I'm sorry, but I think that innovation highly overrated, and you said it yourself: 2D mario is fun. We don't NEED to innovate to create fun games. In fact, I'm wishing developers nowadays tried less to innovate and tried more to simply make a fun game.
I'm not a scientist, but I was at CERN shooting video in April 2008. What surprised me was that a good third of the scientists I did encounter were female, and most of them weren't bad looking either!
I'm afraid this seems in line with what I've heard about them in the past. The book L ROn Hubbard: Messiah or Madman? details child and slave labor on the sea orgs, and forced labor such as this case. This is not new at all.
Story is not the most immersive part of single player games: it is the activity and challenge. This was corroborated by Lennart Nacke working for the
Blekinge Institute of Technology, Game and Media Arts Laboratory in a study called "BOREDOM, IMMERSION, FLOW - A PILOT STUDY INVESTIGATING PLAYER EXPERIENCE". They had players play various levels designed by them, some with scripted story events, and others with no events. Some with a lot of challenge and fast action, others without. Afterwards they asked the players to rate which was the most immersive. By far and large, the level rated most immersive was the level with no story sequences and a lot of action and challenge.
This of course makes sense, since in order to get in the zone and become immersed in the task of playing video games, you need a stimulating activity (action). Having a scripted sequence of cutscene pop up is a good way to kill flow.
Not true at all, the 1 RAX Fast Expand build is designed to allow a Terran player to expand early and EASILY defend against 8 zerglings. For you information, a lot has changed in just a few years.
You have no idea what you're talking about do you? Go watch the professionals play and see how often they rush. Not that often anymore. Modern Starcraft is dominated by Fast Expanding, which is quite the opposite of a rush.
EULAs HAVE held up in court, and they certainly CAN dictate how you use your software. You seem like the kind of guy who would make changes to GPL code and not release the source. Or is that somehow different?
Most customers are idiots, and the influx of casual and dumbed down game that we are getting today is the result of studios 'listening to their customers'.
Yes DRM may always be cracked, but the majority of a game's sales happen in the first few months. If you can create a system that isn't cracked for several months, then it's done its job.
I think everybody likes to feel important, loved, and the sense of having accomplished something. People who don't really get these things might turn to the virtual world for accomplishment and acceptance. What's depressing, is that even if you achieve a feat in a video game, the world is pretty much the way you left it when you stop playing. All that time didn't really have any appreciable impact.
It's ironic that all the connectivity of online gaming is isolating video game players even further. Rather than attend a LAN party, invite your friends over, or going to an arcade we sit at home alone playing with other people who are far an off away. Gaming can be a great social thing, but I don't think a lot of people are realizing just how social it can be. It's sad, because local clubs and frequent arcade tournaments are dying when online gaming is so prevalent. It's no wonder frequent players are getting depressed; they are being isolated.
1. BluRay licensing makes it very difficult (expensive) to enable mass-adoption.
I can attest to this. We shot the US Open Racquetball Championships for the Tennis Channel in HD, so naturally for the DVDs of the matches BluRay was considered. I checked into it, and the setup fees alone were outrageous enough for the Tennis Channel to say no, and we went with SD DVD instead. When a freaking TV network can't afford to make BluRays, you know you're not in good shape. This was in October 2008.
If I walk off with someone's handbag, that handbag is gone. The fact is, with a digital copy, there's no real life analogy. If I go up to someone's handbag, make an exact copy of it, and walk off with the copy, the owner of the handbag probably won't care (nor would I have done anything illegal anyway).
If that person makes and sells handbags, they probably would care, since people could just come along, make a copy of her handbag, and get their own without buying it from her, exploiting the time it took her to create and design said handbag.
And why is that in and of itself admirable? Stupid date movies appeal to the masses, but they don't push the art of cinema. As an aging young adult, I like my entertainment to increase in thoughtfulness and complexity as time goes on in order to keep myself interested, and as far as I can tell, that's not something the wii is doing. Johnathan Blow says that Braid, a game that was definitely unique, couldn't be done on the wii due to hardware limitations revolving around the rewind mechanic (the core of the game). Katamari Damacy was only possible once something like the PS2 came along and could process all those 3D objects. These types of games were only made possible because of the new hardware. So when Nintendo doesn't update their hardware, they're not going to get any of these new types of games.
If you pull off dramatic storytelling in a game where the players is given very little control, how is this a victory? They might as well have just made a movie where they could control every aspect of their narrative.
Creaky old graphics? PLay the talkie Macintosh version of Day of the Tentacle sometime with the Graphic Smoothing option turned on. As gorgeous as a real cartoon.
"It's why I find competitive gaming to be absolutely boring to watch. But this may not be so for others."
