Games We've Never Seen Before 404
anaesthetica writes "The Christian Science Monitor is carrying a story on new directions in game design. The article notes that big gaming companies are not pushing innovation beyond taking advantage of newer hardware. New areas of innovation are coming from education, training, and online communities." From the article: "Online games have the potential to transform entertainment into a global-community exercise, breaking down borders, cultural and language barriers, and even political prejudices...I doubt any other form of entertainment holds out that promise...We have only scratched the surface of what [interactive entertainment] can be."
Make Something New (Score:5, Insightful)
3d immersive shooters have only really been around since Quake came out, for about a decade. Pretty much anything before Quake wasn't realized fully as games like Doom were missing the x/y/z components (and BSP [wikipedia.org] AND lighting, for that matter).
Quake took the games industry by storm because it was the first true-3d game. Everyone had to eventually crank out their branded version of pretty much the same experience, twisted by the trends as they kept going towards the Counterstrike model of gaming.
Now we are overloaded with video game shelves filled with crap. Why?
Because nobody is inventing anything new. They are banking on what sells because the high cost of getting a new game on a shelf to begin with. This isn't the 80's when you could make two red square blocks fight a little jagged octagon shape, and bring home some big bucks doing it. You've gotta put millions into R&D and all that other jazz just to turn a profit. That's where companies like Id Software come in, who spend all their time working on the technology and only a sliver on the story anymore.
They are making it easier for games companies to get in, but you still have to come to the table with a pile of cash before you can launch anything at all. Back to LCD: Shooters.
I disagree, Doug. I have to make these choices in life -- I play games to escape life. That's what you guys have been doing WRONG this WHOLE TIME. Make a game where I can escape into a terrific story that lets me showcase myself and MY PERSONAL TALENT. I'll pay for THAT game. Not your moral ethics quandaries... they are simply boring to me.
Re:Make Something New (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Make Something New (Score:3, Informative)
Not Exactly (Score:2, Informative)
But that was a nice try.
Re:Make Something New (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Make Something New (Score:5, Interesting)
I disagree, Doug. I have to make these choices in life -- I play games to escape life. That's what you guys have been doing WRONG this WHOLE TIME. Make a game where I can escape into a terrific story that lets me showcase myself and MY PERSONAL TALENT. I'll pay for THAT game. Not your moral ethics quandaries... they are simply boring to me.
But you sir are not everyone, I certainly do like playing games where I can make ethical choices, ie be a complete evil bastard which im not in real life. For example KOTOR and KOTOR II, I find it highly entertaining when I choose the darkside options.
Games with a story (Score:4, Insightful)
That's what's been missing. Good stories. I liked FF-X for example, but then it got tedious. I'd like a game with more story so that I could interact with other characters. More story, less leveling up.
Descent (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Descent (Score:2)
Re:Descent (Score:5, Informative)
Because it was *full* 3D in that you could move in any direction no restrictions at all, people had trouble learning to play it. I could easily beat semi-new players 50-0 if I cared to because they couldn't move properly in a 3D space (and my mentor could easily beat me 50-10 if he wanted). I have a demo of me flying rings around someone killing them with flares... Because it was hard to learn how to play people didn't spend time on it and it wasn't as sucessful as other games such as Doom/Quake.
I see this problem in other games too, like Natural Selection, it's a great game but it's very complicated and people don't spend the time learning how to play it. Complicated games will never become as popular as the flavour of the month straight FPS.
Counter-Strike is the most popular game on the internet because it's easy to figure out what to do and it has a low "skill-multiplier" ie its fucked up hitboxes (and spray weapons) add a large amount of randomnes to the game which replaces part of the skill required with pure random luck. Quake3 is pretty easy to figure out, but it has a high skill-multiplier so the newbies hardly get kills. Since they can't get kills they leave and play something like CS because not getting kills isn't much fun.
