Post by: Darkheart on September 10, 2007, 02:02:42 PM
http://www.revogamers.net/articulos-184-Entrevista:-Eggebrecht-y-el-desarrollo-de-la-potencia-de-Wii-5.html
Quote
originally said by Julian Eggebrecht.
- On publishers not taking advantage of the Wii’s power for graphics: “the traditional, more photorealistic route, because there you really have to push it, and they’re really not pushing it. Why not? Hmmm I don’t know, the hardware is very, very easy to understand. Now the problem might be –and it just might be- is that some studios -or some publishers specifically- are discarding the graphical capabilities automatically simply because it is a Wii title and they’re basically telling the developers “look, we won’t pay for any advanced graphics”.”
- On Wii’s “shaders” and possibilities:“If you connect you can get a lot of shader effects which would’ve been on the 360 or the PS3.” (…)”it’s got so much more power compared to the GameCube. If even with the extremely similar shader hardware, the system clockrate is so much higher, you can do so much more advanced things” (…)”in the photorealistic route there’re certain things which the basic structure of the graphics hardware was not meant for and which you have to find really clever tricks to basically make up.”
Of course its been said many times, Factor 5's Gamecube launch game Rogue Squadron still graphically is advanced more than Wii's second generation titles. I really hope that Factor 5 does come and make games for the Wii, they have been hinting at it forever. I know Lair was a major disappointment but lets face it Factor 5's track record on Nintendo has always been positive. They always push the hardware and create top notch titles.
I think the funny thing is that Julian suggested the idea to sell their gamecube engine and tools to other developers so they could get decent looking gamecube games done. . . . XD
Post by: Mashiro on September 10, 2007, 02:07:29 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: darkheart
This thread delivers
Post by: Bill Aurion on September 10, 2007, 02:08:37 PM
Post by: Darkheart on September 10, 2007, 02:11:38 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: MashiroQuote
Originally posted by: darkheart
This thread delivers
Sorry I originally had pictures of boobs repeated over and over but then I edited it out with a news story
. I will save the original for the hawtness thread someday.
Post by: Mashiro on September 10, 2007, 02:11:57 PM
Edit: Reading story . . . (Np Dark)
Update after reading story: Interesting . . . good on factor 5 for saying how powerful the Wii can be!
Post by: ShyGuy on September 10, 2007, 02:18:57 PM
He has a point, but it seems 9 out of 10 vocal devs are idiots these days
Post by: UERD on September 10, 2007, 03:15:40 PM
Ultimately, I would probably have paid $450 for a powerful-hardware Wii with the exact same upcoming games lineup, only with prettier graphics. But that would mean giving up the current Wii's level of market penetration, third-party support, and a strategic foothold going into the next generation. And to be honest, if the 8th-generation Nintendo console really is coming out in 5 years, there won't be nearly enough time for Wii's graphical shortcomings to become glaringly apparent- it generally takes developers at least a year or two to start really utilizing the hardware to maximum capability. A lot of Wii developers don't have that problem (as the general architecture is the same as GC), which means Nintendo has bought them even more breathing room. Sony, if anyone, is screwed. They poured a heck of a lot of money into R&D making the 'same old' even better than before, hoping they'd be able to squeeze 10 years of console lifetime out of their investment- a pipe dream even in the best of circumstances. They have little to show this generation, and when Nintendo (and MS) demonstrate their newest innovations, they'll have even less to show.
So, ultimately, the $250-in-hardware Wii was a good business decision- not a graphical deal-breaker. Can't wait to see what comes next.
Post by: Smash_Brother on September 10, 2007, 03:20:08 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: ShyGuy
Darn it Bill beat me.
He has a point, but it seems 9 out of 10 vocal devs are idiots these days
Darn, Shyguy beat me to Bill beating me to it.
Post by: Bill Aurion on September 10, 2007, 03:24:42 PM
Post by: JonLeung on September 10, 2007, 03:26:55 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: UERD
In fact, people say Wii's hardware is 2 or 3 times more powerful than GC.
