The Best Games of 2020 136
Gamasutra held a contest this year to describe what hit video games in the year 2020 would be like. Over 150 detailed entries were sent in, and they've posted the top 20. One persistent theme is the ever-present connectedness to the outside world, both in reality-based games and with multiplayer modes that are part of typical daily interactions. Quoting:
"It's just an average day at your job. Noon swings around and it's time to amble out of the cubicle farm and venture outside into the city to find some lunch. You put on your slick steel framed Hunters Glasses, place your Hunters earpiece, and with black and white Hunters Gloves on, step out of the building and onto the street. After a block suddenly your dark tinted shades switch to a red tint. A silky female voice echoes in your ear, 'Players within range. Good Hunting.' The glasses are acting as a WiFi enabled computer screen. You swivel your head to scope the scene and find someone standing out within the red crowd as a white outline. The man with the white outline is scouting the area as well, trying to find who else is in the game right now. You get within range, pack a virtual snow ball with your gloves, approach slowly, wind up and throw with all your might the virtual snow ball at the man with the white outline. 'Player Eliminated,' says the female voice, 'Uploading Statistics.'"
duh (Score:5, Funny)
Re:duh (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
That's pretty optimistic of you.
Well the second preview video that they released in late 2017 really looked good (although it was a bit short to really see what the game was going to look like).
But now that they've confirmed that DNF is going to be released "real soon now", I really don't see any other game having a chance. GTA XV is getting a bit old, Doom IX is too dark (I mean even in 3D, black is still black). No, it's DNF all the way.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
GTA XV is getting a bit old, Doom IX is too dark (I mean even in 3D, black is still black).
I played Doom9 a few times. But DVD Fab turned out to be a better tool than most of what hey had to offer.
Re: (Score:2)
My Calculations have it more toward 2022-2038.
Using Mores Law on Ray Tracing Speed for a complex images and a 30 FPS minimum.
..hey.. wait a minute (Score:2)
..weren't we promised that in the far off distance of the year 2000?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Obviously (Score:2, Funny)
The Best Game of 2020 will *not* be Duke Nukem Forever, due to a slight delay in the release schedule.
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Please, quality takes time!
It will be done when it is done but I can tell you that we are still working on it.
You have got to be joking (Score:1, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
2020 and Duke Nuken is YOUR choice?! (Score:5, Funny)
Geeze guys! You are geeks!
Re:2020 and Duke Nuken is YOUR choice?! (Score:4, Funny)
Oh no, not another boring party/mini-game collection. Doesn't the Wii 9 have enough bad orgy games already?
(and we all laughed when Nintendo chucked the name 'Revolution'...)
Re: (Score:2)
DAMN IT, why did I spend my last mod point on that other article? MOD PARENT FUNNY!
Looking at those entries ... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Nope, Scott Adams. The man had a point, too. The rest of the paragraph went something like "It will be hard to convince me to shut off the holodeck, leaving Carmen Electra and her identical twin behind."
AC b/c I'm at work.
Re:Looking at those entries ... (Score:4, Insightful)
Right. It was Scott Adams. And he had a point.
If you could live in an all-encompassing virtual reality world, why would you ever want to leave? You would only want to work just enough to give yourself food and pay the power bill on your holodeck. The world economy would crumble and cease to exist as we know it.
And why would you want to get married to a real wife and have real kids? They'd whine, misbehave, spend your money, and drool all over you. (And don't get me started about the kids.) You could have your very own holofamily instead.
Yes, the invention of the holodecks would spell the demise of humanity.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Sufficiently-realistic robot "partners" may drive us to the brink of extinction well before we reach the holodeck stage.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Naw, they'll just cause the Butlerian Jihad.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, they'll share one, renting time through the local robo-brothel.
Re: (Score:2)
Someone has to repair the holodecks, create new ones, devise feeding "solutions" that let you stay inside of your holodeck, etc. Plenty of work to do.
Can you do it please? Unfortunately I have someone waiting for me in my holodeck and I'm all about punctuality.
