Where are the Original Next-Gen Games? 87
The Guardian has an editorial bemoaning the fact that, while the next-gen consoles all seem to have a lot of promise, so far the much-anticipated titles of 2006 are sequels. Most of those are slated for current-gen systems, too. From the article: "However, those hoping for a new game type to take us into the high-definition era may be disappointed. The most anticipated titles of this year are franchise old-timers - Final Fantasy XII on PS2; Legend of Zelda Twilight Princess on GameCube; Metal Gear Solid 4 and Vision Gran Turismo on PS3; and Tomb Raider Legend on practically everything. Publishers are still relying on games that have been around for more than a decade. Yawn."
decade ? (Score:1, Funny)
Re:decade ? (Score:2, Informative)
MSX = A Microsoft gaming console.
That is all.
Re:decade ? (Score:2, Interesting)
And the Revolution? (Score:1)
The more original a game is... (Score:5, Insightful)
What hype there is for innovative next-gen games is centred round the Revolution's controller, presumably because we have scant news on games that will exploit it yet.
Re:The more original a game is... (Score:3, Insightful)
Even if there is a genre-shaker on the horizon, and some of the gaming mag reviewers have a copy, it won't really start getting notoriety until the thing gets into players' hands. Just think, if you saw some website saying saying X is the next big thing, but you'd never heard of X before, you wouldn't really pay attention.
Well, at least I wouldn't.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The more original a game is... (Score:2)
Enough already (Score:5, Insightful)
And yet when these titles come out, and they rock, we all won't be able to shut up about how excellent they are and how much fun they are to play.
Look, I get that gaming needs to stop relying on sequels, but I'm also getting sick of this notion that just because a game doesn't use 100% original ideas and characters it must suck. Is there really anyone here that doubts that FFXII or Zelda: Twighlight are not going to be Game of the Year candidates when they are released?
Re:Enough already (Score:2)
Myself, after playing the demo, I have to say that the battle system is a load of fun. The game needs the customization system to fill it out, of course, but it's very promising.
Re:Enough already (Score:1)
Re:Enough already (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Enough already (Score:2)
If you don't know the the X series of games, they're the modern day equivelant to the old Elite games.
The X series is from Egosoft. The caveat here is they use Starforce for copy protection and Starforce doesn't have the best rep. For one thing it works as a series of hidden device drivers that load at boot.
Revolution (Score:1, Insightful)
Now, on to the reason behind the problem. This next generation of consoles have taken the wrong path with their hardware. That is, two of them have. The XBox 360 and the PS3 have graphical processors that are fantasti
Re:Revolution (Score:2)
Source (Score:2)
In all likelyhood, the specs will never be completely revealed. However, third party developers with access to hardware documentation say it will be 2.5 times more powerful than the GameCube [gamesindustry.biz].
Re:Revolution (Score:1)
As for polygon processing power, might I remind you that these are video games - their entire reason for existing is to display rich graphical representations of games. So pushing graphical prowess isn
Re:Revolution (Score:2)
You were a Master System person in the days of the NES? How did those 3D glasses work out? I didn't know anyone with a Master System when I was younger.
Re:Revolution (Score:2)
There's something about a 5'5" boxer (Little Mac) whooping the shit out of King Hippo or Piston Honda (who bears a striking resemblance to Yao Ming... Hmm...)
Re:Revolution (Score:2)
Actually, Hyperthreading is making one physical core look like two, when in reality it's still just one core. The Xenon has multiple physical cores, so I doubt they'd need to rely on hyperthreading.
Re:Revolution (Score:2)
Re:Revolution (Score:1)
What the parent was talking about, processing physics and especially AI, the PPC architecture used on the cores in the 360 are inferior to the Intel and AMD architecture's for branching predictions, so having 3 cores, with hyperthreading, does you no good if the cores themselves are inferior. Of course, the PPC architecture is also faster than the Intel/AMD architecture, so it's especially good for graphics hungry console systems.
It's interesting to note that the Re
Re:Revolution (Score:1)
Re:Revolution (Score:2)
Both systems have the capability to push out both logical and graphical power, many times over what the revolution will be able to do.
This is a nice assertion. Where did you get the data? Considering that all three of these systems use different processors, motherboards, and support chips, it would be pretty hard to come up with a clear "winner" in terms of benchmarking. More importantly, tw
Re:Revolution (Score:1)
Re:Revolution (Score:2)
Once again, where is the data to back this up? All we have so far is press releases from Nintendo and Sony. It's completely pointless for you to do such mental masturbation for or against a certain console when we don't even have all three of them.
The most obvious place where your argument fails is that we don't have two of the consoles yet. How can you compare three things if you only have one of them? It's no
Re:Revolution (Score:1)
Re:Revolution (Score:2)
I'm not going to comment on this, except to say this response only proves my point for me.
The ps3 has been toated as being nearly identicle in power to the 360.
First, I'm assuming you meant to use the words "touted" and "identical". Yes, Sony's marketing team has told us this repea
Re:Revolution (Score:1)
Re:Revolution (Score:1)
But it's not about competition since all these discussions come to the same conclusion - the 360 and ps3 are the same, but the revolution is different.
