This is neat. It's been a shortcoming I've noticed in most games, where landscape textures tend to be lacking.
However, what we really need is gameplay innovation. Actually, what we really need is for developers to stop making every last first person game a damn shooter. Can't they do anything else with a first person perspective. The potential here is enormous and yet it looks like developers have a fetish with gunplay.
There have been games with potentially strong storylines that get mired down by this nonsense. There's little discovery and certainly no problem-solving. These games come down to who has more firepower and occassionally discerning some basic pattern in enemy movement.
Maybe the problem is that these developers invest so much energy in graphics that there's little room to refine the other aspects of the game. Or they just think that the consumer doesn't want to do anything other than destroy things and kill people.
I do enjoy dining at nicer restaurants. I'm not talking about excessively over-priced places, I mean $20-$30 for a dish. I think the atmosphere, service and quality of food justifies the added price.
To continue the stupid analogy, however, what is being discussed here is $20-$30 for a Wii or Xbox360 versus $100 for the kind of experience the PS3 supposedly provides. Except that when the dish comes it's no better than the less expensive dish. The waiter, however, assures you that the dinner comes served on the finest silverware available.
It seems Sony is convinced the consumer will percieve the PS3 as more than just a gaming machine. You'd think they would have known better given the fiasco with the PSP. If people want to watch movies they'll buy a DVD player; you can get one for $30 nowadays. If they want to browse the web or download content they'll use a PC which they probably already own. If they don't own one at this point they're probably not going to care about the added functionality of the PS3 either.
The bluray technology is far too new for anyone to embrace. They're going to potentially pay twice as much as they would for a DVD and have only a tiny fraction of the selection. That's assuming they even own an HD television. And then there's the competing format, HD-DVD.
History has shown that people buy gaming consoles to play games. Nintendo had ambitions of turning the NES into a home computer. Needless to say that plan went nowhere. The 3D0 was another system, like the PS3, bloated with features and over-priced. I don't know if the PS3 will suffer quite the same fate, but it isn't looking good.
As for manufacturing costs and exchange rates, I don't think that really applies here. It isn't quite like autmobiles which are entirely manufactured in one nation or another and exported. The vast majority of the sophisticated components in all three consoles, the Xbox360, Wii and PS3 are manufactured in Taiwan with a decent portion coming from South Korea, maybe Singapore and not much from Japan. People still seem to think Taiwan is producing bootleg crap, but they're doing much of the more advanced manufacturing for most electronic devices. Of course a lot of these companies have exported this work to China, but for the most part China is doing assembly more than anything else.
The reason products are so excessively expensive in Europe is all thanks to European governments. They impose heavy import tariffs on products, which is bad enough in and of itself, but then they go and add ridiculous sales taxes on everything. In general it's expensive to do anything in Europe and its reflected in the price of goods.
The US, however isn't nearly as excessive with the taxes which is why we can get products for close to what they cost in Japan. But because of how products are produced pricing is generally based on manufacturing costs.
The gist of all this is that the PS3 is overpriced and it offers little that's compelling.
I have to agree. People really are overdoing it with this damn controller, they're acting like it's the second coming of Christ.
I'm sure the Wii controller will be great when applied well. But a little common sense will tell you it won't work with many types of games. And more importantly, the quality of a game shouldn't have to be dictated by the controller it uses.
Just like graphics shouldn't be the defining aspect of a game, neither should a controller or some other random bit of hardware. Gameplay matters about all else. I'd rather play a great game with a generic control pad than an average game with a Wii controller.
I've been noticing here that it's acceptable to jump all over the Xbox360 and PS3 fans when they defend their systems. But criticizing the Wii is akin to blasphemy.
When it comes to comics/graphic novels/call it what you want, I don't actually know of any other country with as lively, large and varied market as Japan, so how is it overrated?
Maybe after having grown up on American cartoons and comic books what the Japanese offer seems unique; like they say, the grass is always greener on the other side.
However, if you looks specifically at Japanese anime/manga it's the complete antithesis of variety. With some minor exceptions virtually every cartoon and comic book is drawn in exactly the same style. The vast majority of the writing is cloned from work that has come before. And most of it is uninspired.
In recent years all kind of crap has been dumped on the US market, but generally in the past Americans have only gotten the best anime/manga Japan had to offer.
I feel like people are overestimating what this Wii controller will be able to do.
I'm sure the Wii controller is going to be quite good and Nintendo will release some great games for it. But I don't think it's quite as revolutionary as it's being made out to seem.
First of all, a truly revolutionary control system would track your entire body. Secondly, it would likely require some kind of visual interface that makes you feel like you're there. Either that, or playing a game will be like a dream. You're convinced you're actually in the game world even though you're stationary. This Wii controller is one of many, many steps in that direction and it isn't like this sort of thing hasn't been done before in gaming.
Take a look at the gaming console produced by Xavix. The technology is different than what Nintendo is using but the applications are similar. I think all the games offered for that system are sports based, but it shows that the options for these kinds of devices are somewhat limited.
Traditional game controllers have done well for so long because they generally work well-enough for most kinds of games. The mouse/keyboard combination, while superb for FPS and strategy games has proven to be lacking in many other genres. It could be argued that the Wii's controller poses similar problems being somewhat closer in operation to a mouse than it is to a controller.
Another problem is that gaming is generally a sedentary experience. Not many people are going to be able to stand there waving their arms around for several hours straight. When using a keyboard and mouse we're supposed to keep our wrists in a neutral position, and here we have a device that requires we use our wrists in repetitive motions. Your range of motion is fairly limited, which means your entire arm has to move, which increases exhaustion. Hold a remote control in the air and you'll get a good sense of what's involved.