That different? (Score:1, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Back then multiplayer was you bringing your controller to your friend's house or connecting your Game Boy to your buddy's via link cable. The only time you'd ever play with someone that you didn't know was when you played Street Fighter at the arcade in the mall or movie theater. Handheld consoles had tiny screens that weren't backlit, which made playing in anything but ideal conditions
ROFL. Put down the crack pipe. (Score:1, Informative)
ROFL!
11 years ago (i.e., 1998) I was happily playing DF2: Jedi Knight multiplayer against 4-8 people (iirc, it supported up to 16 players).
The game was released in 1997, and wasn't the first game to allow multiplayer.
The Gameboy color, which was released in 1998 ran for roughly 15 hours on two AA batteries. The gameboy did 9 on 4.
As for text messaging?
You're obviously American, as I was happily SMSing back in '95 here in good ol' Europe.
All cellphones I've had came with an address book, btw.
In other words,
Re: (Score:1)
I see your1998 Jedi Knight, and raise you a 1993 Netrek. 8 players
per team, different classes of ships (no, destroyers do not suck),
persistent player ratings, tournament ladders for both coasts, etc...
No, gaming had not gone that far in the last 11 years.
Re: (Score:2)
There was no internet.
The internet was very well alive back then, its after all where I got most of my N64 infos from. There also was Quake. Online on console wasn't yet practical, but a few exotic devices existed for SNES and Genesis that made use of one form of online or another (Satellaview, Sega Meganet). On the Amiga you had modem support in a few games.
which made playing in anything but ideal conditions nigh impossible
Well, back then you had the choice, either go GameGear or Lynx and get color and backlight or go GameBoy and get a decent battery life.
When it comes to games not much has re
Re: (Score:1)
I believe he was saying there was no internet on cell phones, which is true. I was kinda confused by that part as well, but I saw he was talking about it in the same section as his points about cell phones, and, yes, I assumed.
Because no one here would argue that there was no internet a scant 12 years ago, right?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
While this may be true for you, most of us have been playing multiplayer games since 1993 or so. Yeah, they had this bad ass console called a "Computer" and it had a James Bond clone called DOOM that had internet multiplayer.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Your comment holds true only for consoles and ignores years of PC based gaming that had all that.
PCs were doing online gaming well before Goldeneye 64 came out and with the arrival of software like Gamespy, or formerly, Quakespy, we had software that could find games.
Even in Quake 1 people were developing clan skins for their characters and were able to share them so that their clan's players had their own skins. Modding and sharing content goes back even further with games like Doom having support (Alien D
Re: (Score:2)
Get off my lawn. [wikipedia.org]
Seriously, get off it [wikipedia.org]
Why should they be so different? (Score:5, Interesting)
Quake 1 came out 13 years ago, most of what has come out since then isn't all that different. Better graphics sure, but the recipe is the same, the worlds are still 3D, multiplayer support has actually gotten worse - we've gone from 24 to 32 players being fine in Quake/QW CTF down to 8 - 16 being the average in a lot of games nowadays.
That's not to say there haven't been innovations, the Wii is a good example, but it's still only shifted around 40mill units and around 150mill games, which is great, but not enough to suggest it's killed off the classic style of games (the PS3 + 360 + PC have still shifted a lot more games than the Wii in the same period). I think if anything the Wii has just added a new style of gaming that'll sit alongside the existing style, it's certainly earned it's place, but it's also unlikely to be a killer. But even then, particularly in the case of games like duck hunt are the Wii shooters really even an innovation even if the likes of Wii sports is?
But even moving away from that and moving away from FPS, 12 years ago we had Ultima Online, nowadays we have WoW and Warhmmer and I'm not convinced they're relatively any better. Graphics are of course but certainly the time I spent playing UO I enjoyed much more than the time I spent in both WoW and Warhammer, it simply had less of the boring grind/level crap you have today and more about actually enjoying the game and having fun.
So if not much has changed in the last 12/13 years other than the obvious changes we get with more horse-power such as better graphics or in the case of duckhunt to Wii shooters, the ability to move around and shoot has much really changed to suggest that games in 2020 will necessarily be anything different again? Particularly as somethings haven't move on in the last decade- again, multiplayer player limits in FPS haven't increased.