Re:Descent (Score:2)
Re:Descent (Score:3, Funny)
Change "hard to learn how to play" to "making me puke...literally" and I think you might get close to the real thing. I REALLY wanted to learn how to play that game (and by play I mean master it). I loved the totally 3D environment and the way it made me think was really cool, however the visual stimulus was making me nauseous after a while. So much so that I actually started retching a bit when I kept playing in spite of the warnin
Re:Make Something New (Score:2)
Ultima Underworld came out before Doom, before Quake and was full 3D.
Re:Make Something New (Score:2)
I think games like WarioWare, Animal Crossing and Pikmin are good examples of new types of games and gameplay. Oh, you mean PC games aren't doing anything new. Yeah, everyone knows that already.
when are they going to come out with the MMORPG where I can play as the dragon, or the inn keeper, or the weapon master? The real future of gaming is to elliminate the NPGs ion favour of humans.
Re:Make Something New (Score:4, Insightful)
Then again some people don't get enough repetitive button pushing in everyday life. Who am I to judge?
Re:Make Something New (Score:3, Insightful)
when are they going to come out with the MMORPG where I can play as the dragon, or the inn keeper, or the weapon master? The real future of gaming is to elliminate the NPGs ion favour of humans.
You are correct, however MMORPG design is fundamentally different from normal game design due to the fact that MMORPG success is based on continual subscription volume. If it does not turn a profit, it is no longer a valid MMORPG design scheme. Allowing freedoms like true roleplaying (as you stated) is one of t
Re:Make Something New (Score:2)
Re:Make Something New (Score:3, Interesting)
If I'm playing a game vs a computer then from my point of view there is no immoral or unethical choice because no other human is getting a bad deal, it's only a game.
However if I'm playing something like WoW and my choice is to kill the lowbie in 2 seconds then I have to make an ethical choice to do it or not since it will inconvinience another real-life person. It still doesn't require much thought on my part, if killing them will help me
Re:Make Something New (Score:5, Informative)
The Christian Science Monitor tends to be one of the more liberal newspapers in the US. I wouldn't classify them ideologically with papers like the Washington Times. The CSM is also not about spreading the the Christian Science church's doctrine. It was started by Mary Baker Eddy to provide fair and accurate reporting. This was a response to attacks on her from a Joseph Pulitzer newspaper.
For a more indepth explnation:
http://www.csmonitor.com/aboutus/about_the_monito
Re:Make Something New (Score:4, Interesting)
Geez (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Geez (Score:2)
Re:Geez (Score:5, Insightful)
You're correct. Gameplay does trump graphics. In a purely theoretical world, if given choice A or B, almost everyone would choose gameplay over graphics. Fortunately, we don't live in that world.
Further, when people create this dichotomy, they ignore the fact that graphics have an enormous amount of power in enabling good gameplay. Without the simple hardware power increases of the last five years, many of the great games from that same timeframe wouldn't have happened.
Take Grand Theft Auto 3/Vice City/SA, for example. People love the storylines, and the satirical look at the world, but both of those chracteristics were present in GTA 1 and 2. Neither of those games was particularly succesful at all compared to the last three. The sense of immersion was provided by a major jump in graphical capability that afforded the developers the ability to create an extremely immersive environment. In GTA 2, you could still choose to abide by the laws or mow down pedestrians, take alternate missions as you desired, and run amok with a gun or just listen to humorous radio DJs. The only difference was that the whole game took place from a top-down perspective. Arguably, every gameplay aspect of Grand Theft Auto would be do-able on a Sega CD, but I guarantee you it simply wouldn't be as much fun. I enjoy GTA 2, but it can't come close to holding my interest like GTA 3.
Or we'll take Katamari Damacy, a game that will entertain almost anyone. The gameplay and quirky charm is what draws everyone in, but I'll lay straight out that said gameplay simply wouldn't have been possible with the graphical power of the PS1. Seeing individual objects rolled up in the katamri wouldn't be possible. Without the smooth zooming transitions of the camera, the gameplay and control would suffer significantly. Critics would refer to it as a solid idea that was poorly executed, and they'd be absolutely correct. Again, gameplay here is great, but it relies on the graphical capability of good hardware to make it work.