Whatever happened to the good ol' days when people simply equated power with bittage and everyone was okay with the Super NES being 16-bit, only twice as powerful as the 8-bit NES? Oh, and the Genesis supposedly "doubled up" with the 32X, and then there was the 32-bit PSX. Oh, but Nintendo strikes back with the N64, with 64 bits of power!
You'd think it would be normal for being "only twice as powerful" as the previous generation.
In any case, I don't ever find games twice as fun the next generation around.
Post by: Tanookisuit on September 10, 2007, 03:47:08 PM
Post by: UERD on September 10, 2007, 03:55:39 PM
Quote
Whatever happened to the good ol' days when people simply equated power with bittage and everyone was okay with the Super NES being 16-bit, only twice as powerful as the 8-bit NES? Oh, and the Genesis supposedly "doubled up" with the 32X, and then there was the 32-bit PSX. Oh, but Nintendo strikes back with the N64, with 64 bits of power!
You'd think it would be normal for being "only twice as powerful" as the previous generation.
In any case, I don't ever find games twice as fun the next generation around.
I once had the pleasure of reading someone on another forum try to persuade people that 128-bit was better than 64-bit because the former was 10^64 times more powerful, or something stupid like that.
Anyways, I would agree with the 'fun' statement. There are diminishing returns as consoles become more powerful; there is a bigger apparent difference between a 100-polygon and 1000-polygon model than between one with a million polygons and ten million. And I will be the first to argue that MP3 is and will be superior to every other FPS on every other console this generation if only by the virtue of its controls.
Post by: Strell on September 10, 2007, 04:11:17 PM
What do I win.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 10, 2007, 04:30:45 PM
Post by: Kairon on September 10, 2007, 04:40:44 PM
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 10, 2007, 04:48:40 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Kairon
Factor 5 is criticizing other developers on their graphical technology, the one area where Factor 5 is really on good standing.
They all are apart of game creation and you need BOTH. Besides what do they know about other genres? All I've seen are visuals mean't to represent flying games (And from what I've read of Lair it has some framerate issues), at least other developers, um, TRY to create different gaming experiences both gameplay wise and graphically.
Post by: Mashiro on September 10, 2007, 05:02:29 PM
It's about time someone stood up and said "Hey idiots, the Wii is a powerful system, just stop being lazy and learn to utilize its full power".
I just wish factor 5 was standing up and saying this with a game in hand for the Wii lol.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 10, 2007, 05:03:56 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Mashiro
I can't bad mouth factor 5 for these remarks I . . . I just can't.
It's about time someone stood up and said "Hey idiots, the Wii is a powerful system, just stop being lazy and learn to utilize its full power".
I just wish factor 5 was standing up and saying this with a game in hand for the Wii lol.
Yeah and then we can get yet another flying game, maybe they will slap a unicorn skin on Rogue Leader's X-Wing and call it a day.
Post by: Darkheart on September 10, 2007, 05:06:31 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenixQuote
Originally posted by: Mashiro
I can't bad mouth factor 5 for these remarks I . . . I just can't.
It's about time someone stood up and said "Hey idiots, the Wii is a powerful system, just stop being lazy and learn to utilize its full power".
I just wish factor 5 was standing up and saying this with a game in hand for the Wii lol.
Yeah and then we can get yet another flying game, maybe they will slap a unicorn skin on Rogue Leader's X-Wing and call it a day.
UNICORN SQUADRON I CANT WAIT FOR THE HOTH LEVEL WHERE YOU HAVE TO WRAP RAINBOWS AROUND THE GIANT FAIRY'S LEGS TO MAKE HER TRIP AND FALL DOWN AND EXPLODE INTO A 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000 RAINBOWS.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 10, 2007, 05:08:12 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: darkheartQuote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenixQuote
Originally posted by: Mashiro
I can't bad mouth factor 5 for these remarks I . . . I just can't.
It's about time someone stood up and said "Hey idiots, the Wii is a powerful system, just stop being lazy and learn to utilize its full power".
I just wish factor 5 was standing up and saying this with a game in hand for the Wii lol.
Yeah and then we can get yet another flying game, maybe they will slap a unicorn skin on Rogue Leader's X-Wing and call it a day.
