-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Best cases of revisionist history
- Thread starter JoseLopez
- Start date
"Sony was planning on doing the same thing as the Xbox One, guys!"
JonnyDBrit
Member
Yep, normal animals. Like the pokeball, the floating poison rock, and the literal pile of slime.
You could though. Just with restrictions that don't exist in the physical market today.
Or you know, basically every Fighting type.
Guardian Monkey
Member
Well the biggest problem with metal gear solid 5 is that it's worthless in the cannon. It really doesn't do anything with the rest of the series except explain why solid snake fought and "killed" big boss twice in mg1 and mg2. Metal gear stories were fun because they were off the wall and crazy. This was boring and contributed nothing to the rest of the series. On the other side of things though the game play was spectacular.
That's not revisionist history, that's a form of hypocrisy.
Not that there's this hivemind of "Nintendo fans" or any other fans for that matter either, so ultimately your post is just nonsense. It may have been completely different people saying different things.
I know, revisionists would have you believe you couldn't.
Isn't that what the thread is about?
gigantor21
Member
Nothing about Sony crushing MS at E3 that year (by just standing still, LOL) was more satisfying than seeing that "inevitability" argument crash and burn. After the Xbox One reveal, I couldn't go on a single gaming site without people throwing that out like it was a legitimate claim, despite no evidence that it was going to happen. It's not like it would've been a good thing if Sony did the same thing anyway.
Even now, I still can't believe all that Xbox One stuff actually happened. It was like a parody of the industry becoming real life.
Ah ok. I thought the idea that you'd be able to trade in was the revision.
Don't mind me.
I dont know, in my experience most of the time it's not that opinion change as much as those who are critical are being very vocal and loud about it, and people judging without having tried said game, or whatever it is. And then the critics move on and the people that did try the game and liked it form the fan base that become very vocal and passionate and nostalgic, and then it looks like the general opinion has changed while there still might be a lot of people disliking said game, they simply don't express it as frequently. And some critics stop criticizing simply because they played the game and were wrong about it
This is of course not only the way it probably is but people need to stop generalizing in ways like "first you people didn't like this now you like it??" "first you thought this now you think that??" when a lot of the time there probably just are different people being heard, not people changing their minds, even if that of course happens too.
With Wind Waker I can only speak for myself and my friend and my first contact with the game was from my friend who got me interested in buying a gamecube when he talked with me about this new zelda game with cool graphics. So I waltzed in to the store on release day knowing almost nothing about it and absolutely nothing about that people disliked the graphics, and got the copy with OoT and got hooked for life. Loved them both.
This is of course not only the way it probably is but people need to stop generalizing in ways like "first you people didn't like this now you like it??" "first you thought this now you think that??" when a lot of the time there probably just are different people being heard, not people changing their minds, even if that of course happens too.
With Wind Waker I can only speak for myself and my friend and my first contact with the game was from my friend who got me interested in buying a gamecube when he talked with me about this new zelda game with cool graphics. So I waltzed in to the store on release day knowing almost nothing about it and absolutely nothing about that people disliked the graphics, and got the copy with OoT and got hooked for life. Loved them both.
Awwwwwww, I'd love a new Stuntman
Such a weird idea for a video game. It was like a mix of racing gameplay and rhythm gameplay.
jhmtehgamr20xx
Banned
Like it matters? It's a shit opinion; anyone who even remotely respects the history of the industry or has genuine non-baised tastes wouldn't entertain saying even half of that bullshit.
Lol I know right? Exactly the sort of thing I keep saying is a plague in the retro scene.
Particularly KevinCow's response; the first was sarcasm bringing up a sentiment.
Brawly Likes to Brawl
Member
Gen one had TWO separate piles of slime, even.
People claiming the genesis was shit outside of Sonic games must not have been there. They must be basing their opinions purely on downloading some emulator and just grabbing the top 3 game roms (probably sonic titles) then belting out bullshit.
Genesis was amazing. Sonic, RoadRash, Trouble Shooter, Gunstar Heroes, EA Sports games on their weird carts (even college football games IIRC), Phantasy Star and Hang On, Golden Axe, ThunderForce, Shining Force 2 (my first rpg!), Comix Zone, Populous? Streets of Rage!? Shinobi?
Cmon now. The SNES had the better Library but the Genesis was a beast. This wasn't a PS2 vs GCN level of gap between libraries, the gap was much smaller. SNES was better overall but the Genesis pulled its weight. EASILY.
This... I don't .. I don't know where that point of view came from. Even when we were arguing the merits of Sonic vs Mario across the lunchroom table in gradeschool no one would say such a thing.
