Post by: jasonditz on April 19, 2006, 01:05:31 PM
Post by: Bill Aurion on April 19, 2006, 01:19:17 PM
Interface...is...everything...
Post by: Ian Sane on April 19, 2006, 01:25:33 PM
One thing that has always bugged me about the Revolution is this attitude that Nintendo has to reinvent the wheel in order to innovate as if it's impossible to innovate with the existing setup. I think that attitude is total crap. The guy who made Katamari Damacy proves that that attitude is flawed because he innovated with the existing setup. He demonstrated that there is still more that can be done. So if anyone has earned the right to denounce the Rev it's him.
I've always felt the supposed lack on innovation in today's games is a result of the attitude of those making games. When EA is the most powerful developer in the world you're not going to see as much innovation. The same is true when the market leading console is made by an electronics company that is more concerned with introducing proprietary movie formats then making games. Nintendo's own recent change in attitude over the last few years, with all this "who are you?" "our franchises are everything" junk, has directly related to their lack of innovation. They need the remote in order to make interesting Mario spinoffs. But if they dedicated more effort into new content they wouldn't need to reinvent the wheel. Nintendo thinks innovation is finding a new way to incorporate Mario into a game and that's why they struggled to be innovative on the Cube.
Post by: UltimatePartyBear on April 19, 2006, 01:27:54 PM
I feel like I should also point out that Katamari Damacy eschews the vast majority of the PS2 controller's buttons, providing a blissfully simple interface that is a joy to use. I think he's aware of the importance of control in a game. There may be a misunderstanding somewhere regarding this quote.
Post by: Bill Aurion on April 19, 2006, 01:35:53 PM
And this is where you show you really don't understand the point of the Revmote at all...It's not JUST to come up with new gameplay design; it's to lessen the gap between you and the game that you are playing...It doesn't matter just HOW much you innovate, the barrier that exists with the current control setup will STILL exist...
I also really hate the example of a single game being a reason why the current setup should stay, though it's not really surprising to see a single thing singled out from you (Example: When all those DS games were revealed sometime last year and you had to pick on Mario Basket instead of being positive about all the software support the DS was getting)...
Post by: Ian Sane on April 19, 2006, 01:48:22 PM
Well I am mostly responding to all those people that whenever the hardware issue comes up they say something like "I'd rather have innovative games" as if the PS3 and Xbox 360 are incapable of innovation because they don't have a wacky new controller.
"I also really hate the example of a single game being a reason why the current setup should stay"
Fair enough. Here's some more from the last generation:
Pikmin
Metroid Prime
Ikaruga
Devil May Cry
Grand Theft Auto 3
Warioware
If you count the Dreamcast then there's more than that.
I'll admit it's harder to think of examples of innovative games these days but I believe the reason is because of the companies on top.
Someone is probably going to crap on GTA3 despite the fact that it's the most influencial game of the GC/PS2/Xbox generation and was incredibly innovative at the time of release.
Post by: Knoxxville on April 19, 2006, 02:00:40 PM
Besides, the controller shell will still be in the house for the traditional controller crowd and lazy devs, so nothing is really lost anyway.
Post by: Kairon on April 19, 2006, 02:01:59 PM
But Nintendo's games have necessarily had a symbiotic relationship to their input hardware in order to create new experiences. Just as much as Nintendo and others innovate WITHIN the status quo, as Ian attests, so too do some huge Nintendo and non-Nintendo success stories emerge from breaking the status quo: Mario 64's analog stick, DDR's dance pad, Guitar Hero's... guitar...
And Nintendo, as a company: this is who they are. One can argue that innovation can happen inside the status quo, but Nintendo believes that it can happen both inside AND outside, and that the Nintendo legacy is not only one of software, but of HARDWARE as well.
Simply put, GTA 3 was an excellent game, but Nintendo, because of who they are, wants to do more than make the next GTA 3.
