Games only-for-Gamecube

[Edmond Dantes]

This argument makes even less sense than the previous guy's argument.

You're the only one who thinks these arguments don't make sense. That should tell you something.

Your definition would apply to every game ever released on more than one platform.

Keep repeating this bold-faced lie and maybe some day it will become true. Or monkeys will fly out of my butt. Whichever.

Honestly, I'm curious to hear what it would take for a game to be "unique" in your view of things. You've as much as said drastically altering the gameplay (as REmake does) and the plot (as Lunar: SSSC does) don't make it a different game. According to what we've heard from you so far, Mega Man 2 isn't a unique game because it recycles the gameplay and some boss themes from Mega Man 1, Donkey Kong GB isn't a new game because the first four levels are remakes of the arcade game, Strider 2 isn't a new game because its a retelling of Strider 1's story, hell Ms. Pac-Man isn't a new game because its just the original Pac-Man with new mazes. This makes far less sense than anything anyone on the "REmake is a Gamecube Exclusive" side of the fence is suggesting.

[Bojay1997]

Really? As far as I can tell, the majority of the people in this thread agree with me which is why the game is no longer listed in the OP. In my opinion, for something to be a unique game on a particular platform, it has to have not been released on any other platform and has to have a totally unique narrative. I could care less about the graphics, the game engine, the character models, changes to the map, changes to the means of killing enemies or anything else. Those can and often are changed when a new platform comes along and a company decides to re-release a title in an enhanced form. If the fundamental narrative isn't completely unique to the game (i.e. not just re-translated or reworked or added upon), it's just not a different game. I have no issue with calling RE on Gamecube a heavily enhanced version of Resident Evil and certainly worth playing through again even if you have played the other versions of the same game, but in my opinion, that doesn't make it a unique game or a platform exclusive.

You seem to have just taken up the old "I know it when I see it" line of reasoning from the Supreme Court's pornography rulings. Here is what you claim to be your bright line definition - "If you can get basically the same experience from one that you could from the other, then its a port. If its substantially different, then its a new game." Great, what's "substantial"? I have actually played RE on the Gamecube, the PSX and Saturn. To me, it's basically the same experience on all three, the Gamecube just looks better and there are some minor changes to the story, areas, puzzles and enemies. You seem to believe there's a substantial difference whatever that means. Unfortunately, I need a more precise definition than that because nothing you have presented so far is a standard that can be applied in a fair and neutral manner to the entire Gamecube library.

Heck, wouldn't RE 4 on Wii be considered a unique game because it added motion control which is clearly an entirely new means of gameplay not present on the Gamecube version? Where would you place that particular re-release?

You're the only one who thinks these arguments don't make sense. That should tell you something.



Keep repeating this bold-faced lie and maybe some day it will become true. Or monkeys will fly out of my butt. Whichever.

Honestly, I'm curious to hear what it would take for a game to be "unique" in your view of things. You've as much as said drastically altering the gameplay (as REmake does) and the plot (as Lunar: SSSC does) don't make it a different game. According to what we've heard from you so far, Mega Man 2 isn't a unique game because it recycles the gameplay and some boss themes from Mega Man 1, Donkey Kong GB isn't a new game because the first four levels are remakes of the arcade game, Strider 2 isn't a new game because its a retelling of Strider 1's story, hell Ms. Pac-Man isn't a new game because its just the original Pac-Man with new mazes. This makes far less sense than anything anyone on the "REmake is a Gamecube Exclusive" side of the fence is suggesting.

[Edmond Dantes]

Really? As far as I can tell, the majority of the people in this thread agree with me which is why the game is no longer listed in the OP.

The OP had removed it long before you even entered the thread. Also, I've seen two people (not counting myself) criticize your argument and one person almost sided with you until I gave him more information, now he's not so sure. I may be jumping the gun here but it sure doesn't seem like you have a lot of support.

In my opinion, for something to be a unique game on a particular platform, it has to have not been released on any other platform and has to have a totally unique narrative. I could care less about the graphics, the game engine, the character models, changes to the map, changes to the means of killing enemies or anything else. Those can and often are changed when a new platform comes along and a company decides to re-release a title in an enhanced form. If the fundamental narrative isn't completely unique to the game (i.e. not just re-translated or reworked or added upon), it's just not a different game. I have no issue with calling RE on Gamecube a heavily enhanced version of Resident Evil and certainly worth playing through again even if you have played the other versions of the same game, but in my opinion, that doesn't make it a unique game or a platform exclusive.