We were always promised bigger worlds, bigger battles and so on but all the horsepower goes into better graphics, better collision detection than stuff that particularly effects gameplay. This coupled with the fact that internet connection speed improvements are pretty lacklustre in most of the world means we haven't seen what we might have envisaged a decade ago.
Don't get me wrong, I love many of the games that are out today, but I'm not getting my hopes up that games in 11 years will be anything more than to games now that games now are to what they were 11 years ago. I'd rather the next decade was spent on gameplay rather than graphics personally, but gameplay doesn't sell hardware upgrades I guess. If we start to see graphics and story telling like that in Gears of War 2 coupled with the control styles of the Wii it'd be a good start, but for this to happen either MS/Sony need to adapt to Nintendo's control style or Nintendo needs to start catering to the hardcore. I think this is more important than many realise too- I think if Nintendo's control method isn't taken to the hardcore it runs the risk of eventually being just another fad, rather than an integral part of gaming. Hell, even the joystick died out to the mouse and keyboard, which back in the joystick's prime, people would've laughed at the idea of.
Re: (Score:2)
I generally agree with your post, but more players doesn't necessarily make for better gameplay. I recall plenty of times playing Quake, 10 years ago, that the map was over
Re: (Score:2)
I understand where you're coming from and agree to an extent. My point is not so much that more is better, but that more offers greater potential. As you say you can't just stick 32 players in a 16 player map and expect it be more fun but I do believe a map designed specifically for 32 or perhaps even 100 players with 32 or 100 players in it generally has greater potential to be more fun than a 16 player map with 16 players.
Implementation matters more than anything, but greater player numbers I believe open
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
To put it into context I was playing Dark Age of Camelot and Planetside at the same time, I know some new stuff went in but compared to the likes of DAoC the amount of new content that went into Planetside truly was negligible.
It's the amount of new content I took issue with, it wasn't enough to keep the game fresh. Primarily though it was as you say, largely just changing numbers to change balance without any real actual content.
They should've developed it more like an MMO rather than just an FPS with more
Re: (Score:2)
Regarding extra weapons I was thinking more along the lines of Call of Duty 4/5 where you do level up by playing like in Planetside and unlock access to more weapons that aren't as you say necessarily more powerful.
Regarding the quests, the idea would be simply to add goals to what was otherwise a goalless game and rewards for doing so.
Dark Age of Camelot was also oriented towards PvP as it's end game, but the RPG elements meant there was still stuff to do when there was nothing going on, and eventually the
Re: (Score:2)
Well just fluff is all that's needed (i.e. different weapon skins, different styles of attachments such as scopes etc.), it just adds things that players can aim for and use to personalise their character and weapons a little more.
Small things like that just add more for people to aim for, and play around with to give a greater sense of being individual in the world rather than just being clone 1214251.
There are a lot of sideways enhancements games like that can have that add stuff that just make the game a
Re: (Score:2)
I dunno that I agree. I mean, what's really the difference between a map that's "1 unit big" with 16 players and a map that's "2 units big" with 32 players? The density of players on the map is about the same. Yeah, there's potentially a bigger variety of players, but how much does that really add? I guess playing on a larger map is nice, and you do need more players to be sure that you don't spend most of your time just looking for somebody to shoot at, but are there any other benefits? After all, we
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think it's because with more players you usually end up with a better variety of tactics and aren't stuck fighting over the same bridge/building/whatever for the whole map as well as having more different players to fight. Effectively you end up with much more variation and it becomes harder for 7 players to just camp one building.