~Carmine M. Red
-Unable to make up his mind whether Nintendo is singular or plural
Post by: jasonditz on April 19, 2006, 02:09:02 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
I saw this on 1UP.
One thing that has always bugged me about the Revolution is this attitude that Nintendo has to reinvent the wheel in order to innovate as if it's impossible to innovate with the existing setup. I think that attitude is total crap. The guy who made Katamari Damacy proves that that attitude is flawed because he innovated with the existing setup. He demonstrated that there is still more that can be done. So if anyone has earned the right to denounce the Rev it's him.
He's still full of crap. He can wish all he wants, but controllers have a huge effect on the enjoyment of games. The player's only means of interacting with the game is through the controller, and if that interaction isn't "the enjoyable part", you're basically just watching a movie.
I agree that I don't think Nintendo had to do what they did with the revolution's controller. You can innovate without it. I'm interested in seeing how they innovate with it though.
Post by: Hostile Creation on April 19, 2006, 02:15:32 PM
Nintendo never said that. They know good and well they can innovate with current controllers. But the remote opens up a vast new array of possibilities, and it makes the interface more immersive. How can that be bad?
Also, I won't argue GTA3, I'll just say that it's a crappier, 3D version of GTA2.
Post by: Caliban on April 19, 2006, 02:26:31 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
One thing that has always bugged me about the Revolution is this attitude that Nintendo has to reinvent the wheel in order to innovate as if it's impossible to innovate with the existing setup.
So, basically what you are saying is that we should go back to wooden wheels? lol. To reinvent, does such statement make any logic? It doesn't, to invent something that has been invented before, wow*not really*, t-o-t-a-l-l-y_r-i-d-i-c-u-l-o-u-s-!
I don't think Nintendo's intention is to innovate all game genres with one new controller, it is basically giving gamers and developers a way to ease the interaction for the majority of games and then some. Now, whether some will emphasize it for innovation only is something that should be corrected towards a general understanding of ease of use.
Also, that guy that did katamary(sp?) better be careful with his words, because there might be a time when he will want to develop a game for the REV. I wonder if he is a fan of hara kiri.
Post by: Ian Sane on April 19, 2006, 02:29:35 PM
Looking at the 1UP article on this he apparently sh!ts on the Katamari sequels too so he might not have even been involved with the PSP KD.
"Just as much as Nintendo and others innovate WITHIN the status quo, as Ian attests, so too do some huge Nintendo and non-Nintendo success stories emerge from breaking the status quo: Mario 64's analog stick, DDR's dance pad, Guitar Hero's... guitar..."
True but in the past Nintendo merely improved on the status quo. They kept what was there already. The huge overhaul with the Rev controller has always been the main issue with it. Adding motion control is a great idea. The issue has always been more on stripping off so many established functions and fixing what wasn't broken. In the past Nintendo didn't reinvent controllers, they built on them. Plus DDR and Guitar Hero require special controls so they're not an ideal example. No one has ever suggested using the DDR dance pad as a standard controller.
Post by: Kairon on April 19, 2006, 02:47:23 PM
And Ian, you're ignoring a bevy of factors when you characterize Nintendo as burning down bridges. The nun-chuck, the need for hardware differentiation, the move towards a wider casual and non-gamer audience, the taking over of functions by the freehand, the fact that the revolution controller was INITIALLY designed as a detachable section of a traditional controller (see the story of how Retro suggested the nunchuck unit)...
In fact, I'm not at all convinced that Nintendo is doing a huge overhaul at all like you claim. I look at the Rev controller and you lose an analog stick, gain gyroscopic controls (thus dealing with the dual analog set-up), and you take the GC's 1 main and 3 satellite set-up and replace that with a 1 main and D-pad setup, which, when when paired with the context sensitivity of the gyroscopic abilities, is functionaly not at all different.
