Students helping students, join us in improving Bored of Studies by donating and supporting future students!
You were like 13. .... I call that very young and impressionable. What game was this?Hero Of Time said:That is your opinion. Graphics and better physics don't mean a better game at all, and they usually have a predictable and boring as plot. Anyway, my all time favourite game was released four years ago, hardly when I was young and all so impressionable. Games now just target mass audiences due to the realised and expansive audience of videogames today compared to years ago, when they weren't as popular, and audience specific. I never liked Pac-Man really either.
well what makes a good game for you then?Hero Of Time said:That is your opinion. Graphics and better physics don't mean a better game at all, and they usually have a predictable and boring as plot. Anyway, my all time favourite game was released four years ago, hardly when I was young and all so impressionable. Games now just target mass audiences due to the realised and expansive audience of videogames today compared to years ago, when they weren't as popular, and audience specific. I never liked Pac-Man really either.
True that.Hero Of Time said:I agree video games aren't as a majority, as good as they used to be.
Do I really have to bring up the "Bomberman" arguement again on ya, stas? Ahh hell, I think I will anyway:stazi said:...how do you conclude this? nostalgia doesn't equal a better game. Games have better physics, better graphics, at times better storylines, and all of these factors amount to better gameplay. It's easy to think back and go "oh yeah, that game made a huge impact on me" as you were young and more impressionable at that time, but ultimately, games have improved a shitload since pacman. In fact, Pacman is a horrible game.
This game has got a lot better graphics than the predecessors of the franchise, and being put on the 360 has a lot more hardware to work with to produce better physics, enviroments, create a more stylistic storyline and therefore better gameplay by your standards. Not to mention it's in 3D.stazi said:...how do you conclude this? nostalgia doesn't equal a better game. Games have better physics, better graphics, at times better storylines, and all of these factors amount to better gameplay. It's easy to think back and go "oh yeah, that game made a huge impact on me" as you were young and more impressionable at that time, but ultimately, games have improved a shitload since pacman. In fact, Pacman is a horrible game.
I loved Wind Wakerwatkinzez said:To the people who think games aren't as good as they used to be- it helps to stop playing sequels to franchises and instead try something new. Who cares if Wind Waker might not have lived up to Ocarina of Time? Beyond Good and Evil made up for it.
1)The most over-rated game?What do you guys think is:]
1) Manhunt wasn't critically acclaimed or highly rated. It was considered an OK game.s-AINT said:1)The most over-rated game?
Manhunt
2)The most under-rated game?
Area 51
3)The most disappointing game?
50 Cent Bulletproof was the worst game ever created, Space Invaders was more entertaining! Waste of a disk and cover paper.
4)The most surprisingly good game?
Halo: Combat Evolved demo for PC. It may be old, but online play is halirious.
Free Demo Here:
I think that there's a divide between what games are realistic and which games aren't. There are two main groupings: Simulations and Arcade titles. Both have their merits._dhj_ said:I don't like the idea of moving towards "realism" in games. Games should provide an escape from real life not an imitation of it. That's the main reason why games aren't as fun as they used to be.