There are still plenty of simple gameplay improvements left to tweak that will rely on quality graphical capability. I want to see truly, totally deformable environments in an RTS. I want to be able to blast through a building to create an alternate path for my units, or fell that building to block the advance of enemy troops. I want randomized chunks of metal flying off of an exploding tank that can wound surrounding personnel. Realistically, both of those ideas could be implemented in a simple top-down strategy game, but they won't have that truly realistic feel until I can see the size of the building in relation to the troops, or until I can shoot out the corner to drop a chunk on te enemy. Just like GTA would be do-able on a SegaCD, those ideas would be do-able in the original Command and Conquer, but they're not going to have that same truly satisfying feel until they're implemented in full 3D with the proper accompanying physics.
FPSes would benefit from those same characteristics, so it's not as though they're immune from this issue, either. Yes, gameplay is king, but please don't create an argument that forces graphics to the other side. Many gameplay ideas simply need good quality graphics behind them before they can be properly implemented.
Nice fantasy, now welcome to Real World (Score:4, Insightful)
Every extra polygon in models costs man-hours, which means dollars. Every new quest scripted into the game, or every fork in the plot if you want non-linear games, or every alternate way to solve a quest, that's dollars too. Every week spent tweaking the gameplay or balance, now that's _big_ bucks.
And it all ads up. You can't have everything.
Yes, it would be nice to live in a fantasy wonderland where developpers are given enough time and budget to make everything just right and perfect: the best possible graphics (including someone modelling all the chunks and the interiors of the buildings you want to blow holes in), _and_ the perfectly tuned gameplay, _and_ plenty of interesting and unique quests. Quite a nice fantasy, I'll admit. But in the Real World it won't happen.
In the Real World, whatever you do will be a compromise. To put extra money in X, you have to give less budget to Y. To hire an extra scripter for the quests, you give up one artist for the graphics. Or more often viceversa.
Even inside one such category it's a compromise. You could make your game as vast and full of quests like Morrowind, but on the flip side they'll be all generic fed-ex quests and all NPCs will say the same deliberately generic one-size-fits-all lines. Or you could make every quest unique and each area unique like the Tribunal expansion pack to Morrowind, but then it will be a _lot_ smaller. Or have something in between like Bloodmoon. As I've said, it's all a compromise.
But back to the "Graphics vs Gameplay" choice, that _is_ the story of the last decade straight.
What do you think was _really_ the reason why FPS exploded, while a _growing_ market like adventure games was dropped by Sierra and the rest? Yes, more people were buying adventure games than ever, yet that genre skirted with extinction. You know why? Because of that budget choice. Licensing a 3D engine, slapping together a bunch of graphics for it, and calling it a game was cheap. Scripting a complex adventure game was more expensive _and_ didn't leave you enough budget for flashy graphics to flood the screenshot sites with.
Gameplay is even more so. Coming up with something even vaguely original _and_ tweaking the gameplay and controls to be just right, is something that takes lots of testing, lots of tweaking, which all means lots of money. Licensing a 3D engine, and just putting new skins on the monsters and weapons of whatever game sold well last year, meant you had to invest exactly 0$ in gameplay. So everyone and their grandma took that route.
So there you go: _that_ is what and why some of us are ranting about. Because the "gameplay or graphics" is a choice that's very very real, and which is in fact why for a while the market was flooded with pure crap and clones.
Yes, it's gradually getting better, and in the meantime more publishers increased the budgets to sorta cover all bases, at least half-arsedly. But it's still a compromise, and still a choice they have to make: how much goes to gameplay, and how much goes to graphics.
Re:Geez (Score:2)
Wha does this mean? (Score:5, Funny)
Box 360, and Revolution - which was the talk of this year's E3, rival
the computing power of the Pentagon"
Since when has the pentagon been a measuring stick for computing power?
Arash
Ever since... (Score:2)
Something about them being a standard unit of weight, I believe, and thus easier to calculate lift needed.
Re:Wha does this mean? (Score:2)
Re:Wha does this mean? (Score:2)
Breaking Down Borders (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Breaking Down Borders (Score:5, Funny)
Everyone in the world could learn to speak English... well, almost eveyone - I've given up on the Americans.