From that, people tend to say the revolution is either crap or great - most are probably somewhere in the middle. The point is that Nintendo has distinguished itself. Assuming the current perception remains the
Re:Revolution (Score:2)
You are severely misinformed. It's true that the X360 and PS3 have monstrous GPUs and can shovel polygons to the screen faster than before. But that's just one part of the system. The CPU cores are quite capable of processing data and their power has not been sacrificed in favour of the GPU. Rather the CPUs have been boosted to even more ridiculous levels compared to previous generations.
It's also turned out that the DPSs in the PS3 are no
Look a bit further (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Look a bit further (Score:5, Insightful)
The reason that these sequels are being hyped on the next gens is because that is the message that will get the most gamers to by the next gen systems in the least amount of time. Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo aren't talking to the hardcore gamer demographic - we do all our own research without needing it fed to us. Most hardcore gamers already have a biased view on what system they are going to purchase and why, changing that opinion through marketing hype won't work - the big three know that.
Instead they choose to spend their money on getting the casual gamer to convert earlier than they normally would. The path of least resistance is to offer these gamers an experience that they are familiar with and would like to see more of. Casual gamers whos favorite game is Madden are more easily converted to buying a next gen if the Madden on that system looks amazing. Its that simple.
Hardcore and elite gamers need to quit whining about not being catered to in the marketing arena. Why should we be? We don't listen to it anyways. As a whole we rip any marketing aimed at us a new one, regardless of if its for our box or not. So pushing games to us through overt marketing is a negative action.
Games like Katamari and Colossus don't need the same kind of hype. Harcore gamers read every little bit of fanboi material they can get there hands on. In fact, we know these games are coming out well before their overt marketing is apparent. Groundbreaking games need to maximize their budgets, so they keep marketing costs down. Word of mouth works just fine for these games initially as our click is really vocal and has plenty of online outlets. If the hardcore demographic adopts a new title in droves, it's a safe bet that a large chunk of the mainstream demo will also. That's when these games start spending money on the hype.
People need to realize that not everyone shares our passion, and for a business to cater to a smaller group exclusively is a bad business move. We are catered to, we HAVE games like Katamari and Colossus. Don't get jealous because they don't get the face time people because not everyone will appreciate them.
Guaranteed money (Score:1, Redundant)
If PS3 was released with a bunch of games that no one heard of (despite how good they are) it wouldn't do NEAR as well as making sequels of everyone's favorite games from the previous system.
The 360 took this path, as will PS3.
It's about the story! (Score:1)
I *looks around nervously* like sequels, though... (Score:2)
Also, how original does a game have to be? I picked up F.E.A.R. recently, and while it was a lot of fun, the graphics were incredibly similar to Half Life 2, and the gameplay not so
Re:I *looks around nervously* like sequels, though (Score:2)
Because I am and graphically, it rocks.
However it is the tried & tested: clear room, progress, clear courtyard, progress layout of the single person FPS. (though I've not finished it yet) in the same old locations : warehouse, offices, laboratories.
Where are the new environments at ?
Off the top of my head, some reasonable possibilities
zero/low gravity rooms, upside down places (remember the deathmatch one in Sin ?), long underwater battles, volcano with prope
Re:I *looks around nervously* like sequels, though (Score:2)
Zen in HalfLife was horrible. Every part of Half Life rocked except Zen. I couldn't wait to get it over with. I got lost like three times because everything looked the same. I almost gave up on Half Life, but I am glad I stuck though it for the end. Half-Life still is one the best games of all time.
Re:I *looks around nervously* like sequels, though (Score:1)
threats from more axes
inhibiting movement
certain weapons better than others
grenades being useless for throwing distance but horribly louder
diminished depth of field
things falling at reduced terminal velocity
air time limit
Oh Sigh... (Score:2)
Can Zelda games be considered sequals? (Score:5, Insightful)
In the case of the Legend of Zelda games, none of the games have really been a continuation of others.
Yes, there is some supposed chronological line where the games fit in timeline and not release date, but you can pick up any one game and safely ignore the others without it hindering your gameplay. Even if you ignore the different stories (though they tend to have the same outcome, "Defeat the bad guy and save the princess"), the game mechanisms are the same.
In fact, I believe that Link's Awakening and the two NES Zeldas were the only action RPGs that didn't have any special game mechanism. (CD-i be damned.) Contrast this with Grand Theft Auto, where it's always the same "Shoot people, run from police, steal cars" formula, just with better and better graphics. A better term for Zelda games might be "installments", rather than "sequals".
Re:Can Zelda games be considered sequals? (Score:2)
I take offence to these 'sequels suck' articles. I think a more relevant name is 'EA sequels suck'.
Do you forget Zelda 2 and 4? (Score:1)
I believe that Link's Awakening and the two NES Zeldas were the only action RPGs that didn't have any special game mechanism.
Zelda II: The Adventure of Link had that Castlevania style side-scrolling thing going on. The Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening was similar to the first Zelda but Link had to master a teleportation device called "The Select" to cross barriers.