UNICORN SQUADRON I CANT WAIT FOR THE HOTH LEVEL WHERE YOU HAVE TO WRAP RAINBOWS AROUND THE GIANT FAIRY'S LEGS TO MAKE HER TRIP AND FALL DOWN AND EXPLODE INTO A 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000 RAINBOWS.
You know that may actually be too creative for Factor 5, so I take my unicorn skin comment back!
Post by: Kairon on September 10, 2007, 05:17:40 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: darkheartQuote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenixQuote
Originally posted by: Mashiro
I can't bad mouth factor 5 for these remarks I . . . I just can't.
It's about time someone stood up and said "Hey idiots, the Wii is a powerful system, just stop being lazy and learn to utilize its full power".
I just wish factor 5 was standing up and saying this with a game in hand for the Wii lol.
Yeah and then we can get yet another flying game, maybe they will slap a unicorn skin on Rogue Leader's X-Wing and call it a day.
UNICORN SQUADRON I CANT WAIT FOR THE HOTH LEVEL WHERE YOU HAVE TO WRAP RAINBOWS AROUND THE GIANT FAIRY'S LEGS TO MAKE HER TRIP AND FALL DOWN AND EXPLODE INTO A 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000 RAINBOWS.
I'd buy it.
Post by: UERD on September 10, 2007, 05:25:13 PM
Post by: Kairon on September 10, 2007, 05:37:16 PM
Also, I own the My Little Ponies movie.
Post by: UERD on September 10, 2007, 05:40:15 PM
Quote
...and especially UNDER a giant fairies legs.
So we've gone from 'k!ddy' to 'Japanese casual game'. I can live with that.
Post by: Kairon on September 10, 2007, 05:42:01 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: UERDQuote
...and especially UNDER a giant fairies legs.
So we've gone from 'k!ddy' to 'Japanese casual game'. I can live with that.
No no no. That'd be a non-game.
Post by: King of Twitch on September 10, 2007, 05:59:04 PM
Post by: NWR_insanolord on September 10, 2007, 06:05:48 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: MJRx9000
Another week, another desperate Sony-funded propaganda hit piece. When will a real journalist stand up to this bull#^$&
Sony's stupider than I thought if they're paying people to say good things about the Wii's graphics.
Post by: Terranigma Freak on September 11, 2007, 02:23:08 AM
Quote
I once had the pleasure of reading someone on another forum try to persuade people that 128-bit was better than 64-bit because the former was 10^64 times more powerful, or something stupid like that.
Did you know that the PS2 was the ONLY 128 Bit system last generation? Both the Xbox and the GC had 64 bit CPUs.
Also, the GC definitely was NOT known as the weakest of the 3 (unless they're PS2 fanboys). The general misconception last gen was the the Xbox was more powerful than the GC. The true is that both systems trade blows here and there. The GC had the upper hand in certain things whereas the Xbox had the upper hand in other areas. One of the Xbox's biggest advantage is its similarity to the PC. It basically uses the same shaders as the PC games, so it was easier to port things to the Xbox. The GC uses TEVs to do their "shader" effects. It's powerful, but people still had to learn something new in order to make good use of it.
And I'd rather have a Factor 5 game than some crappy RPG from Square Soft or EA.
Post by: mantidor on September 11, 2007, 03:34:42 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenixQuote
Originally posted by: Kairon
Factor 5 is criticizing other developers on their graphical technology, the one area where Factor 5 is really on good standing.
They all are apart of game creation and you need BOTH. Besides what do they know about other genres? All I've seen are visuals mean't to represent flying games (And from what I've read of Lair it has some framerate issues), at least other developers, um, TRY to create different gaming experiences both gameplay wise and graphically.
I think you are bashing them just because.
This is about graphics, they do know their thing in that department so honestly is retarted to say they don't have the authority to say that. Gameplay or genres are irrelevant for this kind of statement.
Post by: KDR_11k on September 11, 2007, 04:25:49 AM
I think the only 128 bit part of the PS2 was some data bus which is really no accomplishment, most processor parts were 32 or 64 bit. The Xbox is x86-based, there was no 64 bit version of that architecture back then. The Gamecube uses a fairly old PPC processor that was still 32 bit for most purposes even though there were some modifications in it that used 64 bit.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 11, 2007, 05:02:31 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: mantidorQuote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenixQuote
Originally posted by: Kairon
Factor 5 is criticizing other developers on their graphical technology, the one area where Factor 5 is really on good standing.