Re:Breaking Down Borders (Score:2)
christian science monitor? (Score:2, Funny)
Christian Science Monitor? (Score:5, Funny)
"Convert the heathens!"
Re:Christian Science Monitor? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Christian Science Monitor? (Score:3, Insightful)
Hence the name of the paper being the "Christian Science" Monitor, i.e. "the Monitor belonging to the Christian Science sect"; (often misread as something like "the Monitor of Science belonging to Christians"). It's a tool for self-promotion insofar as putting out a quality product is self-promotion.
Wouldn't you question their motives if a retarded islamic gr
You just winged him and made him a Unitarian (Score:4, Funny)
No way! (Score:3, Funny)
Re:No way! (Score:2)
A game I would like to see (Score:5, Funny)
Re:A game I would like to see (Score:5, Funny)
And it'll be called.... The Middle East!
</cheapshot>
Re:Or... (Score:2)
The cretins that bless us with their "bad-ass" harleys and their four-wheeled ghetto blasters. Mutual Assault might be a good name for it.
Re:A game I would like to see (Score:2)
Crusades II
Re:A game I would like to see (Score:2, Informative)
I would like to see a game where you take on religious zealots.
How about Ultima 7?
Re:A game I would like to see (Score:2, Informative)
In the first game you take on a bunch of hardcore religious types called the hammers. You discover in the game that they don't have any problems with locking people up in their own prisons , torturing them , even removing body parts. (hands, genitals, etc)
In the second game the hammers have morphed into another religon called the mechanists (but still bow to the same god). These guys are worse then the hammers. They are turning "street scum" into robots, for use as servants for the
Re:A game I would like to see (Score:2, Informative)
Re:A game I would like to see (Score:3, Informative)
It rules.
Hmm...where's my Fallout 2? It takes a while to be able to kill them all, if you don't know how to get the best equipment early (and I can't remember the tricks) but it's worth it.
Joining the army no longer required (Score:5, Funny)
Thats the best thing about online games: I no longer need to join the army to meet new and interesting people, and then kill them. Now I can do it from the comfort of my own living room.
I'm not sure... (Score:4, Funny)
Almost as bad as posts about articles that (Score:2)
I feel funny... (Score:5, Interesting)
Art vs. Concept (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem is where this money is directed. I'm pretty sure the code monkeys at EA aren't seeing much of this. Distribution/production costs I'm sure haven't changed in the past 5 years (and if they have, I would be certain that they would have decreased). Ridiculous amounts of money are being shoved at top level executives and art designers.
If the focus is shifted from game art back into development of the actual game concepts themselves, then innovation will return. Naturally that's not to discount the necessity or preference for the look of a game, but it should never come at the cost of gameplay. This is why HL2 was received quite well, but Doom III wasn't. The latter looked slick, but all in all felt like House of the Dead in a 2 metre wide corridor. The former looked gorgeous, was amazingly engaging and interesting.
Independent development and (to an extent) open source game design can assist in these areas. Honestly, a successful publishing company would trawl the net looking for innovative independent developers, snatch them up and give them a budget to produce a game. The industry has outgrown itself and needs to consolidate to remember what games are for: FUN.
Re:Art vs. Concept (Score:2, Insightful)
There's a really good track record of games that looked brilliant but played poorly selling well; very few manage to look bad, play well and sell amazingly.
(I'd say your off mark with the comment about the art directors getting huge chunks of cash, btw - replace with Marketting and you're bang on the money. In a typical dev studio, the top programmer will earn as much / more than the top artist - depends on the studio tho, admittedly)
all i want to know (Score:5, Insightful)
they can't be that expensive to develop -- i don't know about you guys but I liked guybrush threepwood better in 2D.
Re:all i want to know (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:all i want to know (Score:3, Informative)
There is at least one Flash game:
Curiously Strong All Night Long [altoids.com]
And there is Hapland [albinoblacksheep.com], but that is probably more of a puzzle game.
Re:all i want to know (Score:4, Informative)
http://www3.kingdomofloathing.com/login.php [kingdomofloathing.com]
Think NetHack with stick figures and a lot more humor merged with something like Zork. It's amazing, once you get the hang of it. Try it for 2 days. You'll be hooked forever.
