Mario Golf is out now

[A Black Falcon]

Oh please, they're nothing alike.

So 'driving in a first-person viewpoint and shooting enemies' is nothing?

Both games came out after Mario Kart.

I know, I just wanted to know when Twisted Metal came out...

And you claim that Battlezone is similar to Mario Kart.

Do I even need to respond to this? It's pointless to try and reason with you.

Contra and Doom are obviously way, way more similar than Battlezone and Mario Kart. I never said Battlezone had much in common with Mario Kart... just the most base idea, while Contra and Doom do have a lot more in common.

Gradius and Wing Commander are closer to Battlezone and Mario Kart than Contra and Doom.

Then Contra is the first FPS ever made since the fake 3D parts in that game were as convincing as Hovertank and Catacomb.

I've seen Contra's sections. And no, there is no way in the world that they are a FPS. Its not FIRST PERSON!

And look at the screenshots. Catacomb 3D looks pretty similar to Wolf, at least based on screenshots...

You don't even like Beetle Adventure Racing, by far the best car racing game on the N64.

I have BAR... its okay, fun at times, but nowhere near as good as Rush (2 or 2049), thats for sure. I'd also put it behind F-Zero, Wipeout, Excitebike, DKR, Mario Kart 64, 1080, Wave Race, or Hydro Thunder as far as N64 racing games go. But it is a fairly good one... and that many better than it show how great the N64 racing game lineup is...

Its better than Need for Speed (a series I've never liked very much), though, which is good given that BAR seems to be trying to cross NFS with a small amount of Rush...

[OB1]

So 'driving in a first-person viewpoint and shooting enemies' is nothing?

You drove very slowly and shot missiles at other tanks. So to answer your question, no.

I know, I just wanted to know when Twisted Metal came out...

That other game you mentioned also came out after MK.

Contra and Doom are obviously way, way more similar than Battlezone and Mario Kart. I never said Battlezone had much in common with Mario Kart... just the most base idea, while Contra and Doom do have a lot more in common.

Gradius and Wing Commander are closer to Battlezone and Mario Kart than Contra and Doom.

Uh, no they are not. But as I said before, arguing with you is pointless.

I've seen Contra's sections. And no, there is no way in the world that they are a FPS. Its not FIRST PERSON!

And look at the screenshots. Catacomb 3D looks pretty similar to Wolf, at least based on screenshots...

Take away the character sprites in Contra and it's just like Catacomb.

I have BAR... its okay, fun at times, but nowhere near as good as Rush (2 or 2049), thats for sure. I'd also put it behind F-Zero, Wipeout, Excitebike, DKR, Mario Kart 64, 1080, Wave Race, or Hydro Thunder as far as N64 racing games go. But it is a fairly good one... and that many better than it show how great the N64 racing game lineup is...

Its better than Need for Speed (a series I've never liked very much), though, which is good given that BAR seems to be trying to cross NFS with a small amount of Rush...

BAR is waaaaaaaaaaay better than any of the Rush games. And I can't believe you like Cruisin' more than NFS. But whatever, this is as pointless as me trying to convince Darunia that Metroid Prime is better than Quest 64.

[A Black Falcon]

BAR is waaaaaaaaaaay better than any of the Rush games. And I can't believe you like Cruisin' more than NFS. But whatever, this is as pointless as me trying to convince Darunia that Metroid Prime is better than Quest 64.

Please look at that list I made.

Note that no Cruis'n games are in it.

Now try thinking about your comment again. THE GAMES I LISTED are better than BAR, NOT ONES I DIDN'T LIST. :bang:


Oh, and Rush 2049 is so much better than BAR its not even funny... BAR is fun, sure, but as good as Rush? Absolutely not.

You drove very slowly and shot missiles at other tanks. So to answer your question, no.

Forget it. You obviously won't listen.

All I will say is you have strange criteria for games being similar -- Gradius and Wing Commander are very similar because you shoot at stuff in both games (they have absolutely nothing else in common gameplay wise I can see), but Battlezone and Mario Kart's battle mode aren't even remotely similar because you go slower and have just one weapon in MK? Huh? Explain how your logic makes sense?

That other game you mentioned also came out after MK.

I said that. I was just wondering if Battle Wheels or Twisted Metal was first...

Take away the character sprites in Contra and it's just like Catacomb.

Just try to explain how that comment is sane. Contra's areas like that are a straight cooridor. You go to next area. Kill all baddies at the end of the cooridor. Automove to next one. Its closer to a shooting gallery than to Doom, or even Catacomb 3d.

And so you've played Catacomb and know that it isn't a FPS and all you do is stand in points and shoot? Really? Doesn't sound like that to me...

http://www.3dgamers.com/games/catacomb3d/

Download the file and look at those screenshots. Then talk again.

Uh, no they are not. But as I said before, arguing with you is pointless.

If they aren't how about you give a EXPLANATION of why Gradius and Wing Commander should be in the same genre? I haven't seen you give one yet... not one that carries any weight whatsoever... while I did give a longer reason why they should not. And like usual you didn't directly respond.

[OB1]

Please look at that list I made.

Note that no Cruis'n games are in it.

Now try thinking about your comment again. THE GAMES I LISTED are better than BAR, NOT ONES I DIDN'T LIST.


