WTF is going on here?

[twoquickcapri]

Can someone give me a Short version in 3 sentences or less?

 

Stormworksinteractive is Anakin Skywalker and Reboot is Obi-Wan Kenobi. Ok maybe not, but someone seems to be going to the Dark Side of the Jag.

[+Sauron]

Stormworksinteractive is Anakin Skywalker and Reboot is Obi-Wan Kenobi. Ok maybe not, but someone seems to be going to the Dark Side of the Jag.

 

There's no light or dark side to the Jag, nor any need to put labels on individual developers. We can keep this discussion going without things getting personal with anyone.

[GroovyBee]

but someone seems to be going to the Dark Side of the Jag.

 

So you're saying the plastic underneath the jag smells different?

[the.golden.ax]

The Jaguar CD looks like a toilet. Nobody really ever got over that.

 

[Austin]

Now that I own a Jaguar, I thought I might need to change my avatar...

 

 

 

Making the world a better place, one JagTroll pic at a time!

 

[amiman99]

The Jaguar CD looks like a toilet. Nobody really ever got over that.

 

It even looks more like a toilet when the cartridge is plugged it and CD cover is UP

[Cobra Kai]

Waiting for someone to physically paint a toilet to look like a JagCD. You could paint the tank as a Memory Track

[+wood_jl]

The Jaguar had some amazing games. I don't know why some people won't recognize that.

 

I guess it's just an enormous, all-encompassing conspiracy, then, that the library was lackluster.

 

NBA Jam TE was amazing and by far the best version of all the consoles.

 

It was a good version, but let's not exaggerate. Probably the best version was the 32X or Saturn, with its large sprites. But the game was good on almost every system of the time, even SNES and Genesis with their smaller-than-arcade sprites. It was fun on any system. Just on the other systems, there were so many great games that you lost count. That's the entire problem - you're having to single out a few good games defensively, while there are too many good games to mention on competing systems.

 

[

Doom was amazing. The second best version after the PC.

 

Jag DOOM was good, but let's not exaggerate again. Playstation DOOM (and Final DOOM) are considerably smoother/faster, and have the music missing from the Jag version. I'm not dissing the Jag version, but let's not exaggerate.

 

Atari Karts was great. It's not Atari Karts's fault that you got your fill of Mario Kart.

 

It's also not my fault that Atari Karts wasn't as fun. The projectile power-ups in Mario Kart were way more fun than those in Atari Karts, and the game was 3 years earlier and on inferior hardware. Probably a comparison to Mario Kart 64 would be more fair.

[twoquickcapri]

It was a good version, but let's not exaggerate. Probably the best version was the 32X or Saturn, with its large sprites. But the game was good on almost every system of the time, even SNES and Genesis with their smaller-than-arcade sprites. It was fun on any system. Just on the other systems, there were so many great games that you lost count. That's the entire problem - you're having to single out a few good games defensively, while there are too many good games to mention on competing systems.

Hard4Games did a videos about the different version of NBA Jam T.E. They went PS1 for first and rate the Saturn and Jaguar about the same for second. I somewhat agreed with them, but I'm bias to the Jaguar

 

So you're saying the plastic underneath the jag smells different?

I think it come from the cart slot. If only the Jaguar had a dust cover.

 

There's no light or dark side to the Jag, nor any need to put labels on individual developers. We can keep this discussion going without things getting personal with anyone.

Sorry, wasn't tring to label the two groups, just describing the picture in my head while reading the topic. i have nothing against them and had many hours of enjoyment from their games.

Edited September 20, 2012 by twoquickcapri

[orangest]

Waiting for someone to physically paint a toilet to look like a JagCD.

 

I'm waiting for someone to start a flame-exclusive Jag forum as a quarantine called "The Battlesphere."

[the.golden.ax]

When plugged in to the wrong polarity, my Jaguar smokes more than your Jaguar. Nah Nah

[onlysublime]

I guess it's just an enormous, all-encompassing conspiracy, then, that the library was lackluster.

 

It was a good version, but let's not exaggerate. Probably the best version was the 32X or Saturn, with its large sprites.

 

 

sheesh you are the definition of a troll. these were great games on the Jag and you find some way to reduce them to "good". It's not my job to prove to you that there were great games on the platform. You argued that it's a terrible library and I pointed out plenty of games. It's not picking and choosing. The argument you made was the the entire library was bad. All I had to do was point out some great games. And if you can't see that there were some great games, there's no hope for you.

