|
Chronojam posted:Classic early 90s game Undertale We're not just doing early 90s games!
|
#
?
May 31, 2019 05:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 18:31 |
|
|
Crysis gonna be the one unanimous 5, bet
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2019 05:52
|
|
|
Doom: 5 Doom is a phenomen for a reason. I played it when it first came out keyboard only (I have a weird hand position that I used to get into to play older FPS games that involved cramping around the right hand of the keyboard) and if I boot up the original then I still go into it. The game looks, sounds, controls, and feels great. It is one of the classics for a reason and that is because a lot of the ideas it came up with work and work so well. The faux 3D made it a more immersive game than any faux 3D before it. The combination of action and horror allowed your mind to do more heavy lifting with the pixel representations. The soundtrack is bombastic and full of heavy riffs that conjure up the images of hell and destruction that contemporary heavy metal would have done. It is a tight game that does it exactly what it set out to do. That it laid the foundations for hundreds of other games was a bonus. I recently played through it again with a more modern engine port and it was still as exciting and fresh as the first time I played it all those decades ago.
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2019 09:54
|
|
|
SM64: Still has the best flying in video games. 5 Doom: Better levels than Doom 2, but no super shotgun. 4
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2019 10:12
|
|
|
Week 3: 1st June - 7th June Doom posts a very healthy score but can't quite beat Super Mario 64 at 4.22! Which brings us to... IGN posted:The game isn't just addictive, it's downright dangerous. ActionTrip posted:Original, amusing addictive, and most of all incredibly fun and relaxing to play. If we only had more great ideas like these… GamePen posted:This game will provide you with emotional experiences that you could never imagine from a video game. RATED 92 ON METACRITIC SOLD 16 MILLION COPIES #6 BEST SELLING PC GAME OF ALL TIME STARTED THE #7 BEST SELLING FRANCHISE OF ALL TIME 2016 INDUCTEE IN THE VIDEO GAME HALL OF FAME  THE SIMS (PC, Maxis, 2000) We've gone from 3D platforming to FPS and now we've switching gears completely as we take a look at the biggest simulation game of all time. The Sims changed the landscape of gaming when it burst onto the scene bringing a brand new audience to the medium. Packed with innovation and imagination it allowed you to create virtual versions of all your family and friends and    
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 06:09
|
|
|
5, thinking back, they never really improved on the original, just bolted more systems on. The first one is so pure and good and was a true crossover hit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 06:16
|
|
|
3/5 Theres a lot of play in the Sims but not very much game which is why ive never cared for it even if Id recommend it to basically anyone else to play. Somehow despite selling truckloads of copies and having multiple sequels and profitable spinoffs like "Urbz" this is basically a genre of one. Its like the Avatar (David Cameron film) of games where somehow despite being massively popular weve all agreed to just not discuss it or ever rip it off because ???* *We know why
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 06:21
|
|
|
1 Technically speaking, as well executed as it could have been. However the concept, or even the concept of someone playing a game like this, is better as a narrative for a nightmare artist like Philip K Dick or David Cronenberg than a premise for a fun video game. I love the Silent Hill series and this game makes my skin crawl edit: those quotes from reviewers are absolute gold though pieuvre armement fucked around with this message at 06:47 on Jun 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 06:35
|
|
|
4 I love everything about this game except actually playing it. Creating characters, building houses, trapping said characters in said houses, all that is great but the actual simulation part of The Sims could never entertain me for more than about half an hour. It's a really well made game though and the good parts are good enough that I remember it extremely fondly.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 11:47
|
|
|
4 The Sims invented an entire genre and it still hasn't been overshadowed today. Any person in 2019 could load up the original and get sucked into it just as easily as the year it came out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 14:46
|
|
|
2 very realistic, especially the part where late in play i realized I'd been wasting time on pointless poo poo and none of the goals had any meaning.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 19:00
|
|
|
2 The Sims suffers more than the other games we've done so far from its sequels existing. Even at the time I found The Sims fun until you hit the point where it becomes a mad scramble to get all your needs in the green before the car shows up to go to work then you have a mad scramble to get the needs all green before bed. Unless you just Rosebud your way to not needing to do work stuff at which point it just becomes an interior design program. The gradual simplification of the needs system over time through sequels makes the core concept work way better, but in the original it was carried a long way by just being a new thing. Not a bad thing, it got the series where it needed to be but the first game is just miserable to play now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 19:16
|
|
|
It's basically a pet raising simulator but the pets are people. Creepy. 2
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 19:23
|
|
|
3 Revolutionary for its time, sequels has barely evolved the genre (3 introduced an open world setting but they took it away in 4). Game is fun to mess around for the first month or so with its customizable characters, interior decorations, and people interaction before shelving it for eternity. You have to really be into interior decorating and sim customization to find any replay value in this game. This genre could really use more competitors.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 21:08
|
|
|
njsykora posted:you hit the point where it becomes a mad scramble to get all your needs in the green before the car shows up to go to work then you have a mad scramble to get the needs all green before bed So you're saying it's just like real life? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2019 23:41
|
|
|
3. It's fine, I guess. It was cool at the time but you also had a lot more valid simulation games at the time too.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2019 00:19
|
|
|
Rarity posted:So you're saying it's just like real life? But why, I ask, would anyone want that. Unfortunately I can't give my opinion on this game because that was my feelings on the sims so i never played it but I'm going to keep watching this because oh boy do i love giving opinions on stuff. Also if its not too rude, i would like to suggest Runescape as a idea.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2019 00:20