Excercise is a great thing; anything that encourages kids to work out is good. People are too sedentary. But keep in mind, most people who game for hours on end aren't necessarily looking to move around much. But it also get's a point where you might as well just go out and play sports for real if you need to move that much.
I think the Wii will be great for simple puzzle games, like those we've seen for the DS. Beyond that I think it will be an ideal fit for party games. It might provide the right kind of action and excitement people need to be encouraged to play. On the other hand, while providing a better control scheme it will still lose every to the precision and speed of a mouse in many genres.
Thats my ultimate problem. It's not that the controller is bad. I think it's great. I just think it's a bit too specialized and people seem to be overestimating what it can do. However, if Nintendo provides a more ubiquitous control option I think they wont have a problem.
I agree completely. I couldn't have said it any better myself.
I enjoy the occassional anime myself, and was into it back when no one even knew what anime was. But the overwhelmingly vast majority of anime and manga is crap. The US has generally gotten only the best work, but in recent years it seems like everything has been imported. As like as its Japanese it gets the seal of approval from fans.
Anime is like anything, most of it is subpar, but there is a small handful that stands out. The thing is that with the success of the good anime come numerous imitators. The more complicated and abstract the story is the more artistic and profound it supposedly is.
My sister is a fan of Ghost in the Shell, the series, and I've tried to follow a few episodes. Half the time it's like listening to gibberish. It's like mental masturbation. These characters told talk like any real person would and spew convoluted philosphical concepts. They beat the view over the head with these concepts so that there's no doubt whatsoever that they're trying to be profound. They may as well have a powerpoint presentation at the beginning of each episode highlighting the relevant key points.
Certainly a good story sometimes is complex and difficult to understand. But in the case of a lot of anime the ambiguity is used to cover up the lack of real substance.
I am a designer and I have to agree. I tend to avoid reading anything on that site specifically because it is so difficult to follow. They seem to think they're designing for the printed page, although oddly enough, magazines almost always run vertically.
There are very creative and unique ways to design a layout for the web that still work well and are easy to read. Unfortunately, this isn't one of them. Nor is the design so good as to justify the awkward layout.
People may get used to Wii but a good name wouldn't take any time at all to be accepted. People felt good about Revolution because actually meant something.
Even then, it will probably only be a certain group of people who accept it. The same gamers who rejected the Gamecube as being a kid's system will likely continue to reject the new console, especially with this name. Furthermore, the average consumer with little knowledge of any console might be put off by the name. Perhaps the child-like nature of the name will attract anyone looking for a system for their kids. Whether something called Wii can be taken seriously by a more mature audience remains to be seen.
I hope they plan on introducing the other colors in the US shortly after the release of the white one.
For whatever reason there seems to be this habit companies have of only releasing bland, uninspired colors for products in the US. Nearly all mobile phones in the US are the same crappy silver color and apparently it's manditory that all portable electronic devices have the same look and feel of the iPod.
Gimp is an incredibly stupid name. And there is countless software out there with some particular awful names, especially when it comes to emulators. Nesticle and RAPE are two particular gems.
The key distinction here is that Nintendo presumably spent tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands coming up with the Wii in addition to the logo and all the marketing materials. In addition, Nintendo is competing in a market where perception matters. If people can't even accept the name how will they ever embrace the system.
The Wii is going to be absolutely amazing for people to get over a name like Wii.
With all the emphasis on increasingly realistic graphics it's logical to expect that there's going to be a drive to produce more accurate physics. That said, Ageia might find it's cards rendered obsolete within a short period of time.
Right now developers likely to develop a game with gameplay features that make a physics card manditory. It's kind of like the hard drive on the PS2. So, for a while all we'll see are novelty uses for physics, kind of like City of Villains. The problem is that, at least from what I've seen from that game, the load on the CPU still isn't a problem.
Games are currently pushing the limits of video cards, not CPUs. A reasonably powerful PC should have power to spare for some physics. Of course that's also dependent on programmers not being overly reliant on powerful hardware and actually doing efficient coding.
Anyway, the point is that by the time we see physics being pervasive in games nVidia and ATI will almost certainly have physics processors integrated onto their video cards. Either that or Intel and AMD multi-core processors will more than be able to handle the burden of processing physics.
Either way it will likely make the Ageia processors of irrelevant. Except for those consumers in the interim looking for a cheaper method of physics acceleration.
They'd tax us for the air we breathe if they could.
I've got a better idea... How about aggressively cutting excessive waste from government. They could be just as efficient with half the bloat they have now.
The amount of waste in government is mindblowing. Around here we've had a milder winter than normal and yet, by some miracle local governments still managed to go over-budget on snow removal. We get one bad snowstorm, like we do every year and they start crying for emergency funding.
The government is essentially like a bad welfare case. What do they care about being efficient? They're guaranteed an endless stream of money from their citizens. And when they need more they just find some way to raise taxes.
I can only imagine that this name was dreamt up in Japan; it certainly has that feel. The logotype is similar to what many other Japanese companies use, moreso in Japan than here. Japanese companies also have a bad habit of coming up with some horrendous english-inspired names.
You can find some particular good examples in the Japanese domestic automotive market. The Mitsubishi Galant is called the Grunder there. They have a van like car called the Freeca. Honda has a car called the Vamos Hobio and another one called the Thats. It's even worse for other products but we rarely see the problem here because things tend to be localized.