Oh, and Rush 2049 is so much better than BAR its not even funny... BAR is fun, sure, but as good as Rush? Absolutely not.

You're absolutely nuts.

Forget it. You obviously won't listen.

All I will say is you have strange criteria for games being similar -- Gradius and Wing Commander are very similar because you shoot at stuff in both games (they have absolutely nothing else in common gameplay wise I can see), but Battlezone and Mario Kart's battle mode aren't even remotely similar because you go slower and have just one weapon in MK? Huh? Explain how your logic makes sense?

I made the Gradius/WC comparison because you were having difficulties (to put it nicely) distinguishing Mario Kart from other racers. Battlezone is a very slow tank game where you shoot missiles at people. There are more similarities between Gradius and Wing Commander or Contra and Doom than there are with MK and Battlezone. For one thing MK's battle mode isn't even the main part of the game.

I said that. I was just wondering if Battle Wheels or Twisted Metal was first...

Well seeing as how the PSX came out after 1993 I think it's a pretty safe bet that Battle Wheels came out first.

Just try to explain how that comment is sane. Contra's areas like that are a straight cooridor. You go to next area. Kill all baddies at the end of the cooridor. Automove to next one. Its closer to a shooting gallery than to Doom, or even Catacomb 3d.

I was talking about those "3d" parts, dummy.

And so you've played Catacomb and know that it isn't a FPS and all you do is stand in points and shoot? Really? Doesn't sound like that to me...

http://www.3dgamers.com/games/catacomb3d/

Download the file and look at those screenshots. Then talk again.

Yeah I have played it, actually. I can send you the files next time I'm on Direct Connect. It's not a 3D game, just barely more than the 3d parts in Contra.

If they aren't how about you give a EXPLANATION of why Gradius and Wing Commander should be in the same genre? I haven't seen you give one yet... not one that carries any weight whatsoever... while I did give a longer reason why they should not. And like usual you didn't directly respond.

You are confusing me with yourself, my dear boy. You never give me a direct response, as you have proven over and over in this thread.

I gave you an answer to that question several times now, and you just keep on bringing this stupid-ass argument back to square one!! Here is what we both said just a few posts up:

Me: ALL shooters belong to the same genre. Contra, Gradius, Doom, and Wing Commander. They are all seperated by distinct sub-genres. WC isn't nearly enough "sim-like" to truley belong in the sim genre, and you know that.

Let me follow your rules by comparing Gradius to Wing Commander. All shooters share a few basic traits: shooting, flying, and dodging enemy fire. You stripped down racing games to similar basic qualities, and now I'm doing the same thing for space shooters. If Wing Commander didn't have that very simple perspective change and was played from a top-down angle like Gradius (with all of that shield management, etc. retained) would you still call it drastically different from the likes of Gradius? No, you wouldn't. So the only major difference you can find is a paper-thin perspective difference.

You:Okay, okay, Wing Commander is a simplistic space sim. I know.

Now... if you took TIE Fighter and put it topdown, I'd still argue that its much more a sim than an action game. But Wing Commander admittedly is a simpler game.

Honestly, I never really liked Wing Commander's 'kill group of enemies, warp to next group, kill them, warp to next group, kill them, end mission' gameplay... so simple, compared to better space sims...

Try this arguement with X-Wing, TIE Fighter, I-War, Battlecruiser, Freespace, X, or a dozen other games and you'd lose. Because those just AREN'T ACTION GAMES!

You basically admitted that I was right, and the only retort you could come up with was that TIE Fighter isn't like WC! THAT'S IT!!

You just happened to forget everything and didn't expect me to check previous posts. This is very, very pathetic and arguing with someone as inane as yourself is extremely tiresome. Just give it up already.

[A Black Falcon]

You basically admitted that I was right, and the only retort you could come up with was that TIE Fighter isn't like WC! THAT'S IT!!

You just happened to forget everything and didn't expect me to check previous posts. This is very, very pathetic and arguing with someone as inane as yourself is extremely tiresome. Just give it up already.

If you'd been paying attention earlier you'd have noticed that I did say that Wing Commander is the least simlike space sim I can think of. So unlike pretty much the rest of the genre you have a case with it. I said that... you ignored it, but I said it. :)

Now... how about this. What about the rest of those games I listed as space sims? Would you call the rest of the space sim genre 'action games'? That I'd definitely have an issue with... but Wing Commander, I admit, is about as close the genre gets to action games.

I'd say now Wing Commander is a cross between a hard space sim and an action space flying game (Rogue Squadron, Starfighter...), so it might belong in both genres. Earlier on, anyway. By the later games in the series (Prophecy), and Starlancer, its a true space sim and not an action game anymore.

You're absolutely nuts.

The three best racing games on N64 are Rush 2049, F-Zero X, and Wipeout 64. The order I'm not sure of, but the contents I am. Ever since the first ten minuites of playing Rush 2049 I knew it was in the company of the two games I'd been considering (since I got F-Zero) the best racers on the system... since then I have switched the order of those three sometimes (at one point I said Wipeout was better than F-Zero...), but they are, IMO, clearly the best three racing games on the system.

Number four? Probably Excitebike 64.

Feel free to disagree, but that's my opinion.