Actually, I'm of the opinion that you've been completely fooled by the shape of the controller Ian. It may look like it rebels against all the old favorites, but upon closer examination it's a GC controller split in two for gyroscopic ergonomic ease and adjusted slightly to better suit that single essential change.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: odifiend on April 19, 2006, 02:47:55 PM
Ian, what bugs you about the Revolution is sort of stupid as well. The existing setup (whatever that really means) is included in the new setup. Any 'old school' innovation can still be done on the Revolution...
Post by: KnowsNothing on April 19, 2006, 03:09:01 PM
Post by: Jensen on April 19, 2006, 03:12:43 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
The huge overhaul with the Rev controller has always been the main issue with it. Adding motion control is a great idea. The issue has always been more on stripping off so many established functions and fixing what wasn't broken. In the past Nintendo didn't reinvent controllers, they built on them.
I don't see how this isn't building on an existing controller. They replaced one of the analog joysticks with 6 axis motion detection. Two of the buttons were moved to an unconvenient place. The controller was split into two parts to make it easier to point (there is a reason that laser pointers aren't shaped like controllers).
Where is the big change?
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on April 19, 2006, 03:42:23 PM
MAYBE DK JUNGLE BEAT SHOULD BE $20 TOO! SUCCESSSSSSSSSSSS!!
Post by: Renny on April 19, 2006, 03:55:28 PM
Post by: Hostile Creation on April 19, 2006, 04:09:25 PM
From what I've seen (played only briefly), it's nice and quirky and fun and all of that. But it's boring. Maybe you could do it to chill out, but I find something like Electroplankton a much more mellowing experience.
Post by: Wesisapie on April 19, 2006, 04:15:51 PM
nintendo is meant to be fun, and you are a wet blanket
Post by: Renny on April 19, 2006, 04:19:53 PM
Post by: Kairon on April 19, 2006, 04:20:25 PM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: capamerica on April 19, 2006, 04:41:30 PM
I think the us-seen success of this game has gone right to his head and now he thinks he's mister big shot. What other games has this guy done? None that I know of, and I'm more then willing to bet that if he ever makes another game it will not be as big of a hit as KD was, He's a one trick pony and once people relies that maybe they will stop kissing his butt.
I have a feeling he was bought off by Sony, I mean he only made 3 games and all 3 were for Sony systems. Even thou people were saying how much KD would rock on the DS way before the PSP version was even hinted at. Has this guy even used a Revolution controller or is he just talking out his butt like the dumbass from epic games.
I wouldn't care if I never see another KD ever again. The series jumped the shark when they made the sequel.
Let him go build his tiku tiku tiku! playgrounds and leave the videogame world. I don't care, not like he actually brought anything to the table.
And Ian I believe you are wrong, Yes the developers are also responsible for innervating games, But the controller is also just as important to moving people to the next level. Just look at what Nintendo has done. They redesigned the controller back on the NES, introduced the Cross pad. On the SNES they added more buttons which expanded what you could do. N64 we entered the 3D world with the analog stick, Sony didn't have this vision and with the Playstation they actually started off with pretty much a knockoff of the SNES controller. If it wasn't for Nintendo changing things up we would still be playing games with a Arcade stick and a single red button. The Revolution Remote is going to take us out of the stale setup we are currently in. Its going to make old styles of games feel like new. FPS are not going to change at all with the current controller the way it is. Infact most games will continue to play just like they didn't last gen. With the Rev controller things will change and new ways to play will be found and for the first time ever you will actually be part of the game. You can't get that with the current controller no matter how much the developers try.
Post by: KnowsNothing on April 19, 2006, 04:51:47 PM
Quote
I wouldn't care if I never see another KD ever again. The series jumped the shark when they made the sequel.
Every time that term is used nonchalantly in conversation another angel gets its wings.
Post by: mantidor on April 19, 2006, 05:48:15 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane"I also really hate the example of a single game being a reason why the current setup should stay"
Fair enough. Here's some more from the last generation:
Pikmin
Metroid Prime
Ikaruga
Devil May Cry
Grand Theft Auto 3
Warioware
Ikaruga isnt that innovative, certainly not at the level of Pikmin or MP... and DMC? wtf?