Either Nintendo of America was forced to go with the name or they actually liked it, we really have no way of knowing. Nintendo sometimes seems to make decisions based solely on the Japanese consumer.
Regardless of how ridiculous Wii may sound I think it poses some serious issues for Nintendo. It's a short, simple word something I could easily see associated with a children's product. More serious gamers and adults might have a very hard time taking something called the Wii seriously. Imagine a game like Grand Theft Auto played on a console with this name; it just doesnt seem to fit.
The Gamecube already suffered from the perception that it was a kid's console, so I don't really see how the Wii is going to help. Given the fact that the PS3 seems like it wont be nearly as expensive as people were predicting I think Nintendo is going to have a lot of competition. It's looking like this generation will play itself out much in the same way as the previous one.
One of the problems the Gamecube faced was that many gamers perceived it to be a kid's console.
Now they have this console with promises of innovation in gameplay and gave it a potent codename. But then Nintendo goes and calls it the Wii which beyond sounding ridiculous, sounds very child-like and insignificant.
Try to visualize playing some of the more adult-oriented games out there on a console called the Wii. It just doesn't seem right.
The name doesn't seem to represent anything other beyond the marketing crap I've read that it stands for "we". The name that had come up in rumors, "Go", is a lot better than this. It actually stood for something and is energetic. "Wee" is what a 5-year-old does before going to bed.
I guess someone at Nintendo seems to think this name is unassuming and will attract non-gamers. The problem is that I don't think even non-gamers will be able to take it seriously. At least not anyone other than parents looking for a safe, kid-friendly console to give their children.
Given the fact that the PS3 is supposed to go for $399 when it's released doesn't particularly bode well. It looks like in the end we might end up in a situation very similar to the PS2/Xbox/Gamecube generation.
The games for the Wii will really need to be phenomenal on a level like we haven't seen before for a lot of consumers to get past that name.
The reality of the situation is that if Microsoft were a European corporation there would have never been a trial. The real issue here is that the EU resents the fact that an American company is so dominant. They want an open and fair market until its detrimental to their companies, then they clamor for protection and security.
I see this thing all the time with clients who have a presence in Europe. The Europeans will be damned if they ever do anything the US office wants. But the Americans are so busy worrying about offending anyone and being politically correct that they let themselves get bullied by the European offices.
I'm not saying Microsoft isn't guilty of anything and that they shouldn't be punished accordingly. But forcing them to strip basic functionality from Windows is just plain stupid and certainly doesn't help the consumer. Since the beginning we've all been able to install any media player, browser or any other application and use that exclusively. But at least we had the convenience of getting an operating system which already included those tools. Most people dont have the knowledge or inclination to look for these applications.
And what is the EU going to do? Start forcing every operating system on the market to not come packaged with these applications? It would only be fair. If Microsoft has done something wrong by packaging this software than it only stands to reason that Apple and others are also in violation.
If Microsoft has done something wrong then punish them accordingly. But I don't see how stripping functionality is the answer. It looks to me like the EU is trying to manipulate the market in favor of European developers.
People love to exaggerate the potential of the internet. It's going to make it so that you don't actually have to leave your seat to travel the world! You can go to school from your living room! It's going to liberate everybody!
Like those stupid AOL commercials with that over-weight middle-aged guy running with professional runners or the kid swimming with athletes. Yeah, because reading a bunch of text, screwing with an unintuitive flash interface and looking at miniscule over-compressed photographs is just like being there!
The internet certainly has a lot to offer, but it's not going to do anything for people living in places like rural parts of China. What they need a fancy computer with all the blinking lights isn't going to provide. Where would these people even afford such a luxury when they can barely afford to keep enough electricity running to power a few lightbulbs, assuming they even have any electrcity at all.
If anything this is going to cause a bigger gap between the weathy and poor. The impoverished remain where they are while those already well off exploit every opportunity they see.
Of course the big problem I see here are American companies stumbling over themselves to appease China with the United States along for the ride. If this nation were a bit more principled and didn't worship the mighty dollar at the expense of everything else they'd threaten to take their business elsewhere the moment China starts trampling on human rights. It isn't like China is the only nation in the region with over 1 billion citizens.
These companies want advertising in games to make extra money above and beyond what they make now. There's no way in hell they're going to lower prices because they've crammed a game full of ads. If they did that they might as well not have advertising in the game at all.
The last time I checked cable and satellite television is getting more expensive despite more advertising than ever before. The same goes for movies, which have absurd amounts of product placement despite ever increasing ticket cost.
These companies don't care about preserving immersion, they care about making a few extra bucks. GTA Vice City took place in the 80s, San Andreas took place in the 90s. If they put in real ads rest assured they wouldn't be advertising from each game's respective time period. We'd see big flaming ads for Dell XPS computers, Subway sandwiches, bad ringtones, some new SUV and lord knows what else. And then the best part is when they throw these ads in a player's face and force them to watch it. We'll have a game with completely destructable environments except for advertisements. And entire town will be obliterated but all the billboards will be pristine.
And for every one creative, well-designed ad there are 10,000 awful ones. This entire venture is about making money. These jerks aren't going to spend on anything if they don't need to which means we're going to see low quality garbage everywhere. Look for high quality advertising in the style of lowermybill.com.
Just because the guy developed one popular game doesn't suddenly make him an expert. On the other hand, I tend to agree with the guy. I'm positive that the Revolution's controller is going to be absolutely phenomenal, but only with a handful of games. Excessive amounts of emphasis have been placed on this controller when the reality is that most games just wont quite work with the controller. It's control mechanism is simply too specialized to fit most games. Maybe its partly the media's fault for pushing this thing so much, but then again, Nintendo hasn't really shown us anything other than that controller.