Genesis was amazing. Sonic, RoadRash, Trouble Shooter, Gunstar Heroes, EA Sports games on their weird carts (even college football games IIRC), Phantasy Star and Hang On, Golden Axe, ThunderForce, Shining Force 2 (my first rpg!), Comix Zone, Populous? Streets of Rage!? Shinobi?
Cmon now. The SNES had the better Library but the Genesis was a beast. This wasn't a PS2 vs GCN level of gap between libraries, the gap was much smaller. SNES was better overall but the Genesis pulled its weight. EASILY.
This... I don't .. I don't know where that point of view came from. Even when we were arguing the merits of Sonic vs Mario across the lunchroom table in gradeschool no one would say such a thing.
LegendofDragoonLives
Member
If you're going to make a console and a handheld, then yes you will be responsible if one of them is lackluster at a certain department. I don't give Sony a pass on what happened to the VIta, and I certainly will not do the same to Nintendo's consoles.
Hyperboles that get to the point that Nintendo does not make enough new IPs and heavily rely on their proven franchises. That has been the general consensus and those people aren't wrong.
The Dreamcast died for a whole bunch of reasons (nearly every reason a good console could die tbh), but the PS2 was a significant factor... "I'm waiting for the PS2, have you seen the fucking graphics?" was a ridiculously common reason for skipping the Dreamcast back then. Metal Gear Solid 2 was super effective, lol.
I think the libraries are fundamentally different enough to leave that much more open to preference. I don't care that much for JRPGs (of the DQ/FF template variety) for example, and I really like arcade style games. It's just that the latter has largely fallen out of relevance with the gaming zeitgeist so they're hardly even considered any more when comparing the two.
There was also the direct comparison of the DVD player. For the longest time the PS2 was one of the better, cheaper DVD players you could get, and at a time when DVD was just starting to explode.
wolfhowwl
Banned
Mass Effect revisionism usually less involves the admittedly average or mediocre sequels and more inflating the reputation of the first game and pretending it wasn't an unfinished mess with ludicrously terrible combat (outright bad).
I remember rolling my eyes hard at the "CAPCOM'S IGNORED MEGA MAN!!" nonsense when MML3 got canned.
I played less of the Mega Man games in the 00s because I felt that there were literally too many of them
I mean, the issue isn't Soul Reaver, but Soul Reaver was a relative rarity on Dreamcast. Big "console" games were the rarity, not small scale arcade ports. And that's because large console publishers mostly avoided post-Saturn Sega.
And speaking of ports, it's bizarre you'd discount 3rd party ports on Wii U and I then go on to counter list a bunch of Dreamcast games... half of which are arcade or PC ports? But that seems to the theme here with Wii U; indies don't count, ports don't count, we have to make sure most of those 400 games don't count. Meanwhile on Dreamcast equivalents of both are perfectly valid and everything was awesome with AAA games like, uh, TXR and DOA.
I don't really think DC and Wii U are good parallels either though. Their similarities are mostly circumstantial and superficial. I don't think GC and Wii U are particularly close either, especially when it comes to 3rd party games. Unlike Wii U (or Dreamcast) I'd say Gamecube actually had halfway decent 3rd party support.
Halo isn't iconic nor was it a cultural phenominon. I've seen the debates and people seem to have forgotten not only the effect Halo has had on the game industry but the entertainment industry as a whole.
Let alone Halo 2's launch was the first huge worldwide videogame launch event not only covered by the mainstream media but also to outgross in 24 hours what most movies make at the box office inthe first 3 days.
The industry would be alot difirent without Halo.
Let alone Halo 2's launch was the first huge worldwide videogame launch event not only covered by the mainstream media but also to outgross in 24 hours what most movies make at the box office inthe first 3 days.
The industry would be alot difirent without Halo.
jhmtehgamr20xx
Banned
I wouldn't even say you had to be there to get the picture: I didn't get my Genesis until 1995 for example, the same year it was officially discontinued. I played it religiously until getting a PS1 three years later, and even after that and an N64. It was my most played console out of the three of those. I've been going back and digging through the collection of both it and SNES (which I never had as a child) these days and it's library is easily on par, and in some cases superior, to offerings on the SNES.
For example, while Genesis's best stab at a Zelda clone still wasn't as topnotch as LTTP, it was at least comparable with Zelda clones on SNES like Illusion of Gaia, and superior to a fair number of others. Likewise I can't think of any SNES shmups on par with Gaires or ThunderForce IV as a total package, but Axeley is very good technically and in play systems, and beats out a decent amount of Genesis's other shmups.
There was no real equivalent to Super Metroid on Genesis? That's false. Like it or hate it Chakan: The Forever Man was a lot like Genesis's Super Metroid. Meanwhile I honestly can't think of an SNES equivalent to Alien Soldier off the top of my head, maybe someone can chime in.
