Extra Punctuation: Getting Innovation Wrong

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT
 

Though at least 3D can work alongside normal games and is otherwise unobstructive. YOu can make a perfectly normal game... and have 3D as well, there's not as much of a barrier, and really WHY NOT have 3D? especially if you can turn it off if you have an irrational hatred of 3D or are a cyclops

I love my Wii, but I get that the motion controls get in the way of many devs trying to make normal games.

3D (doesn't) represent the way forward because they both involve making games and movies less immersive

Yahtzee.... WHUT? I mean, WHAT???? How is that even taken as a given?? I have two eyes, I can see 3D in normal life, does that make my life LESS IMMERSIVE????. If I can gauge depth perception in my games it can make it more immersive and actually helps since... well you can perceive depth better, that's the whole point.

And he doesn't even explain what he means. Not that I've taken Yahtzee that seriously, but still, at least when doesn't like something, he usually explains why....

Next console control upgrade should be the Trackball Controller:

image

Now that i'm imagining it yes it would be quite hilarious to see nintendo ripping it's hair out due to frustration. but seriously we really need the dual analog sticks back *goes to play on PS2*

I'm not against the HD, 3D, touch screen, etc. just because it is what it is. Higher quality pictures and new methods of interactivity and control are not a bad things inherently. It's when they are used as an excuse not to develop in other areas that it pisses me off. How many 3D movies can you name where it doesn't exist just to say "LOOK! I GOT 3D!!!". The interactive technologies, touch screen and motion sensitivity, I feel are a little better, but are still too frequently used in a similar fashion.

All of these things are being raped for spectacle instead of being worked into the experience properly most of the time.

I feel you've not given 3D a fair try. Or at least, you haven't looked at what good 3D is.

I recommend this article http://www.cracked.com/article_18877_4-reasons-3-d-movies-dont-have-to-suck.html (yes yes, Cracked just read it.) This article is about movie 3D, but it can just as easily apply to videogames.

3D can be good, but the majority of people don't use it the right way, and only use it to make some quick extra money. In this case, don't hate the game, hate the player.

Squilookle:
And you know what? Blu Ray and HD-DVD were exactly the same thing- a technological gimmick that nobody even needed.

I disagree with this. Higher-definition image does, actually, help watch some movies.

BUT:
- Most movies do not benefit from the higher definition.
- An image with EVEN higher definition than Blu Ray would NOT be useful. There is no use for any more pixels than that.
- The sound that both BR and HD-DVD provided is also about as good as is necessary for a home setup. I really don't think that any time in the next few decades sound systems will get so good that they will need higher definition sound than that carried by the blu ray.

Nvm

Oh, and on-topic: I pretty much agree with Yahtzee, but with a few caveats:
- 3D is a complete waste, it needs to fucking end. He is 100% right about that.
- Motion control, I think, has some use. But, it needs to be FAAAAAAR more precise than what the Wii can offer, in order to help. The ideal game for motion control, I think, is a fighting game, where the motion controller reads your body's movement and reproduces it on screen. But. That's basically what Wii boxing does... except that if you actually move your hands as fast as you would in a fight, the fucking thing completely fails to register that. Because it's not fast enough for it, so it really turns into a gesture mode, not a true reproducible motion. And gesture-based controls are fucking idiotic.

So I think motion control has potential, but Wii failed to pick up on that potential. Largely because the instrumentation isn't there yet - cheap MEMS accelerometers are not sufficiently accurate to pick up on a boxer's hands.

I think the 3DS and the next home console are going to be awesome mainly becasue of the games, really.

As long as project Cafe has graphics better than the 360 and ample 3rd-party support, I'll be fine.

Juan Regular:

Srdjan Tanaskovic:
Motion Control: Bad
3DS: Bad
New Games in there franchises: Bad
Upcoming Console: Bad

I mean really?

And he backs all of it up with valid points, doesn´t he? But to me The franchise thing has always been the biggest stone in my shoe. I used to love Mario, Zelda, Metroid and so forth when I was a kid but now after seeing them for years on end, I´ve gotten so sick of all of them. At some point you have to leave the old heroes be and create some new ones.