I personally cant stand the existing controllers covered in buttons and poorly designed games where developers felt the need to use every single button on them. So, I'm not saying Nintendo shouldn't use this thing as the centerpiece for the Revolution. Games like Guitar Hero have shown that Nintendo doesn't really corner the market on unique controllers. So I don't think it's going to quite spur the sort of innovation some people are expecting. The innovations that come will be due to compelling game design, not because some unusual controller has inspired it.
There's a simple problem facing most indie games. They simply aren't very good. A few offer innovative concepts, but most are very derivative. The games also seriously lack polish. Often its poorly conceived controls, a sloppy interface or extremely amateurish artwork. The concept might be great, but the game in general is poorly executed.
The standard commercial game is fairly refined despite the occasional bug. Despite contrived content and a general lack of imagination a player can still expect a sufficiently satisfying gameplay experience. That's why these games continue to sell; they're adequately good.
Although I tend to follow whats out there I personally could care less about most games. I haven't played probably 90% of the commercial games available in the past few years and I've purchased even fewer.
I'm not looking necessarily for innovative gameplay. I'm looking for games that are outright fun; that make me feel like they're worth the money. I think there's too much of an emphasis on the latest and greatest 3d graphics with so much potential being wasted.
I don't have a problem with sequels. I like the familiarity of playing the same characters and seeing their worlds evolve and grow. What I dislike is when they're called franchises. Because it means the sequel is nothing more than a way of making money on the reputation of the first game, which inevitably means insufficient effort is put into making the sequel good.
There seems to be this fixation on innovation like that's somehow going to eliminate the glut of uninspired gaming. I don't need to wave around a wand like a fool in order to experience great gameplay. It might make for a great party game, but do I really want to physically move something every single time I play a game? There's already the problem on the DS with developers who are feel they absolutely must utilize the touch screen an end up with a weak game as a result. Those tools are great, but they just wont work with the majority of games.
Just focus on good gameplay. Blizzard has done well for a long time because they'd take an existing genre, strip it down, and focus on the elements that made that genre fun. Nintendo also has great games because they generally understand what's fun.
The problem is that game development is a time consuming process. I've developed a few flash games and most of it I've never finished beyond a basic proof of concept because of how involving it can be, although I tend to get too ambitious. I've also tried to initiate some projects with friends but those go nowhere fast and again, it can be a daunting process. You either need too much free time on your hands or a group of people who are committed to giving up their spare time to develop something. Creating artwork is overwhelming let alone actually coding these games.
One other problem is that of all the people out there trying to create games only a handful really have the skill to produce something truly good. The problem is that the ones who are that good probably end up working for the big developers in one form or another. That's probably why we rarely see outstanding indie work, because the ones that good are usually swallowed up by commercial gaming.
If Half Life is a better game than Half Life 2 it certainly isn't because of modding or a lack thereof.
Even though neither is a pinnacle of storytelling the original was more compelling. I think what is a detriment to HL2 is that the emphasis was on the graphics moreso than anything else. So the game was built around providing a visually impressive experience, which inevitably means other aspects of the game suffers.
Furthermore, there are countless FPS games out there nowadays many of which seem to have emphasized the quality of graphics above all else. The more recent games are beginning to overshadow Half Life 2, forcing it out of many gamer's minds.
I was never a big fan of the original, but I did find the game compelling. The new one never impressed me much beyond the visuals. But then I haven't enjoyed FPS games for a long time because they're all so generic and uninspired in every way except the use of pixel shaders and normal maps.
I eagerly hope to see a new Star Control game. The originals were great. I just hope whoever develops the game keeps things simple and is faithful to the gameplay of the originals. But man, there's a lot of potential here.
I abhor farmers and on principle alone I'd never buy anything from them. I have to admit I have some satisfaction in seeing them get screwed.
On the other hand, I completely understand why they exist and can accept their presence because of that.
Developers like Blizzard have done a careful job of balancing grind so that it provides a sufficient emotional response that encourages gamers to keep playing. The more they play and the more they care about the characters they've put so much effort into the longer they stay subscribed. Gold farmers provide the closest thing to cheat codes available in MMOs. For a given fee playtime can be significantly reduced, allowing players to reach their goals more quickly and making them likely to cancel their subscriptions sooner.
It's a great model... Provide content comparable to a substantial single-player RPG and spread it out with excessively repetitive gameplay and charge players monthly fees. Unfortunately because of the turnstile-style presentation nothing actually flows together properly like it would in a single-player game.
So MMOs are almost never about story. The journey is irrelevant, it's the destination that matters. A high-level character in rare gear is really all players have to show for all the time they've spent playing.
Farmers are detrimental to MMOs, they ruin the economy among other things. But in the end, if it isn't them its something else. Everquest had all kinds of problems with loot and farmers didn't really exist in significant numbers yet.
The solution is simple, stop making MMOs a boring grind.
In fact, I've wished Blizzard, and others, would just take the artwork created for their MMOs and produce neat, single-player RPG out of them.
Slashdot Mirror
This is neat. It's been a shortcoming I've noticed in most games, where landscape textures tend to be lacking.
However, what we really need is gameplay innovation. Actually, what we really need is for developers to stop making every last first person game a damn shooter. Can't they do anything else with a first person perspective. The potential here is enormous and yet it looks like developers have a fetish with gunplay.