They all are apart of game creation and you need BOTH. Besides what do they know about other genres? All I've seen are visuals mean't to represent flying games (And from what I've read of Lair it has some framerate issues), at least other developers, um, TRY to create different gaming experiences both gameplay wise and graphically.
I think you are bashing them just because.
This is about graphics, they do know their thing in that department so honestly is retarted to say they don't have the authority to say that. Gameplay or genres are irrelevant for this kind of statement.
I am bashing them because they don't see the log in their eye, they are perhaps one of the most stale repetitive companies going, so to critisize others when they themselves have huge problems of their own is ridiculous.
Post by: Strell on September 11, 2007, 05:06:08 AM
They are saying other developers suck at graphics on the Wii, and that's because they are lazy and don't care. Then they turn around and blame it on the weakness of the system, which F5 says is nonsense because you can still accomplish good visual with what is there.
When we've got Midway churning out a game that literally looks like a gimped DS game, there's something wrong.
This is like getting mad at the guy who has a fruit cart on the street for not having any hot dogs. Where are all the hot dogs! you cry out. The guy appropriately flips you off and says to buy a banana or stfu.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 11, 2007, 05:09:28 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Strell
They aren't making the claim that their gameplay is amazing/unrivaled/super fantastic.
They are saying other developers suck at graphics on the Wii, and that's because they are lazy and don't care. Then they turn around and blame it on the weakness of the system, which F5 says is nonsense because you can still accomplish good visual with what is there.
When we've got Midway churning out a game that literally looks like a gimped DS game, there's something wrong.
This is like getting mad at the guy who has a fruit cart on the street for not having any hot dogs. Where are all the hot dogs! you cry out. The guy appropriately flips you off and says to buy a banana or stfu.
I wonder what excuse they have for Lair, which appears to be a graphically flawed game? Not to mention the fact that all I've seen visually from Factor 5 is flying games, I don't even know if they can pull off good visuals in other genres.
Post by: Strell on September 11, 2007, 05:24:47 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
I wonder what excuse they have for Lair, which appears to be a graphically flawed game? Not to mention the fact that all I've seen visually from Factor 5 is flying games, I don't even know if they can pull off good visuals in other genres.
I'm curious what either of these two things have to do with what they are talking about.
Maybe you can non-sequitur it up a little for me.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 11, 2007, 05:36:20 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: StrellQuote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
I wonder what excuse they have for Lair, which appears to be a graphically flawed game? Not to mention the fact that all I've seen visually from Factor 5 is flying games, I don't even know if they can pull off good visuals in other genres.
I'm curious what either of these two things have to do with what they are talking about.
Maybe you can non-sequitur it up a little for me.
My point is that I'm not even sure they have any room to critisize other genres, it is like comparing apples to oranges. You wouldn't compare the "graphics" of something like Fight Night to a Mario platformer, just like you can't compare the visuals of a flying game to any other genre. Now if Factor 5 did some other type of game for Wii, I could understand the argument because ever genre requires different sacrifices in the visuals. Just because Factor 5 rode its one trick pony throughout Wii's lifespan doesn't make them a real authority in visual acuity. Now if there was another flying game similar to their Rogue Squadron or Lair I would say they would have that authority, but there are only a couple of games that match that description (In fact I think only Wing Island and Heatseeker are the only flying genre games out for Wii).
Post by: Strell on September 11, 2007, 05:46:27 AM
They made a very targeted claim - developers can do better with the graphics. And while graphical style might be subjective, there's a hefty objective component that says you ought to be able to guarantee an acceptable FPS rate, appropriate textures, and models that at least give the impression that your artists have some semblance of capability. And that is EXACTLY what F5 is hitting on, because we've seen a ton of titles where the developer obviously didn't care about the aesthetics at all. Ubisoft is the best example, but Midway is on their way to dethroning them.
I get to make that claim despite the subjective nature of graphics because Super Mario Galaxy looks gorgeous, and within a year, we'll be seeing games that truly stress that the Wii operates well beyond the Gamecube's capabilities. Brawl itself looks amazing, and I'm wondering where games like Disaster will come into play.