|
|
|
I feel like we're touching the "what is a game" argument which is effecting the score.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2019 00:42
|
|
|
Thats always been the Sims issue; its a great sandbox but there really isnt enough concrete direction, especially in the first game. There are spinoff games in the series that tried to add direction but those all took away most of the sandbox which is nonsensical to the appeal. That all said its an amazing sandbox so if naming a sim after a roomate you hate and making them have babies with the grim reaper sounds fun, get out the credit card cause the Sims is built for you
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2019 07:54
|
|
|
2 because the original is definitely just a skeleton, but it's not a 1 solely on the basis of "Man, what a defining title". It's just been eclipsed by literally everything since.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2019 10:12
|
|
|
2/5. The Sims has always been a great proof of concept just waiting for someone to actually make it good, and for some reason no one ever has. It's the best game of its genre purely by default because it has no competitors - aside from its own sequels and spin-offs. And it's annoyingly mediocre. You can play it for hours and not be sure if you actually had fun or not. And it constantly makes you think "this would be so much better if..." because it's such a great idea and so limited in execution. Even the sequels don't really add anything particularly interesting or new, they just update the graphics and tweak some small things. I guess there's no reason to mess with a winning formula, especially when your customers have nowhere else to go.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2019 01:41
|
|
|
2/5 I think the greatest failure of The Sims is the fact that not even the developers seem to know what's fun about the game. I don't think I could name any other game where cheat codes are so integral to the experience, because without them the game is more of a management sim than the emergent storytelling experience that people enjoy. Instead of really leaning into the crazy situations that the game can throw your characters into, they focus on making sure your character is watching enough TV, or going to the bathroom. Limiting the amount of money you can spend on a house would be an interesting limitation if the ways that you made money didn't also remove your Sim from engaging in any of the good stuff, sometimes literally by whisking them off-screen for eight hours at a time. The character creator was so detailed that even modern games use this framework, but that's probably it's largest accomplishment. The Sims invented a life-sim genre that tried to replicate the most mundane aspects of life.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2019 02:00
|
|
|
3/5 It's a strange game. Influential, a massive hit, and yet overshadowed by its sequels. I wonder how much of it comes down to the series being such a hit that, say, defining it further into more of a 'game' would hurt its popularity. I feel like there's always been space for a Sims-like game which is very detailed on one player character and living their life, like a cross between the Sims and Alter Ego, but...
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2019 02:40
|
|
|
3 I have a bit of a weird relationship with the Sims as I personally hate the poo poo out of it, but my wife played it and the sequels to death and yet I love a good LP of it with named characters. If we're simply going with our own experiences though, there wasn't enough to do for me back in the day, and that has only gotten worse as time has gone on. I've given it a bonus point because MrsMachineGun would still love the poo poo out of it today.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2019 05:28
|
|
|
I'll pass on voting because I've never played the first Sims but I will say back when I first got my DS for Christmas around launch the Urbz: Sims in the City was one of the first games I had for it alongside Mario 64 DS. That game was rather neat because it was essentially the Sims as an RPG where you rose up the ranks through the city with a set goal in mind and story missions for you to do. I wish the franchise explored that direction more because it was cool and unique.
Accordion Man fucked around with this message at 05:48 on Jun 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2019 05:38
|
|
|
3. I would give The Sims as a series a 3 overall. It seems like most people aren't grabbed by the games, it founded a genre that basically only includes itself, and it doesn't seem to have inspired a great many games. I don't think there's enough to differentiate the first Sims game from the rest, so it gets the same score. The future games refined the formula, but if you enjoy them, you'll surely enjoy the first one too. That said, I've noticed that my friends who do like the Sims have sunk hundreds of hours into the games. I guess it just works for some people!
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2019 06:30
|
|
|
I've never played doom or the sims but i feel comfortable assuming for the sims that I'd play it for a couple of hours, think "hm this is neat but weird," and then never play it again
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2019 19:39
|
|
|
Never played a Sims game, which is weird because I love SimCity 2k/3k/4 as well as all those odd SimWhatever games that Maxis developed and/or published in the West from Japanese developers throughout the 90s. Maybe The Sims came out at an awkard time for my computer, I think I still had a Pentium 1 then and it was showing its age (especially the jam-packed 2GB hard drive). Maybe I just prefer playing with higher level systems to playing with discrete people (I prefer Advance Wars to Fire Emblem and Europa Universalis 4 to Crusader Kings 2, after all). It's definitely fun to watch other people LP Sims games, though. But I'm surprised to see so many people criticising it for being what it is, because it's something I love about all those SimWhatevers. Maxis have always been up-front about the "software toy" thing for all their products, you have to make your own game and set your own goals. The question is "was it good?", not "was it a game?". The complicated Needs system does sound like it gets in the way of that, though. Paul.Power fucked around with this message at 20:15 on Jun 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2019 20:08
|
|
|
There are barely any goals to set in the Sims. It's easy in Sim City 2000 given how many metrics are tracked. Idk I don't think it's a game for me so it's hard for me to evaluate (I've never liked sandbox games). I'll point out that the demographic of Sims players is thought to be higher % female than most other major PC games. This NY Daily News article claims 60% (https://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/women-click-sims-article-1.283191).