You can be negative all you want, but that list that you just gave, every single of those games would be simple awesome for the remote, its not just to make innovative games, is making the games better.
The katamari guy is so stupid, he should try to make his game with the NES pad to see if he can have the same results... after all the controller doesnt matter that much for him.
Post by: NWR_pap64 on April 19, 2006, 06:31:47 PM
And I agree about Ian Sane. Dude, why are you SO negative about Nintendo? Sure, they are NOT perfect and they have messed up way too many times, but why bash every single thing they do? You need to realize that innovation IS needed in order to evolve gaming.
Let's use that mentality of yours with the N64. How would gaming be like today if Nintendo didn't create a controller that worked PERFECTLY in a 3D game? We would still be clunkily controlling a character with the d-pad or a joystick. How about the guy that came up with First person shooters? Or even Tetris??
If it weren't for innovation we wouldn't have half the stuff we have today. Innovation is the thing that fuels our life. It makes our lives better, more easier and enjoyable. True, innovation isn't always needed or works, but someone HAS to reinvent the wheel in gaming.
One of the problems this generation is that what we are basically getting is highly souped up versions of what was established this generation. How can the PS3 and XBOX 360 be considered "next generation" when the games they have is the same stuff we got last generation? Nintendo is TRULY going next gen. They aren't just going to update the graphics chip or the RAM, they are going to update the game we play games.
Wake up and smell the reality, Ian. THE GAMING INDUSTRY NEEDS INNOVATION MORE THAN EVER. Deal with it...
Post by: trip1eX on April 19, 2006, 07:13:01 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: mantidorQuote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane"I also really hate the example of a single game being a reason why the current setup should stay"
Fair enough. Here's some more from the last generation:
Pikmin
Metroid Prime
Ikaruga
Devil May Cry
Grand Theft Auto 3
Warioware
You can be negative all you want, but that list that you just gave, every single of those games would be simple awesome for the remote, its not just to make innovative games, is making the games better.
Yeah I agree all those games would be better with a revmote. GTA3 and MP would benefit from an easier to aim and look around peripheral. Score one for the revmote.
Pikmin would benefit from the preciseness and accuracy of the revmote. PIcking up a specific group would be much easier. Also I can imagine flinging PIkmin around with a flick of the revmote. Score another pt for the revmote.
Ikaruga would also be a fun game to play by using the tilting functionality of the revmote. Tilt to turn left and right and move/forward backward. But from what I know about the game the setup it uses now seems to be fairly simple and might work with the revmote titled as an NES pad.
Warioware of course is a game that could take on a whole 'nother dimension with the revmote. You can see in what directions the GBA and DS versions of the game went with their tilting and precise/accurate touchscreen control respectively. BAg the revmote another pt.
I don't know much about Devil May Cry. Is that a 3d fighting game? If so then cha-ching!!!
The beauty of the revmote too is that it's going to allow additonal peripherals to be attached to it. Take a trip to the arcade and past arcades. You'll see all sorts of different control devices for all sorts of games. I think many of these control devices made the game or at least made the experience more immersive.
Way back when when Battlezone came out you learned thru a 'submarine scope' of sorts and you had 2 flight sticks for control. That really added to the immersion factor.
Steering wheels add to the fun of many racing games. I'm just finding that out today. I'm not sure why I never picked one up before, but man it really makes some of these racing games unique and more enjoyable.
You've seen how trackballs are inherent in the enjoyablity of arcade titles from Centipede to Golden Tee.
Not to mention NIntendo is going to put out a classic controller shell. Somehow they have to make their N64 games playable on the virtual console.
And lastly videogame console controls have gradually been refined and added onto over the years. From the ATari 2600 joystick with one button to today's 2 analog thumbsticks, d-pad, 4 face buttons and 4 triggers, etc. I don't think it should suprise anyone that someone out there especially Nintendo is trying to further videogame control.