You're turning this into a whole thing about one-trick-pony-ness and an assault on how "certain genres do graphics different than other genres." Amazing. Neither of those things have anything to do with their assertion, and beyond that, the whole genres thing isn't profound, it's obvious. Of course a fighter's engine has to function differently from a racer's. Or a shooter's, a RTS's, a god simulation's, a platformer's, or a sports's.
They aren't criticizing genres, they aren't criticizing people trying to make flying games, they are saying the graphics are faulty due to faulty developers being lazy on PURPOSE in order to maximize profits. All these other things you are bringing up require their own thread, so I suggest you go make it and hope you draw enough people in there to get some kind of discussion going on, instead of one man railing against a company because he can't get past their products and their limitations/triumphs.
Stop with all this "F5 passes themselves off as the sole authority." That's bullsh*t.
Post by: Smash_Brother on September 11, 2007, 05:59:15 AM
Post by: Ian Sane on September 11, 2007, 06:26:59 AM
So far on the Wii the only developer that I've noticed to actually put any real effort in has been Retro Studios. Now HAL and Nintendo have stuff in the works that also demonstrates effort but right now it's Metroid Prime 3 and then practically everything else is either some non-game that graphically could have been done on the N64 with only bluriness being an issue or it's a port of a last-gen title (or in Super Paper Mario's case it started as a last gen title). Nintendo is so far the only one who gives a sh!t and they're not even consistent with that. It seems that because the Wii is a non-gamer focused system that devs are intentionally abusing the knowledge that the userbase is unfamiliar with games and thus ignorant of what level of quality should be expected. Factor 5 is just talking about graphics but it goes beyond that. There's just a lot of sh!t outright. My co-worker who owns a Wii suggests I get Zelda and Resident Evil 4. I buy a Wii and the BEST games he can recommend me are f*cking GAMECUBE GAMES?!
Now Nintendo has a lot of influence. They started the trend at launch. WiiSports slacks off bigtime in presentation and Zelda was actually a Gamecube game (delaying the Cube release so that the Wii version came out first doesn't change that). It's no surprise that the Wii lineup is the way it is. Hopefully now that Metroid Prime 3 is out and games like SSB Brawl and Super Mario Galaxy are on their way Nintendo will raise the bar. They'll actually have more than one game that looks like someone tried to make full use of the hardware and hopefully that will encourage others to follow. But then the Wii has already established itself as a console where third parties can dump crap and watch it sell which just isn't good. That might not change. What I hope is that when the really good games come out that the userbase notices them and raises their expectations accordingly so that crap doesn't sell anymore and everyone starts putting some damn effort into their games.
Though in Japan I expect all of those titles to bomb for being, you know, good and stuff.
Post by: mantidor on September 11, 2007, 07:38:01 AM
It would also be ok if it was a trade for more enemies on screen or better AI or something, but the game doesn't have this. Maybe the open areas, but they aren't much different than the ones in echoes.
Then again, I do not own a widescreen TV, I guess it would look better with the progressive scan thing but I thought Nintendo's focus wasn't on that, but in the far more bigger SDTV install base.
Post by: ShyGuy on September 11, 2007, 07:51:30 AM
MANTIDOR
MP3 grafix>LAIR grafix
Post by: bustin98 on September 11, 2007, 08:02:10 AM
Another item to keep in mind is there is already a style established for Metroid Prime. Retro is conscious of it and decided not to use various texture maps to stay in line with the art direction. It does look better: bloom lighting, increased polygons on Samus, any one notice the nice round lens flare around Samus after defeating a meteor boss? And the reflective surface on the ship. Its subtle, but its there. And the cool way the pirates disenegrate after torching them.
I think its silly to want or expect a huge leap in graphics for MP3. Just like Halo 3. There's a reason it doesn't look like Gears of War and its not technology.
Post by: darknight06 on September 11, 2007, 09:05:27 AM
Post by: Terranigma Freak on September 11, 2007, 09:41:04 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: KDR_11k
Did you know that the PS2 was the ONLY 128 Bit system last generation? Both the Xbox and the GC had 64 bit CPUs.