I think this true in general, for a variety of reasons, but there are certain games that make great spectator sports. We tend to like FPS games here in the states for competition, and games like Halo 3 are some of the big names at MLG. Unfortunately FPS is not a good spectator sport, since it's not easily watchable. The games don't have a visual progression: you did and respawn, die and respawn, etc, so at a glance there's no indication of who's winning and why. Second, there really isn't a good viewpoint for the spectator. You could have a floating spectator camera, or the view of a player, but neither of those can give you a sense of how the game is going overall.
Two game types that do very well for spectators are RTS games and Fighting games. Fighting games are great because the perspective is easy to watch, and you can see the match progress as a spectator. You can even jump right in mid fight and know who's winning and why. Furthermore, the actions have an indicative permanence that FPS games don't. You see a move, and it takes off life, and every action is quickly relatable to the overall whole flow of the match. The problem, is that matches tend to be short. A three round match can last maybe a few minutes.
RTS games are of course perfect, which is why Starcraft is the most widely watched E-Sport in the world. Games can be longer than fighting games, yet it has an easy perspective for spectators. At a glance you can see what buildings and units a player has, their map control, etc. Being a fan of Pro SC myself, I can say that it is very exciting to watch. Unfortunately for whatever reason, in the States we tend to like games that aren't spectator friendly, which may be a large reason why Pro gaming is not as big here as in Korea.
"Imagine World Of Goo in 3D. Would it be a better game? Of course not, it would be horrid, and would lack the charm and individual art style that makes a game like that so fresh and awesome." Actually, I think it would be pretty sweet having that extra dimension to worry about when building my huge towers. Instead of falling left or right, it could fall towards or away. 3D would really help world of goo. Please tell me katamari damacy would have been best as a 2D game. Go on. Don't blindly dismiss 3D as the root of all problems, because 3D enables a lot of great game mechanics.
This is probably true. The reason being, is that students recently graduating who are around my age are children of the baby boomers. The baby boomers were a rather prosperous generation, so in general their kids had a lot of comforts and opportunity that they take for granted. Almost everybody I knew in college didn't know the value of hard work, and expected their privilege and excellence to be rewarded at face value, probably because they never HAD to work hard, because their baby boomer parents had provided them with everything they need. I really do blame the baby boomers. They grew up in a sort of fantasy world, where they could preach peace, love, and not war, and ignore the realities of the world. And so, their children will most likely have the same attitude.
Slashdot Mirror
Sites like Homestar Runner are supported entirely by merchandise. There isn't a single ad on the site, so it can be done.
What about 'qwyjibo' ?!
I'm sorry, but I think that innovation highly overrated, and you said it yourself: 2D mario is fun. We don't NEED to innovate to create fun games. In fact, I'm wishing developers nowadays tried less to innovate and tried more to simply make a fun game.
I'm not a scientist, but I was at CERN shooting video in April 2008. What surprised me was that a good third of the scientists I did encounter were female, and most of them weren't bad looking either!
If you option click the green button on the window in OS X, it will make it fullscreen, much like your maximize feature in Windows.
I'm afraid this seems in line with what I've heard about them in the past. The book L ROn Hubbard: Messiah or Madman? details child and slave labor on the sea orgs, and forced labor such as this case. This is not new at all.
Mother 3 is for the GBA. There's even an english patch out there.
Story is not the most immersive part of single player games: it is the activity and challenge. This was corroborated by Lennart Nacke working for the Blekinge Institute of Technology, Game and Media Arts Laboratory in a study called "BOREDOM, IMMERSION, FLOW - A PILOT STUDY INVESTIGATING PLAYER EXPERIENCE". They had players play various levels designed by them, some with scripted story events, and others with no events. Some with a lot of challenge and fast action, others without. Afterwards they asked the players to rate which was the most immersive. By far and large, the level rated most immersive was the level with no story sequences and a lot of action and challenge.
This of course makes sense, since in order to get in the zone and become immersed in the task of playing video games, you need a stimulating activity (action). Having a scripted sequence of cutscene pop up is a good way to kill flow.
No, Flash is currently the number 1 ranked player.
Not true at all, the 1 RAX Fast Expand build is designed to allow a Terran player to expand early and EASILY defend against 8 zerglings. For you information, a lot has changed in just a few years.
You have no idea what you're talking about do you? Go watch the professionals play and see how often they rush. Not that often anymore. Modern Starcraft is dominated by Fast Expanding, which is quite the opposite of a rush.
EULAs HAVE held up in court, and they certainly CAN dictate how you use your software. You seem like the kind of guy who would make changes to GPL code and not release the source. Or is that somehow different?
Over 7.8 billion light years, a difference of 9/10 of a second is such an incredibly small margin.
Most customers are idiots, and the influx of casual and dumbed down game that we are getting today is the result of studios 'listening to their customers'.
Yes DRM may always be cracked, but the majority of a game's sales happen in the first few months. If you can create a system that isn't cracked for several months, then it's done its job.
I think everybody likes to feel important, loved, and the sense of having accomplished something. People who don't really get these things might turn to the virtual world for accomplishment and acceptance. What's depressing, is that even if you achieve a feat in a video game, the world is pretty much the way you left it when you stop playing. All that time didn't really have any appreciable impact.