Post by: Djunknown on April 19, 2006, 07:14:05 PM
Quote
How would gaming be like today if Nintendo didn't create a controller that worked PERFECTLY in a 3D game?
I hate answer a question with a question, but what if Nintendo unveiled the the analog stick with no games, just a concept and theory to go with it? The gaming press and co. would say Nintendo lost their mind; the joystick's been around since the Atari days, so why go back to it? Thankfully, they didn't. We're in a point in time where we don't know if the Revmote is going to be a hit, let alone 'save' gaming.
Quote
How can the PS3 and XBOX 360 be considered "next generation" when the games they have is the same stuff we got last generation?
Because there's no way that Elder Scrolls IV could be done even on an Xbox. That massive land battle in Kameo can't be done on the 'Cube. Can't say much about PS3, its been hiding somewhere...
Post by: wandering on April 19, 2006, 07:18:49 PM
a)Takahashi is just criticizing the rev because he's jealous.
b)Takahashi isn't even that talented.
c)Ian Sane is actually obsessive compulsive.
Anyway. On topic, I don't take Takahashi's comments too seriously. The criticizm that Nintendo is focusing too much on the controller, to me, is kind of silly. Who cares what the focus is on? Sony focuses too much on the synergistic Toy Story power of their system's graphical capabilities. The important thing is: the rev's controller can be used for interesting new game ideas, and, at the same time, is flexible enough to allow for traditional game design.
Post by: Kairon on April 19, 2006, 07:21:45 PM
Seriously, I haven't played either game, but explain to me how these next generation systems provide us with anything more than more eye-candy or open-ended worlds that were already achieved last gen.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: Kairon on April 19, 2006, 07:22:53 PM
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Post by: jasonditz on April 19, 2006, 07:46:14 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
Seriously, I haven't played either game, but explain to me how these next generation systems provide us with anything more than more eye-candy or open-ended worlds that were already achieved last gen.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
Well yeah, but they could. The early PS2 games weren't exactly sparkling innovations either... I'm sure there'll be some new genres that the enhanced processing power and RAM make possible, and just some new stuff that would've been possible before but no one thought of yet.
But I don't think it's an either/or proposition. I'm still not convinced that the difference between the Rev's power and it's competitors is that significant, since most of their extra horsepower will go unused in a standard resolution environment. The Rev's jump in processing power and RAM compared to this generations offerings is non-trivial, and it will probably allow for some fascinating new features in and of itself. Then we also get all the things that wouldn't be possible under the traditional control scheme on top of it all.
Post by: wandering on April 19, 2006, 07:51:48 PM
Quote
Wandering, how can you sound so sensible and even-handed with Jack Thompson as your Avatar?!?!
Ahaha.
(I'm sure I don't have to say this, but, I don't actually agree with Thompson.)
edit: thanks, btw. For the sensible and even-handed thing, I mean.
Post by: NWR_pap64 on April 19, 2006, 07:52:26 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
In my opinion, the massive land battles of Nintey-Nine Nights amount to little more than Dynasty Warriors on the PS2. And the world of Elder Scrolls IV exposes plenty of neat open-endedness, but does it give you any new gameplay options that you couldn't do in Elder Scrolls III or in the GTAs?
Seriously, I haven't played either game, but explain to me how these next generation systems provide us with anything more than more eye-candy or open-ended worlds that were already achieved last gen.
~Carmine M. Red
Kairon@aol.com
EXACTLY!
This is the point I was trying to make.
True, I agree that powerful hardware will make what was impossible in this gen possible and even expand on that. But in terms of gameplay you can have the most powerful hardware and still be playing a game designed with a 1980s ideal.
Better graphics, expanded hardware and bigger mediums are important, yes, but creativity and innovation are also important as well. If there is no one daring enough to be creative what's teh point of having the newest and best hardware if all the games are basically the same?
And to answer your question, djunknown, yes, Nintendo hasn't truly shown what the Rev. controller can do, leaving many of us in the air regarding it's features. But a lot of developers are impressed with it, and if there's one thing the DS proved is that Nintendo can take an idea that is too farfetched and make it logical and fun, so at least in my case I can't help but think that this could do wonders for games.
