Xiron wrote:
Toshabi, I think you should start to realize that not everyone likes old "classic" games.
What Toshabi thinks: People are kind of ******ed for buying a product and complaining that it's in black and white when the screen shots located right underneath the "add to cart" button are in black and white.
What Canoas is trying to do: Make it seem like Toshabi is a fanboy of Mario Land 2 and is crying because people downvoted his stupid game.
What's actually happening: Canoas is having a miserable time trying to failtroll the great and powerful Toshabi.
I give him props though for baiting the people that he did bait in this thread though, it's entertaining to see people argue with him despite him taking a "No matter what you say I'm going to have to disagree with you despite my stance being ******ed" approach. The whole point of this thread was suppose to be about people complaining about things they got stuck with for them not paying attention to obvious details before their purchase. :V
MrCuddowls wrote:
Hahahaha telling me my items are bad HHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAhA
Listen buddy don't judge someone's items if your only level 13
This build is Platinum approved, Thats all you need to know
Canoas
<Member>
<Member>
Beeswarm17 wrote:
Screen size has little to do with graphics changes. They changed nothing, not because the screen is smaller, but because it is cheaper to directly port it and people will still buy it.
It does actually. Smaller screens means less space for details, so the graphics can't be that complex or it'll be too confusing and unpleasant to the eye. The bigger the screen the better the graphics need to be.
Beeswarm17
<Member>
<Member>
Canoas wrote:
It does actually. Smaller screens means less space for details, so the graphics can't be that complex or it'll be too confusing and unpleasant to the eye. The bigger the screen the better the graphics need to be.
That doesn't actually change things like polygon count, but I see what you mean. Also, after looking at some comparable screen shots, they did actually change a few things. They improved on some of it, though it's pretty minor.
Freddy Shopan
<Member>
<Member>
You need to log in before commenting.
@Beeswarm
Ocarina of Time 3D is for DS.. The first ocarina of time was for TV. Obviously the graphics won't be that different because the screen size got reduced by 95%. Play ocarina of time on a TV and you'll see the difference.
Would you buy FF VII (I assume you meant VII, because XII is rather recent) for 60$ if it came out now? With the lack of voices and blocky graphics? I don't think so. At least I know I wouldn't.
Obviously games aren't only based on graphics. I never said they were. I've been saying exactly the opposite. For me playability and story > graphics. However, I still acknowledge that graphics are important for a game and a game that has 20 year old graphics will never sell in today's market. It's not a difference like between MW3 and MW2, it's being able to see every individual pixel on the screen.
Whether they looked at the screenshots is irrelevant. That does not change how the game is. They bought a game, tried it and found it boring so they rated it 1/10. They are completely unbiased as they are rating the game as if it had come out now.
Screen size has little to do with graphics changes. They changed nothing, not because the screen is smaller, but because it is cheaper to directly port it and people will still buy it.
I will not buy FF VII for $60 because I don't like the game. I would buy FF4 for $60 if it is in new condition, in the box, with instruction guide and everything. I straight up would. Call me an idiot, but I think it's a better game than most new games on the market now. Plus, the resale value on that is pretty damn high, because there are others like me.
I agreed with you that you didn't say graphics were everything. That was the first thing I said. That is why I said I agreed with you. You told me that you believe that story and gameplay are more important than graphics, and I believe you. That was not an argument. I also agreed that graphics are important to a game and that 20 year old games will not sell at the same price as new games on the market. None of this was disagreement.
If they think the game is bad, that's fine. I don't think they even played the game, though. They essentially went to McDonald's, asked for a big mac, and got a veggie burger. They then proceeded to talk about how bad the veggie burger was. No ****, they wanted a big mac. If they wanted a veggie burger, they would have bought one. These people rage reviewed a game they didn't even want to play because it was different than what they wanted.