I guess basically, some people like to snipe, some people hate snipers, some people like fast paced close quarter combat, some like to camp a room in a building, some just like
Re: (Score:2)
I really don't believe so. There are whole genres of games around today that pretty much didn't exist 10 years ago. Rhythm action, for example, and that's not counting the recent phenomenon of instrument peripherals. There have been dramatic strides in how the traditional RPG should operate, in part due to cross-pollination from online RPGs where character automation for grinding becomes inevitable rather than si
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I really don't believe so. There are whole genres of games around today that pretty much didn't exist 10 years ago. Rhythm action, for example
You've never played with a Simon [wikipedia.org] have you? Oh, I guess you're right. That was nearly 20 years ago. 10 years ago we only had Parappa the Rappa [wikipedia.org].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Storytelling, from the sublime elegance of System Shock 2's logbooks to MGS4's split-screen-cut-scene absurdities, has advanced tremendously
For one thing, System Shock 1 is a a 15 years old. For another, storytelling really hasn't advanced much at all, for most part it has taken many steps back. Sure, MGS4 has insanely long and pretty cutscenes, but those things are cutscenes, not gameplay. The disconnect between story and actual gameplay is still as bad as it was a decade ago, if not worse, since dynamic scenarios such as seen in XCom:Ufo or EF2000 have pretty much disappeared and replaced by much more linear structure in most games. And of co
Re: (Score:2)
I'd question whether the disconnect is still as bad as it was, though. Silent Hill 2 is largely linear, but in the context o
Re: (Score:1)
We were always promised bigger worlds, bigger battles and so on but all the horsepower goes into better graphics, better collision detection than stuff that particularly effects gameplay.
You should try Space Rangers 2: Reboot.
Re: (Score:1)
I'd rather the next decade was spent on gameplay rather than graphics personally, but gameplay doesn't sell hardware upgrades I guess
The same is true for movies. As the graphics get better, the plots are getting weaker - and this has been going on for 30 years at least.
Already the budgets of games have expanded to the size of big-budget movies, and I expect that in the future games will expand to take over broader audiences, while at the same time younger generations will be more accustomed to games and less accustomed to movies. Eventually, games will become a sub-genre of games - They'll be know as input limited games.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
So you missed the Wii and DS, huh? The idea behind those was that more graphics don't matter as much as new inputs and genres. A plain horsepower race won't be able to happen from here on, the current "HD" market is already ruining companies with its costs, a race would mean death for everyone.
BTW, we do get bigger worlds, bigger battles but it turned out that you can only interact with so much land area and so many enemies at a time (especially in games with melee combat as the only way to fight) so the pa
Re: (Score:2)
You're right about a lot of that.
But I have something to add, regarding player count... the number of players possible has been overshadowed by more complex physics. Different kinds of weaponry with more data synced to the server means more bandwidth usage and less players possible.
Companies are also reinventing the wheel over and over. How many games can you think of that sync the positions of everything every "tick"? The Battlefield line is notorious for this. Developers need to take a cue from HTML; if y
Re: (Score:2)
If you think that's bad, check out the real world some time. I mean, can you believe people still play tennis? Or soccer? Hell, I tried a new sport a few years ago, one I'd never heard of, and it turns out they've been playing it in the Netherlands for a flipping hundred years.
And don't even get me started on chess...
Re: (Score:2)
You'd think they were trying to kill the game. What's next? No LAN play?
Re: (Score:2)
I thought the lack of LAN play was confirmed.
Look, the number of LANners is amazingly small, why spend time developing, debugging and testing a feature that the vast majority of players aren't going to use.
LAN play takes time to organize and set up, unless you go to some "lan center" (which aren't exactly common in the US). Think about it, set up a time that works with everyone's schedules, gather the equipment (and not everyone is like /. geeks with multiple computers), set it up at the location, play, ta
Re: (Score:2)
It was confirmed. That was an attempt at sarcastic humor.
I could argue with you that there's really no more code needed except the button needed to launch the same server that the game already has built into it for battle.net. You plug in some simple run of the mill local broadcast and discovery that has been the staple method taught in schools for years now, and you're done. They just need to enable it.
I enjoy playing LAN games with my friends over Hamachi without having to first log into a remote serve
Re: (Score:2)
Ever play tabletop D&D? 8 character parties are unwieldy. 6 is best from having tactical options but 4 is better from a "keeping the game running quickly" perspective. With an 8 character party it's very easy to spend a lot of the session just debating on what to do and who does it rather than actually doing things. With 8 players there's more bathroom breaks and whatnot and in an online game people will be going in and out of the menu's all the time. "Hold up, I need to go back to Grizwold, and pi
Re: (Score:2)
Well I live in the UK and unless you live in central London then you'll get shit broadband here too sadly.