Post by: wandering on April 19, 2006, 08:03:29 PM
Quote
Because there's no way that Elder Scrolls IV could be done even on an Xbox. That massive land battle in Kameo can't be done on the 'Cube. Can't say much about PS3, its been hiding somewhere...
If I could respond to this also, we don't know whether or not these things can be done on the rev yet. And, more importantly, these things are, really, pretty unimpressive. Saying 'OO! Look! 100 enemies on screen!' or, 'OO! Look! Slightly wider-open environnments!' every once in a while is all well and good, but...look at Rogue Leader. EVERYTHING about that game's graphics was amazing when it came out.
Post by: TrueNerd on April 19, 2006, 09:30:04 PM
However, his critique matters not. He's not making anymore games. He's into playground design now.
Post by: ruby_onix on April 20, 2006, 01:03:07 AM
Considering this guy built his entire game around analog, he should be on his hands and knees, kissing Nintendo's feet in gratitute for pioneering the analog stick. If he's not already drooling over the Revmote, he should at least be watching it very closely. But to dismiss it out of hand because it's hype is too big? Because it's supposed to be too good? That's just crazy.
Oh wait. He didn't build his game around analog. He built it around dual analog. He's kissing Sony's feet for stealing Nintendo's idea. He's waiting for Sony to steal 3D space control, which will be his signal that it's a working technology, and that it's okay for him to like it.
Post by: Infernal Monkey on April 20, 2006, 03:25:43 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
Looking at the 1UP article on this he apparently sh!ts on the Katamari sequels too so he might not have even been involved with the PSP KD.
He was, but he didn't want to. He didn't even want to make a sequel, but Namco was like "come aaaawwn" and showed him some money, so he sold his soul to the devil for a donut. Only to complain about Nintendo's controllers because PSP wasn't able to do justice to the series.
Kinda like how Midway and Acclaim blamed Nintendo because their PS2 and Xbox games weren't selling.
Post by: ThePerm on April 20, 2006, 05:26:13 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on April 20, 2006, 07:47:53 AM
Because they have very specialized control mechanisms. The most intuitive control scheme for any game would be custom to it with no buttons that don't do anything, like an arcade game. But a console controller has to be more generic so that it will work with a wide variety of games. So something like DDR or Guitar Hero has to be niche because their controllers are far too specialized and won't work with any other games.
Post by: Bill Aurion on April 20, 2006, 07:50:22 AM
Post by: Rhoq on April 20, 2006, 08:02:39 AM
Post by: KDR_11k on April 20, 2006, 08:09:04 AM
Katamari on the Rev wouldn't need two directional inputs to be played.
One thing that has always bugged me about the Revolution is this attitude that Nintendo has to reinvent the wheel in order to innovate as if it's impossible to innovate with the existing setup. I think that attitude is total crap.
Eh, yes, but how else are you going to sell a new piece of hardware to the people? Would you rather have another Gamecube? "Why should we buy your console?" "Um, uh... We got Mario! Isn't that great?" The new controller isn't just attracting users, it's attracting developers as well. If Nintendo tried to steer the same course as the competition they'd end up with another Gamecube, the Rev controller is their primary selling point both to developers and users. Without it they'd have another pointless console the market doesn't need.
Post by: Dirk Temporo on April 20, 2006, 09:13:32 AM
Post by: GregLee on April 20, 2006, 10:33:01 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: trip1eX
Steering wheels add to the fun of many racing games. I'm just finding that out today. I'm not sure why I never picked one up before, but man it really makes some of these racing games unique and more enjoyable.
Speaking of which, do you think we'll be able to plug the Logitech Speed Force wheel into the Revolution and have it work right?