Re:all i want to know (Score:3, Informative)
Second, The sequel to The Longest Journey, Dreamfall, will be coming out at the end of this year (I think; you might have to check up on that one).
Third, if you would like a fun (but short, and kind of unfinished) online flash adventure game, I recommend: The Mystery of Time and Space [albartus.com].
Over (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Over (Score:2)
Textbooks are awesome.
Re:Over (Score:5, Insightful)
Erm okay. I don't buy that as an absolute. Teaching requires interacting with the student. Textual resources offer some interesting abilities here. However, it's not a safe assumption that this is correct every single time. I've actually watched kids pick up and grasp ideas they couldn't get from a book from simple Apple II games. Why did it work? a.) It was made interesting to the kids and b.) the games presented the information in a way the kids could really quickly wrap their minds around. Text books are fine and dandy, but they're not a one-size-fits-all approach.
"Give me a book any day. You can have your flash, video games, and propreitary applications."
Give me all of the above. A mix of all three has led me to indepdent study. Right now, I'm an animator for a full-length animated movie. Books got me interested in the story making process. TV/Movies got me interested in how the visuals are captured. (Special FX, filming actors, etc.) Video games got me interested in interaction and UI design. So now I'm writing tools [nanogator.com] to make the process smoother.
Nothing wrong with having multiple options.
Re:Over (Score:3, Interesting)
The Social Angle (Score:4, Interesting)
Since that time, the depth of virtual worlds has only increased and holds real potential for providing the environment for new game experiences. I play games to escape reality and do fantastic things that I cannot do in real life. And being able to do those things with other real breathing people is the thing that keeps me coming back. Now I'm not the most social person in the world (hey this is
Be very ascared (Score:2, Interesting)
A new SimWhatever game (Score:3, Funny)
I want a SimSlashdot game where you play the role of Cowboy Neal managing the /. website..
In this exciting new addition to the Sim line of games, which previously included SimCity and SimHospotal; you are challenged with the juggling act that is Slash Dot.
Blast through 24 different scenarios and try to keep the daily traffic level and number of posts by making sure the site has enough flamebait and re-posts to get the visitors streaming in.
This will, as usual, be released for the Phantom console.
Re:A new SimWhatever game (Score:2)
Yeah, but I heard some guy already came out with an editorbot hack that totally ruins it for everyone else.
Break down cultural borders indeed (Score:4, Insightful)
Didn't they say that was what the internet was supposed to do?
Re:Break down cultural borders indeed (Score:2)
I forget where I first heard something like that and what it was referring to, "this technology will bring the world together, there will be no more war, bla bla bla..." was it the communications satellite (invented by Arthur C. Clark so many decades ago) offering instant (minus speed-of-light delays) communications around the world, or was it Television itself?
It was likely said even earlier about radio, the telephone, and the telegraph.
All is not sweetness and light (Score:5, Interesting)
Case in point: the popular new game Guildwars.
For reasons that might have been innocuous at the time, the designers decided to pit region against region in battles for the "Hall of Heroes". The 3 main regions are America, Korea, and Europe. Whichever region has the most wins on its side has the 'favor of the gods' and this is announced after every battle.
This decision has engendered incredible racism and nationalism. Spouting of slurs is incessant. American teams gang up on Korean teams to keep them from getting the favor of the Gods. They accuse the Koreans of cheating [belied by the fact the America is always in favor], and the Europeans of being cheese eating wimps. They fling hate like a frisbee, and they rationalize their horrible behavior because, I suppose, the Gods are on America's side.
It's an ugly sight. With the only basis being an artificial division in a made up game for the favor of made up gods.
Re:All is not sweetness and light (Score:5, Insightful)
If anyone's racism or nationalism is even REMOTELY affected by something like Guildwars and the "Favor of the Gods" message, then they are fucking idiots.
The end.
Re:All is not sweetness and light (Score:2)
Re:All is not sweetness and light (Score:3, Insightful)
William
Re:All is not sweetness and light (Score:3, Informative)
Try a Non-U.S. server.