 

I'm not arguing that the Jag library was great. But give credit where credit's due. There were some great games. For some reason, for a lot of people, they sway to wild extremes and talk in superlatives. If it's not great, it must suck. Well, there's a lot of room between awful and awesome. If you're having trouble with dealing with words in-between, use a thesaurus and dictionary.

 

Anyone that says the 32X version of any game is better than the Jag version reveals themselves as being terrible at judging games. NBA Jam better on the 32X? On what basis? the crappy audio? the slower framerate? I bet you thought the 32X version of Doom was better as well. O_o

 

Doom on the Playstation was better because they could fit more levels on the disc and had more room for better audio. But the closest in performance was the Jag. Even Carmack said the Jag version was the best console version (though he's biased as he programmed it himself). Some levels got gimped from PC to Jag due to lack of cartridge space. But they made up by creating new levels to replace some of the missing ones.

Edited September 20, 2012 by onlysublime

[Austin]

sheesh you are the definition of a troll.

 

Not really. He brought up perfectly valid points.

 

these were great games on the Jag and you find some way to reduce them to "good".

 

Maybe they are just "good"?

 

The problem with underdog systems is that its fans often have to dig and scrape for reasons why they think their games are "great" or "excellent". Then they put said games on a pedestal and defend them to the death, seemingly forgetting about the groundbreaking competition available at the same time in history.

 

My outlook is this: "Great" games have widespread appeal and are almost universally praised--they are polished, easy to pick up and play, and have a simple "feel" that just connects with the player with little to no effort (the combination of the sites, sounds, and audio cues). Simply "good" games often do not have that wide appeal. They might require effort, cater to a specific audience, or have some flaws that might disrupt the experience a bit (i.e., poor hit detection, inconsistent framerates, difficult controls). These games might feel "great" when a player dives into them and learns the nuances, but these games will never be "great" in the minds of the average player.

 

Here's a good example: I have always thought that Zool 2 is a "great" game. However, when I really dig into it, I see it has some problems that aren't going to be appealing to many: The super-fast gameplay makes it difficult to control; The candy collecting is poorly implemented and sometimes leaves you trapped to die when you get to the end of a stage without collecting enough; The bosses arguably lack creativity and in some cases feel broken; The constantly respawning enemies, along with the iffy hit detection, make you feel like a ticking time bomb rather than a player in control. These aren't even all of the issues people could potentially have with the game, and each of these are likely to lead to an experience that is far from perfect for many players.

 

Basically, these are not the qualities of a "great" game. A "great" game doesn't require the player to get used to something as if it's a permanent disability. And sure, I can get control of all of this and thoroughly enjoy it, but when I see few others have even managed to make it as far as I have, maybe it's not them. Maybe it's something with the game. It's a great game to me, but rather than gloating and berating people with, "durrr this game is great, you're wrong and have problems", I tell people how it is as objectively as possible, and don't let emotion get in the way: It's a good game, with problems. It might great for some, but is likely to be a nightmare for others.

 

To be honest, I can easily say the same thing for Atari Karts, DOOM, Power Drive Rally, Val D'Isere (this one especially), and even Super Burnout (one I've become much, much more partial to myself over the last few years).

 

It also helps to talk about things in the context of when it was available. Jaguar DOOM, for instance, was amazing for the time. There was nothing like it on a home console. But it was eventually surpassed by competing platforms. Is it still relevant? Sort of. It might be a "great" game for the Jaguar in comparison to other titles on the system, but again, even that is setting it up on a pedestal. It's still just a "good" version of the game when you look at the wider picture and the other more modernized ports available (or to most, the PlayStation version).

 

Anyone that says the 32X version of any game is better than the Jag version reveals themselves as being terrible at judging games.

 

And anyone that labels every average game they play as "excellent" without objective thought is probably exaggerating.

[the.golden.ax]

 

 

 

And anyone that labels every average game they play as "excellent" without objective thought is probably exaggerating.

 

..and anyone with an avatar like NE146 is probably master... wait, what?

[+Sauron]

Jag Doom was definitely the greatest console version when it was released. I think the PSX version didn't come around until several years later.