Post by: KDR_11k on April 20, 2006, 11:15:30 AM
Post by: jasonditz on April 20, 2006, 12:04:06 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: GregLeeQuote
Originally posted by: trip1eX
Steering wheels add to the fun of many racing games. I'm just finding that out today. I'm not sure why I never picked one up before, but man it really makes some of these racing games unique and more enjoyable.
Speaking of which, do you think we'll be able to plug the Logitech Speed Force wheel into the Revolution and have it work right?
My guess would be they'd just have some sort of wireless version.
Post by: MaryJane on April 20, 2006, 12:23:17 PM
GameInformer played a Revolution game, granted they didn't play full levels, but they played nonetheless, and they liked it. did this guy play with it? i ask seriously cuz i wouldn't be too surprised if he hasn't because he approached Ninty with an idea and they said, no. that'd be funny, idie devs are getting kits, and this guy gets shunned and pissed.
or maybe he's one of the people who truly don't like the idea.
You can't please everybody all the time.
Post by: Hostile Creation on April 20, 2006, 12:27:49 PM
Especially when Katamari's look is so simplistic.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on April 20, 2006, 01:35:18 PM
Quote
Because there's no way that Elder Scrolls IV could be done even on an Xbox. That massive land battle in Kameo can't be done on the 'Cube. Can't say much about PS3, its been hiding somewhere...
But it can be done and was done on the PC, I don't know about others but I want console games to be unique experiences from the PC, not a strong reliance on graphical horsepower. Instead there should be a focus on different gaming experiences from what the PC has to offer (though it is fine to have a PC port here and there if need be). Elder Scrolls IV is a fun game (I have it for PC) but it isn't what I would call a truly next generation game, it basically is a revamped ESIII with larger and more detailed worlds.
Post by: RiskyChris on April 20, 2006, 01:51:57 PM
It was done on a powerful system too.
Space Invaders
Edit: Ninja edit to make it more apparent.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on April 20, 2006, 01:55:25 PM
Post by: ShyGuy on April 20, 2006, 02:44:51 PM
That new capcom zombie game for the 360 is supposed to have hundreds of zombies on the screen, although I don't know how you could fit them all on the screen to see.
Post by: Magik on April 20, 2006, 03:39:21 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: ruby_onix
Oh wait. He didn't build his game around analog. He built it around dual analog. He's kissing Sony's feet for stealing Nintendo's idea. He's waiting for Sony to steal 3D space control, which will be his signal that it's a working technology, and that it's okay for him to like it.
So Nintendo came out with the first dual-analog controller? Wow, that's news to me.
Get over this stealing bullcrap, its retarded.
And so what if he doesn't like or have any interest in the REV controller. If he doesn't like, so be it. There's no need for people to get their panties in a bunch and start throwing insults at him.
Post by: NinGurl69 *huggles on April 20, 2006, 03:55:54 PM
Adding more junk on-screen, adding new routines to compliment existing ones because you have stronger hardware is always expected. It's a stale definition for "next-generation."
Having your weapons tilt by reflecting how you tilt the controller isn't as expected. That's definitely a new generation.
Post by: Deguello on April 20, 2006, 06:17:13 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"I also really hate the example of a single game being a reason why the current setup should stay"
Fair enough. Here's some more from the last generation:
Pikmin
Metroid Prime
Ikaruga
Devil May Cry
Grand Theft Auto 3
Warioware
Ian... citing Wario Ware as an example to require conventional controls... is just...
There are black holes in outer galaxies being made by the absence of logic to that.
2/3's of this series doesn't even use the D+pad/analog + button Paradigm. You are using things that disprove your point to prove your point.
Post by: RiskyChris on April 20, 2006, 06:26:17 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: DeguelloQuote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"I also really hate the example of a single game being a reason why the current setup should stay"
Fair enough. Here's some more from the last generation:
Pikmin
Metroid Prime
Ikaruga
Devil May Cry
Grand Theft Auto 3
Warioware
Ian... citing Wario Ware as an example to require conventional controls... is just...
There are black holes in outer galaxies being made by the absence of logic to that.
