Slashdot Mirror
In Search Of The Continuous Gaming Platform
Thanks to The Register for its Faultline-reprinted analysis discussing the concept of making games that are playable on multiple hardware devices. The analyst argues: "Games writers now need to move on a generation to what we shall call 'continuous immersive absorption' into a game. That means that the play should... have elements that are played on a big home based screen, have elements of play that are ideal for a mobile gaming platform or phone so that it is portable on trains and cars and even the playground, and it should have communication elements that see players interact." The piece goes on to churn out much general analysis, but is the concept that "[Game]play should be able to proceed on the home platform, and on mobile platforms, and on your PC at work or school" a viable or attractive one?
So it's not bad enough when developers release games unoptimised for three home console systems at once instead of optimising for one of them, now they should spread their resources even thinner and try to cram in totally different platforms as well? Isn't it hard enough to come up with meaningful content for the GC-GBA connection to show that this won't hold up?
"[Game]play should be able to proceed on the home platform, and on mobile platforms, and on your PC at work or school" a viable or attractive one?
HUH? Why do we need games at work or school? Or in the car for that matter? Don't we have enought real world problems to deal with as is?
If anyone should be so bored as to need this type of game, they should instead look around them and see what can be done in the real world to improve it's environment.
There's some good ideas here. Think "Puzzle Pirates". Or imagine, for example, that you could craft items in Star Wars Galaxies while sitting on the bus with just your phone. This provides a way to buff your character without commiting as much sit-down gametime - and provides a new source of content for mobile gamers. This is certainly a marketable idea.
To those who would ask "Does the world really need this?", the answer starts off with "you're stupid and lost" and ends with "you can disable games.slashdot.org".
Let's not stir that bag of worms...
Being able to play a game on your computer, then to continue to play exactly the same game miniaturized on your mobile phone while going to school is a very nice idea said as such, but the author seems to completely forego the real problem of making the same game playable on multiple formats. For this kind of feat to be possible, you would need all the systems which are being aimed at (most probably computer, console, portable gaming systems and mobile phone) to use the same format for games, which in my opinion is just impossible for several reasons. If that stage is passed, you then have to pose the problem of the game being able to adapt itself to all these different systems, without having it too underopzimized proportionally in each form it is usable as.
As I have said, I beleive the problem of each system using the same format for games is most probablyy impossible to solve. I cannot conceive how it can be possible to create a format which is both usable on each system and powerful enough for the variety of systems it has to face. You just have to take a look at the diversity of the gaming platforms the author wishes the ideal game to aim for to see that this imaginative idea will have to stay just that, an imaginative idea. Personal computers are continually evolving, gaining megahertz by the second, and it is a platform which can harness incredible power; computers are out-of-date in three to six months, and it is just about the same thing for their games' graphics. Whereas computers are getting more and more powerful as time goes along, consoles are only released every few years and do not benefit of the same continual evolution that computers do, and as home consoles have to keep price reasonable not to push consumers away, they are virtually out-of-date when they leave the production factory. As for portable gaming systems, they obivously cannot boast too much power as they have to stay portable. This may change a bit as minituarization of material goes on, but not to the point of havinh the power of a computer in a pocket. Finally, mobile phones are primarily communation tools and not gaming tools, but as the emphasis is put on the phones having better support for games, one can notice the abundance of the latter growing quickly; but mobile phones have to stay portable phones, and overhauling the power of the integrated graphics for gaming would surely mean producing heavier phones aimed at a more special sector of the market and not at the everyday user.
I cannot see how one could actually think it is possible to create a game which could expand over so many systems. You would need a format which would be compatible with machines from the size of a pocket calculator to that of a television, and that would be able to support information compatible with everyone of these systems. If you were able to solve that problem, which is very unlikely, then you would surely be halted when it comes to developing a same game which would have to run on both systems with enormous power and systems with less than a hundredth of the power of the latter. It is just unconceivable, as you would need a common format, the tools to develop the same software on all these systems and for it to be able to harness enough power of each system to be up-to-date when it comes to graphics and gameplay.
Though the author's idea is just pure fantasy, I think we can certainly approach a level of interactivity and interoptability between the currently available gaming platforms which have a lot of possibilities. Of course, I am talking about Nintendo's GameCube/GBA connectivity features (me, biased? No way! :o), which I think have the potential to allow a satisfying level of interactivity between games on both format if the usage is pertinent enough. You do not need to stretch your mind much to find a lot of possible features with this, though it still means having to develop a game separately for each system. By the way, Nintendo were not the first to throw themselves into the 'connectivity' ide
"Really, I'm not out to destroy Microsoft. That will just be a completely unintentional side effect" -- Linus Torval
this sounds like a great way to make money of course ("Buy cellphone X and serive provider Y to unlock more SW: Galaxies content and exciting gameplay!!"), but i'm not sure the gamer benefits as much as do the corporations. how does this add to the gameplay experience, other than simply multiplying a beloved franchise's content? Animal Crossing was neat, and i havnt yet played FinalFantasy Crystal Chronicles, but as far as i can tell not even Nintendo has answered this question despite a sustained effort for a few years. people want a new experience, not new variations on a theme.