Really though even in the countries that really lead the world on broadband such as Sweden, the 100mbps connections are only available around Stockholm and such so very few countries really do have decent broadband. I'd say 20mbps should be minimum nowadays to really open the door for much more innovative online gameplay and I'm pretty sure only small amounts of the world do actually have that kind of s
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not aware of any FPS that supports 11 million players?
I can only guess you're referring to WoW, but even that doesn't support 11million on one server, only around 1500 to 2000. As I mentioned before however, even this was available 11 years ago in Ultima Online, so as MMOs go it's still certainly nothing new. Whilst WoW supports 1500 - 2000, even Dark Age of Camelot and Everquest were able to handle 3000 - 3500 and Warhammer online maxed out at around 2000 - 2500 so in fact, even MMOs have seen a decrea
Come on!!! (Score:1)
Wild Gunman (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, guys, but that's stupid. (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
If you were the VR goggles in private, say, in your living room, then what's the problem?
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that would be considered anti social. Gaming has only been truly popular when it's a social experience.
Look at the Wii's success and the success of MMO's.
Re: (Score:2)
Popularity is relative. I'd even argue that MMOs are not about social experiences but about competitiveness with millions of people and being able to escape reality's social experiences. If popular gaming is social, arcades would be thriving today.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
#1 selling PC game of all time: The Sims [wikipedia.org]
The Sims: Not MMO, not multiplayer, and not something you do with your friends.
Please do some research before you make blanket statements like that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You know what really killed VR's prospects as a game interface? You look like a total tosser wearing any kind of VR goggles.
No. I think the fact that VR goggles hurts your eyes and your neck after an hour of gameplay.
That and the cost.
That said, I've heard good things about EMagin's [wikipedia.org] goggles, but you still have to pony up $1000 some for it and your eyes still hurt.
Re: (Score:2)
World of Warcraft Expansion #7 (Score:2, Funny)
Paladins are still busted!
New Archmage heroic class - start at level 120!
All your life are belong to us!
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Also, people are seeing problems of their HP rolling over into the negatives when they get more than about 2.14 billion.
Oh, what a load of rubbish. (Score:5, Interesting)
First, classic mistake of picking a year SO close to us that there's almost no time to even guess what will happen before it comes around. It's like back in the 60's when everyone was discussing silver-jumpsuit-clad superhumans who live off food-tablets and have computers as their best friends on Neptune in artificial gravity... too much exaggeration in too short a time... all the "incidentals" that aren't mentioned (i.e. minor technical innovations that are mentioned in passing, or just assumed to be present) occur along the way but nobody ever noticed them. Come on, we still haven't properly managed videophones yet, although Skype comes damn close (it's just not "simple" enough that everyone wants to go out and buy a Skype-phone that doesn't need a computer switched on 24/7).
All we've done in the last ten years in gaming is go from Quake to Quake IV... it's all graphics. The *real* innovation in the last ten years has been in things like the Wii (specifically the controller), but STILL nobody wants to look like an idiot by *wearing* anything computer-related... the closest thing we have is fashionable mobile phones that you carry, but you STILL look a pillock with a Bluetooth headset - it's a simple fact.
Games in 2020 will be like games today... they will use the computer's facilities. This will undoubtedly include more speed, more CPU's, more realistic graphics (although "more" sound probably isn't achievable without spending a fortune on specialist hardware), smaller hardware, more touch-interfaces and more networking. The controllers may well change, but they will still be controllers (you can't beat a keyboard/mouse combo for FPS, a D-pad for platformers, a touch-screen for certain simple games, but there may well be "new" genres to take account of new-style controllers too)... you won't want to carry *anything* that you're not going to use throughout the day, certainly not a game controller. They may well integrate (so your phone is just as good a controller for your console as a Wiimote), but commercial "enterprise" will ensure that nothing works together without a hell of a lot of messing about.