As for Rush 2049... I just love that game so much. The gameplay, the music (that game has great music! My favorite track is the first stunt song... from the first two stunt tracks. That song's great...), how its still so much fun to play on a weekly basis 2 1/2 years later...

I made the Gradius/WC comparison because you were having difficulties (to put it nicely) distinguishing Mario Kart from other racers. Battlezone is a very slow tank game where you shoot missiles at people. There are more similarities between Gradius and Wing Commander or Contra and Doom than there are with MK and Battlezone. For one thing MK's battle mode isn't even the main part of the game.

I'd call them tank shells, not missiles. :)

And I wasn't comparing Battlezone to the whole of Mario Kart, just battle mode! As I said!

Sure, the similarities are very, very thin... probably less than Gradius and Wing Commander. But there is SOMETHING.

you were having difficulties (to put it nicely) distinguishing Mario Kart from other racers.

That is how you interpreted it, but it really isn't true.

I was talking about those "3d" parts, dummy.

And so was I...

Well seeing as how the PSX came out after 1993 I think it's a pretty safe bet that Battle Wheels came out first.

Yeah, I thought so... wasn't the PSX '94 in Japan?

Yeah I have played it, actually. I can send you the files next time I'm on Direct Connect. It's not a 3D game, just barely more than the 3d parts in Contra.

The moron who runs the plinko hub banned me for no reason, but I'm still on the three other hubs I use sometimes.

Also, the Plinko hub is private now, so you've got to go to the plinko forum and PM/email the guy who runs it a username and password...

[OB1]

If you'd been paying attention earlier you'd have noticed that I did say that Wing Commander is the least simlike space sim I can think of. So unlike pretty much the rest of the genre you have a case with it. I said that... you ignored it, but I said it.

Now... how about this. What about the rest of those games I listed as space sims? Would you call the rest of the space sim genre 'action games'? That I'd definitely have an issue with... but Wing Commander, I admit, is about as close the genre gets to action games.

I'd say now Wing Commander is a cross between a hard space sim and an action space flying game (Rogue Squadron, Starfighter...), so it might belong in both genres. Earlier on, anyway. By the later games in the series (Prophecy), and Starlancer, its a true space sim and not an action game anymore.

Wing Commander is the bridge between the regular action shooter and the space sim, so yes there is a similarity there.

The three best racing games on N64 are Rush 2049, F-Zero X, and Wipeout 64. The order I'm not sure of, but the contents I am. Ever since the first ten minuites of playing Rush 2049 I knew it was in the company of the two games I'd been considering (since I got F-Zero) the best racers on the system... since then I have switched the order of those three sometimes (at one point I said Wipeout was better than F-Zero...), but they are, IMO, clearly the best three racing games on the system.

Number four? Probably Excitebike 64.

Feel free to disagree, but that's my opinion.

As for Rush 2049... I just love that game so much. The gameplay, the music (that game has great music! My favorite track is the first stunt song... from the first two stunt tracks. That song's great...), how its still so much fun to play on a weekly basis 2 1/2 years later...

Hey I'm fine with it being your opinion and everything but you know, you suck.

Now I feel like playing the stunt mode in Rush 2049.

I'd call them tank shells, not missiles.

Or green dots, actually.

And I wasn't comparing Battlezone to the whole of Mario Kart, just battle mode! As I said!

Sure, the similarities are very, very thin... probably less than Gradius and Wing Commander. But there is SOMETHING.

Oy, this is getting nowhere.

That is how you interpreted it, but it really isn't true.

:bang:

And so was I...

Then I am right.

Yeah, I thought so... wasn't the PSX '94 in Japan?

I think so.

The moron who runs the plinko hub banned me for no reason, but I'm still on the three other hubs I use sometimes.

Also, the Plinko hub is private now, so you've got to go to the plinko forum and PM/email the guy who runs it a username and password...

Ugh, screw it.

[A Black Falcon]

BAR is waaaaaaaaaaay better than any of the Rush games. And I can't believe you like Cruisin' more than NFS. But whatever, this is as pointless as me trying to convince Darunia that Metroid Prime is better than Quest 64.

NFS is better than Cruis'n. I never said Cruisn was better than NFS... where DID you get that from?

Hey I'm fine with it being your opinion and everything but you know, you suck.

Now I feel like playing the stunt mode in Rush 2049.

Stunt mode in Rush 2049 gave me a bad habit for a few years... I kept tossing tv remotes into the air and catching them... a lot... now two remotes are broken and two others rattle... :D

Wing Commander is the bridge between the regular action shooter and the space sim, so yes there is a similarity there.

Hey, we almost agree! You say its a action game bridging to sims and I say its a sim bridging to action games... close enough. :)

Or green dots, actually.

Or were they squares...

Oy, this is getting nowhere.

No.

:bonk:

What? You kept saying how I wasn't making the distinction between differnet types of racing games but its just not true. That isn't what I was saying. Of course I know the difference between Outrun and Mario Kart... I don't remember exactly but I didn't really understand why you were saying that. It wasn't accurate based on how I interpreted what I was saying, anyway...

Then I am right.

How so? Explain Catacomb 3D better. How it looks very similar to Wolf but is in a totally different genre.