There have been games with potentially strong storylines that get mired down by this nonsense. There's little discovery and certainly no problem-solving. These games come down to who has more firepower and occassionally discerning some basic pattern in enemy movement.
Maybe the problem is that these developers invest so much energy in graphics that there's little room to refine the other aspects of the game. Or they just think that the consumer doesn't want to do anything other than destroy things and kill people.
I do enjoy dining at nicer restaurants. I'm not talking about excessively over-priced places, I mean $20-$30 for a dish. I think the atmosphere, service and quality of food justifies the added price.
To continue the stupid analogy, however, what is being discussed here is $20-$30 for a Wii or Xbox360 versus $100 for the kind of experience the PS3 supposedly provides. Except that when the dish comes it's no better than the less expensive dish. The waiter, however, assures you that the dinner comes served on the finest silverware available.
It seems Sony is convinced the consumer will percieve the PS3 as more than just a gaming machine. You'd think they would have known better given the fiasco with the PSP. If people want to watch movies they'll buy a DVD player; you can get one for $30 nowadays. If they want to browse the web or download content they'll use a PC which they probably already own. If they don't own one at this point they're probably not going to care about the added functionality of the PS3 either.
The bluray technology is far too new for anyone to embrace. They're going to potentially pay twice as much as they would for a DVD and have only a tiny fraction of the selection. That's assuming they even own an HD television. And then there's the competing format, HD-DVD.
History has shown that people buy gaming consoles to play games. Nintendo had ambitions of turning the NES into a home computer. Needless to say that plan went nowhere. The 3D0 was another system, like the PS3, bloated with features and over-priced. I don't know if the PS3 will suffer quite the same fate, but it isn't looking good.
As for manufacturing costs and exchange rates, I don't think that really applies here. It isn't quite like autmobiles which are entirely manufactured in one nation or another and exported. The vast majority of the sophisticated components in all three consoles, the Xbox360, Wii and PS3 are manufactured in Taiwan with a decent portion coming from South Korea, maybe Singapore and not much from Japan. People still seem to think Taiwan is producing bootleg crap, but they're doing much of the more advanced manufacturing for most electronic devices. Of course a lot of these companies have exported this work to China, but for the most part China is doing assembly more than anything else.
The reason products are so excessively expensive in Europe is all thanks to European governments. They impose heavy import tariffs on products, which is bad enough in and of itself, but then they go and add ridiculous sales taxes on everything. In general it's expensive to do anything in Europe and its reflected in the price of goods.
The US, however isn't nearly as excessive with the taxes which is why we can get products for close to what they cost in Japan. But because of how products are produced pricing is generally based on manufacturing costs.
The gist of all this is that the PS3 is overpriced and it offers little that's compelling.
I have to agree. People really are overdoing it with this damn controller, they're acting like it's the second coming of Christ.
I'm sure the Wii controller will be great when applied well. But a little common sense will tell you it won't work with many types of games. And more importantly, the quality of a game shouldn't have to be dictated by the controller it uses.
Just like graphics shouldn't be the defining aspect of a game, neither should a controller or some other random bit of hardware. Gameplay matters about all else. I'd rather play a great game with a generic control pad than an average game with a Wii controller.
I've been noticing here that it's acceptable to jump all over the Xbox360 and PS3 fans when they defend their systems. But criticizing the Wii is akin to blasphemy.
When it comes to comics/graphic novels/call it what you want, I don't actually know of any other country with as lively, large and varied market as Japan, so how is it overrated?
Maybe after having grown up on American cartoons and comic books what the Japanese offer seems unique; like they say, the grass is always greener on the other side.
However, if you looks specifically at Japanese anime/manga it's the complete antithesis of variety. With some minor exceptions virtually every cartoon and comic book is drawn in exactly the same style. The vast majority of the writing is cloned from work that has come before. And most of it is uninspired.
In recent years all kind of crap has been dumped on the US market, but generally in the past Americans have only gotten the best anime/manga Japan had to offer.
I feel like people are overestimating what this Wii controller will be able to do.
I'm sure the Wii controller is going to be quite good and Nintendo will release some great games for it. But I don't think it's quite as revolutionary as it's being made out to seem.
First of all, a truly revolutionary control system would track your entire body. Secondly, it would likely require some kind of visual interface that makes you feel like you're there. Either that, or playing a game will be like a dream. You're convinced you're actually in the game world even though you're stationary. This Wii controller is one of many, many steps in that direction and it isn't like this sort of thing hasn't been done before in gaming.
Take a look at the gaming console produced by Xavix. The technology is different than what Nintendo is using but the applications are similar. I think all the games offered for that system are sports based, but it shows that the options for these kinds of devices are somewhat limited.
Traditional game controllers have done well for so long because they generally work well-enough for most kinds of games. The mouse/keyboard combination, while superb for FPS and strategy games has proven to be lacking in many other genres. It could be argued that the Wii's controller poses similar problems being somewhat closer in operation to a mouse than it is to a controller.
Another problem is that gaming is generally a sedentary experience. Not many people are going to be able to stand there waving their arms around for several hours straight. When using a keyboard and mouse we're supposed to keep our wrists in a neutral position, and here we have a device that requires we use our wrists in repetitive motions. Your range of motion is fairly limited, which means your entire arm has to move, which increases exhaustion. Hold a remote control in the air and you'll get a good sense of what's involved.
