Multimodal, Multitouch Gaming Gaining Traction

andylim writes "Several universities and commercial entities are developing multimodal, multitouch games, such as a card game using iPhones for individual hands and an iPad for public information, and an iPad Scrabble game that lets you use your iPhone to see your letter tiles. Of course, it's an extremely expensive setup right now, but over time it will become cheaper. It's also pretty cool, so why wouldn't you want to play board/card/strategy games like this?"

Comments

RPGs/interaction games

[tacarat]

You run the risk of ruining pen and paper games by increasing the speed in which encounters get dealt with. GMs need time to BS and slow mechanics enable that. I'm sure there are other games where being efficient will detract from the social aspects of the situation. Slot machines are probably one of the best examples of such.

Re:RPGs/interaction games

[gmhowell]

How about we give it a nice grahpical interface where I can see my character fighting alongside my friends? Ooh, and then give the monsters a little AI so that the GM has less work to do still?

It would be pretty.... Well, all I can say is:

WoW!

Re:RPGs/interaction games

[tacarat]

Pulling a Leroy Jenkins on your friends is simply not the same as having them attacked by rabid ninja gerbils. For one thing, they still have hope.

"Multi" touch?

[White Flame]

The only multitouch demonstration on any of the videos was rotating the playing cards (to little effect anyway).

Why is "multitouch" specifically such a buzzword, and not just "touch" on its own? Multitouch has so far had weird implications on what sort of appendage/stylus you can use on the surface, whereas single touch does not. Plus, you can effectively do pinch/zoom on a typically single-touch panel, just not rotations.

Re:"Multi" touch?

[michaelhood]

The only multitouch demonstration on any of the videos was rotating the playing cards (to little effect anyway).

Why is "multitouch" specifically such a buzzword, and not just "touch" on its own? Multitouch has so far had weird implications on what sort of appendage/stylus you can use on the surface, whereas single touch does not. Plus, you can effectively do pinch/zoom on a typically single-touch panel, just not rotations.

simply, multitouch refers to a type of screen (capacitive in this case) that can track more than one point of contact simultaneously.

the other type of popular touchscreen is resistive, this is what is used on my htc touch pro2.

if you put three fingers on the surface of the screen, one after another (like how you'd press ctrl-alt-del), it would look like the following:

capacitive: _ _ _
resistive: _

on the resistive screen, whichever spot you touched first is "it".

Re:"Multi" touch?

[mdwh2]

I fear the answer is basically because it's the one thing that Apple did first, therefore it's touted as important.

I do agree with you. Touch works fine on my 5800, and lacking multitouch has never been a problem (indeed, I find it easier - one mouse button is simpler, remember?), and a resistive touchscreen has some minor benefits to make up for this minor loss. A well designed UI doesn't need multitouch, it can simply use better paradigms instead.

There are plenty of other touchscreen tablets and phones out there, that would also make perfect boardgame platforms, but we're not going to hear about them here. Expect to see a lot more of these "Doing X on the Ipad" stories, just as we did with the Iphone.

And the politics get started again

[Whuffo]

In the interest of truth, how about the commenters in this thread start by telling us if they own or have used at length an iPhone, Ipod Touch, or an iPad. I think that if we pay more attention to the people who have something that they know to add we might discover something useful here.

I mean, sheesh - if you want to see people holding forth on things they know nothing about you can always tune in the Fox channel. We're better than that here, aren't we? This "I heard it was bad so it must be" nonsense isn't doing anyone any good. It's a product, not a philosophical statement - so get down off of those high horses and let's discuss this like men and women.

Re:And the politics get started again

[causality]

In the interest of truth, how about the commenters in this thread start by telling us if they own or have used at length an iPhone, Ipod Touch, or an iPad. I think that if we pay more attention to the people who have something that they know to add we might discover something useful here.

That would exclude the people who don't own those and believe they have good reasons for this. Truth is not served by discounting them. Even if you could never agree with them, consider them an important contrast.