[Great Rumbler]

The sad truth is all of this could have been avoided had I not opened my mouth and attempted to use Mario Kart in an analogical equation.

[Dark Jaguar]

GR, I know what you mean, and I kinda snapped in another thread and told them both off. I was going to just delete it, but I think maybe I should leave it there and see what happens, and if it turns out too horribly bad, it'll likely stand as a testament to "what NOT to EVER post".

[Great Rumbler]

Come on, DJ, let's go make a forum just for us!! We could go there and live in peace and harmony, with unicorns, and rainbow, and pixies!! It would be the most fun place in all of Happy Hug Hug Land!!

GR, I know what you mean, and I kinda snapped in another thread and told them both off. I was going to just delete it, but I think maybe I should leave it there and see what happens, and if it turns out too horribly bad, it'll likely stand as a testament to "what NOT to EVER post".

I read that post and I think it can be summed up in two simple sentences: "Don't argue all the time. If you do, use logic and at least try to be civil with the other person."

[OB1]

NFS is better than Cruis'n. I never said Cruisn was better than NFS... where DID you get that from?

You said that you didn't like NFS but did like Cruis'n.

Stunt mode in Rush 2049 gave me a bad habit for a few years... I kept tossing tv remotes into the air and catching them... a lot... now two remotes are broken and two others rattle...

Why the hell did you toss them up in the air?

And I just played about an hour of the stunt mode with some friends. It's very addictive even though it's pretty simple (spin real fast and hope you don't blow up!).

Hey, we almost agree! You say its a action game bridging to sims and I say its a sim bridging to action games... close enough.

Which is how it TIES them (pun intended!) to action shooters like Gradius.

Or were they squares...

Well large pixels which some people just call dots.

What? You kept saying how I wasn't making the distinction between differnet types of racing games but its just not true. That isn't what I was saying. Of course I know the difference between Outrun and Mario Kart... I don't remember exactly but I didn't really understand why you were saying that. It wasn't accurate based on how I interpreted what I was saying, anyway...

What?

How so? Explain Catacomb 3D better. How it looks very similar to Wolf but is in a totally different genre.

Well in terms of gameplay it's similar to Wolfenstein 3D, but it's not really a FPS.

[A Black Falcon]

You said that you didn't like NFS but did like Cruis'n.

NFS is alright. I have NFSHS and it is fun... I say 'i don't like it' but that really isn't true. I do wish it was faster and more arcadey, though... but NFSHS IS fun. Not one of the best racing games out there... but decent. And better than Cruis'n because of much greater depth.. especially in HS, with its deep campaign mode...

Why the hell did you toss them up in the air?

And I just played about an hour of the stunt mode with some friends. It's very addictive even though it's pretty simple (spin real fast and hope you don't blow up!).

Not so much toss as flip... like flip-toss it in the air and catch it... but when they drop it is bad for them...

And I did it for several years. Only stopped nine months ago because i had nothing around to toss... :)

Why? Two things... because of how the cars flip and spin in the air, and that song in the first two stunt tracks... it has these 'wsssh wssshhh' spinning noises in it... for some reason that, i think, got me to start... I don't know... :S

And yes stunt mode quite simple, but oh so much fun. Track 2 is best, and track 4 second best.

Oh... a few weeks back I got my best stunt trick score ever.

65,000 points for ONE TRICK. How? It was a 7-stunt trick... with 100 grinds. I was super lucky and got halfway up on a wall... so of course i kept grinding on 2 wheels for as long as I could. :D

Oh, and I have 29 hours and 3.6 million points in stunt mode. :)

Well large pixels which some people just call dots.

Same thing... :)

What?

I am confused too... but am too lazy to re-read the thread and figure out what I did and didn't say and mean...

Lets just leave it at that I know Mario Kart invented the kart-racing subgenre, and made big improvements in the use of weapons in racing games. But I'm not sure if that counts for revolutionary change.

Which is how it TIES them (pun intended!) to action shooters like Gradius.

:D

Well in terms of gameplay it's similar to Wolfenstein 3D, but it's not really a FPS.

That really helps...

[OB1]

NFS is alright. I have NFSHS and it is fun... I say 'i don't like it' but that really isn't true. I do wish it was faster and more arcadey, though... but NFSHS IS fun. Not one of the best racing games out there... but decent. And better than Cruis'n because of much greater depth.. especially in HS, with its deep campaign mode...

The latest NFS (Hot Pursuit 2) game is superb. Well the PS2 version is superb, to be more precise. The Gamecube port (and to a lesser extent the X-Box port) is really bad. One of the worst ports I've ever played.

Not so much toss as flip... like flip-toss it in the air and catch it... but when they drop it is bad for them...

And I did it for several years. Only stopped nine months ago because i had nothing around to toss...

Why? Two things... because of how the cars flip and spin in the air, and that song in the first two stunt tracks... it has these 'wsssh wssshhh' spinning noises in it... for some reason that, i think, got me to start... I don't know...

You are so weird.

And yes stunt mode quite simple, but oh so much fun. Track 2 is best, and track 4 second best.

Oh... a few weeks back I got my best stunt trick score ever.

65,000 points for ONE TRICK. How? It was a 7-stunt trick... with 100 grinds. I was super lucky and got halfway up on a wall... so of course i kept grinding on 2 wheels for as long as I could.