I think the only 128 bit part of the PS2 was some data bus which is really no accomplishment, most processor parts were 32 or 64 bit. The Xbox is x86-based, there was no 64 bit version of that architecture back then. The Gamecube uses a fairly old PPC processor that was still 32 bit for most purposes even though there were some modifications in it that used 64 bit.
No, the emotion engine is a 128 bit CPU.
Post by: Ian Sane on September 11, 2007, 10:24:30 AM
You deserve to be murdered... for your crappy grammar! "I didn't saw"? That's terrible.
Post by: Plugabugz on September 11, 2007, 10:28:31 AM
70% less costs than a 3 title? Great, 70% less effort to boot!
Post by: mantidor on September 11, 2007, 11:14:51 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
"I'll get murdered for this but, honestly, I didn't saw a noticeable improvement in MP3."
You deserve to be murdered... for your crappy grammar! "I didn't saw"? That's terrible.
ARGH! *hides head in shame* this is your fault people I learned english from forums and sitcoms
a terrible way of practicing a foreign language.I agree with the point on the styleand the need for continuity in the art direction of the series. Like I said, there isn't a lot to be improved, specially because MP1 and 2 are incredibly good.
However Retro managed the impossible, I didn't think there could be a worst 3D model of Samus face in 3D after echoes, but how wrong I was!
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 11, 2007, 11:23:14 AM
Post by: Galford on September 11, 2007, 06:04:01 PM
MP3 has great art direction better then most games.
Julian is correct about developers being lazy on the Wii, but are publishers giving devs the budget to push the Wii?
Sad fact that no matter how good the team, the Wii will never push next-gen graphics.
Also the only thing 128-bit about the PS2 was the vector engines on the EE.
Post by: Deguello on September 11, 2007, 09:43:26 PM
Post by: Shift Key on September 11, 2007, 10:06:53 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: Deguello
Mario Galaxy is "Next Gen," whatever that means nowadays. Galford fails.
"Next-gen" is just some stupid excuse that people use to distract other people from the gameplay.
Post by: NWR_insanolord on September 11, 2007, 10:32:52 PM
Post by: Terranigma Freak on September 12, 2007, 01:30:47 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Plugabugz
Developers look at the Wii as glass half empty.
70% less costs than a 3 title? Great, 70% less effort to boot!
It can't be helped. These developers also have 70% less talented than Nintendo.
Post by: Galford on September 12, 2007, 10:41:14 AM
Maybe some part of the PowerVr chip???
Otherwise the SH4 cpu used was 32/64-bit like every other cpu from that generation.
Post by: Mashiro on September 12, 2007, 11:15:27 AM
Quote
Originally posted by: Deguello
Mario Galaxy is "Next Gen," whatever that means nowadays. Galford fails.
I never thought I would say this but . . . QFT Dequello, QFT.
Post by: Ian Sane on September 12, 2007, 12:11:29 PM
Bits made it so easy. You had an easy name for a generation of consoles. I guess Nintendo goofed it up by having a 64 bit console competing with 32 bit consoles. What do you call that? 32/64 bit? No wonder the term "Next Gen" was invented. Sony, Nintendo and MS should just stamp "256 bit" on their consoles, regardless of whether it makes sense to or not, and then we have an easy name and we'll all retroactively associate the Dreamcast/PS2/Gamecube/Xbox generation as 128 bit. Then next time around stamp 512 bit on the consoles. All is solved.
Wikipedia has some stuff about first, second, etc. generations but I've never heard anyone use those terms. It's also a little goofy since the Atari 2600 and 5200 are both in the same generation and the first generation consists of stuff like those home PONG systems which aren't really included as videogame consoles. Having the games be seperate from the hardware is usually a important part of what a console is or else stuff like plug-and-play controllers and Game & Watches are all included. With the Atari 2600 being the first machine to fit this description I think if you said "first generation" people would think of that.
Post by: NWR_insanolord on September 12, 2007, 12:48:28 PM
In a related note, I wholeheartedly recommend the book "The Ultimate History of Video Games" by Stephen Kent to anyone interested in the history of the medium. It covers from the earliest pinball machines through about 6 years ago and has some very interesting accounts of the events that led the industry to become what it is today.
