's internal development that are better than average or even great games are not what I would call comparable data. The fact that Nintendo generates both high quality hardware and software consistently puts them in their own class. If you like Nintendo games, you have to like Nintendo hardware. You cant have one or the other.
Why not? Why do I HAVE to like their hardware? I like Nintendo's games but I think the XBox has some better features. If the argument is that the games inherently validate the system, or alternatively, that the system is needed to play the games and thus is an extension of them, then that begs the question as to whether or not those conclusions are self apparent.
So let's take it this way. What if Nintendo's games were on every system but they still made their own hardware? I believe then it wouldn't be needed to like the systems Nintendo makes if at least by the argument they aren't needed. So, what if the game is only on certain hardware? Well, then it comes down to the sort of evaluating you do. Let's look at it this way. I prefer the DVD format to the VHS format, but at the same time many movies are only on VHS and have yet to be released on DVD. Am I not allowed to say "I like the movie but I hate the VCR"? In the end what you are liking is the experience more than the actual disk itself.
All that said, I think the Gamecube does have some nice design advantages built into it which make it in many ways better than the PS2, and in a few ways better than the XBox. I like the little thing. I'm just saying I don't think I'm required to like it just because I like the games on it.
There's nothing wrong with being a fan... :)
It probably is going too far, however, to say that the other guys make nothing worth playing. But when you're dealing with a rivalry such things are understandable... for instance, my dislike of Total Annihalation because of all of its stupid fans saying it's better than Starcraft (it's not a good game, darnit... :D)... :)
But yeah, from what I can tell Sony does seem to have been increasing its game quality over time, while Nintendo's has stayed the same... but that says how good Nintendo is, and how far Sony had to catch up, really. I don't think Sony is there yet... :) (and nor do gamers, looking at just their own production, given how Nintendo is a much larger game developer/publisher than Sony is... or Microsoft, to say the least... (though MS does have a pretty good upcoming PC games lineup between Rise of Nations II, Age of Empires III, (though I found the first one dull) Dungeon Siege II), and whatever else... RoNII in particular looks fantastic. (but I expect nothing less from Brian Reynolds...))