Oh, and I have 29 hours and 3.6 million points in stunt mode.

That's insane!

I am confused too... but am too lazy to re-read the thread and figure out what I did and didn't say and mean...

Lets just leave it at that I know Mario Kart invented the kart-racing subgenre, and made big improvements in the use of weapons in racing games. But I'm not sure if that counts for revolutionary change.

It's revolutionary since it brought radical change to the entire genre!

That really helps...

Well ALttP has gameplay very similar to OoT but that's not a 3D action-adventure game.

[A Black Falcon]

The latest NFS (Hot Pursuit 2) game is superb. Well the PS2 version is superb, to be more precise. The Gamecube port (and to a lesser extent the X-Box port) is really bad. One of the worst ports I've ever played.

But does it have a campaign where you start with one car and little money and by winning races you have to make enough money to fix your car (since it gets damaged in races and that greatly effects performance), enter circuits (most have entry fees), and buy more cars (once you can get enough...)?

IMO NFSHS is quite hard. I've never gotten very far... I've only ever beaten the first two easiest circuits, and in campaign never got anywhere near the money needed for a second car. Its very challenging... not the hardest racing game ever, but quite hard.

The hardest racing game I own? Motocross Madness 2. I have only ever one ONE campaign RACE. One. And that was REALLY hard... in the checkpoint mode. Its just ridiculous!

I know... I'm just AWFUL at it. Well I have played it enough to know that its just not worth the time to get good. :)

Same with NFSHS, but not that dramatic...

You are so weird.

Well... yeah. :)

That's insane!

That trick, or my total time and score? :D

It's revolutionary since it brought radical change to the entire genre!

Yeah yeah yeah... it made some changes... but lots of games add some new stuff and too many of them label themselves as 'revolutionary'...

Well ALttP has gameplay very similar to OoT but that's not a 3D action-adventure game.

Sure, but LttP doesn't look very, very similar to OoT like Catacomb does to Wolf...

[OB1]

But does it have a campaign where you start with one car and little money and by winning races you have to make enough money to fix your car (since it gets damaged in races and that greatly effects performance), enter circuits (most have entry fees), and buy more cars (once you can get enough...)?

IMO NFSHS is quite hard. I've never gotten very far... I've only ever beaten the first two easiest circuits, and in campaign never got anywhere near the money needed for a second car. Its very challenging... not the hardest racing game ever, but quite hard.

The hardest racing game I own? Motocross Madness 2. I have only ever one ONE campaign RACE. One. And that was REALLY hard... in the checkpoint mode. Its just ridiculous!

I know... I'm just AWFUL at it. Well I have played it enough to know that its just not worth the time to get good.

Same with NFSHS, but not that dramatic...

You're talking about Hot Pursuit 2, right? Well you really ought to play the PS2 version. The Gamecube version looks worse and is much, much slower than the PS2 version. It's embarrassing, really.

That trick, or my total time and score?

Both.

Yeah yeah yeah... it made some changes... but lots of games add some new stuff and too many of them label themselves as 'revolutionary'...

If a game brings radical new changes to a genre then it is revolutionary.

Sure, but LttP doesn't look very, very similar to OoT like Catacomb does to Wolf...

But Lttp's gameplay is more similar to Oot's than Catacomb's is to Wolfenstein.

[Great Rumbler]

I'll try to explain Catacombs 3D's gameplay based on what I've read, you tell me if I'm right, OB1.

In Catacomb it looks like it's 3D, but it's not because when you move forward it take a predetermined distance forward and re-renders everything to give you the feeling that are moving closer to something. Rather like Myst. It isn't really an FPS because you can only move in four different directions and are restricted to moving predetermined distances.

I think that's right.

[A Black Falcon]

You're talking about Hot Pursuit 2, right? Well you really ought to play the PS2 version. The Gamecube version looks worse and is much, much slower than the PS2 version. It's embarrassing, really.

No, I was talking about High Stakes' campaign mode. HP2 is like that also?

But it doesn't matter because I have no way of playing the PS2 version and the Cube and PC versions are equally bad.

Both.

Well... yeah. :D

I also have all the car parts because I have over 2000 logged miles of racing. :)

If a game brings radical new changes to a genre then it is revolutionary.

I just think too many games call themselves revolutionary...

But Lttp's gameplay is more similar to Oot's than Catacomb's is to Wolfenstein.

But OoT plays so different from the 2d Zelda games...

In Catacomb it looks like it's 3D, but it's not because when you move forward it take a predetermined distance forward and re-renders everything to give you the feeling that are moving closer to something. Rather like Myst. It isn't really an FPS because you can only move in four different directions and are restricted to moving predetermined distances.

If that's the case then it depends on what your definition of FPS is...

[OB1]

I'll try to explain Catacombs 3D's gameplay based on what I've read, you tell me if I'm right, OB1.

In Catacomb it looks like it's 3D, but it's not because when you move forward it take a predetermined distance forward and re-renders everything to give you the feeling that are moving closer to something. Rather like Myst. It isn't really an FPS because you can only move in four different directions and are restricted to moving predetermined distances.

I think that's right.