No he doesn't.

He's talking how PS3 and Xbox are to expensive for third part developers, jet he thinks 3D is bad since it's not a hologram.
He doesn't like motion control since he didn't play a game with GOOD motion controls where the motion was used in a natural way (play Red Steal 2 and you will see how awesome motion controls are when done right)

He doesn't like new games of Nintendo's olf franchises, jet he doesn't give even 1 solid reason. No, Mario Galaxy 2 is not a clone of Galaxy one. It's a continuation of the story. Is CoD 4 a clone of CoD 3?

Upcoming console, where NOTHING is really knows, jet he doesn't like it.
I see tons of possible uses for the screen, only if those developers know how to use it right. Not "put something there so it seems like we used it".

He does have some points, but the whole text looks like a HUGE rant because Nintendo tries to innovate, but doesn't do it right, jet he completely ignores Sony and MS who didn't do ANYTHING for the game industry at all.

He just sounds like a kid who hates Nintendo, nothing more.
I'm disappointed. Try pointing those fingers some someone who seriously deserves it (Sony, MS).

I'm so glad that someone besides me hates 3D. 3D was invented in the 1950's when the home television became popular. Hollywood was losing a ton of money because people didn't see the need to go out to movies anymore, they had movies at their house now! So Hollywood invented something to try and show audiences that you can have something at the movies that you can't have at your house. And that is 3D. That's all it is, a cheap gimmick to try and hide how horrible it actually is.

3D worked a little better than last time. Remember Virtual Boy?

@Yahtz Yep, that pretty much sums up my thoughts.

DayDark:
Next console control upgrade should be the Trackball Controller:

image

Oh no you didn't!

still its extremely disadvantageous for orientation not to have 3D,I figured Tron Evolution would be way more onjoyable if I could sense the space from one angle.

fantastic column this week, Yahtzee and I have to say that I agree with you on most, if not all points
not much humor to be found but excellent nonetheless

Yahtzee's greatest failure is that he identifies a primary purpose of gaming development as advancing gaming as a whole. This is largely false - the point of gaming development is to cater to a demographic, whether the developers admit or not. They develop these technologies because they believe that a large group of people will spend money on it and have fun, not because they give two fucks about the "future of gaming." Yet people shun the "gimmick" because of the connotation that it is inherently crappy, despite the fact that they have existed for quite some time. You cannot properly justify that something should not exist simply because it does not innovate, or does not cater to your likings. All that matters is whether it sells or not, and whether people like it or not, 3D is just one of those things.

I'm, personally kind of excited about the possibilities of a screen on the controller, but that might just be because I was a huge fan of Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles, the the instant access to the inventory without pausing just worked for same console co-op, and the secret individual objective that no one else could see was a great idea. I also think that a touch would serve as an opportunity to take us back to the pre-consolization of shooters, where you could carry around 15 different weapons, but instead of tapping a number key, just tap an icon on the touch screen. I'd always have to glance down to tap a number key anyway, especially for anything past 3.

Tulks:

Squilookle:
And you know what? Blue Ray and HD-DVD were exactly the same thing- a technological gimmick that nobody even needed.

there is a reason HD-DVD died and not Blu-Ray

Yes. Marketing. And having it crammed down our throats by the film industry. So two reasons.

The porn industry helped by adopting Blu-ray as well.

Kumagawa Misogi:

B: That didn't work out to well for the DSi and with this

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2011/03/nintendo-backs-away-from-3ds-games-that-require-3d-others-may-follow.ars

Why bother.

E: There is.

Well ariplanes didn't work out that well at the beginning to

and know what they are saying in that link? they are saying that if the game doesn't benefit of 3D then they won't ad it

and from the many who have the 3DS I haven't heard anything about Eye Strain

RadiusXd:
should i feel bad about the 120Hz screen I am typing this on?

Yes. You are putting disgusting fingerprints all over it. Use a keyboard like everyone else!