[onlysublime]

 

My outlook is this: "Great" games have widespread appeal and are almost universally praised--they are polished, easy to pick up and play, and have a simple "feel" that just connects with the player with little to no effort (the combination of the sites, sounds, and audio cues). Simply "good" games often do not have that wide appeal. They might require effort, cater to a specific audience, or have some flaws that might disrupt the experience a bit (i.e., poor hit detection, inconsistent framerates, difficult controls). These games might feel "great" when a player dives into them and learns the nuances, but these games will never be "great" in the minds of the average player.

 

Basically, these are not the qualities of a "great" game. A "great" game doesn't require the player to get used to something as if it's a permanent disability. And sure, I can get control of all of this and thoroughly enjoy it, but when I see few others have even managed to make it as far as I have, maybe it's not them. Maybe it's something with the game. It's a great game to me, but rather than gloating and berating people with, "durrr this game is great, you're wrong and have problems", I tell people how it is as objectively as possible, and don't let emotion get in the way: It's a good game, with problems. It might great for some, but is likely to be a nightmare for others.

 

To be honest, I can easily say the same thing for Atari Karts, DOOM, Power Drive Rally, Val D'Isere (this one especially), and even Super Burnout (one I've become much, much more partial to myself over the last few years).

 

It also helps to talk about things in the context of when it was available. Jaguar DOOM, for instance, was amazing for the time. There was nothing like it on a home console. But it was eventually surpassed by competing platforms. Is it still relevant? Sort of. It might be a "great" game for the Jaguar in comparison to other titles on the system, but again, even that is setting it up on a pedestal. It's still just a "good" version of the game when you look at the wider picture and the other more modernized ports available (or to most, the PlayStation version).

 

And anyone that labels every average game they play as "excellent" without objective thought is probably exaggerating.

 

So how does that invalidate what I said were some of the great Jaguar games? What makes NBA Jam TE not great on the Jag? It is superior to the other versions. It has the best framerate, supports 4 players, has full size characters, and crisper sound with weight to them.

 

and just how are the Jag games I mentioned only "good" or "average"? All the people who are criticizing aren't citing any details. just throwing out hit and run comments.

 

And if you're going to judge Jag Doom compared to the most recent versions of Doom and say it's inferior.... What kind of criteria is this? Then you have to say that Mario Kart on the NES or SNES is poor. Because there's a much better version of it on the Wii. Or that Doom on the Playstation was crappy. Because there's a better version on the 360.

 

greatest is not merely defined as popular. lots of great games weren't popular. lots of popular games that weren't great.

[+wood_jl]

sheesh you are the definition of a troll.

 

Because I disagree with you? Because you say so? HA HA. Please, let's be big boys here, and not resort to name-calling. Your doing-so tends to reinforce the point of the original poster, who said this.....

 

What is it about the Jaguar scene that causes so much drama, name calling, inmature behavior, and locked threads?

 

I should think you would rather want to disprove that statement, so consider giving it a try.

 

these were great games on the Jag and you find some way to reduce them to "good". It's not my job to prove to you that there were great games on the platform. You argued that it's a terrible library and I pointed out plenty of games. It's not picking and choosing. The argument you made was the the entire library was bad. All I had to do was point out some great games. And if you can't see that there were some great games, there's no hope for you.

 

No, I said the library was - overall - lackluster, relative to other consoles. I didn't say the entire library was bad. In the interest of clarity, please quote me (if you can find it) where I said that.

 

I'm not arguing that the Jag library was great. But give credit where credit's due. There were some great games. For some reason, for a lot of people, they sway to wild extremes and talk in superlatives.

 

That's exactly why I took issue with your doing so, where you claimed Jag DOOM and Jag NBA Jam T.E. are the greatest home versions, ever known to man. I merely contend that there are other excellent versions of this game.

 

Anyone that says the 32X version of any game is better than the Jag version reveals themselves as being terrible at judging games. NBA Jam better on the 32X? On what basis? the crappy audio? the slower framerate? I bet you thought the 32X version of Doom was better as well. O_o

 

HA HA. Slow down there, hoss. I'm not a fanboy, and I'm definitely not advocating any particular system. Are you? I wasn't advocating the 32x at all, and I mentioned the Saturn version, which would be in-the-running for "best home version" if comparision is made. The fact is, the "lowly" 32X has a great version of NBA Jam TE. Is it worth buying the system for? Probably not, but one could say that about the Jaguar version, as well.

