Fangirling? Maybe. Nonetheless, I'm right.
I know, I know, why aren't I working on all those past due sets I have? Well, I am. I took a quick break to check livejournal, and comments in this thread struck a nerve.
Why, may I ask, is a Silent Hill game on the Revolution such a horrible idea? How in the world is it any different than the PS3? The controller can be held like any normal controller - even if it looks different at times, you can assemble it to be that good old shape you're used to - so why would the game necessarily be any different control-wise? And even if they did controls differently, would that really be bad? I'm excited by the idea of holding an actual flashlight or gun in Silent Hill. That would be absolutely mind-blowing, if you ask me. It's not like the series was ever about conventions. Breaking out and doing something new and unexpected is what the title is based on. Why should they stop now?
Now, I'm not primarily a Nintendo fangirl, anyone can tell you this. I mean, I like Nintendo, but my favorite console is the PS. My digital camera is a Cybershot. The laptop I desire (besides a MacBook Pro) is a Vaio. Sony makes me squee on a pretty regular basis. Besides that, I gamed up first with Colecovision, fools, so I don't even have the "Nintendo iz mah r00Tz!!!11!11!" bias. I am, however, greatly offended by the idea that being on a Nintendo console would change the content of the game. The only games that involve Mario and the like are... prepare yourselves... Nintendo games! Ahh, oh no, logic! Why in the world would Mario appear in a Silent Hill game? It's not even made by Nintendo! Say it with me, folks: Konami makes Silent Hill. Konami is not Nintendo. Thus, Nintendo does not make Silent Hill. Got it?
Honestly, did the Gamecube Resident Evil games have "posters for old school mario games" or make you "beat off giant mushrooms with a frying pan as your melee weapon"? That's just ridiculous and uninformed. Stagnant little fools. Embrace innovation, you crazies, or stop playing Silent Hill. You can't do both. Besides, prejudice is wrong. Give Nintendo a chance. It's equivalent to someone saying, "Oh, you play Silent Hill. Isn't that all dark? You cut yourself, don't you? Oh, and I bet you wear really thick eyeliner and listen to bands that 'embrace your pain'. Gosh, you goths are all alike."
Stupid, yah? Stop being that.
... Fuckwads.
P.S. OH NOES, I'm angry on teh interwebs!!! Blame all the ranting on my frustration with school. Gorramit.
Edit 3/3/06 3:14am: P.P.S. Sweet Jesus on a stick, Jaime's comment on this post is far better than the post itself. Go read!
Why, may I ask, is a Silent Hill game on the Revolution such a horrible idea? How in the world is it any different than the PS3? The controller can be held like any normal controller - even if it looks different at times, you can assemble it to be that good old shape you're used to - so why would the game necessarily be any different control-wise? And even if they did controls differently, would that really be bad? I'm excited by the idea of holding an actual flashlight or gun in Silent Hill. That would be absolutely mind-blowing, if you ask me. It's not like the series was ever about conventions. Breaking out and doing something new and unexpected is what the title is based on. Why should they stop now?
Now, I'm not primarily a Nintendo fangirl, anyone can tell you this. I mean, I like Nintendo, but my favorite console is the PS. My digital camera is a Cybershot. The laptop I desire (besides a MacBook Pro) is a Vaio. Sony makes me squee on a pretty regular basis. Besides that, I gamed up first with Colecovision, fools, so I don't even have the "Nintendo iz mah r00Tz!!!11!11!" bias. I am, however, greatly offended by the idea that being on a Nintendo console would change the content of the game. The only games that involve Mario and the like are... prepare yourselves... Nintendo games! Ahh, oh no, logic! Why in the world would Mario appear in a Silent Hill game? It's not even made by Nintendo! Say it with me, folks: Konami makes Silent Hill. Konami is not Nintendo. Thus, Nintendo does not make Silent Hill. Got it?
Honestly, did the Gamecube Resident Evil games have "posters for old school mario games" or make you "beat off giant mushrooms with a frying pan as your melee weapon"? That's just ridiculous and uninformed. Stagnant little fools. Embrace innovation, you crazies, or stop playing Silent Hill. You can't do both. Besides, prejudice is wrong. Give Nintendo a chance. It's equivalent to someone saying, "Oh, you play Silent Hill. Isn't that all dark? You cut yourself, don't you? Oh, and I bet you wear really thick eyeliner and listen to bands that 'embrace your pain'. Gosh, you goths are all alike."
Stupid, yah? Stop being that.
... Fuckwads.
P.S. OH NOES, I'm angry on teh interwebs!!! Blame all the ranting on my frustration with school. Gorramit.
Edit 3/3/06 3:14am: P.P.S. Sweet Jesus on a stick, Jaime's comment on this post is far better than the post itself. Go read!
no subject
and then they go back to playing ridge racer (you know, the best selling of the five ps3 launch titles)
People that bash the revolution obviously have not seen the xbox 360, nor have they realized that the ps3 "is not designed to be a game machine." Sony wants it to be a home entertainment mecca. Oh, and it runs on a processor that has never been used in any piece of consumer electronics yet, hell, not anything ever until the recent IBM server with it. DAMN, seems pretty risky for an industry that, because of sony, is all about not taking risks. D00d.
The revolution is really the only hope for next-gen consoles, and obviously Konami realizes this. The period of "ooh look at how good the graphics are" as the primary reason for buying a new console is over. Instead of investing dickloads of money into new hardware that will never be used to even a fraction of it's potential, maybe, just maybe, they should try and make GOOD games every once in a while. Note: Halo does not count as a good game.
Nintendo has proven with the DS that something that seems gimicky can really be a good thing. I doubted the DS. I was very wrong. I think most people were very wrong. The PSP didn't trounce the DS, at all. It is regularly outsold by the DS in the regions they are available. Also, I don't think there are any games for the PSP. Oh wait, there is lumines. And that GTA game. The DS has far less processing power, but...
1. it actually has good games
2. it can run longer (a lot longer) than that copy of Episode III you paid 30 bucks for on UMD.
3. it actually adds new and fun aspects to portable gaming
Oh, and also, IT IS ABOUT HALF THE FUCKING COST OF THE PSP. The games are cheaper, too. After I pay $250 and $40 or $50 for one game I'm broke. Or, I can pay $130 and five or six games, and then be broke. and the game carts are smaller, and they don't spin so they have almost no load time.
Nintendo is innovating. Sony is not. Microsoft is doing it's usual microsoft thing, copying other and not doing a great job. Sony innovates when it wants to get into a market and dominate it (original PS, Walkman, most home electronics), and then they sit around circle jerking or something. Sony is an inept company and it shows. Apple killed them in portable music. Apple. APPLE????? what the fuck, how did that happen? Sony, the biggest consumer electronics company in the FUCKING WORLD got beaten soundly by a computer company that has less than 10% of the home pc market. Good job guys, in 5 years the 'kids' won't even know what a walkman is.
I think the console market will be even harsher to sony. People don't want to pay $500 for a console and then pay $60-$70 for games. At least I don't. Unless those are really really really fucking good games. Like, collecting gold in the game causes real fucking gold to shoot out of the gold port on the limited edition gold-shitting edition of the ps3.
The Revolution is a gamer's only hope. Nintendo knows games. They will never go away and they will rise again in the console market. That's why it's call the Revolution.