I like 3D!

Raeil:
[Edit: This point is incorrect due to me not reading every word of the article. Thanks to mjc and rje for point out that Yahtzee addresses this.] Finally, this: "I'm trying to think of ways to employ a touch screen and a TV, and the problem I keep bumping against is that the player can only look at one screen at a time." You're right, they can only look at one screen at a time, that explains why the Nintendo DS has flopped completely... oh wait, it's the highest selling handheld of all time (if you use the numbers for all its iterations).

Just wanted to address this.

You can look at both screens when playing a DS. Not perfectly focus on both, but you can certainly be aware of what's going on on the other screen. This is because they're next to each other. Unlike a tv/controller combo in which the only way to put the screens next to each other is to hold up the controller in front of you, which is considerably more uncomfortable than normal. He specifically addresses this. Besides, he likes the DS.

I wasnt that impressed with the 3d on the 3ds till I played super street fighter 4 on it, that game looks fantastic with the 3d on, Im not sure I could play it without it, everything is setup at just the right level so its very very cool looking

Only thing I could think of where a screen on the controller would be useful is playing Madden. You could choose your plays without having your opponent know what you are doing. But all in all it's shit, especially since I don't play many sports games. I agree that I'd rather pause the game to look at a map than look at the controller and get killed while figuring out where to go.

I agree with Yahtzee's earlier article about motion control and that it's not immersive at all. The last thing I want to do is have to jump around and think about how I need to wave my arms in the right pattern.

Manufacturers should just stick with making better games, with better graphics and stories until some new innovation come along.

Humans see in 3D. 3D it's a natural step. They're trying since the 1950's. We're in the midle of the process so things don't look perfectly as they should. but is on the way.

I don't get the gimmick part. Entertainment it's a gimmick itself. Think about.

Hitman Dread:
Metal Gear Solid 4: You now discuss with Otocan during battle, drastically cutting down on cutscene time (something the game needs)

Except that works perfectly fine without a second screen. Put the face in the HUD and do the voice via the regular TV speaker. Problem solved, plenty of games do it that way.

Multiweapon FPS: Your items are all on the touch screen, allowing you to call them in on the fly.

Again, put it on the HUD, use Dpad to select stuff. Tons of games do that, it works. Second screen would at little to nothing.

RTS: RTS's have never worked with consols, but this may give them a chance. Having this screen could allow for dealing with complex interfaces that RTS's require.

If the screen could act as touchpad, and thus mouse replacement, maybe, but you still want all the action on the big screen, so a small screen won't really help you much.

These are just basic UI enhancements too, from an artistic standpoint there's a flurry of ideas that could be brought to the table.

But that's the problem. Those are all little gimmicks that don't really change anything and it is really hard to think of anything that actually changes the game in substantial ways that doesn't come of as short lived gimmick.

Even on the NintendoDS there are hardly any games that really benefit from the two screens, what they benefit from is that you can touch it, but they would work just as well if not better with simply a single big touch screen.

Man, people sure do turn on your ass when you say something negative about Nintendo.

Anyway. Bluray? Yeah. That's 27gb of storage vs DvDs 4.7gb 50gb if you do dual sided. Do you want to keep claiming that isn't key advance for the medium? Not going to bother with the HD graphics bit, that's too silly.

But yes, this feels like an overblown gimmick. I've yet to see a game or a movie that was actually improved by it. Rather than 'real' 3D, it's more like its just fucking with our depth perception.

Plus it gives me headaches.

* You want to advance stuff? Bring on the Smell-o-technology. Then games and movies could really get their immersion on.

Mangue Surfer:
We're in the midle of the process so things don't look perfectly as they should. but is on the way.

The problem is that "3D" has been in existence since even before the 1950, it was already there in the 1800 shortly after photographs got invented and since then it hasn't really changed as far as tech goes and on each try to bring it to the masses it failed.