Re:Can Zelda games be considered sequals? (Score:1)
Re:Can Zelda games be considered sequals? (Score:1)
Yes. (Score:2)
Except "Zelda II: The Adventure of Link", a direct sequel to "The Legend of Zelda".
Or "Majora's Mask", a direct sequel to "The Ocarina of Time".
If you're going to base your entire post on a premise, at least make sure it's sound. You do have some points other, but there are Zelda sequels. That alone should be reason to not have a score of +5.
" Link's Awakening and the two NES Zeldas were the only action
Re:Yes. (Score:2)
Or "Majora's Mask", a direct sequel to "The Ocarina of Time".
My point still stands, though. It was that these games didn't feed off of each other, except for the rather generic plot devices (Link, evil sorcerer, princess). You don't need to know anything about Ocarina of Time to understand the story in Majora's Mask. Hell, Majora's Mask could be the first game that you ever picked up and you wouldn't be missing anything. I ha
Uh. (Score:1)
Every dungeon you entered, your goal was an instrument. In previous games, you had to do it for pieces of the Triforce -- this was a big plot change.
Dragon Warrior 3 and 4 both don't require you play 1 and 2; indeed, 3 is a prequel to 1 and 2, and 4 is set someplace else. Few would argue that Dragon Warrior 7 and 8 are net sequels to this disparate games. To do the same
Next-gen doesn't mean innovation. (Score:1)
The term "next generation" applied to consoles is a bit stupid anyway. If these consoles are ne
Easier to promote sequels (Score:1)
Given this, what is there for me to get excited about? Well, if I know there's a game in a series I already like (Zelda: Twilight Princess, though it's current-gen) I have a
So come up with an original game. (Score:2)
Not that easy is it? Is that bad? We been playing the same video F1 games since the first F1 video game BUT the real F1 hasn't changed either. Same with all sports games. They are all sequels but then every World Champion ship is a sequel. Go to the olympics and you got the sequels of sequels and apperenly it is still very popular.
It just ain't that easy to come up with a good game design and since any game design of the past can easily be sold again with better graphics and margenilly improved gameplay th
Re:So come up with an original game. (Score:2)
The problem with this type of argument is that video games allow completely arbitrary representation of the game or event in question. In real life, there's pretty much only one
Re:So come up with an original game. (Score:2)
Re:So come up with an original game. (Score:2)
Basically its like this.... (Score:2)
The way you are going to see games come about is the way GTA started. It started out as a simple little 2d top down game, and now its become this great 3d game. Innovative games are going to start small, then after
Re:Basically its like this.... (Score:2)
Games like Bejeweled shoot through this argument faster than the NSA snoops your e-mail. Seriously though, thanks for the data to back up your assertions. Not all game developers are funded the way you claim. You have no data to show that older consoles had higher yields. The original GTA was not simple. Just because it lacked polygons and Hollywood voice actors does not make it less complex. Innovative
Sequels != Not Innovation (Score:4, Insightful)
Oh, and by the way. The Final Fantasy and Zelda series have very few actual sequels. Especially the Final Fantasy series, where a majority of the games in the series are stand-alone efforts.
Re:Sequels != Not Innovation (Score:2)
Re:Sequels != Not Innovation (Score:1)
Re:Sequels != Not Innovation (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Like Sequels (Score:2)
The last flurry of original games... (Score:2)
What? Most anticipated? What about... (Score:1)
Re:What? Most anticipated? What about... (Score:2)
Middle Earth Online - Another fantasy MMO.
Black - Another first person shooter.
Bully - Controversial beat-em-up from who else? Rockstar
Okami - I'll give you that, this game looks wild.
Winback 2 - Never heard of Winback 1, to be honest.
Star Wars Empire at War - Ever played the first Star Wars strategy game? Truly horrific. And this isn't groundbreaking at all.
So far it's not looking so pretty, and as you say this is from now until May.
Re:What? Most anticipated? What about... (Score:1)
Re:What? Most anticipated? What about... (Score:2)
Back to the topic, we SHOULD be hard on these guys, especially Rockstar. Yes they've done some amazing things, but they can easily fall into the trap of doing more of the same. GTA3 was amazing, but were the subsequent games really all that much different than the first? Not really. LCS is on the PSP so it's portable (yay!), but will LCS on the PS2 (annou
Re:What? Most anticipated? What about... (Score:1)
Trivia question (Score:2)
You're going to have to go back pretty damn far.
I'm Confused (Score:1)
ps2 or gamecube? (Score:2)
If you own a PS2, the domestic robot sim Chibi Robo, the surreal collecting game We Love Katamari and the extraordinary Japanese adventures Shadow of Colossus and Okami should all be on your must-have list.
If you own a PS2, you'll want to pick up a gamecube to play Chibi Robo.. it's a Nintendo exclusive, and miyamoto himself had a hand in its development.
We want Originality like before (Score:2)
We need new genres for everything. Also why can't we get another day in the week? Week In Week Out its Mon,Tues,Weds,Thur,Fri,Sat,Sun. When will the "calendar makers" listen to the consumer and put 2 more days in between Sat and Sun?
On a serious note. Quit bemoaning it and draft Your Original Ideas, If you can't code them there are DevHouses who need writers/story edit
duh (Score:1)