The casual games that are doing well are doing so because they have what people want, an engaing and fun experience. I fall safely into the "hardcore" description, but am slowly coming to the realization that the AAA titles sometimes miss the point. The nail the graphics, sounds, and guest Hollywood voice-over chicks, but are not nessasarily fun. I'm deeply involved in Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter, but I have been hooked into Kirby Canvas Curse all week. When it comes down to it, I'll play what is fun regardless of the development budget. The sooner gamers come back to basics, the sooner the big publishers will start pushing innovation instead of sequals. Nintendo seems to have figured it out with the DS and the upcoming Wii. Lets hope the other two jump on board.
I had my laptop stolen last year. It was sold to someone who never took AIM off and it was set to login on startup. A few court orders later, we (the cops) took the IP address of the user and got the phisical address from the ISP. They recovered my laptop but botched up and didn't make any arrests or get my other items back. They wouldn't even have done that if I hadn't layed it out for thenm step by step.
Thanks Lexington, KY police!
Initially I was very excited about GoW, but after seeing the gameplay footage (from Cliffy B), I worry that this game will get old, fast. The pop and shoot mechanic is nice, but it looks like the game will just be
1) Run to cover
2) Duck behind/beside cover
3) Lean out and shoot
4) Leap over/leave cover
5) Rinse
6) Repeat
The game is beautiful and I hope that there is more to the action the the pop and shoot gimick.
I find myself playing the $5 - $10 Xbox Live arcade games more often and for longer stretches of time that the triple A titles that I paid $60 for. I hope that the big money publishers (EA, MS Game Studio, Activision, etc.) will learn that isn't uber graphics, well known voice actor, Hollywood titles, and endless sequals that make good games. It is fun and creative gameplay.
Now if you will excuse me, I'm going to go play Zuma on my $400 console.
I can see your point, but notice the "could" portion of the statement. As this is just a rumor at this point, it would be silly of me to reference any price points as they are just speculation. My intention was to show that Sony "could" take a loss to ensure that the price was signifigantly lower than the price of the Rev as M$ did with the entire Xbox console (and is still doing to some degree with the 360).
Sorry if this was confusing to anyone. I was speaking literally of the "fraction."
Turbine cast Magic Missle at the Mac.
Saving throw... Failed!
The Mac is hurled across the room gently landing on a pile of Adobe/Macromedia software and Quake 4.
I don't see this as something that has to be better than the Revolution. I see this as something that targets the PS2's huge instal base and could cost a fraction of a whole next-gen system (Rev), but offer similar enough experience to disway people from going out and getting the Revolution. It doesn't have to be better, just more appealing and with 100+ million PS2's out there, it is easy to see that they just need to keep Nintendo from gaining any market share to be "successful" with something like this. I could see them dumping a ton of money on it just to humle the revolutionary aspects of the Revolution.
Really, take a way the cool control scheme and Nintendo's only remaining strong point is their IP (Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Animal Crossing, etc). Is that enough to compete with two consoles with admittedly better specs and a rapidly growing IP catelog of their own (Sony more than M$)? This could be the shrewd move that pulls the plumber's pants down.
Of course M$ is showing Halo in the vid. That is kind of like putting a giant neon light that blinks, "Free porn" in your store window. Of course people will pay attention.
That being said, I want one if I get free porn with my collector's edition of Origami Halo.
This is the perfect example of a game relying soley on a 'gimick' and not gameplay/value. I like to blow stuff up as much as the next guy/gal (more than some), but that is the extent of interest in this game. The racing machanics are garbage and the combat doesn't hold a candle to even the original Twisted Metal on PS1.
I applaude developers for realizing that people want to blow stuff up, but we need more than that to get any lasting enjoyment from a game. The games that stand out are the ones that keep offering new challenges and escape from the tired old gameplay. Special effects [read: particle effects] and imitating hollywood-style films [read: jump cam] are only cool the first few times. After that, we have seen it and would like to move on.
I fear that the upcoming 'Outfit' game may also rely on the "blow stuff" up theme. Let's hope I'm wrong and there is some substance to it. Luckily there will be a multiplayer demo available for dl. The demo for Full Auto saved me $60.
Not a new design element per se, but rather a new implementation. Having played Full Auto, I wouldn't say this is sugar coating, just an accurate description.
Seems that retro games are getting their second chance with services like GameTap and Xbox Live Arcade. I have to admit that I shelled out $5 a piece for Gauntlet and Joust. Where they worth it? No, but I was buying into the nostagia not nessasarilly the game. With the PopCap games and other similar "new" games available on Xbox Live Arcade, I will probably not be buying these retro games any longer. With the exception of the upcoming Street Fighter re-release.