That's not to say that it's hopeless, I see lots of potential for 3D done right, but doing it right means you either need a large screen and a headtracker or VR goggles and realtime graphics, as without those you don't get 3D, but just stereoscopic graphics. And that's the issue, 3D as the 3DS does it is just stereoscopic, so you don't get all the benefits from real 3D such as the ability to look around objects, instead when you move your head, the 3D effects breaks. On the 3DS that issue is not fixable, in the cinema it isn't fixable either, with Kinect or the Playstation3 camera there is still some hope, but I don't think any game offers that feature so far.

Entertainment it's a gimmick itself. Think about.

Gimmick means that is a short lived thing you will grow tired off it. For example the Dpad is not a gimmick, it has existed for decades and is still a major part of games today, same for the analogstick. Those are not gimmicks because they are flexible, you can use them in a ton of different styles games and they work reliably. 3D is at best like the rumble pack, a nice addition that you can disable when it annoys you. That doesn't mean its useless, but neither is it that big revolution some people want you to believe.

Yahtzee Croshaw:
Extra Punctuation: Getting Innovation Wrong

Yahtzee thinks that Nintendo may have taken a wrong turn with its hardware.

Read Full Article

By that logic,one could argue that video games were just an unnecessary quarrelsome feature that was added.You can turn the 3d off for one and we don't know if this console exists or not.Plus,if you've seen Nintendo's sales in comparison to the competition,they are far from desperate.This seems to be based more on opinion then fact Yahtzee.I get you don't like motion control or 3d but don't force your discontent on others.Wii was new so you really can't blame them for opting to motion exclusive when they are GameCube compatible and have about as good visuals.

BiH-Kira:

Juan Regular:

Srdjan Tanaskovic:
Motion Control: Bad
3DS: Bad
New Games in there franchises: Bad
Upcoming Console: Bad

I mean really?

And he backs all of it up with valid points, doesn´t he? But to me The franchise thing has always been the biggest stone in my shoe. I used to love Mario, Zelda, Metroid and so forth when I was a kid but now after seeing them for years on end, I´ve gotten so sick of all of them. At some point you have to leave the old heroes be and create some new ones.

No he doesn't.

He's talking how PS3 and Xbox are to expensive for third part developers, jet he thinks 3D is bad since it's not a hologram.
He doesn't like motion control since he didn't play a game with GOOD motion controls where the motion was used in a natural way (play Red Steal 2 and you will see how awesome motion controls are when done right)

He doesn't like new games of Nintendo's olf franchises, jet he doesn't give even 1 solid reason. No, Mario Galaxy 2 is not a clone of Galaxy one. It's a continuation of the story. Is CoD 4 a clone of CoD 3?

Upcoming console, where NOTHING is really knows, jet he doesn't like it.
I see tons of possible uses for the screen, only if those developers know how to use it right. Not "put something there so it seems like we used it".

He does have some points, but the whole text looks like a HUGE rant because Nintendo tries to innovate, but doesn't do it right, jet he completely ignores Sony and MS who didn't do ANYTHING for the game industry at all.

He just sounds like a kid who hates Nintendo, nothing more.
I'm disappointed. Try pointing those fingers some someone who seriously deserves it (Sony, MS).

-He says he doesn't like 3D because it adds almost nothing to the gaming experience. And when Nintendo themselves say that all of the games on their system can play fine without the 3D, it just shows how little 3D actually does.

-He has played Red Steel 2, he reviewed it in fact. He said it did motion controls fine, but he pointed out that one game that functions fine with it does not mean motion controls are the way to go. One good game does not make up the rule for motion controls, it makes up the exception, something he pointed out.

-He has given reasons why he doesn't like new games in old franchises: because he is generally opposed to sequels. Further, its not so much that he thinks the games are say the worst games ever made, rather he hates the mentality behind them, giving gamers the same game with the differences minut enough to warrent DLC but not full price. If you want proff of this, look no further then his review of Mario Galaxy 2, where he says the game is enjoyable but admitadly feels samey and copy-pastes levels and fights from previous Mario games. To answer your question BTW, while I haven't played the galaxy series, I'll say this about CoD (series is okay, but I could care less about CoD): at least CoD 4 was set in modern era while CoD 3 was set in WW2, so at least the similar mechanics are being tested in different scenarios.

