Future of gaming?

[Rostum]

Softkinetic Natural Interfaces
(http://www.gametrailers.com/player/usermovies/191679.html?playlist=featured)
I find this stuff to be so incredible, and favour any new and intuitive designs for interaction with digital mediums. I certainly hope this develops far more into virtual reality than we thought would ever be possible.

Just imagine the possibilities with technology like this. Damn, we've progressed so far in the last 50 years or so of video games.

Please discuss, and provide your own insight into what you have just viewed.

[Markus. D]

I'm very interesting.

Possibly what will advance us into Next Gen.

As long as we don't have to stand up (all the time :3) D:...

[Dreddz]

Games should stay the way they are now. I dont have a clue how exactly a Virtual Reality console will work but theres no doubt that it will suck.

[blackmage_nuke]

Oh great another reason to sacrifice good story and characters for gimicky gameplay and graphics.

As good as it all looks i think technology sometimes gets in the way of a good game

[Bakamut]

I like using controllers. I don't like the Wii very much, because I do not like the Wii Remote. I am too lazy to stand up and move around, I'd rather just sit on my bed with a controller. Nonetheless, this is very intriguing. It would be cool if you had the option of getting up and moving around or switching to "controller mode" or something.

I think it would be cooler if they had a headset for a console that's already out that goes over your eyes, where you just use the controller but you're almost in the world of the video game itself.

[Captain Maxx Power]

Oh great another reason to sacrifice good story and characters for gimicky gameplay and graphics.

It's the Wii-maneuver!

[Roto13]

I lol at you people who play games for their stories. I lol hard.

[Dreddz]

And I thought you liked the Phoenix Wright games Roto?

[Madame Adequate]

When this tech gets a little better, I think it's time for someone to make ArtGod.

The more I watch of this, the more awesome it seems. This has some srs potential.

[Shoeberto]

I like how, in order to come across as a "hardcore gamer" these days, you basically have to be the video gaming equivalent of an old person. "I like things the way they are and anyone who tries to change them is a fool! Back in my day we... "

[Roto13]

And I thought you liked the Phoenix Wright games Roto?

Yup. I play them for the gameplay; solving puzzles.

[Madame Adequate]

I lol at you people who play games for their stories. I lol hard.

I played BioShock for the story. :(

[Roto13]

The only game that gets away with being focused almost entirely on the story is Metal Gear Solid, and even then because it's basically (and probably should be) a series of movies.

[Madame Adequate]

... so I guess you don't approve of me saying that I don't play MGS for the story, but for the stealth lulz? xDDD

[Roto13]

I think if MGS were judged based only on gameplay, it wouldn't stand up too well against a lot of games. But whatever. xP It's not a matter of approving or not. I just think if you want a good story, there are a bout a zillion books and movies out there that do a lot better job than any game of telling one.

[Madame Adequate]

Oh, I agree with that claim fully, but I don't think it has to be that way. And when you do get a game with a good story, it's a pretty awesome thing. Many times moreso when it's a story that you couldn't do, or couldn't do as well, in another medium, i.e. Shadow of the Colossus. Sure, you could do it, but you wouldn't be able to force someone to question their own actions if it was a movie.

[Roto13]

Well, whenever I hear someone complaining that Mario has to save Peach again and it's not a heartwrenching journey of self discovery, I'm reminded of that Penny Arcade strip where the guy is complaining that a muffin isn't a cake or a dog isn't a cat. You could probably tell the best story in the world with a video game, but if you have a story to tell, it's usually a lot more practical to tell it via another medium. Games need to focus on interesting gameplay above all else.

But yeah. Go, natural interfaces, go.

[KentaRawr!]

Well, the page hasn't loaded yet, but I'll still reply, gosh darnit!

Video Games will always be advancing, as there is competition between the companies. Each company will be looking for a way to attract more customers in various ways. It's impossible for games to stay the way they are now, unless 5 or so companies gain equal mastery of the population and just say "Well, we're getting by. No need to get more money!", and shake hands with the other companies when they make the first video game system on Mars.

Also, "Gimicky graphics"? I do believe you mean ":skull::skull::skull::skull:ty graphics", mirite?

[Dreddz]

All it takes is for one company (Nintendo) to do something very ballsy (Wii) and succeed. Edging other companies to take a similer route. The end result is companies constantly trying to outdo their competators to the point when one of them does something as stupid and ridiculous as a Virtual Reality console. And by that point the whole Video game biz has been botched and we head into another Video game crash.

Change should only involve what we are playing, not how we play it.

[KentaRawr!]

What if how we play it effects what we play? The Wii may not do this, but the Wii isn't related what-so-ever. :p Something such as Virtual Reality this is an entirely different medium of playing a Video Game, and because of this, will have an entirely different type of video game released for it.

[Big D]

This new system seems like it's got some potential... there haven't been many truly fundamental changes in how we play games for a very long time. The current consoles, like the first ones, are basically a "brick with button pads attached with string", to quote Yahtzee, who also mentions (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/zeropunctuation/1383-Zero-Punctuation-Console-Rundown) that even the Wiimote often behaves just like a joystick without a base.

But in reality... we are so completely accustomed to using our hands to control games that it might be really hard to replace controllers with something new. Every form of media, from a sketchbook to newspapers to games, is created, changed and controlled with our hands. It's basically been hard-wired into our culture for centuries, and computer keyboards only reinforce the idea of using a specific button to input a specific command.