Well it feels more 3D than Myst does, and you can move in more directions than that. Rather, you should think of something like Space Harrier (NES version), but with walls and more directions to walk in. Then make it really slow, choppy, and almost impossible to move where you want to.

No, I was talking about High Stakes' campaign mode. HP2 is like that also?

But it doesn't matter because I have no way of playing the PS2 version and the Cube and PC versions are equally bad.

I don't know if HP2 has that mode, but I'm sure the sequel (NFS Underground or something like that) will have something similar to that since it's all about underground street racing. And hopefully the GC port of that will be good.

I just think too many games call themselves revolutionary...

Only the ones that deserve it. Not many games radically change or create new genres, but Mario Kart did both.

But OoT plays so different from the 2d Zelda games...

Controls differently, sure, but the gameplay is essentially the same. Same thing with Super Metroid and Metroid Prime. You run through a huge non-linear world exploring and shooting and find power-ups to gain access to new areas.

[A Black Falcon]

Well it feels more 3D than Myst does, and you can move in more directions than that. Rather, you should think of something like Space Harrier (NES version), but with walls and more directions to walk in. Then make it really slow, choppy, and almost impossible to move where you want to.

Space Harrier for NES? Haven't played that, just the near-arcade-perfect 32X version...

But it seems to be a attempt to do 3d without having full, real 3d. Whether or not it counts as a true FPS... I don't know.

I don't know if HP2 has that mode, but I'm sure the sequel (NFS Underground or something like that) will have something similar to that since it's all about underground street racing. And hopefully the GC port of that will be good.

NFSHS is pretty good. Oh, did I mention that it has a (still operational) online service run by EA? I didn't play it online a lot, but its fun there...

Online was also one of Pod's greatest strengths. How many other racing games had a functional online service in late 1997 that you can feasibly play on a modem?

Didn't think so...

Unfortunately, about a year ago Ubisoft killed the Pod online gameservice. Which stinks, but almost no one used it anyway...

Oh well, at least Pod still has splitscreen/modem/network/IP. :)

Only the ones that deserve it. Not many games radically change or create new genres, but Mario Kart did both.

I'm just not comfterble with saying it radically changed the genre to the degree you say...

Controls differently, sure, but the gameplay is essentially the same. Same thing with Super Metroid and Metroid Prime. You run through a huge non-linear world exploring and shooting and find power-ups to gain access to new areas.

I know when I played OoT for the first time it was so different from LA that it almost felt like a different series... it has critical differences, such as the dramatic difference in the overworld -- LA had a large, challenging overworld you spent a lot of time in, wandering around and fighting badguys and doing quests. In OoT, you spend some time in the overworld but not that much and its much more open and there are very few enemies. I love it that way too, but its quite different...

[OB1]

NFSHS is pretty good. Oh, did I mention that it has a (still operational) online service run by EA? I didn't play it online a lot, but its fun there...

Online was also one of Pod's greatest strengths. How many other racing games had a functional online service in late 1997 that you can feasibly play on a modem?

Didn't think so...

Unfortunately, about a year ago Ubisoft killed the Pod online gameservice. Which stinks, but almost no one used it anyway...

Oh well, at least Pod still has splitscreen/modem/network/IP.

The DC POD game had pretty smooth online play.

I'm just not comfterble with saying it radically changed the genre to the degree you say...

That's because you know very little about this topic.

I know when I played OoT for the first time it was so different from LA that it almost felt like a different series... it has critical differences, such as the dramatic difference in the overworld -- LA had a large, challenging overworld you spent a lot of time in, wandering around and fighting badguys and doing quests. In OoT, you spend some time in the overworld but not that much and its much more open and there are very few enemies. I love it that way too, but its quite different...

OoT was a near-perfect leap from 2D to 3D. It kept the trademark 2D Zelda gameplay but changed some things to fit three dimensions (like the fighting system). But overall OoT is very similar to the 2D Zeldas.

[A Black Falcon]

The DC POD game had pretty smooth online play.

Yeah, but the PC game came out years earlier...

That's because you know very little about this topic.

I've played Mario Kart, Mario Kart clones, F-Zero, Outrun, etc...

OoT was a near-perfect leap from 2D to 3D. It kept the trademark 2D Zelda gameplay but changed some things to fit three dimensions (like the fighting system). But overall OoT is very similar to the 2D Zeldas.

Play style and dungeons... yes. But the overworld changed a lot... especially from LA. LttP it was a smaller change since that one has a more compact overworld... or at least it feels smaller, since its split in two. :)

[OB1]

Yeah, but the PC game came out years earlier...

Okay....

I've played Mario Kart, Mario Kart clones, F-Zero, Outrun, etc...

But not when MK came out, so you didn't see the impact it had on the genre.

Play style and dungeons... yes. But the overworld changed a lot... especially from LA. LttP it was a smaller change since that one has a more compact overworld... or at least it feels smaller, since its split in two.

The overworld isn't as important as the rest of the game.

[A Black Falcon]

Okay....

Did you miss when I said 1997?

But not when MK came out, so you didn't see the impact it had on the genre.

You don't always have to be there to analyze it later!

Anyway, I played some of the copies (on PC) not too long after they came out...

The overworld isn't as important as the rest of the game.

Especially in OoT. Its much less of a actual gameplay part of the game than it is in the previous games.