-He doesn't like the current rumours circulating around. Is he not allowed to have an opinion on them? Its one thing to disagree with ones opinion, its another to say they shouldn't have one. Otherwise every site that posts these rumours and adds even a hint of opinion or speculation is wrong in your books, even the ones that have a positive reaction to the rumours.

-This goes back to what he has said about motion controls. Sure, there are tons of possibilities with it, but who is actually going to impliment them? Further, how many games out there are actually going to benefit with this feature? Sure, perhaps there are certain genres out there that can benefit, but what about the ones that don't? Do they simply fall to the way-side or are they forced along a path? This is his problem, not that some games may have this control scheme, but that there will be several that don't need it and only serve to show how little the control adds to the game. If you take a look back at his reviews for Galaxy 1 and No More Heros 2, he points out that despite the fact that these games are championed as some of the best games on the Wii that they are in fact games that would've worked better on other systems.

-This was an article about Nintendo. Why would he bring Sony or Microsoft into it? It would be like doing an article that talked about the issues of shooters and complaining that it doesn't mention the issues of other genres such as platformers or puzzle games. Further, it would be one thing if he was complaining about an innovation that may not do well but at least has good intentions or original thought, but he isn't. Its not like the screen on the controller is something new. Ignoring the Dream Cast, remember when Nintendo would allow users to connect their GBA to their Game Cube and use that as the controller? Sure no touch capabilities but it is roughly similar in execution.

-Good intentions do not make up for bad results. Just because Nintendo has made some good games (personally I'm not a big fan, but some stuff is okay), has started certain gaming trends, and used to have good intentions with their creations does not excuse them from criticism.

DayDark:
Next console control upgrade should be the Trackball Controller:

image

brilliant!

Pretty sure the thing sold like hotcakes, sold out at most EB games here in Aus, but I totally agree with you Yahtzee, I'm one of the few people I know who still attends 2D cinema when 3D is available.

its not as though the whole "video screen" on the controller is a new idea. they and other companies have thought of it before. it doesn't sound like a really great idea. But i remember playing the crystal chronicles you had to have the cables for the game boy and the game boy advances. 4 of them.... it was painful and hard and well.... it just wasn't fun. I bet you money those controllers are going to cost around 80-120$ and to buy 4 of em it will most likely cost as much as buying a second new nintendo console. This may be the final straw to break nintendo's anemic starving legs. shame on you nintendo for shame....

Hexenwolf:

Raeil:
[Edit: This point is incorrect due to me not reading every word of the article. Thanks to mjc and rje for point out that Yahtzee addresses this.] Finally, this: "I'm trying to think of ways to employ a touch screen and a TV, and the problem I keep bumping against is that the player can only look at one screen at a time." You're right, they can only look at one screen at a time, that explains why the Nintendo DS has flopped completely... oh wait, it's the highest selling handheld of all time (if you use the numbers for all its iterations).

Just wanted to address this.

You can look at both screens when playing a DS. Not perfectly focus on both, but you can certainly be aware of what's going on on the other screen. This is because they're next to each other. Unlike a tv/controller combo in which the only way to put the screens next to each other is to hold up the controller in front of you, which is considerably more uncomfortable than normal. He specifically addresses this. Besides, he likes the DS.

Thank you for ignoring the edit, placed before the point itself, where I acknowledge this fact...

Srdjan Tanaskovic:
there is a reason HD-DVD died and not Blu-Ray

Yeah, Blu-Ray supports porn.

Squilookle:
And you know what? Blue Ray and HD-DVD were exactly the same thing- a technological gimmick that nobody even needed.

I don't specifically know about HD-DVDs, but I know HD(meaning a high resolution with a greater number of pixels) does at least make things look better, even if it does lag a bit more. I do agree about Blu-Ray though, I've watched things on my PS3 and I haven't noticed enough of a difference.

I agree overall though, gimmicks just don't fly.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here