Author Topic: boom completed portal 2  (Read 2338 times)

SNES

The 8-bit - 16-bit era is more of a golden age than N64 - Gamecube
But then again that's opinion.

SNES

The 8-bit - 16-bit era is more of a golden age than N64 - Gamecube
I can understand 16-bit and N64, as the Gamecube wasn't that amazing but in my opinionthe NES was boring.
Of course, it's all opinions, so it doesn't really matter
Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask damnit

But then again that's opinion.
It's generally regarded as the "Golden Age". That and the Atari days.

I can understand 16-bit and N64, as the Gamecube wasn't that amazing but in my opinionthe NES was boring.
Of course, it's all opinions, so it doesn't really matter
Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask damnit
Every console generation has its masterpieces.

It's generally regarded as the "Golden Age". That and the Atari days.
It's still opinion.

It's generally regarded as the "Golden Age". That and the Atari days.
I suppose but I mean my personal view of the Golden Age

oh and don't get me started on Atari *shudder* because sure it was really old but nobody knew how to make a game. Of course there were good ones like PONG but the console wasn't worth the money because everything else spare 3 games were total utter crap

It's still opinion.
So?
The golden age of radio is generally thought of between 1930-1950, you're saying that's just an opinion? That 1980-2000 is the real golden age?

I suppose but I mean my personal view of the Golden Age

oh and don't get me started on Atari *shudder* because sure it was really old but nobody knew how to make a game. Of course there were good ones like PONG but the console wasn't worth the money because everything else spare 3 games were total utter crap
You just said one of the very first consoles was bad because no one knew what they were doing.

It's hard to say that and not look handicapped.

So?
The golden age of radio is generally thought of between 1930-1950, you're saying that's just an opinion? That 1980-2000 is the real golden age?
It's not really fact though, it's a collection of opinions.

It's not really fact though, it's a collection of opinions.
Yeah, from people more knowledgeable in the subject than us. Same with video games, experts on that subject generally refer to the Atari days or 8-bit - 16-bit as the "Golden Age of Video Games".

Yeah, from people more knowledgeable in the subject than us. Same with video games, experts on that subject generally refer to the Atari days or 8-bit - 16-bit as the "Golden Age of Video Games".
I know. It's still a gosh darn opinion.

It doesn't factually prove anything. Now lets stop this derailment. This is nonsensical.

What is nonsensical is every time there is some sort of argument/ disagreement on the internet, on party always has to say "opinion".

What is nonsensical is every time there is some sort of argument/ disagreement on the internet, one party always has to say "opinion".
Well it is. Just stating the obvious.

You just said one of the very first consoles was bad because no one knew what they were doing.

It's hard to say that and not look handicapped.
The problem didn't lie in the console. There WERE good games for the Atari. The problem was standards. Nintendo 64 complicated gaming a lot with 3D (yeah yeah yeah PS1 and PC I know) worlds and the more advanced memory storage. What did this mean? It measn bad companies couldn't release games anymore. In reality, anybody could make a game for the NES if they had the money, the cartridge, the time, and the will. It wouldn't be a good game, but still a game. This was the main reason that NES through GameCube was all a very good time for gaming: CARE. During the second half of the GameCube's lifetime, a lot of companies that were known for making games because they honestly wanted to began doing it simply for the money. This caused games to go down in quality and enjoyability. The same can be said for before the NES, I suppose.

What is nonsensical is every time there is some sort of argument/ disagreement on the internet, on party always has to say "opinion".
I know. It's still a gosh darn opinion.

It doesn't factually prove anything. Now lets stop this derailment. This is nonsensical.
Because it is. Also this is turning into an argument,  which I was never intending it to become. Simply stating opinions. I don't have anything to prove, you don't have anything to prove, Cyber doesn't have anything to prove. That's what speech is, isn't it? Sharing of opinions?

Hey silly heads, stop derailing topic pls

The problem didn't lie in the console. There WERE good games for the Atari. The problem was standards. Nintendo 64 complicated gaming a lot with 3D (yeah yeah yeah PS1 and PC I know) worlds and the more advanced memory storage. What did this mean? It measn bad companies couldn't release games anymore. In reality, anybody could make a game for the NES if they had the money, the cartridge, the time, and the will. It wouldn't be a good game, but still a game. This was the main reason that NES through GameCube was all a very good time for gaming: CARE. During the second half of the GameCube's lifetime, a lot of companies that were known for making games because they honestly wanted to began doing it simply for the money. This caused games to go down in quality and enjoyability. The same can be said for before the NES, I suppose.
Because it is. Also this is turning into an argument,  which I was never intending it to become. Simply stating opinions. I don't have anything to prove, you don't have anything to prove, Cyber doesn't have anything to prove. That's what speech is, isn't it? Sharing of opinions?
You really didn't need to make a long ass post to prove your point.

Portal 1 was easy though.
I think Portal 2 was harder.
Portal 2 was harder because there were those long stages where you hop around on the catwalks trying to figure out where to place your next portal.
Portal 1 was harder in the sense that there were more full-fledged puzzles to complete back-to-back.