Hi Michael, I both agree and disagree with your post for several reasons. First, off do remember that most of the people on this list have never been able to play montezuma's Revenge. We are all blind or have very poor vision, and from my personal experience I know noone without site can just buy an old Atari, and play the game. So your statement of just buy it and play it is pretty mute. If they couldn't play it way back then do to lack of accessibility I don't see how that status has changed. Second, I'm aware it seams to you like a step back, but there are people who like things vintage. For example, I grew up largely in the 70's and 80's so all my music cd's are all pop/rock bands that were out in the 70's and 80's. I see no reason to change my taiste in music just because some of the songs have some vintage to them now. Yeah, sure I know Wrap is huge with the younger croud. It is super popular, but just because it is new it doesn't make it any better than the classic rock bands. The only difference in terms of better or worse is personal opinion. Same goes for vidio games. Are you aware Activision has released Pacman several times over the past 25 years? People are still buying it. Even younger kids are playing it and enjoying it. Age has nothing to do with it. It is personal likes and dislikes plus some replay value that has people coming back to it again and again. Third, I agree with you that technology should be pushed to it's limits to make more complex and interesting games. The technology is here, and we might as well use it. However, don't forget there is plenty of room in the accessible games market for both new top-of-the-line games as well as some productions of classic games. Fourth, see my post on Montezuma's Revenge decisions. In that post I basicly explained I was doing Montezuma's Revenge as classic, but at some future date I am going to write a game along similar lines, but do it my way with a new story line, all 3D environment, and top-of-the-line coding.
Michael Maslo wrote: > I disagree with that statement he would be the loser. I think the chances > are e would have more sales. > > This is the 21st century and everyone wants something that was popular in > the 70-80's to be kept the same. > > How about moving up and upgrading to the current and future? If people want > games that are from the 70-80's, why not just buy a game from that era and > play it? > > How ridiculous is it to want a game that is old and dusty? Why not have a > game that has a lot of replay value and one that can offer so much more fun > and challenges and current with today's programming capabilities? why not > make a game that is attractive to all old and young a like? > > I am a older gentlemen and want games that are current and offer all the > bells and whistles. > > I think the chances are for those who want a game like what Thomas is > proposing would increase sales and if not may have the same affect you were > talking about of taking credit and waiting for a different game. > > Thomas go with the new ideas. They are fresh and wonderful ideas. > > I played the alpha beta and while it is ok I believe the way he wants it to > be and proposing would really rock! > > My opinion only. > _______________________________________________ Gamers mailing list .. Gamers@audyssey.org To unsubscribe send E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can visit http://audyssey.org/mailman/listinfo/gamers_audyssey.org to make any subscription changes via the web.