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 12, 2007, 12:49:18 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: insanolord
The 2600(VCS) and 5200 are in the same generation because the 5200 was a complete flop and the 2600 actually lived on past the death of the 5200. And while I'm not sure I'd count Pong as a console, I would certainly call the Odyssey a console, and it's not that technically different from Atari's Pong (nor creatively, as Ralph Baer and Magnavox successfully sued Atari for copyright infringement because Pong was virtually identical to one of the games built into the Odyssey that Nolan Bushnell had seen at a trade show before "creating" Pong.)
In a related note, I wholeheartedly recommend the book "The Ultimate History of Video Games" by Stephen Kent to anyone interested in the history of the medium. It covers from the earliest pinball machines through about 6 years ago and has some very interesting accounts of the events that led the industry to become what it is today.
That is a great book, I've had it for years!
Post by: GoldenPhoenix on September 12, 2007, 12:49:20 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: insanolord
The 2600(VCS) and 5200 are in the same generation because the 5200 was a complete flop and the 2600 actually lived on past the death of the 5200. And while I'm not sure I'd count Pong as a console, I would certainly call the Odyssey a console, and it's not that technically different from Atari's Pong (nor creatively, as Ralph Baer and Magnavox successfully sued Atari for copyright infringement because Pong was virtually identical to one of the games built into the Odyssey that Nolan Bushnell had seen at a trade show before "creating" Pong.)
In a related note, I wholeheartedly recommend the book "The Ultimate History of Video Games" by Stephen Kent to anyone interested in the history of the medium. It covers from the earliest pinball machines through about 6 years ago and has some very interesting accounts of the events that led the industry to become what it is today.
That is a great book, I've had it for years!
Post by: NWR_insanolord on September 12, 2007, 12:50:59 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenixQuote
Originally posted by: insanolord
The 2600(VCS) and 5200 are in the same generation because the 5200 was a complete flop and the 2600 actually lived on past the death of the 5200. And while I'm not sure I'd count Pong as a console, I would certainly call the Odyssey a console, and it's not that technically different from Atari's Pong (nor creatively, as Ralph Baer and Magnavox successfully sued Atari for copyright infringement because Pong was virtually identical to one of the games built into the Odyssey that Nolan Bushnell had seen at a trade show before "creating" Pong.)
In a related note, I wholeheartedly recommend the book "The Ultimate History of Video Games" by Stephen Kent to anyone interested in the history of the medium. It covers from the earliest pinball machines through about 6 years ago and has some very interesting accounts of the events that led the industry to become what it is today.
That is a great book, I've had it for years!
So have I, I'm currently in the process of reading through it again.
Post by: Ian Sane on September 13, 2007, 06:03:15 AM
So the PS2 and PS3 must be in the same generation as well.
Post by: LuigiHann on September 13, 2007, 06:21:15 AM
Post by: Strell on September 13, 2007, 06:25:16 AM
The Virtual Boy jumped like 85 generations by itself.
Post by: vudu on September 13, 2007, 07:19:54 AM
QuoteOur current consoles will be Next Gen until the PS2 finally dies.
Originally posted by: Ian Sane
I remember when "Next Gen" meant Playstation, N64 and Saturn. The term seems to refer to the newest generation of consoles that we have any knowledge of. So our current consoles will be "Next Gen" until their successors are revealed in which case those consoles will become "Next Gen".
Post by: King of Twitch on September 13, 2007, 01:10:34 PM
Post by: Crimm on September 13, 2007, 08:07:52 PM
Quote
Originally posted by: GoldenPhoenix
Yeah and then we can get yet another flying game, maybe they will slap a unicorn skin on Rogue Leader's X-Wing and call it a day.
DO NOT ENCOURAGE FACTOR 5 TO GO ON THE GROUND! It has never worked. The least fail was their Episode 1 game back on the N64.
Eggebrecht is more or less crazy. I think Lair really did a number on him, as he has become prone to shooting his mouth off as of late. I have no doubt that he is correct, the Wii is capable of a lot more. However, some of the blame for this goes on Nintendo. "The Wii allows cheaper games to be made." Yep, just ask Ubisoft!