Excercise is a great thing; anything that encourages kids to work out is good. People are too sedentary. But keep in mind, most people who game for hours on end aren't necessarily looking to move around much. But it also get's a point where you might as well just go out and play sports for real if you need to move that much.
I think the Wii will be great for simple puzzle games, like those we've seen for the DS. Beyond that I think it will be an ideal fit for party games. It might provide the right kind of action and excitement people need to be encouraged to play. On the other hand, while providing a better control scheme it will still lose every to the precision and speed of a mouse in many genres.
Thats my ultimate problem. It's not that the controller is bad. I think it's great. I just think it's a bit too specialized and people seem to be overestimating what it can do. However, if Nintendo provides a more ubiquitous control option I think they wont have a problem.
I agree completely. I couldn't have said it any better myself.
I enjoy the occassional anime myself, and was into it back when no one even knew what anime was. But the overwhelmingly vast majority of anime and manga is crap. The US has generally gotten only the best work, but in recent years it seems like everything has been imported. As like as its Japanese it gets the seal of approval from fans.
Anime is like anything, most of it is subpar, but there is a small handful that stands out. The thing is that with the success of the good anime come numerous imitators. The more complicated and abstract the story is the more artistic and profound it supposedly is.
My sister is a fan of Ghost in the Shell, the series, and I've tried to follow a few episodes. Half the time it's like listening to gibberish. It's like mental masturbation. These characters told talk like any real person would and spew convoluted philosphical concepts. They beat the view over the head with these concepts so that there's no doubt whatsoever that they're trying to be profound. They may as well have a powerpoint presentation at the beginning of each episode highlighting the relevant key points.
Certainly a good story sometimes is complex and difficult to understand. But in the case of a lot of anime the ambiguity is used to cover up the lack of real substance.
I am a designer and I have to agree. I tend to avoid reading anything on that site specifically because it is so difficult to follow. They seem to think they're designing for the printed page, although oddly enough, magazines almost always run vertically.
There are very creative and unique ways to design a layout for the web that still work well and are easy to read. Unfortunately, this isn't one of them. Nor is the design so good as to justify the awkward layout.
People may get used to Wii but a good name wouldn't take any time at all to be accepted. People felt good about Revolution because actually meant something.
Even then, it will probably only be a certain group of people who accept it. The same gamers who rejected the Gamecube as being a kid's system will likely continue to reject the new console, especially with this name. Furthermore, the average consumer with little knowledge of any console might be put off by the name. Perhaps the child-like nature of the name will attract anyone looking for a system for their kids. Whether something called Wii can be taken seriously by a more mature audience remains to be seen.
The fact that the UN refuses to recognize a legitimately free nation like Taiwan is evidence enough that the organization is full of shit.
I hope they plan on introducing the other colors in the US shortly after the release of the white one.
For whatever reason there seems to be this habit companies have of only releasing bland, uninspired colors for products in the US. Nearly all mobile phones in the US are the same crappy silver color and apparently it's manditory that all portable electronic devices have the same look and feel of the iPod.
Gimp is an incredibly stupid name. And there is countless software out there with some particular awful names, especially when it comes to emulators. Nesticle and RAPE are two particular gems.
The key distinction here is that Nintendo presumably spent tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands coming up with the Wii in addition to the logo and all the marketing materials. In addition, Nintendo is competing in a market where perception matters. If people can't even accept the name how will they ever embrace the system.
The Wii is going to be absolutely amazing for people to get over a name like Wii.
With all the emphasis on increasingly realistic graphics it's logical to expect that there's going to be a drive to produce more accurate physics. That said, Ageia might find it's cards rendered obsolete within a short period of time.
Right now developers likely to develop a game with gameplay features that make a physics card manditory. It's kind of like the hard drive on the PS2. So, for a while all we'll see are novelty uses for physics, kind of like City of Villains. The problem is that, at least from what I've seen from that game, the load on the CPU still isn't a problem.
Games are currently pushing the limits of video cards, not CPUs. A reasonably powerful PC should have power to spare for some physics. Of course that's also dependent on programmers not being overly reliant on powerful hardware and actually doing efficient coding.
Anyway, the point is that by the time we see physics being pervasive in games nVidia and ATI will almost certainly have physics processors integrated onto their video cards. Either that or Intel and AMD multi-core processors will more than be able to handle the burden of processing physics.
Either way it will likely make the Ageia processors of irrelevant. Except for those consumers in the interim looking for a cheaper method of physics acceleration.
They'd tax us for the air we breathe if they could.
I've got a better idea... How about aggressively cutting excessive waste from government. They could be just as efficient with half the bloat they have now.
The amount of waste in government is mindblowing. Around here we've had a milder winter than normal and yet, by some miracle local governments still managed to go over-budget on snow removal. We get one bad snowstorm, like we do every year and they start crying for emergency funding.
The government is essentially like a bad welfare case. What do they care about being efficient? They're guaranteed an endless stream of money from their citizens. And when they need more they just find some way to raise taxes.
I can only imagine that this name was dreamt up in Japan; it certainly has that feel. The logotype is similar to what many other Japanese companies use, moreso in Japan than here. Japanese companies also have a bad habit of coming up with some horrendous english-inspired names.
You can find some particular good examples in the Japanese domestic automotive market. The Mitsubishi Galant is called the Grunder there. They have a van like car called the Freeca. Honda has a car called the Vamos Hobio and another one called the Thats. It's even worse for other products but we rarely see the problem here because things tend to be localized.
Either Nintendo of America was forced to go with the name or they actually liked it, we really have no way of knowing. Nintendo sometimes seems to make decisions based solely on the Japanese consumer.