Any game is better on a Non-U.S. server...
New Concepts (Score:4, Insightful)
It's just that the non-game-playing world doesn't notice much. Instead, they read articles by people who oveiously don't really play too many games complaining that gaming has become stale.
This isn't to say that the majority of games AREN'T stale, but there are still some new and interesting concepts in gaming coming out all of the time. You just have to be willing to try an obscure title from time to time.
Katamari Damacy and Yoshi Touch-n-Go are two recent games that stand out in my mind as really original ideas.
The Christian Science Monitor is NOT Christian (Score:5, Informative)
The Christian Science Monitor is an international newspaper published daily, Monday through Friday. Started in 1908 by Mary Baker Eddy, the founder of the Church of Christ, Scientist, the paper does not use wire services and instead relies largely on its own reporters in bureaus in eleven countries around the world. Reporters at one time were drawn largely from church members but this no longer holds true.
Despite its name, the Monitor was not established to be a religious-themed paper, nor does it directly promote the doctrine of its patron church. However, at its founder Eddy's request, a daily religious article has appeared in every issue of the Monitor. Eddy also required the inclusion of "Christian Science" in the paper's name, over initial opposition by some of her advisors who thought the religious reference might repel a secular audience.
Re:The Christian Science Monitor is NOT Christian (Score:3, Informative)
Re:The Christian Science Monitor is NOT Christian (Score:3, Funny)
Funny quote from article (Score:2, Insightful)
Like that really happens in online games.
Re:Funny quote from article (Score:3, Funny)
Of course, I use the phrase "take care of" in the Mob-movie sense (two in the back of the head), so perhaps that's not what you were thinking of.
Oddball game premises (Score:2)
New gaming concepts need to be unique, interesting and they can be complex but if they are the complexity must make sense.
LK
Outsider Games (Score:2)
NOT PUSHING INNOVATION? (Score:2)
think about that!
no innovation indeed!
As companies grow, innovation slows (Score:5, Interesting)
Unfortunately as any entertainment industry grows, the market for edgy and unique games gets further and further marginalized. The populace wants more of what they had last year, only bigger and better. Why do you think the summer blockbuster movie season looks the same every year? Because this is what a majority of people want and/or what they are willing to see.
You have to start scouring the net for smaller software companies online, much like you have to visit art house cinema deep in major cities to find the truly great movies of the year. It woul be nicer if the economy was more like the pre year 2000 era when all these obnoxiously crazy ideas were out there and tons of venture capital was available to try them out, and the best ideas survived. We lost that era and now all those companies are merging with each other and not coming up with risky new ideas.
but it sells (Score:2)
Investors are scared of innovation, they want a garanteed return on investment, and you get that with same old same old, not unproved ideas.
Novel game idea - open sourced (Score:2)
I want a shoot-em up game in 3D, SIRDS style. Yes, those magic eye type things that you look at and your brain tricks you into seeing a 3D picture from random noise. Maybe something Zaxxonish.
So please, 31337 programmers with too much time on their hands, write this for me. I will be grateful. Otherwise, I'll have to do it one of these days - whe
Re:Novel game idea - open sourced (Score:2)
Hmm (Score:5, Interesting)
Ouch, man, have you ever actually ever seen an online game going on? Breaking down prejudices is the last thing going on. What are you, some kind of mexican jew lizard? [penny-arcade.com]
Personally, I do not think online-playable games are the place to look for real change in video games. Online games require infrastructure-- sometimes not much, sometimes a lot. Sometimes you can cut down almost entirely on how much infrastructure you need by some clever design, such as Spore uses. But in general you're going to have additional costs for an online-play game. And the greater those costs are, the more risk-adverse the developer-- or more specifically the people funding the developer-- will become. MMORPGs in particular, since they require a fantastic amount of infrastructure, are probably the most homogenous, unsurprising, boring portion of the entire game market.
