Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Nintendo Sony Games

Carmack On the Wii U and PS Vita 140

Gamespot spoke at length with id Software's John Carmack at E3 about upcoming FPS RAGE (which is now only a few months away from release), as well as his thoughts on the new console offerings revealed by Nintendo and Sony. He seems optimistic about the Wii U, and rather less so about the Vita. "But you know the technology level on [the Wii U] brings it up to parity with the other consoles, which is nice for us. Previously, the Wii was not a target. Id Tech 5 was just not suitable for the Wii at all. ... now that we're looking at another platform that is eminently suitable for the technology, I'm sure we're going to try and bring it up on there." On the other hand, Carmack and Tim Willits both expressed concerns about whether Nintendo users were the right demographic for id games. Of the Vita, he said, "I wouldn't want to be the executive making the decision to launch a new portable gaming machine in the post-smartphone world. I think that they've picked as eminently a suitable hardware spec as they could for that. ... But of course, by the time they actually ship, there may be smartphones or these tablets with twice as much power as what they're shipping with on there. And a year or two after that, it's going to look pretty pokey."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Carmack On the Wii U and PS Vita

Comments Filter:
  • Re:Hmm (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Stormwatch ( 703920 ) <> on Friday June 10, 2011 @03:00AM (#36397480) Homepage

    I've played MAME on an OLED device before and... you know, there's something about each pixel emitting light... it's like you're actually using a CRT again.

    Then... buy a CRT monitor?

  • Re:Lead. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by mwvdlee ( 775178 ) on Friday June 10, 2011 @03:20AM (#36397544) Homepage

    I distinctly remember playing 3D games well before VGA or even IBM PC was invented. They were mostly a few lines of wireframe 3D, but 3D nonetheless.

  • by Hadlock ( 143607 ) on Friday June 10, 2011 @04:22AM (#36397756) Homepage Journal
    Seeing Rage demoed back to back with Fallout 3 freshly in our minds, Borderlands having been released three months prior and New Vegas looking shiny and new at E3, there was a bit of buyer apathy when we saw YAPAOWG (yet another post-apocolyptic open-world game).

    Rage simply exists to fund the engine it's built around. It's nice when you develop a new engine for the next 3-5 years worth of games, and can pay for all of it's development in a single title. Everything after that is pure profit.

    Bethesda has iDtech, EA has Frostbite (and others), and then there's always Crytech and Unreal, but it's nice to have an inhouse engine for use with your other titles.
  • by Elbereth ( 58257 ) on Friday June 10, 2011 @05:05AM (#36397928) Journal

    As opposed to what? The latest Bioware RPG, where you have three dialogue options (Angelic, Satanic, and Snarky), act as a glorified FedEx courier, and use extreme violence to solve every problem you face? Or maybe you prefer the latest indie puzzle game, which is a direct ripoff of either Tetris or Sokoban (apparently the only two puzzle games to ever exist, although there are rumors of a third archetype called "breakout"). Or maybe you prefer Civilization X, which is just like Civilization IX, except it has Morocco as a playable civilization this time! Or there's always SimCity, where you build a city. Again. Just like the rest of the SimCity games. Let's not even get into racing games, which haven't evolved since the very first generation.

    I like Bioware, Firaxis, and Maxis as much as the next guy, but... seriously... what are expecting? You can tear down any genre, and in those genres there are always going to be the complicated/innovative and the streamlined/derivative games. id makes mindless, uncomplicated action games, where you kill everything that moves. Don't like that? Don't play it. Some of us like that kind of gameplay. It sounds like you're more demanding, and that's fine. I love complex, deep games, but when I play an FPS, I generally just want to blow shit up and/or shoot people in the face. I don't want to deal with any complexity beyond that, when I'm playing an FPS, because it just draws time away from blowing shit up... and, frankly, the idea of someone begging for his life or limping around sounds disturbing to me. I like shooting at pixels, not humans. Anyway, why would I want wide open worlds to explore, enemies that beg for their life or limp, or AI when I'm going to be playing multiplayer deathmatches 99% of the time? Scratch that. 100% of the time. It sounds to me like you want a wholly different genre... some kind of console game, where you play solo, solve puzzles, and explore the world. That sounds boring as fuck to me, but, then again, I like FPS games.

Perfection is acheived only on the point of collapse. - C. N. Parkinson