But, to think that things are never going to change is surely a bit narrow-minded, and it's great that companies are working on new interfaces. The example from the video - the church with the creepy white rabbits - was a pretty good example of where things are going, and it's only a few steps removed from a totally immersive game environment, kind of like the holodeck of Star Trek or the entirely unrelated holoshed from Futurama. Something like that would be great for navigating huge amounts of non-textual information - the video mentioned Google Earth as a possible use, and being able to 'fly' around a large, detailed representation of the world would be kinda exhilarating, as well as letting you take in as much as you like, controlling location and scale without having to drag windows and click assorted buttons that are strewn about the screen.

Actually interacting with the game environment could be great, too - for now, 'interactive' usually means 'destructible' or 'press the interact button to do something scripted with it', but a game that lets you pick something up and manipulate it to your liking is a neat idea and a logical advance.

When I first saw the 'Softkinetic' name, before watching the video, I assumed they were going to be discussing a new type of controller - I imagined something kind of like a large hacky sack or stress ball, a slightly squishy object that could be re-shaped a little, with no pre-defined 'buttons' but instead capable of having a different response assigned to each finger or thumb. Kind of like a totally customisable controller, customisable either by the user, or by the particular game they're playing. The surface could be divided into areas of different colour, perhaps, to make things easier. For example, "index finger = trigger, thumb = movement (like a thumbstick or pressure-sensitive D-pad)" and so forth. A wireless device like that could be good for gaming - it'd possibly gain more acceptance than something that requires continuous use of the entire body, like the motion-sensitive stuff, but the addition of a basic motion sensor would mean it could be used as a mouse as well. It'd be kinda cool to have a palm-sized, malleable 'ball' in each hand, allowing you to relax at whatever angle while playing the game, rather than needing to clutch a rigid controller with its pre-defined buttons and sticks.

Progress is progress, even if the intermediate stages don't seem all that appealing at this stage. I'm looking forward to seeing where all these advances are really going:greenie:

[Rostum]

I knew I'd get the responses that have been in this thread. It's very narrow-minded responses that really need to open up to better ideas.

Not all games are about "storyline" and "character development", please go read the definition of what a video game is. Video games have joined and excelled the filming industry in terms of popularity among mass media, and I don't see why just because a bunch of nerds love hardcore gaming, that we can't develop beyond what they think is fine. The video game market isn't just solely about the hardcore gamer any more. This idea isn't sprung from the Wii console. Virtual Reality has been a huge interest in the digital field for decades. I suggest you go and find out why there were a couple of video game industry crashes Dreddz, before comparing it to the introduction to newer technologies.

Who's to say this will be used just for video games? These guys aren't just developing this thing for video games. Who's to say we will start seeing a decline in video game quality? I mean, it's become apparent already that video game quality is dropping even without the introduction to newer technologies (mainly because a lot of companies sell their games off their graphics).

This kind of thing could allow greater possibilities and I don't think we can dismiss virtual reality at this stage. It is coming, and it could possibly change a lot of things in the digital world.

I think a lot of gamers, especially here on EoFF, don't realise exactly how large the gaming industry is, and therefore have this self-righteous attitude to what must be a game or a gaming system. There are so many casual gamers out there that would see virtual reality as enhancing the way in which they chill out and explore.

Just as a side note: Imagine exploring a beautiful world from a Myst game, being able to interact with the environment with your full body. Imagine solving puzzles with your physical body, but altering the environment in the digital world. When we talk about this technology, we don't mean to use it in some RPG that plays like a movie, but more in terms of interaction.

I don't feel this is a gimmick at all. Virtual reality has been in development long before the Wii, and I think it will definitely enhance what we see today. I think a lot of you really need to open your minds past the jRPG and your hardcore gaming mindset, and realise how huge the market is and how the affects of this kind of technology (once developed a lot more) could bring entertainment to a whole new level.

Edit:


Change should only involve what we are playing, not how we play it.

I think that is one of the most ignorant posts I have come across on EoFF in a very long time.

[Big D]

Well said. The company in the video isn't even a games company specifically; they just used game-based examples to showcase their advances, and they make frequent references to the non-gaming applications of their technology, as well as the gaming ones.

[Rostum]

I don't know about well said, I can't articulate that well.

Something that is also similarly related (but this is to do with how we actually view digital media). (http://www.joystiq.com/2008/03/21/pentagon-project-to-put-game-like-display-on-contact-lenses/)

[Carl the Llama]

After seeing the vid I am very excited asbout the future of video gameing, and all the way through I was thinking "how would this work as a FPS lol"

9/10 for me.


I don't know about well said, I can't articulate that well.

Something that is also similarly related (but this is to do with how we actually view digital media). (http://www.joystiq.com/2008/03/21/pentagon-project-to-put-game-like-display-on-contact-lenses/)

all I can say is... wow

[Madame Adequate]

Change should only involve what we are playing, not how we play it.

I agree, Guitar Hero is ruining videogames.

[Big D]

I don't know about well said, I can't articulate that well.

Something that is also similarly related (but this is to do with how we actually view digital media). (http://www.joystiq.com/2008/03/21/pentagon-project-to-put-game-like-display-on-contact-lenses/)

all I can say is... wowWow indeed. I've been insisting for a few years now that it should be possible to cheat in exams by printing notes on a contact lens, in such a way that they're legible to the wearer. The idea of an in-eye HUD never occurred to me as a serious notion, though. Pretty damn cool, and a great way to make use of the recently-developed flexible plastic screens and conductors.

[Roto13]

"You want me to put it in my eye!?"

I think I'll wait for the version that comes in glasses. :P

[Big D]

"You want me to put it in my eye!?"

I think I'll wait for the version that comes in glasses. :PSomething like MGS4's "Solid Eye" could work, too. I guess the contact lens idea would just be the most useful from a military standpoint: unobtrusive, concealed, and very hard to knock off compared to spectacles