We've been *technically* able to have the sorts of games that people are discussing here for DECADES. I've even suggested it myself in the past - combine paintball/lasertag with a real-time 3D game, stick a silly head-display on them and let some nutters run around in an enclosed virtual environment and shoot the crap out of each other (virtually). In an enclosed environment, location of each of the players quickly is almost trivial (especially if they are wearing your hardware), matching a plain warehouse modelled on the in-game map with some actual plain green boxes to clamber over is easy. That same plain-green background can be video processed by the most basic of PC's to overlay player's *actual* position/image into a virtual game perfectly - so you're running around a warehouse with your mates, but in your display, you and your mates are running around a map in Counterstrike. Targetting, aim, distance, recoil etc. is available through a conventional toy-gun accessory. It doesn't matter what it looks like in real life in this case (which is a big plus, because you do look a pillock running around an all-green warehouse firing a cap gun at virtual enemies), so it's easy, cheap and doesn't need a ton of technical expertise. You might only find them in theme parks, or specialist places at first, but we haven't even got *that* yet.
Instead, paintball has died. Lasertag died years ago. The companies that used to do it could *easily* have switched on to new media but didn't, because people *LIKE* the game-reality border, even if it blurs, they still need to know that they (and other, possibly more unstable people) are in a game and not killing real people. Plus, I don't *want* to play the games in real life... I play them to relax, not run around scared that someone will run faster than me, catch up with me and kill me in the game I'm paying to play.
Now, "all-digital down
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with your post and was going to mod you up, but I really had to stop reading - please use asterisks sparingly, otherwise your post becomes unreadable and cloying.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
ledow said:
> you can't beat a keyboard/mouse combo for FPS
?!?
Let me introduce you to the Wii Zapper.
Wii Zapper, please meet Nyko Perfect Shot Pistol.
Nyko Perfect Shot Pistol, please meet:
- Resident Evil Umbrella Chronicles (unfortunately v4 Wii edition doesn't work w/ a normal Zapper)
- Quantum of Solace
- House of the Dead Chop Til You Drop
- Call of Duty World at War
- Medal of Honor Heroes 2
- Call of Duty 3
- Wiiware: Onslaught
Even Link's Crossbow Tra
Re: (Score:2)
So when you spin your body around 180 degrees to take shots at the guy behind you launching rockets at your head... how do you see the TV?
Re: (Score:2)
I've actually tried to do that --- but if one controls one's reactions the control system will rotate one in place.
William
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I didn't say you can't USE other systems. I said you can't BEAT mouse/keyboard.
- Tiny flick of the wrist and tap of a key = 180 turn (or slightly more, or slightly less, depending on your needs - 3D sound and good knowledge of the terrain make this especially useful), crouch, compensate for height difference (perfectly if you know how), straight into a headshot. You can't do that with anything except a mouse/keyboard (or extremely realistic virtual reality) setup.
- Precision movement of one pixel up and t
Re: (Score:2)
My metric for games isn't whether I win or lose, but how much fun I have and how it's played.
I push a mouse around quite enough at work, and I've zero interest in sitting and playing a game by pushing a mouse around --- that's the big win on the Wii --- it makes new forms of gaming possible.
It would be interesting to see how players using different control systems would do in competitive play though.
William
Re: (Score:2)
Let me introduce you to the Wii Zapper.
The Wiimote is rather troublesome for FPS, since they have yet to figure out a proper way to actually turn your character. The whole 'move cursor to edge of screen' is really awkward and makes both turning and aiming troublesome. Even as straight lightgun replament it isn't good, because it lacks proper line of sight aiming, which is why you get a cursor in all games.
Re: (Score:2)
As I noted in another post I've actually tried to turn around when playing. Improvement in this area would be welcome, but for the current system it's a matter of balancing responsiveness and twitchiness and most games tend to be conservative, hence less responsive.
Aiming based on the Wii remote is somewhat improvable by adjustment in some games and Ghostsquad does afford the option of turning the aiming reticle off.
The real question this poses is when will consoles begin to offer multiple display out conne
Re: (Score:2)
You say people don't like clutter, but then you have all these people with various guitars, microphones, and drums laying around all so they can play one genre of game.
I don't disagree with ever
Re: (Score:2)
"You can't beat a keyboard/mouse combo for FPS, a D-pad for platformers"
Wow, I can't believe I'm replying to such a passing statement, but I can't help myself. I'm a nerd, after all.