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2019 20:20
|
|
|
When I was a youngin' I had The Sims, made the Simpson family, watched Homer beat up Bart while Marge vanished and Maggy died in a puddle of piss, then didn't play it again after half an hour because it turns out it's super boring. 2/5 I guess The later ones though are actually good RBA Starblade fucked around with this message at 20:55 on Jun 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2019 20:37
|
|
|
RBA Starblade posted:When I was a youngin' I had The Sims, made the Simpson family, watched Homer beat up Bart while Marge vanished and Maggy died in a puddle of piss, then didn't play it again after half an hour because it turns out it's super boring. 1.5/5 I guess Sorry bud, you're gonna have to either round up or down. Sounds like your Simpson family was very true to life though!
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2019 20:45
|
|
|
I'll round it to 2 then 
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2019 20:55
|
|
|
Im going to give the game a 4. There really isn't any other game I can think of quite like it and they nailed down a lot of stuff the first time around, but I can't help but think that it was missing a lot that the sequels added and that its extremely basic.
|
|
#
?
Jun 3, 2019 21:01
|
|
|
When I got my first ever PC for my 18th birthday I also got Warcraft III, the latest Championship Manager and the Sims. Out of those 3 games the Sims was the one that grabbed my attention the least. I think that's more on me than the game though, I don't do well with unstructured sandboxes. I made some sims, I built some houses and I poked around with them for a while but it turned into this mad rush to try and fill up all the needs before and after work and it was just impossible. My perfectionist brain can't handle having to deal with always having stats in the red. It's a game where I can appreciate what it was doing but I don't think I'm the right audience for it. Going to rate it 3/5 in respect of what it offers even though it's not something that's ever going to click for me.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2019 18:40
|
|
|
It was okay. The basic premise got old relatively quickly so there was a lot of dlc to add new tricks or random stuuuuff, which is a mixed bag. Future games in the series would lack features earlier games had, until you got appropriate paid dlc of course. Some people got really into it, though. It's like an ant farm, except people. 3/5
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2019 08:42
|
|
|
Week 4: 8th June - 14th June The Sims proves that this thread isn't all about sunshine and joy by posting a very middling score of 2.8. Which gives us our current rankings: 1. Super Mario 64: 4.38 2. Doom: 4.22 3. The Sims: 2.8 This week we're taking a look at a game that I expect everybody will be familiar with... Computer and Video Games posted:The most exciting, action-packed head-to-head conflict yet seen in an arcade game. Electronic Gaming Monthly posted:The moves are perfect, the graphics outstanding and the audio exceptional. Sinclair User posted:It's not that bad really. RATED AT 90% ON GAMERANKINGS SOLD 14.75 MILLION COPIES REJUVENATED THE ARCADE SCENE 2017 INDUCTEE INTO THE VIDEO GAME HALL OF FAME 1992 GOLDEN JOYSTICK GAME OF THE YEAR  STREET FIGHTER II (Arcade, Capcom, 1991) The Grandaddy of Fighting Games has made its entrance. Street Fighter II put beat-em-ups on the map with its mixture of sharp combos, devastating specials and colourful characters. Few games have blown up into the cultural zeitgeist the way Street Fighter II did. Even non-gamers will recognise the likes of Ryu and Chun-Li and it's all because the fighting was fast and snappy and brutal like none ever seen before. It dragged the arcade scene into the 90s, blew up on every console system imaginable, released two updates in Turbo and Super but how good was it, really? And this week there's also a special B-B-B-B-BONUS POLL! Who's the best character?    
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2019 09:14
|
|
|
Hey Rarity, can you define if youre asking about a specific Revision of SF2 or all of it as a single "game"? The reason I ask is because of things like you showing Deejay in your images but he only got introduced in the fourth revision of the game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2019 09:26
|
|
|
Yeah you're going to have to specify which sf2 you're talking about here.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2019 09:27
|
|
|
I've only played Super Street Fighter II Turbo Revival, for the GBA It was pretty good
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2019 09:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 18:31 |
|
|
Ah sorry, I thought mentioning Turbo and Super in the blurb would be enough. This score covers The World Warrior/Turbo/Super as one single "game" (including all various ports). I feel like the updates are basically the same kind of thing as DLC.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2019 09:43
|
|