Regardless of how ridiculous Wii may sound I think it poses some serious issues for Nintendo. It's a short, simple word something I could easily see associated with a children's product. More serious gamers and adults might have a very hard time taking something called the Wii seriously. Imagine a game like Grand Theft Auto played on a console with this name; it just doesnt seem to fit.
The Gamecube already suffered from the perception that it was a kid's console, so I don't really see how the Wii is going to help. Given the fact that the PS3 seems like it wont be nearly as expensive as people were predicting I think Nintendo is going to have a lot of competition. It's looking like this generation will play itself out much in the same way as the previous one.
One of the problems the Gamecube faced was that many gamers perceived it to be a kid's console.
Now they have this console with promises of innovation in gameplay and gave it a potent codename. But then Nintendo goes and calls it the Wii which beyond sounding ridiculous, sounds very child-like and insignificant.
Try to visualize playing some of the more adult-oriented games out there on a console called the Wii. It just doesn't seem right.
The name doesn't seem to represent anything other beyond the marketing crap I've read that it stands for "we". The name that had come up in rumors, "Go", is a lot better than this. It actually stood for something and is energetic. "Wee" is what a 5-year-old does before going to bed.
I guess someone at Nintendo seems to think this name is unassuming and will attract non-gamers. The problem is that I don't think even non-gamers will be able to take it seriously. At least not anyone other than parents looking for a safe, kid-friendly console to give their children.
Given the fact that the PS3 is supposed to go for $399 when it's released doesn't particularly bode well. It looks like in the end we might end up in a situation very similar to the PS2/Xbox/Gamecube generation.
The games for the Wii will really need to be phenomenal on a level like we haven't seen before for a lot of consumers to get past that name.
The reality of the situation is that if Microsoft were a European corporation there would have never been a trial. The real issue here is that the EU resents the fact that an American company is so dominant. They want an open and fair market until its detrimental to their companies, then they clamor for protection and security.
I see this thing all the time with clients who have a presence in Europe. The Europeans will be damned if they ever do anything the US office wants. But the Americans are so busy worrying about offending anyone and being politically correct that they let themselves get bullied by the European offices.
I'm not saying Microsoft isn't guilty of anything and that they shouldn't be punished accordingly. But forcing them to strip basic functionality from Windows is just plain stupid and certainly doesn't help the consumer. Since the beginning we've all been able to install any media player, browser or any other application and use that exclusively. But at least we had the convenience of getting an operating system which already included those tools. Most people dont have the knowledge or inclination to look for these applications.
And what is the EU going to do? Start forcing every operating system on the market to not come packaged with these applications? It would only be fair. If Microsoft has done something wrong by packaging this software than it only stands to reason that Apple and others are also in violation.
If Microsoft has done something wrong then punish them accordingly. But I don't see how stripping functionality is the answer. It looks to me like the EU is trying to manipulate the market in favor of European developers.
People love to exaggerate the potential of the internet. It's going to make it so that you don't actually have to leave your seat to travel the world! You can go to school from your living room! It's going to liberate everybody!
Like those stupid AOL commercials with that over-weight middle-aged guy running with professional runners or the kid swimming with athletes. Yeah, because reading a bunch of text, screwing with an unintuitive flash interface and looking at miniscule over-compressed photographs is just like being there!
The internet certainly has a lot to offer, but it's not going to do anything for people living in places like rural parts of China. What they need a fancy computer with all the blinking lights isn't going to provide. Where would these people even afford such a luxury when they can barely afford to keep enough electricity running to power a few lightbulbs, assuming they even have any electrcity at all.
If anything this is going to cause a bigger gap between the weathy and poor. The impoverished remain where they are while those already well off exploit every opportunity they see.
Of course the big problem I see here are American companies stumbling over themselves to appease China with the United States along for the ride. If this nation were a bit more principled and didn't worship the mighty dollar at the expense of everything else they'd threaten to take their business elsewhere the moment China starts trampling on human rights. It isn't like China is the only nation in the region with over 1 billion citizens.
These companies want advertising in games to make extra money above and beyond what they make now. There's no way in hell they're going to lower prices because they've crammed a game full of ads. If they did that they might as well not have advertising in the game at all.
The last time I checked cable and satellite television is getting more expensive despite more advertising than ever before. The same goes for movies, which have absurd amounts of product placement despite ever increasing ticket cost.
These companies don't care about preserving immersion, they care about making a few extra bucks. GTA Vice City took place in the 80s, San Andreas took place in the 90s. If they put in real ads rest assured they wouldn't be advertising from each game's respective time period. We'd see big flaming ads for Dell XPS computers, Subway sandwiches, bad ringtones, some new SUV and lord knows what else. And then the best part is when they throw these ads in a player's face and force them to watch it. We'll have a game with completely destructable environments except for advertisements. And entire town will be obliterated but all the billboards will be pristine.
And for every one creative, well-designed ad there are 10,000 awful ones. This entire venture is about making money. These jerks aren't going to spend on anything if they don't need to which means we're going to see low quality garbage everywhere. Look for high quality advertising in the style of lowermybill.com.
I never liked advertising and I never will.
Just because the guy developed one popular game doesn't suddenly make him an expert. On the other hand, I tend to agree with the guy. I'm positive that the Revolution's controller is going to be absolutely phenomenal, but only with a handful of games. Excessive amounts of emphasis have been placed on this controller when the reality is that most games just wont quite work with the controller. It's control mechanism is simply too specialized to fit most games. Maybe its partly the media's fault for pushing this thing so much, but then again, Nintendo hasn't really shown us anything other than that controller.