I just thought I'd point out that the anolog sticks on a console controller work far better than the D-pad for platformers. However, some people would argue the D-pad works better for fighting games and side-scrollers (but even that's arguable).
Dennou Coil. (Score:5, Interesting)
There's a Japanese Anime/Light Novel called 'Dennou Coil' or 'Cyber Coil'. It's about kids that have grown up with glasses that are their link to the network. It lets them buy virtual items of all sorts, including pets and toys. They virtual items obviously can't interact with real objects, but they can react with other players (especially the glasses of the other players) and virtual objects. And they can make phone calls using the glasses by just making a phone shape with their hand, or call up a virtual keyboard and monitor for direct input/programming.
Yes, you'll still look a little silly to anyone not wearing the glasses. But once there are enough people doing it, it ceases to look funny. Bluetooth headsets are proof of this. 15 years ago, you'd look like you were talking to yourself. Now, everyone assumes they can't see your earpiece.
Also, having phone capabilities in the glasses will speed adaption greatly, even for those who don't normally wear glasses.
Re:Dennou Coil. (Score:4, Informative)
No, no, wearing a Bluetooth headset outside of your car still makes you look like a douchebag.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Quite right. The only thing douche-ier is wearing two Bluetooth headsets at once, one in each ear. I saw a man so clad not long ago.
Re: (Score:2)
You asshole! That guy wasn't wearing Bluetooth headsets, he was being controlled by Cybermen!
Gaming News (Score:2)
April 1, 2020: Square-Enix announces that Final Fantasy XIII has been delayed again.
The future is D-R-M (Score:5, Funny)
I see the "future" of gaming in digital restriction management. Sports Game 2019 will automatically stop working when Sports Game 2020 is released. Moreover, maybe Sports League will convince Console Company to lock players out of the game when actual sports games are being played so as to conserve their audience.
Also, to shut down the used game market, games will become tied to the first console they're played on and won't work on others.
The rise of the big game financiers will push all games stories towards a generic formula that involves space marines. People won't like it, but what are you going to do, read a book! Muhahahaha!
Oh, sorry. Continuing, Rock Band 2020 will innovate significantly, featuring not only toy guitars drums and a microphone, but also a virtual hotel room that you wreck after the show for bonus points and a USB whiskey bottle.
It'll be a bright future!
Re: (Score:2)
Funny? I wish. This is more +1, Sadly Prophetic. Especially the part about sports games not working when a real game is on.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, you might not be far from the truth.
Ever since this DRM thing came out, the big companies have been asking their lawyers if its legal to make a game stop working (like imagine if you had it through steam) when the follow-up game came out. The general consensus is no..but if you were to patch the game and make it worse and/or unplayable, that would be just peachy.
I don't think it has been done yet, but I think that time is coming. I don't think steam would cater to the kind of company that would
Huh?!?! (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I read through them and thought the same. I personally hope to have some massive virtual worlds with seamless transitions, weather, deformation... hell, I just want my Dwarf Fortress worlds to be persistent and explorable in 3D with fortresses and kingdoms that compete for population and trades while fending off goblins, dragons, and demons. Oh, and add to that the need to protect their trade routes...
Wait a minute... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I can't wait for the legislation making public gaming illegal. You know, to protect the kids from themselves.
Reality Check (Score:5, Funny)
"It's just an average day at your job. Noon swings around and it's time to amble out of the cubicle farm and venture outside into the city to find some lunch. You put on your slick steel framed Hunters Glasses, place your Hunters earpiece, and with black and white Hunters Gloves on, step out of the building and onto the street. After a block suddenly your dark tinted shades switch to a red tint. A silky female voice echoes in your ear, 'Players within range. Good Hunting.' The glasses are acting as a WiFi enabled computer screen. You swivel your head to scope the scene and find someone standing out within the red crowd as a white outline. The man with the white outline is scouting the area as well, trying to find who else is in the game right now. You get within range, pack a virtual snow ball with your gloves, approach slowly, wind up and
you are struck by a car.
'Player Eliminated,' says the female voice, 'Uploading Statistics.'"
They forsee my Snowball Fight iPhone game... (Score:2)
...version 27. How cool!
Re: (Score:1)