[OB1]

Did you miss when I said 1997?

What about it?

You don't always have to be there to analyze it later!

Anyway, I played some of the copies (on PC) not too long after they came out...

Well unless you take a good long look at all of the racing games that came out before and after Mario Kart, you had to be there.

Especially in OoT. Its much less of a actual gameplay part of the game than it is in the previous games.

Also, LttP's overworld is a bigger than LA's, and I'm not even counting the Dark World in LttP.

[OB1]

And before you try to say that LA's map is larger than LTTP's, here's a to-scale comparison of LA's and LTTP's maps. After getting huge versions of the maps I measured Link in each map (by taking out my GBA and checking the size of each Link next to bushes and trees and such) and then reduced the size of the maps so that Link is four pixels high and four pixels long. So this is a very accurate comparison. Oh and I didn't even include the Dark World LttP map which is pretty different from the Light World map and the exact same size.

[OB1]

And in case you were wondering, here's what LttP's Dark World map looks like:

[EdenMaster]

You sure go through a lot of trouble to prove your points, OB1.

[OB1]

Well this is an ancient debate between me and ABF so it's great to finally be able to prove that I'm right.

Now the only thing left to do is see how ABF tries to deny it. :S

[A Black Falcon]

I don't have to try very hard when its that blatantly obvious that the two maps aren't on the same scale.

Look at the trees. The doors. The houses.

They are about twice the size in LttP as they are in LA.

Look at that square that you say is "Link". Sorry, but look at the map. It is horribly, horribly out of scale. Of course since you cannot prove your point with facts, you've got to make them up, so I understand... did you not think I'd look at the scale of the objects on those three maps?

Plus, I have played LttP. It is far, far smaller. 8 zones from end to end. I think, it might be less... Sure, zones are larger than a screen, so I'll give it maybe 14 screens from end to end... at absolute best.

Compared to 16x16.

NO WAY IN THE WORLD is the Light World anywhere NEAR as large as the LA overworld. LOOK AT THOSE MAPS and COMPARE THE SCALES! You would see that too if you actually look...

Now is BOTH the light AND dark worlds bigger than the LA overworld? Maybe, but its close. Double the size of that LA map and make them closer to the same scale and you'd see what I mean.

What about it?

Just that I don't really see why you were talking about the sequel there... its not like by the time that one came out online play was rare...

Well unless you take a good long look at all of the racing games that came out before and after Mario Kart, you had to be there.

"be there" means what? I played Nintendo (NES, mostly), I read Nintendo Power... had a PC...

So to analyze anything you must have been alive when it happened? Funny, try to tell that to historians...

[A Black Falcon]

http://www.portfolio16.de/zelda/map4/map_en.htm

Link to a larger-scale LA map. Well, LA-DX.

[OB1]

*sigh*

I knew you'd never admit that you're wrong.

The original LA map that I used was as big as the one you posted, and I measured Link before I shrunk it down in size, which then distorted all of the images. But it is still to scale!!

You wanna know why the trees in that image look so much smaller than the ones in the LttP map? Because the trees in LttP are much bigger than the trees in LA!! Take a look for yourself:

LttP's trees:

LA's trees:

As you can plainly see here, the trees in LttP are four times the size as the trees in LA!!

Edit: the old LA screen doesn't work anymore so I replaced it. Link is a bit smaller in this new screen so the image is 100% to scale, but it is close enough.

[A Black Falcon]

You cannot deny that LttP's light world is 8x8 screens. While LA is 16x16. Yes, the screens are smaller... but that's not the point...


Look. A GB screen is smaller than a SNES screen. True.

However... I didn't say physical size, I think, I said screens.

And LttP has two 8x8 (screens, not zones) worlds. That is 128 screens.

LA has one 16x16 screen world. That is 256 screens.

Yes, LttP has larger screens.

But LA has twice as many of them.

Oh, and LttP fills a lot more space in those larger screens with larger obsticles -- lots of empty space, trees four times larger, etc. so its only saying part of the story if you say "more physical space". The fact that LA has twice as many screens matters a lot too. Though both are decent sized... LTTP just feels small, with only 8 screens to cross to get all the way across the map...

[OB1]

That has got to be the dumbest thing I've heard from you in a long, long time. So LA's world is bigger because there are more grid spaces than LttP's, even though each one of LttP's grid spaces is over eight times the size of LA's??!

That screenshot I posted doesn't even cover an entire grid space in LttP. If you had played the game you would know that each grid space is larger than the screen itself, and you know when you've gotten into another grid space when the camera shifts Link to another space, just like it goes in LA. The two maps I posted are to scale, but since you're so damn stubborn I'll post another two maps, although this time I'll blow up the LttP map and keep the LA map pretty clear, but Link's size with be the exact same in both maps so it will be to scale!

[OB1]

"be there" means what? I played Nintendo (NES, mostly), I read Nintendo Power... had a PC...

So to analyze anything you must have been alive when it happened? Funny, try to tell that to historians...

Oh wow, you read Nintendo Power! Holy crap, that must have made you an expert then!

You did not play consoles during the SNES days, or even the N64 days. And PC racers were always behind consoles ones. So no, you did not have first-hand experience of the changes that Mario Kart caused in the racing genre. If you look at all of the racing games that came out before Mario Kart and look at the ones that came out after MK, you'll see what I'm talking about.