I mean, sheesh - if you want to see people holding forth on things they know nothing about you can always tune in the Fox channel. We're better than that here, aren't we? This "I heard it was bad so it must be" nonsense isn't doing anyone any good. It's a product, not a philosophical statement

It's possible to know something about an object that you've still chosen not to purchase. In fact I'd recommend knowing something about it before you decide whether or not to purchase it. There actually are philosophical aspects to this. Your own might motivate you to dismiss the opinions of anyone who hasn't patronized Apple. They could also motivate you to understand an alternative viewpoint and why a given person holds it. Either way you are reflecting a philosophy, worldview, set of priorities, values, whatever you wish to call it. Is it therefore an offense when others do the same?

so get down off of those high horses and let's discuss this like men and women.

That's a related but different subject, easily conflated with your first. This one is about the style with which something is expressed, not the nature of what is being conveyed. It's really about how the tone that is used can affect the quality of discourse but not the subject.

Re:And the politics get started again

[GrumblyStuff]

I think the gaming potential is going to be phenomenal.

Except for the price.

Are they really getting traction?

[Trepidity]

All this article seems to claim is that some people are making them. And most of the ones the article mentions aren't even out yet. It remains to be seen if they'll "get traction".

The overall trajectory of hyper-realistic computer versions of traditional games reminds me of an old SNL parody of virtual reality: you put on a headset, and engage in an immersive story world, consisting of a 3d-rendered room exactly like the one you're sitting in. You pick up a 3d-rendered book from the 3d-rendered table beside you, and can read it, turning the pages in beautiful virtual reality. Unfortunately only about 5 words fit per page, due to technical limitations.

Re:Because I have no interest in owning iDevices

[Shikaku]

http://www.engadget.com/2010/02/02/nexus-one-gets-a-software-update-enables-multitouch/

*BZZT*

Try spreading FUD again later.

Why not just play the actual games

[Gothmolly]

Why not just play the real games, rather than an electronic version of the game?

Re:Why not just play the actual games

[yotto]

Pick one:

* You're not in the same room as the person or people you're playing with (for the network games)
* You don't have room for 100 (board) games, but one iPad with 100 games is small.
* The game is difficult to score (or easy to score incorrectly) but otherwise fun (example: Carcassonne)
* You don't have time to complete the game so would like to easily save it to continue another time.
* You own a pet, or have children and are afraid of them disturbing the pieces.

I'm sure you can think of more.

Re:Why not just play the actual games

[amRadioHed]

Also: The game takes an hour and a half to set up, like Axis & Allies.

It needs a catchier name.

[s-gen]

"multimodal multitouch gaming"???? Sod that. How about... "Two pods, one pad".

Re:Randomness

[mrsurb]

If only there were some way of combining two or more 32-bit numbers together to form a 64-bit or greater number. This is a solved problem.

Re:Because I have no interest in owning iDevices

[SCPRedMage]

I've got $5 that says such a game would never make it past Apple's approval process.

Re:Little Nerdy, but hey THIS IS SLASHDOT.

[gmhowell]

This IS Slashdot right, I mean here people try to get DOOM to run on ancient ATM hardware.

Why would you run Doom on an old Sonet card?

Re:Because I have no interest in owning iDevices

[Madrayken]

Until Google does something wacky with Java allowing it to run at a reasonable clip (better support for float ops, better garbage collection), or makes using native code seamless (a long way from the horrific situation at the moment) developers like myself will be sticking to iDevices, if only to avoid pulling out our remaining hair.

Why wouldn't you?

[YourExperiment]

why wouldn't you want to play board/card/strategy games like this?

Because then they're no longer board games. Part of the fun factor of these games comes from the physical board and pieces. The components can be quite beautiful in some games (Euro-games especially). The tactile nature of the game is part of its appeal.

There's no denying that multi-touch screens are cool, but (shock, horror) the real world can be even cooler! I happen to like holding cards in my hand, and dragging a bunch of wooden pieces around an expansive, beautifully artistic board.

This might be an odd claim to make on /., but not everything can be improved by putting it on a computer.