2/3's of this series doesn't even use the D+pad/analog + button Paradigm. You are using things that disprove your point to prove your point.
I also particularly like the *6* examples of thousands of games that supposedly prove that conventional controls are the way to go.
GTA3 has awful controls. Ever tried to aim in that? It's the only fault of the game series, IMHO.
Post by: Renny on April 20, 2006, 06:55:20 PM
Post by: KDR_11k on April 21, 2006, 04:07:11 AM
GTA3 has awful controls. Ever tried to aim in that?
Really? It did bug me how many different keys it used but aiming really wasn't the problem, just point and click.
Post by: couchmonkey on April 21, 2006, 07:58:01 AM
I do disagree with Ian's claim that games are stagnant because of who's on top. I think the situation would be better if companies like Nintendo were on top of the industry, but it still wouldn't be perfect. Sega and Nintendo were on top in the early 90s and while their own games were fairly innovative, you can't claim that the dozens of Sonic knock-offs or the Mario Kart knock-offs were super-innovative. There will always be a good percentage of sequels and copycats in this industry (and any industry for that matter) because they are thought to be easy money. Example: making a sequel to The Lion the Witch and the Wardrobe is a no-brainer, they'll be rolling in cash. They even gave the "Chronicles of Narnia" top billing in the movie title so that it would be more sequel-friendly.
Bill's point is right too, though: the controller isn't just about forcing innovation, it's about cutting down the barriers between the player and the game. This controller will hopefully be more natural and intuitive than previous ones. I hope KD dude realizes that eventually.
Post by: RiskyChris on April 21, 2006, 01:12:19 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
RiskyChriss: If you want your 100 enemies to act like one big block that's easy. Now try hundred enemies with individual behaviour and decent AI. And I'm not talking about realtime strategy titles here.
GTA3 has awful controls. Ever tried to aim in that?
Really? It did bug me how many different keys it used but aiming really wasn't the problem, just point and click.
It was really a facetious comment to begin with.
I'm not sure if you're talking GTA3 on the PC, because the controls were more bearable in that.
Post by: Djunknown on April 21, 2006, 07:31:05 PM
Quote
Adding more junk on-screen, adding new routines to compliment existing ones because you have stronger hardware is always expected. It's a STANDARD definition for "next-generation."
Fixed.
What's the difference between the various versions of Fight Night Round 3? Nothing, they can be done on all current gen systems, though the 360 version has extra sweat and shine. Same with Tomb Raider Legend.
But can you say with a straight face that Kameo on the 360 can be ported directly to the Xbox?(Elder Scrolls IV can be done on PC, but a gaming class PC is expensive compared the next round of consoles. Can a maxed out PC from 2001 run games from 2006 at full tilt?)
Progress, no matter how marginal, is still progress. I'll concede that the 'sandbox' can only get so much bigger, but hey its bigger than it was before...
Quote
Having said that, you also don't need to RESIST a new controller that will help people to explore new ideas more fully.
True. Just as how its up to Devs to use these CPU cores, RAM and other bits of hardware, the software has to keep up with it. Same with the Revmote. The gaming press reports that the 3rd party devs are happy with it, but if all they do is take the easy way out, what does the Rev have then? Content is king. Red Steel is a step in the right direction; at least the Ubisoft hate has been kept to minimum now...
Slightly on-topic, Takahashi semi-sort of reminds of Fiona Apple. Talented (Yes, he has some.), but unpredictable (Remember Fiona's little outburst at the Grammy's a few years back?).
Post by: KDR_11k on April 21, 2006, 10:03:33 PM
But can you say with a straight face that Kameo on the 360 can be ported directly to the Xbox?(Elder Scrolls IV can be done on PC, but a gaming class PC is expensive compared the next round of consoles. Can a maxed out PC from 2001 run games from 2006 at full tilt?)
I don't think Fight Night is any less difficult to do on the Xbox than Kameo. Both would require some serious reductions to the graphical assets but the gameplay could remain intact.