But we are seeing some interesting backlash against the whole risk-averse thing, and some really interesting things are beginning to emerge. Interestingly, most of the really interesting things right now seem to be in the budget title area. The game I probably got the most out of that I've gotten recently is this absolutely bizarre nintendo DS thing called "electroplankton". I imported this from Japan about a month ago on the assumption that it would never be released in America, only to find a couple weeks ago that... it's planned to come out in America now. But anyway. It isn't really even a game, exactly. It's just ten little generative music toys where you mess with the touchscreen and automatically generated music results. But it's fun as hell. I play with this thing for days at a time without getting bored, while if you passed me your average full-price FPS I'd spend eight hours playing through the single player campaign once and then throw it away forever, since I'd seen all there was to see (of course, I paid full price for electroplankton since I imported, but anyhow).
I don't think this kind of reaction is unique to me. I'm curious what's going to happen when people start to realize they have more fun with quick cheap katamari damacy or tetris like games, than they do with the current trendy video games that are basically high-budget interactive movies that, were we judging them by the standards of movies and not video games, would not be very good ones.
Re:Hmm (Score:2, Informative)
But this has happened! (Score:5, Funny)
heard it before (Score:4, Funny)
The same things have been said about internet chat. At last we invented a medium that ignored age, sex, and location yet all we can seem to do with it is ask for age, sex, and location.
Please do not innovate... duplicate... (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)
Unfortuantly we don't want innovation (Score:4, Interesting)
Most people are like me: buy a few games a year and that is it. When I get a game I expect it to be good because I'm stuck with it. (Returning a game is hard after you open it, not to mention the hassle of a special trip back to the store)
I cannot afford a copy of every game made this year. Even if I could I do not have enough free time to play them. So I buy games that I can trust because earlier versions have been good. I wouldn't mind an innovative game, but I don't like all types of games, and I don't want to make a mistake.
As a game developer, (Score:4, Insightful)
1. Inventing is hard. Admitedly I can only speak from personal experience based on a budget of pocket lint, hardware rivaled by 2600s, and a social life outdone by hermits.
2. There's a lot of innovation happening out there if you stop reading glossies at the 7-11 and playing multinational-controlled consoles. This is the same reason I'm tired of hearing "pc gaming is dead" FUD. Plenty of independent shareware developers are quietly pushing the boundaries and pcs are one of the only places they're allowed free reign.
Multinationals have been keeping a stranglehold on the tech specs and apis for their hardware since day one and I've been struggling to figure out why. My best guess so far is because they don't believe they would benefit if they gave up a little control. There is no evidence to prove this belief but, imho, when you're a mega corporation the mere shadow of risk is enough to send you screaming in the other direction.
If you want to see a lot of innovation check out a 48 hour game making contest, or find an indie developer's website and start hunting through the affiliates. Tucked away in those dark, mossy corners of the web are some really cool things with no eyes that wriggle and glisten.
New idea: virtual girlfriend (Score:3, Interesting)
The virtual girlfriend is high-maintenance. She needs to be called frequently, expects her text messages to be answered, and wants to be bought gifts, for real money. Otherwise she gets annoyed.
Everytime I hear this... (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't care if something is "Innovative". I care if it's good. Two examples: Serious Sam and Morrowind. Was either remotely innovative? SS was a self-parody of shoot-em-ups. Morrowind was innovative only in the expanse of the game- there was nothing there that hadn't been done a dozen times before.
But both were fun. Thinking back, the last "innovative" games I really enjoyed were Thief and System Shock 2, and I'd be happy to play an SS3 or another Thief not crippled by XBox compatibility.
As far as online play transforming everything, I don't really want to play a game that requires a lot of interaction with other people around the globe- I've got two young kids, a wife, a job and a house to take care of. Every online game I've seen seems to assume that you have none of those and that you'll just spend 60+ hours a week in your guild.
try psychonauts (Score:4, Interesting)
If you really feel this way, you should check out the new game Psychonauts [gamespy.com]. Easily the most creative computer game I've played in the last ten years.
Addictive game and utterly bizarre. Various missions involve finding a milkman, destroying a city of fish, playing Risk with Napolean and floating through a pinball disco. Game of the Year easily.
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Three words... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)