[OB1]

Now here you go, bigger comparisons of the two games' maps. These maps are to scale, and this argument is not about which game you feel is bigger, but which one is actually bigger!

[A Black Falcon]

That has got to be the dumbest thing I've heard from you in a long, long time. So LA's world is bigger because there are more grid spaces than LttP's, even though each one of LttP's grid spaces is over eight times the size of LA's??!

Uhh... the size of LttP grid spaces seems to vary depending on which zone you are in... or is that wrong? But it seems like it.

That screenshot I posted doesn't even cover an entire grid space in LttP. If you had played the game you would know that each grid space is larger than the screen itself, and you know when you've gotten into another grid space when the camera shifts Link to another space, just like it goes in LA. The two maps I posted are to scale, but since you're so damn stubborn I'll post another two maps, although this time I'll blow up the LttP map and keep the LA map pretty clear, but Link's size with be the exact same in both maps so it will be to scale!

Look. It is physically larger. But once you factor in the other things I mentioned -- larger terrain features, 4x larger trees, etc, etc -- that size "advantage" becomes much, much less. LttP has more physical territory but gameplaywise... it just isn't that clear. Factor in the size differences between things and I bet it suddenly wouldn't look as clear that LttP's gameplay world is bigger in a gameplay, and not just direct look, way...

The Light World. You wander around about 2/3 of that area right at the beginning with not much opposition... actually its closer to OoT in that respect -- a more open, less challenging field in that part. Yes, the Dark World defintely gets harder... but still...

Oh, and because of the difference in level design and size of stuff those "8x larger zones" lose a fair part of their size advantage...

And because of the game design it feels large in LA. Yes, LttP's feels big too.... but just not in the same way, not when you can access so much of it relatively early on in the game...

LA also has you go through many areas of the game in your travels due to the world design while often in LttP it feels like you go to one corner, get whatever you need to do there, then don't return there and go back to the central area (with a really, really big castle filling up a lot of space).


I'm not insulting LttP... its a great game! The world just doesn't feel as large to me. Thats all.

[OB1]

Uhh... the size of LttP grid spaces seems to vary depending on which zone you are in... or is that wrong? But it seems like it.

I don't think so, but that doesn't matter.

Look. It is physically larger. But once you factor in the other things I mentioned -- larger terrain features, 4x larger trees, etc, etc -- that size "advantage" becomes much, much less. LttP has more physical territory but gameplaywise... it just isn't that clear. Factor in the size differences between things and I bet it suddenly wouldn't look as clear that LttP's gameplay world is bigger in a gameplay, and not just direct look, way...

The Light World. You wander around about 2/3 of that area right at the beginning with not much opposition... actually its closer to OoT in that respect -- a more open, less challenging field in that part. Yes, the Dark World defintely gets harder... but still...

Oh, and because of the difference in level design and size of stuff those "8x larger zones" lose a fair part of their size advantage...

And because of the game design it feels large in LA. Yes, LttP's feels big too.... but just not in the same way, not when you can access so much of it relatively early on in the game...

LA also has you go through many areas of the game in your travels due to the world design while often in LttP it feels like you go to one corner, get whatever you need to do there, then don't return there and go back to the central area (with a really, really big castle filling up a lot of space).

Look, you lost the argument so now you're changing it like you always do. Seriously man, just give it up! You lost! You didn't think that the first set of shots were to scale because the trees in the LA map were smaller than the Lttp's map, and then after I showed you that the Lttp trees really are bigger than the LA trees, you changed your argument because you can never admit that you're wrong. I'm using facts to back up my argument, while you're using opinion.

I'm not insulting LttP... its a great game! The world just doesn't feel as large to me. Thats all.

This argument isn't about which world you "feel" is larger. It's about which one actually is bigger!

[A Black Falcon]

Fine, fine fine. The maps are accurate.

But that doesn't change any of my "issues" with LttP, and you know it. :)

Now do you want to debate that, or just drop it and 'debate' that another time? :D

LttP has a larger, but more empty, world.

[OB1]

The world isn't empty at all, but think what you want. It's good to see you finally admit that you're wrong.

[A Black Falcon]

Compared to LA, areas are larger but much more spread out. They put at best the same amount of stuff to really do, but spread it way out...

[OB1]

Whatever you say, falcon.

[A Black Falcon]

What, are you going to deny that LttP spreads out areas more and has less real stuff (ie other than more trees, grass, etc) per screen than LA? You're nuts if you think that...

[OB1]

Things are spread out more, sure, but having more bushes and tiny trees per square meter isn't that amazing.

[A Black Falcon]

Its not just more trees and bushes, its dramatically larger areas with the same number of places you have to go to in them... and of course those trees are 4 times larger. You said that yourself. :)

[OB1]

Well I certainly prefer more open areas than cramped ones. And then you also have to take into consideration that LttP has two maps which are different in many ways. Same basic topography but most of the details are vastly different.

[A Black Falcon]

Yeah, that 'two ages, similar yet different' idea was copied in OoT and OoA...

And I like LA's more focused zones, and the layout that puts them all over the place and not mostly around the edges.