I personally cant stand the existing controllers covered in buttons and poorly designed games where developers felt the need to use every single button on them. So, I'm not saying Nintendo shouldn't use this thing as the centerpiece for the Revolution. Games like Guitar Hero have shown that Nintendo doesn't really corner the market on unique controllers. So I don't think it's going to quite spur the sort of innovation some people are expecting. The innovations that come will be due to compelling game design, not because some unusual controller has inspired it.
Sirius and the like are free now. Just like cable was at the beginning. It's only a matter of time before they catch advertising fever.
Most MMOs require monthly subscriptions and even some of those are starting to have in-game advertising.
If there's an easy way for a company to make a few easy bucks you can sure as hell be sure they're going to take advantage of it.
As for iPods, well DRM will fix that too. This is a brave new world we're living in!
There's a simple problem facing most indie games. They simply aren't very good. A few offer innovative concepts, but most are very derivative. The games also seriously lack polish. Often its poorly conceived controls, a sloppy interface or extremely amateurish artwork. The concept might be great, but the game in general is poorly executed.
The standard commercial game is fairly refined despite the occasional bug. Despite contrived content and a general lack of imagination a player can still expect a sufficiently satisfying gameplay experience. That's why these games continue to sell; they're adequately good.
Although I tend to follow whats out there I personally could care less about most games. I haven't played probably 90% of the commercial games available in the past few years and I've purchased even fewer.
I'm not looking necessarily for innovative gameplay. I'm looking for games that are outright fun; that make me feel like they're worth the money. I think there's too much of an emphasis on the latest and greatest 3d graphics with so much potential being wasted.
I don't have a problem with sequels. I like the familiarity of playing the same characters and seeing their worlds evolve and grow. What I dislike is when they're called franchises. Because it means the sequel is nothing more than a way of making money on the reputation of the first game, which inevitably means insufficient effort is put into making the sequel good.
There seems to be this fixation on innovation like that's somehow going to eliminate the glut of uninspired gaming. I don't need to wave around a wand like a fool in order to experience great gameplay. It might make for a great party game, but do I really want to physically move something every single time I play a game? There's already the problem on the DS with developers who are feel they absolutely must utilize the touch screen an end up with a weak game as a result. Those tools are great, but they just wont work with the majority of games.
Just focus on good gameplay. Blizzard has done well for a long time because they'd take an existing genre, strip it down, and focus on the elements that made that genre fun. Nintendo also has great games because they generally understand what's fun.
The problem is that game development is a time consuming process. I've developed a few flash games and most of it I've never finished beyond a basic proof of concept because of how involving it can be, although I tend to get too ambitious. I've also tried to initiate some projects with friends but those go nowhere fast and again, it can be a daunting process. You either need too much free time on your hands or a group of people who are committed to giving up their spare time to develop something. Creating artwork is overwhelming let alone actually coding these games.
One other problem is that of all the people out there trying to create games only a handful really have the skill to produce something truly good. The problem is that the ones who are that good probably end up working for the big developers in one form or another. That's probably why we rarely see outstanding indie work, because the ones that good are usually swallowed up by commercial gaming.
If Half Life is a better game than Half Life 2 it certainly isn't because of modding or a lack thereof.
Even though neither is a pinnacle of storytelling the original was more compelling. I think what is a detriment to HL2 is that the emphasis was on the graphics moreso than anything else. So the game was built around providing a visually impressive experience, which inevitably means other aspects of the game suffers.
Furthermore, there are countless FPS games out there nowadays many of which seem to have emphasized the quality of graphics above all else. The more recent games are beginning to overshadow Half Life 2, forcing it out of many gamer's minds.
I was never a big fan of the original, but I did find the game compelling. The new one never impressed me much beyond the visuals. But then I haven't enjoyed FPS games for a long time because they're all so generic and uninspired in every way except the use of pixel shaders and normal maps.
I eagerly hope to see a new Star Control game. The originals were great. I just hope whoever develops the game keeps things simple and is faithful to the gameplay of the originals. But man, there's a lot of potential here.
I abhor farmers and on principle alone I'd never buy anything from them. I have to admit I have some satisfaction in seeing them get screwed.
On the other hand, I completely understand why they exist and can accept their presence because of that.
Developers like Blizzard have done a careful job of balancing grind so that it provides a sufficient emotional response that encourages gamers to keep playing. The more they play and the more they care about the characters they've put so much effort into the longer they stay subscribed. Gold farmers provide the closest thing to cheat codes available in MMOs. For a given fee playtime can be significantly reduced, allowing players to reach their goals more quickly and making them likely to cancel their subscriptions sooner.
It's a great model... Provide content comparable to a substantial single-player RPG and spread it out with excessively repetitive gameplay and charge players monthly fees. Unfortunately because of the turnstile-style presentation nothing actually flows together properly like it would in a single-player game.
So MMOs are almost never about story. The journey is irrelevant, it's the destination that matters. A high-level character in rare gear is really all players have to show for all the time they've spent playing.
Farmers are detrimental to MMOs, they ruin the economy among other things. But in the end, if it isn't them its something else. Everquest had all kinds of problems with loot and farmers didn't really exist in significant numbers yet.
The solution is simple, stop making MMOs a boring grind.
In fact, I've wished Blizzard, and others, would just take the artwork created for their MMOs and produce neat, single-player RPG out of them.
I guess he should have thought about where he would end up before he decided to hack into these systems.