The question I want to raise is, "What is the worth of 20 yr old games brought back to new consoles or just as PC roms?"
I definitely agree. I wanted to show the obsurdity of the situation with that comment. Anything can be considered "addicting", but we tend to focus on the hot button topics like video games.
Thanks for linking to that translated article. I hope some people get some insight from it.
Of course maybe he wants more contol to sell some in-game ads and M$ is reluctant since they may not make any additional money from the ads, but I would have figured that they have been planning on profitting from ad sales since the concept was concieved.
I'm assuming that he is reffering to things like hosted in-game events??? Eposodic content and downloads are already built in, but maybe not realtime interaction from an administrator level. I'm sure it is possible since FFIX is on the 360, but maybe more difficult than it has to be.
I wish he was a little more specific in his comments...
I was referring to the literal meaning of this figurative statement. I agree with you entirely. Everything on my list is exteremly addictive including (and especially) the garden gnome.
On a related note:
Books are not drugs
Movies are not drugs
TV is not drugs
Spatulas are not drugs
Garden gnomes are not drugs
Drugs are not drugs... no, wait...
It is vague patents like this that will ultimately squash the game industry.
Keeping a 'lock' on a particular camera movement forces developers to design away from certain gameplay elements/patterns which will limit the player in various degrees. One of the biggest complaints with platformers and 3rd person perspective games in general is poor use of the camera and/or lack of control. So thanks to money grubbing mother...'s this problem continue to be an issue for some games. Great for American Video Graphics, but crappy for the gamers. I know it is a money driven industry, but this is just going to make the wrong people suffer, me.
I see this as a double edged sword. On one hand the industry will be using the lobbyist to better protect them from their own employees (http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/06/1 231236). On the other, they can gain some protection for their games and their creators from Jack Thompson types and the popular media in general.
So in the future, you will be able to rape cats in GTA12 if you feel like it, but the game will be developed by abused Taiwanese children in exchange for small morsels of bread.
Slashdot Mirror
The casual games that are doing well are doing so because they have what people want, an engaing and fun experience. I fall safely into the "hardcore" description, but am slowly coming to the realization that the AAA titles sometimes miss the point. The nail the graphics, sounds, and guest Hollywood voice-over chicks, but are not nessasarily fun. I'm deeply involved in Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter, but I have been hooked into Kirby Canvas Curse all week. When it comes down to it, I'll play what is fun regardless of the development budget. The sooner gamers come back to basics, the sooner the big publishers will start pushing innovation instead of sequals. Nintendo seems to have figured it out with the DS and the upcoming Wii. Lets hope the other two jump on board.
I had my laptop stolen last year. It was sold to someone who never took AIM off and it was set to login on startup. A few court orders later, we (the cops) took the IP address of the user and got the phisical address from the ISP. They recovered my laptop but botched up and didn't make any arrests or get my other items back. They wouldn't even have done that if I hadn't layed it out for thenm step by step. Thanks Lexington, KY police!
Initially I was very excited about GoW, but after seeing the gameplay footage (from Cliffy B), I worry that this game will get old, fast. The pop and shoot mechanic is nice, but it looks like the game will just be 1) Run to cover 2) Duck behind/beside cover 3) Lean out and shoot 4) Leap over/leave cover 5) Rinse 6) Repeat The game is beautiful and I hope that there is more to the action the the pop and shoot gimick.
I find myself playing the $5 - $10 Xbox Live arcade games more often and for longer stretches of time that the triple A titles that I paid $60 for. I hope that the big money publishers (EA, MS Game Studio, Activision, etc.) will learn that isn't uber graphics, well known voice actor, Hollywood titles, and endless sequals that make good games. It is fun and creative gameplay.
Now if you will excuse me, I'm going to go play Zuma on my $400 console.
I can see your point, but notice the "could" portion of the statement. As this is just a rumor at this point, it would be silly of me to reference any price points as they are just speculation. My intention was to show that Sony "could" take a loss to ensure that the price was signifigantly lower than the price of the Rev as M$ did with the entire Xbox console (and is still doing to some degree with the 360).
Sorry if this was confusing to anyone. I was speaking literally of the "fraction."
Turbine cast Magic Missle at the Mac.
Saving throw... Failed!
The Mac is hurled across the room gently landing on a pile of Adobe/Macromedia software and Quake 4.