 

If you have any bandwidth there, here's an excellent-quality Youtube capture of 32X NBA Jam that should be viewed in at least 480p, full-screen. What crappy audio? What about the framerate? I'm not making any claims as to framerate as you are, but it looks and sounds very good, to OBJECTIVE eyes and ears.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48YRMigcUvs

 

I said NOTHING about 32X DOOM, and I'm not here to discuss it. Can't we stick to the topic (in that case, it was specifically NBA JAM I was discussing)? If it pains you too much to admit the 32X version was good, then let's substitute the Saturn version. On the topic of DOOM, I said Playstation DOOM was the best. I don't really care when it was published (it's such an old game now, who really cares?). It's an excellent version, and it flies in the face of your claim that Jag DOOM was the greatest home version known to man. The shoulder buttons on the PS controller made for excellent strafing control, excellent framerate, excellent sound, all the levels, and the sequel "Final DOOM" which allegedly was compiled from the "best" user-created levels on the PC. What's not to like about it? The PS Doom games can be had for $5 to $10.

 

Please, remember the "if you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen" adage and remain calm, and discuss things rationally with those whom you disagree. Or stay out of the kitchen.

[+rdemming]

The Jaguar CD looks like a toilet. Nobody really ever got over that.

 

 

 

A toilet in a bar at Saturday 3:00 am smells better than my Jaguar

[JagChris]

The Jaguar NBA Jam TE is the closest to the arcade port. The next would be the 32x version. Its closer than the Saturn and PSX version whose sprites are too big and everything is over exaggerated. Even over the arcade version. The Saturn and PSX had more sound samples though because of CD.

[Austin]

So how does that invalidate what I said were some of the great Jaguar games? What makes NBA Jam TE not great on the Jag? It is superior to the other versions. It has the best framerate, supports 4 players, has full size characters, and crisper sound with weight to them.

 

Perhaps there's a reason why I didn't mention NBA Jam (likewise with Rayman)?

 

and just how are the Jag games I mentioned only "good" or "average"? All the people who are criticizing aren't citing any details. just throwing out hit and run comments.

 

Why should I need to? I thought I laid it out pretty well with my Zool 2 example, and I can apply the same logic to games like Atari Karts, Val D'Isere, and yes, even Jaguar DOOM. The point is, you might think a game is great relative to what else is available on the platform (in this case, the Jaguar)--and perhaps they are in THAT sense--but where does that leave those very same games relative to what's available on other platforms?

 

For instance--(this is a hypothetical scenario)--if you say "Sega Rally Championship on the Saturn is great", and then turn around and give the same label to Checkered Flag on the Jaguar, that just doesn't make any sense at all. Sure, you can like both games (trust me, there are people here that somehow really enjoy Checkered Flag), but how do you expect anyone to trust your word if you label every half-assed game as "great"? An alternative is to say, "I enjoy this game a lot, but it has problems. I am recommending this, but be warned, you might not enjoy it." Essentially, it's about recognizing, "hm, my game might not actually be all that great in the common sense of the word.. but who cares? I like it." Realizing that, how one can simply slap the label of "great" onto everything he comes across without rational thought is beyond me. It's wildly misleading.

 

"Yeah, that guy says everything is 'great'. What a friggin' gaming hippie!"

 

(I mean, that's fine too, I guess.)

 

A similar example of a game being frequently placed on a pedestal (and called "great" or "excellent") is in the CD-i community. They often consider The Apprentice one of the defining CD-i titles. Considering what else is available on the system, that makes perfect sense. However, it doesn't seem to have that level of creativity or polish of its mainstream (or even not so mainstream) competitors of the time. It doesn't have that responsiveness that other games do, and even to some CD-i veterans, nothing about it is particularly captivating compared to what was available on competing platforms. But, it's the best the CD-I has to offer. Does that simple fact make it "great" like they say it is (again, it is one of the only viable and remotely enjoyable platformers on the CD-i)? Or perhaps people should actually classify it as simply "average", or "good", relative to what's available on other platforms.

 

And if you're going to judge Jag Doom compared to the most recent versions of Doom and say it's inferior.... What kind of criteria is this? Then you have to say that Mario Kart on the NES or SNES is poor. Because there's a much better version of it on the Wii. Or that Doom on the Playstation was crappy. Because there's a better version on the 360.