There's no reason to absolutely denigrate one system over the other; they had their share of strengths of weaknesses we're all pretty much familiar with by now. Only someone completely ignorant or completely deceptive would entertain dragging either system down that far.
This is such an excellent point, and it's particularly damning and troubling when you think about it. There's plenty of reasons why it's happened, mainly b/c there was no one like Sega, SNK or NEC to push that style at the forefront for consoles once they left the market (which is why it's particularly insulting when people try to call the Wii U a "Dreamcast 2"; whatever similarities they have in common are superficial), Sony being successful in ushering in the cinematic style and Microsoft being successful in pushing big FPSers and Western games which, given their PC origins, were almost forced to go after different design styles b/c they could not directly compete with the arcade-style offerings of back in the day outside of very rare exceptions like Jazz Jackrabbit.
I mean, the thing is there's somewhat of a slow resurgence of them coming back in the non-mobile gaming space, but it's almost exclusively contained to certain indie games, and a lot of those aren't as good at it as the legends they're inspired by. Though when a few come by that are truly exceptional, like Omnikron or Freedom Planet or the upcoming 90s Arcade Racer, are definite good signs of hope.
Mushroomer25
Member
Can it really be revisionist history if we never know the truth? Sony had the patents to do the same thing. Microsoft couldn't have been alone in seeing digital as the industry's future.
The people who actually know what was going on behind the scenes at Sony & Microsoft at the time are locked behind serious NDAs, and we'll only get the truth a few decades from now when they can afford to burn a few bridges for the sake of a great tell-all book.
direct_quote
Member
Recessive genes are usually inferior though. It's one of the main reasons inbreeding is bad because you are more likely to express more recessive genes.
Thankfully there's actually a lot of objectivity we can use for this comparison.
The Genesis had -
1) a library similar in size to the SNES for english releases, about 800 games if I recall
2) Most of the large third parties on board pumping out exclusive and multi-platform games
3) heavy first party support
4) similar(?) hardware sales numbers as SNES
So... similar number of games, similar number of sales, and a swirling pool of opinions by a bunch of people that have likely only played a small (and different) fraction of each console's games (like you) = "revisionist history" that they're comparable?
Also, unless there's some well documented enjoyment levels of console owners back then that you've researched, you're talking about a history you literally didn't experience since you didn't own a genesis.
soul creator
Member
When people talk about how much they miss J Allard, it always seem funny to me because I seem to remember him catching shit for the hoodie/suit jacket, talking about Velocity Girl, and him being some kind of lame forced attempt by Microsoft to be "cool".
nowadays though, he represents the "good old days of Xbox" when it was "for the hardcore" before MS "lost their way". Same thing with thinking the unimplemented DRM thing is some unforgivable offense that means MS can't be trusted again, even though it seems like the RROD was by far a more serious issue to base one's lack of trust on (since it actually affected something people spent money on and made the product nonfunctional). Yet I tend to hear more "I can't trust MS because of them trying to propose DRM" rather than "I can't trust MS because of the RROD". even though MS addressed both problems.
On a related note, one could argue it's somewhat revisionist to pretend like TV/Games/Sports/Kinect/discless play/Etc. was some kind of shocking change of plans, when for 3+ years beforehand, the Xbox 360 was always pretty much the same thing, and had great success with it. Sure, feel free to not like that approach (and obviously, there were other factors such as the $499 price that made it less acceptable), but people pretending like it was some grand "hardcore gamer betrayal", rather than the logical extension of their existing trajectory always seemed odd to me.
nowadays though, he represents the "good old days of Xbox" when it was "for the hardcore" before MS "lost their way". Same thing with thinking the unimplemented DRM thing is some unforgivable offense that means MS can't be trusted again, even though it seems like the RROD was by far a more serious issue to base one's lack of trust on (since it actually affected something people spent money on and made the product nonfunctional). Yet I tend to hear more "I can't trust MS because of them trying to propose DRM" rather than "I can't trust MS because of the RROD". even though MS addressed both problems.
On a related note, one could argue it's somewhat revisionist to pretend like TV/Games/Sports/Kinect/discless play/Etc. was some kind of shocking change of plans, when for 3+ years beforehand, the Xbox 360 was always pretty much the same thing, and had great success with it. Sure, feel free to not like that approach (and obviously, there were other factors such as the $499 price that made it less acceptable), but people pretending like it was some grand "hardcore gamer betrayal", rather than the logical extension of their existing trajectory always seemed odd to me.
:/
How is people saying it as if it were fact not revisionist history? That's literally what you are doing right now. "For all we know Sony could of done it!"
Companies have hundreds of patents that they never act on. It's brand protection.
