🚀 go-pugleaf

Now I seem to have created a bit of a misunderstanding here, so let me clear
this up. I never meant to compare the games. I never meant to start yet another
sustemwar flame-fest. I could care less, to be honest, since I work so damn
much I never get much chance to play games anymore. But since I started this
little battle, I'm gonna finish it. 

With that in mind, would you rather play a game that will most likely end 100%
linear, like Zelda always has, or at least get something with a good amout of
lasting power, such as a fighting game (or in this case car
fighting/combat/whatever)? I sincerely hope Nintendo at least follows example
that Konami did with Metal Gear Solid, which is to put TONS of secret hidden
stuff in with the game. TM3 has plenty of secrets. I still have yet to find
everything on MGS as well. I judge Zelda only on the experience of past titles,
and on the experience that Nintendo is still Nintendo. I do not have high hopes
for Zelda, but I do not think in the least that it will suck. 

I will be disappointed if Nintendo doesn't go all out to make Orinca of Time (I
think that's how it's spelled) they BEST game they have ever made. . . because
quite simply, their company's future relies on just that. In the two years of
the N64's history, less than 100 games were released. VERY FEW of them were of
any real interest to me, since the majority seems to be aimed at the younger
crowd. Maybe it's just me, but how many games can YOU count on the N64 that you
like to play? I'm betting you can count them on one hand. 

Now take a look at Sony. Sony is whooping Nintendo's ass on the market simply
because they offer a better and more varied product. How many fighting games on
the N64 come even close to Tekken 3? Well? How many of you N64ers got to play
Final Fantasy 7? How many will get to play Final Fantasy 8? How about the
currently popular real-time strategy game, how many exist on the N64? Zero. How
many games on the N64 get as sophisticated as Metal Gear Solid, as far as story
lines are concerned? 

I will hail the N64 for some tributes that it has made, such as the built-in
four player capabilities, or pioneering the analog and jolt features on
controlers. But let's face the facts; Nintendo still contiues to cater to the
younger crowd of gamers, and this has hurt them badly. You would think they had
learned their lesson when they cencored MK1. 

You would think with the CD medium being popular, Nintendo would have chosen it
due to the fact that it allows a greater base for creativity, but no. The
Nintendo 64 is the second biggest blunder the big N has made (Virtual Boy being
the first). Even Sega knew that cartrige games were on the way out. In no way
will Zelda 64 have the standing and lasting power that even it's predecessors
hadm simply because of memory restaints on an aged technology. You, Thelma,
think it's just pretty cinematics that you're missing on your N64? No. It's
much more. 

I tried so hard with the N64. But I lost my faith in Nintendo, and thank god I
tried before I bought it. I can only compare the N64 to like playing pc games
that come on 3.5, because that's what it feels like. And this 64DD thing that
got scrapped? Another fine example of Nintendo's stubborness to improve upon
itself. Business is like life, and I'm afraid Nintendo will learn this lesson 
the hard way:

"Those that do not adapt will not survive."

Ok. I'm done now. I've stated the facts, kiddies. I made my cool statement. I
quoted Charles Darwin. I sincerly like Twisted Metal 3. I could probably
compare it to MK3 as it would be compared to MK2. . . good, but not great. I
would probably like Zelda too. But guess which one I would play more? Call me
stupid if you like. Say I have no scruples. I don't care. I know what I like. I
like games that last. I still played MK3 and I'll still play TM3. 


TiGeR X-Treme

No returns, no refunds.

Satisfaction is MANDATORY!