 

What does it matter? The criteria is that we are living in 2012, not 1994. Simply because your game was great 18 years ago doesn't automatically make it worth playing, let alone one of the definitive versions now. The average Joe isn't going to think twice about the incomplete Jaguar version of DOOM when he can play the flawless PC port on his XBOX 360. Or, hell, the savvy kind can install it on a modded XBOX. Or any grandmother with a computer still capable enough to get on the internet can snap up the original DOS version on Steam (you know, the one the Jaguar version was based on).

 

The Jaguar version had its place in time. It will always be the prerogative of people like you and I to go back to it for one reason or another (nostalgia, simply being a die-hard fan of the series, or whatever). For the rest of the gaming world, this version is redundant. It no longer needs to be placed on a pedestal, and there is no longer a need to get defensive about it when someone says that there are better versions available (because there are). It is what it is now--a solid, but fairly imperfect version of a PC classic. Great for the time, hardly the worst now, but little reason to play it if you don't want to waste time searching for the definitive version of DOOM.

 

greatest is not merely defined as popular. lots of great games weren't popular. lots of popular games that weren't great.

 

There are also a lot of games (and systems) that were unpopular for good reason.

[sh3-rg]

Making the world a better place, one JagTroll pic at a time!

 

If you don't mind, Brian Badonde has requested a signed print for his Baguar Bart Buseum - bexcellent berk!

[DracIsBack]

The Jaguar is not a popular system -- it wasn't popular when it was commercially viable, and it isn't popular now

 

In terms of users, not popular. It always was a fun system for many to pick on though. Probably caused the extra touchiness.

[sh3-rg]

Some levels got gimped from PC to Jag due to lack of cartridge space.

From memory (it's a while ago now, I can't remember too accurately) when Neo was hacking Jag Doom, it seemed like the levels were trimmed and tweaked more to keep the performance acceptable, not just keeping a check on cart space used. You can throw a lot more level data into the Jag Doom game engine as he showed with the edited Doom II levels, but when you push the boundaries, the game begins to act a little less impressively/reliably. I think there was actually some free space in the Doom cart, but I can't check that now though as I only have various versions of Neo's hacked ROM, not the original (I own multiple copies of the cart so...).

[Reaperman]

The Jag ads said that jaguar was the best thing since sliced beer, and anything that wasn't jaguar was crap. From what I've seen, we still have a lot of that going on here. It's the black and white crowd. This one thing is the best, and everything else is awful.

 

Neo Geo went for the same advertising campaign, and to some extent retains the same attitude in its fan base. There is a slight difference in that the Neo Geo ads were largely considered correct about being sliced beer, and the Jaguar ads were/are largely considered empty puffery to cover for a below average system. The result is that Neo Geo fans aren't generally considered to have the 'wrong' opinion of their system, but otherwise seem like about the same kind of folks. I believe that the term 'butthurt' is, to a degree, the added Jag ingredient. It takes a very special kind of person to be a hardcore Jaguar apologist.

 

Then that 'special' kind of personality runs off everybody else who comes into the Jag forum. This place runs off folks who may be interested in jag, but maybe make the *huge mistake* of comparing it to other systems or have *anything* negative to say about the Jag. This place runs off more casual Jaguar owners with the attitude of 'yeah, it's kind of a piece of crap, but it's fun to drag it out every so often.' That leaves a Jag forum of concentrated unfriendliness. Life is too short already without the added stress of this place.

 

There's some fun to be had on Jag, there really is. And I'd certainly play jag more often if I had a place to talk about it. I wonder what the result would be of a poll titled: "I own a jaguar but avoid the jag forum, yes/no." How many AA Jag owners avoid this place?

Edited September 20, 2012 by Reaperman

[Tempest]

I think part of the problem is that you had Atari fans who bought into the Jag hook, line, and sinker, only to discover that it wasn't all that great. However rather than dumping the system and getting a better on, they decided that they were in too deep to back out now, put blinders on, and dug in. So now all the average Jag games are 'teh best evr!' and all the crappy games get the 'it's a decent game, I like it' treatment. I've seen this kind of thing on other obscure systems to the point of being downright silly, but everyone just laughs at those people and leaves them to their own devices. For some reason the Jaguar has a lot of trolls that like to shout down anyone who dares disagree with them, which makes it much worse.

 

That's my theory anyway. I have a Jag and some games (I had a complete collection years ago and sold it) and I like to screw around with them now and then, but it's hardly a great system IMHO.