You might seriously want to rethink that. I mean, gameplay doesn't matter at all? In video GAMES? Only having a "totally unique narrative" matters? What makes a narrative "totally unique" anyway? Final Fantasy IV borrows a lot of themes and concepts from earlier games in the series--is it still "totally unique"?

I don't have much to say about the rest of the post. All it is, is more of you calling me vague, saying I need to explain myself (you no longer have the right to ask that of me after delivering this doozy) and once more trying to claim some inconsequential change made in a particular port contradicts my definition when it in fact does not. Quit doing that. It's just making you look bad.

[Bojay1997]

Again, all you are doing is stating your opinion just like I am stating mine. There is no right or wrong here and your opinion isn't any more or less valid than mine. I just don't agree with you that your standard is as clear as you think it is. I see games as essentially an interactive narrative medium and for something to be a platform exclusive, in my opinion it has to have an original narrative which doesn't simply retell the same story with changes. I will concede that there is vagueness in my proposed standard, but ultimately, what matters is what each of us personally feel to be appropriate for our own collections.

The OP had removed it long before you even entered the thread. Also, I've seen two people (not counting myself) criticize your argument and one person almost sided with you until I gave him more information, now he's not so sure. I may be jumping the gun here but it sure doesn't seem like you have a lot of support.



You might seriously want to rethink that. I mean, gameplay doesn't matter at all? In video GAMES? Only having a "totally unique narrative" matters? What makes a narrative "totally unique" anyway? Final Fantasy IV borrows a lot of themes and concepts from earlier games in the series--is it still "totally unique"?

I don't have much to say about the rest of the post. All it is, is more of you calling me vague, saying I need to explain myself (you no longer have the right to ask that of me after delivering this doozy) and once more trying to claim some inconsequential change made in a particular port contradicts my definition when it in fact does not. Quit doing that. It's just making you look bad.

[old_skoolin_jim]

Edit: Dualshock PS1 is also acceptable for my GC version. Black label, of course.

RE1 Dualshock PS1 was only released under the GH label. No black label exists.

[Edmond Dantes]

Again, all you are doing is stating your opinion just like I am stating mine. There is no right or wrong here and your opinion isn't any more or less valid than mine.

That's a cop-out. Being an opinion doesn't make it immune to evaluation or criticism, and opinions can indeed be wrong.

But, fine, whatever.

[Bojay1997]

That's a cop-out. Being an opinion doesn't make it immune to evaluation or criticism, and opinions can indeed be wrong.

But, fine, whatever.

Not at all. I just find you to be intolerant of the views of others and this statement makes it clear why there is no point in having a rational discussion with you. Contrary to your assertion, an opinion can never be wrong. Facts can be wrong because they can be tested or proven one way or another. An opinion can never be wrong, it can simply be unpopular, intolerant, different than your own, not shared by the majority of people, etc..There is no objective test for what constitutes a platform exclusive release, there are only opinions about what should or shouldn't count.

[Edmond Dantes]

Contrary to your assertion, an opinion can never be wrong.

I'm sorry, but WHAT?! How can you be a grown man and believe this? Look, I'll give you an example: Pretend you have a chill spell, an auto mechanic believes you have syphalis and a doctor believes you just have a fever. Who would you take more seriously in this case? If you say "the doctor," you're unwittingly admitting that his opinion has more validity than the mechanics--as it should, since this guy spent his life studying diseases.

That's just a hypothetical. Real-life examples can be found by watching Irate Gamer reviews (one reason he's notorious is because he complains that games are bad or hard when its clear he just doesn't understand the mechanics or isn't really trying to play them) or by watching true-life courtroom documentaries like City Confidential or Notorious. Indeed, that's how the justice system works: two sides present their version of things to a jury and the jury decides who they believe more. The very fact that jury rulings have been overturned proves that not all opinions are created equal.

Seriously if you don't see how opinions can be wrong, I can only imagine you've led a sheltered existence.