I don't see this as something that has to be better than the Revolution. I see this as something that targets the PS2's huge instal base and could cost a fraction of a whole next-gen system (Rev), but offer similar enough experience to disway people from going out and getting the Revolution. It doesn't have to be better, just more appealing and with 100+ million PS2's out there, it is easy to see that they just need to keep Nintendo from gaining any market share to be "successful" with something like this. I could see them dumping a ton of money on it just to humle the revolutionary aspects of the Revolution.
Really, take a way the cool control scheme and Nintendo's only remaining strong point is their IP (Mario, Zelda, Metroid, Animal Crossing, etc). Is that enough to compete with two consoles with admittedly better specs and a rapidly growing IP catelog of their own (Sony more than M$)? This could be the shrewd move that pulls the plumber's pants down.
Of course M$ is showing Halo in the vid. That is kind of like putting a giant neon light that blinks, "Free porn" in your store window. Of course people will pay attention.
That being said, I want one if I get free porn with my collector's edition of Origami Halo.
This is the perfect example of a game relying soley on a 'gimick' and not gameplay/value. I like to blow stuff up as much as the next guy/gal (more than some), but that is the extent of interest in this game. The racing machanics are garbage and the combat doesn't hold a candle to even the original Twisted Metal on PS1.
I applaude developers for realizing that people want to blow stuff up, but we need more than that to get any lasting enjoyment from a game. The games that stand out are the ones that keep offering new challenges and escape from the tired old gameplay. Special effects [read: particle effects] and imitating hollywood-style films [read: jump cam] are only cool the first few times. After that, we have seen it and would like to move on.
I fear that the upcoming 'Outfit' game may also rely on the "blow stuff" up theme. Let's hope I'm wrong and there is some substance to it. Luckily there will be a multiplayer demo available for dl. The demo for Full Auto saved me $60.
Prince of Persia time-rewind to the racing genre
Not a new design element per se, but rather a new implementation. Having played Full Auto, I wouldn't say this is sugar coating, just an accurate description.
Seems that retro games are getting their second chance with services like GameTap and Xbox Live Arcade. I have to admit that I shelled out $5 a piece for Gauntlet and Joust. Where they worth it? No, but I was buying into the nostagia not nessasarilly the game. With the PopCap games and other similar "new" games available on Xbox Live Arcade, I will probably not be buying these retro games any longer. With the exception of the upcoming Street Fighter re-release.
The question I want to raise is, "What is the worth of 20 yr old games brought back to new consoles or just as PC roms?"
I definitely agree. I wanted to show the obsurdity of the situation with that comment. Anything can be considered "addicting", but we tend to focus on the hot button topics like video games. Thanks for linking to that translated article. I hope some people get some insight from it.
A game like Snow Day would just be asking for a "Hot Cocoa" mod.
Of course maybe he wants more contol to sell some in-game ads and M$ is reluctant since they may not make any additional money from the ads, but I would have figured that they have been planning on profitting from ad sales since the concept was concieved.
Yeah, that will really benifit the gamers.
I'm assuming that he is reffering to things like hosted in-game events??? Eposodic content and downloads are already built in, but maybe not realtime interaction from an administrator level. I'm sure it is possible since FFIX is on the 360, but maybe more difficult than it has to be.
I wish he was a little more specific in his comments...
I was referring to the literal meaning of this figurative statement. I agree with you entirely. Everything on my list is exteremly addictive including (and especially) the garden gnome.
On a related note:
Books are not drugs
Movies are not drugs
TV is not drugs
Spatulas are not drugs
Garden gnomes are not drugs
Drugs are not drugs... no, wait...
It is vague patents like this that will ultimately squash the game industry.
Keeping a 'lock' on a particular camera movement forces developers to design away from certain gameplay elements/patterns which will limit the player in various degrees. One of the biggest complaints with platformers and 3rd person perspective games in general is poor use of the camera and/or lack of control. So thanks to money grubbing mother...'s this problem continue to be an issue for some games. Great for American Video Graphics, but crappy for the gamers. I know it is a money driven industry, but this is just going to make the wrong people suffer, me.
I see this as a double edged sword. On one hand the industry will be using the lobbyist to better protect them from their own employees (http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/10/06/1 231236). On the other, they can gain some protection for their games and their creators from Jack Thompson types and the popular media in general.
So in the future, you will be able to rape cats in GTA12 if you feel like it, but the game will be developed by abused Taiwanese children in exchange for small morsels of bread.