I believe the systems sold about the same outside of Japan during the actual gen itself.
Manmademan
Member
Nope. Sega beat nintendo in the US every single year the two systems went head to head. Nintendo was in a VERY bad place thanks to Sega's marketing machine, and Sega's almost complete lock on the sports genre. Sega ending support for the Genesis MUCH earlier than nintendo did for the SNES in order to push the saturn makes the gen seem a lot closer than it was.
edit: from wiki, because I'm too lazy to find a better source:
Yeah, I'm sure the Super Famicom was a whole other beast. Not too familiar with the Japanese libraries.
Manmademan
Member
Nintendo remained dominant in Japan, which explains the surplus of JRPGs on that system compared to what was available on the genesis.
But it's impossible to overstate the massive, massive amount of damage to nintendo's brand that SEGA did from 1991-1995.
So it's similar to the Wii vs. 360 in the US? Wii was insanely popular, but the 360 overtook in America in 2014, when both console manufacturers had moved on.
I was in the UK in the 90s and it certainly felt like Sega was more popular.
Manmademan
Member
not the best comparison, but you're going in the right direction. SEGA underestimated demand for the genesis in the US and terminated support far earlier than they should have- they literally didn't have enough Genesis consoles to meet consumer demand in 1995, the year they launched the Saturn here. There was some fairly interesting conflict between Sega US and Sega JP over the direction of the business that explains why.
The vast majority of SEGA's fanbase was in the US, but the parent company chose to focus on JP and pretty much killed SEGA's console business because of it.
jhmtehgamr20xx
Banned
Oof, no they did not, unfortunately. SNES kind of really steamrolled Genesis in Japan. But FWIW, Genesis did somewhat similar to SNES in most of Europe, and was definitely the goto in Brazil.
U.S was pretty contested when you average it out tho the highest marketshare Genesis got was 65% in 1993 iirc.
EDIT: Reread your comment. Still not quite true but it's closer than most are aware. Genesis did about 40 million WW, SNES around 50 million. The 28.1 number people love to quote for Genesis cuts out Brazil and a few other markets, and also only accounts for up to 1995, whereas the SNES number accounts for all markets it was available in and goes up to 1997, the year that system was officially discontinued.
Supermanisdead
Member
all the people saying N64 is the best nintendo console like... u can count the good games on 1 hand. i get that super mario 64 and ocarina of time are probably the 2 best in their series and 2 of the best games ever but lmao come on. did u really enjoy quest 64 or did u just not have anything else for months?
It's alright, I'm too subtle for my own good!
Yup, SNES definitely dominate the Megadrive in Japan, which is what I meant by "outside of Japan."
zero shift
Banned
"Nintendo used to be hardcore."
Interficium
Banned
Off the top of my head:
Nintendo fans denying having meltdowns when Metroid Prime was shown to be first-person.
Nintendo fans denying having meltdowns when Metroid Prime was shown to be first-person.
jhmtehgamr20xx
Banned
Lol yeah I know, caught that on the reread. My bad.
MasterHoodie
Member
There are a ton of good games on that system, but I didn't know until recently that it got smashed in just about everything that mattered by the PS1.
nkarafo
Member
"Halo invented dual analog FPS controls and revolutionized console FPSes"
Even Goldeneye had real dual analog controls, despite having just one analog on it's controller (you had to hold two controllers, in the same way you would hold 2 nunchucks. It works much better than it sounds). And it also "revolutionized console FPSes", a few years before Halo.
Even Goldeneye had real dual analog controls, despite having just one analog on it's controller (you had to hold two controllers, in the same way you would hold 2 nunchucks. It works much better than it sounds). And it also "revolutionized console FPSes", a few years before Halo.
There sure is a lot of revisionism surrounding the MegaDrive and classic SEGA as a whole. Imo most of it comes from the bad image arcade gaming has among current gamers which was the MD's and SEGA's forte at the time.
Atleast the misconceptions of the Megadrive's soundchip has largely being addressed on this forum, even though I'm sure there are many gamers out there who still think the MD could only produce robot fart noises.
BTW how bad were the SNES' PAL50 conversions compared to the MD's? I never owned a Nintendo system in the SD era but I hear 1st party PAL conversions were pretty shitty.
Atleast the misconceptions of the Megadrive's soundchip has largely being addressed on this forum, even though I'm sure there are many gamers out there who still think the MD could only produce robot fart noises.
BTW how bad were the SNES' PAL50 conversions compared to the MD's? I never owned a Nintendo system in the SD era but I hear 1st party PAL conversions were pretty shitty.
Supermanisdead
Member
for a system that came out in 1996 and wasn't replaced until 2001, it maybe has the most barren overall library.