It's ironic that all the connectivity of online gaming is isolating video game players even further. Rather than attend a LAN party, invite your friends over, or going to an arcade we sit at home alone playing with other people who are far an off away. Gaming can be a great social thing, but I don't think a lot of people are realizing just how social it can be. It's sad, because local clubs and frequent arcade tournaments are dying when online gaming is so prevalent. It's no wonder frequent players are getting depressed; they are being isolated.
1. BluRay licensing makes it very difficult (expensive) to enable mass-adoption.
I can attest to this. We shot the US Open Racquetball Championships for the Tennis Channel in HD, so naturally for the DVDs of the matches BluRay was considered. I checked into it, and the setup fees alone were outrageous enough for the Tennis Channel to say no, and we went with SD DVD instead. When a freaking TV network can't afford to make BluRays, you know you're not in good shape. This was in October 2008.
If I walk off with someone's handbag, that handbag is gone. The fact is, with a digital copy, there's no real life analogy. If I go up to someone's handbag, make an exact copy of it, and walk off with the copy, the owner of the handbag probably won't care (nor would I have done anything illegal anyway).
If that person makes and sells handbags, they probably would care, since people could just come along, make a copy of her handbag, and get their own without buying it from her, exploiting the time it took her to create and design said handbag.
And why is that in and of itself admirable? Stupid date movies appeal to the masses, but they don't push the art of cinema. As an aging young adult, I like my entertainment to increase in thoughtfulness and complexity as time goes on in order to keep myself interested, and as far as I can tell, that's not something the wii is doing. Johnathan Blow says that Braid, a game that was definitely unique, couldn't be done on the wii due to hardware limitations revolving around the rewind mechanic (the core of the game). Katamari Damacy was only possible once something like the PS2 came along and could process all those 3D objects. These types of games were only made possible because of the new hardware. So when Nintendo doesn't update their hardware, they're not going to get any of these new types of games.
If you pull off dramatic storytelling in a game where the players is given very little control, how is this a victory? They might as well have just made a movie where they could control every aspect of their narrative.
Creaky old graphics? PLay the talkie Macintosh version of Day of the Tentacle sometime with the Graphic Smoothing option turned on. As gorgeous as a real cartoon.
Try running film through a camera at 6 million frames per second. The physical mechanism is the bottleneck.
"It's why I find competitive gaming to be absolutely boring to watch. But this may not be so for others."
I think this true in general, for a variety of reasons, but there are certain games that make great spectator sports. We tend to like FPS games here in the states for competition, and games like Halo 3 are some of the big names at MLG. Unfortunately FPS is not a good spectator sport, since it's not easily watchable. The games don't have a visual progression: you did and respawn, die and respawn, etc, so at a glance there's no indication of who's winning and why. Second, there really isn't a good viewpoint for the spectator. You could have a floating spectator camera, or the view of a player, but neither of those can give you a sense of how the game is going overall.
Two game types that do very well for spectators are RTS games and Fighting games. Fighting games are great because the perspective is easy to watch, and you can see the match progress as a spectator. You can even jump right in mid fight and know who's winning and why. Furthermore, the actions have an indicative permanence that FPS games don't. You see a move, and it takes off life, and every action is quickly relatable to the overall whole flow of the match. The problem, is that matches tend to be short. A three round match can last maybe a few minutes.
RTS games are of course perfect, which is why Starcraft is the most widely watched E-Sport in the world. Games can be longer than fighting games, yet it has an easy perspective for spectators. At a glance you can see what buildings and units a player has, their map control, etc. Being a fan of Pro SC myself, I can say that it is very exciting to watch. Unfortunately for whatever reason, in the States we tend to like games that aren't spectator friendly, which may be a large reason why Pro gaming is not as big here as in Korea.
"Imagine World Of Goo in 3D. Would it be a better game? Of course not, it would be horrid, and would lack the charm and individual art style that makes a game like that so fresh and awesome."
Actually, I think it would be pretty sweet having that extra dimension to worry about when building my huge towers. Instead of falling left or right, it could fall towards or away. 3D would really help world of goo. Please tell me katamari damacy would have been best as a 2D game. Go on. Don't blindly dismiss 3D as the root of all problems, because 3D enables a lot of great game mechanics.
This is probably true. The reason being, is that students recently graduating who are around my age are children of the baby boomers. The baby boomers were a rather prosperous generation, so in general their kids had a lot of comforts and opportunity that they take for granted. Almost everybody I knew in college didn't know the value of hard work, and expected their privilege and excellence to be rewarded at face value, probably because they never HAD to work hard, because their baby boomer parents had provided them with everything they need. I really do blame the baby boomers. They grew up in a sort of fantasy world, where they could preach peace, love, and not war, and ignore the realities of the world. And so, their children will most likely have the same attitude.