Warning: I'm working on three hours of sleep and dealing with my bitch of a boss all day, so my mind is gone right now but I'll do my best. Forgive my spelling and grammar mistakes I simply just don't care to fix any of them right now ( how's that any different whenever you do post WK?) Quiet you!!!
Rambling aside...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Vivi22
I wasn't really questioning whether you played it since I knew you had, only that it not changing much from MGS isn't the reaction I expect from someone who played the entire game at least once, let alone more times. My point was really only that I've never seen a game merge so many disparate play styles so well. I played through it several times like it was a third person shooter, a stealth game, siding with the various factions, etc. and each was a substantially different experience. You don't really get that in any game, so that it was done so well utterly floored me.
I felt the introduction of other game elements just didn't work for me, the gaining the rebels trust element always felt incredibly underwhelming and easy to garner and exploit, not to mention is sometimes made the game a bit too easy, as I was able to walk out in the open in some battlefields with little to worry about outside of stray fire.
I also felt the better emphasis on "run and gun" play destroyed the importance of stealth cause not making a mistake no longer held the same weight it did in previous installments. Granted its been going that way since MGS2 and lord knows my fave entry MGS3 made dealing with enemies much easier. I just kept getting annoyed that I would get caught and quickly kill the swarms of enemies coming after me and was even eventually able to just walk through areas guns of blazing. Stealth now sorta lost its importance cause its not like guns and ammo are not easy to come by in the game.
It was just one of those things where I felt the blending of genres didn't work for me. The boss battles were still MGS epic but the different stages never once impressed me or stood out with the exception of Prague which forced the player to do some kick ass film noir style stealth.
Quote:
I agree with this statement up until you mention Natal. Because honestly, the biggest reason I see motion controls never working in any current form that they exist in is because of a lack of sufficient physical feedback. Our bodies and brains expect physical feedback when making the motions required of us for the purposes games ask of us but we never get it. Physical feedback is an integral part in reacting to swords clanging together, steering a car, or dribbling a ball but we get none of that feedback from Natal and almost none from the Wii-mote.
Let me clarify with Natal, its gaming application is debatable at this point but will find out once it actually launches but looking at just tech demos, I feel the technology has at least everyday applications as well, and part of me would be just stoked to see gaming create a technology that has everyday use. I like the idea of switching on consoles by motion and voice recognition, it utterly appeals to the little kid in me who grew up watching Star Trek: The Next Generation :D
Quote:
I'll agree that the actual motions feel more natural and immersive, but that immersion has always been immediately broken for me because of the lack of physical feedback. Because without it, everything in Wii Sports was based as much on luck and randomly swinging the controller as anything else and Mario Kart Wii was utterly unplayable with the motion controls. I agree there's potential in some genres and game markets for motion control, but until they workout the problem of physical feedback I have no problem saying that I don't think it will ever reach it's potential.
Most Wii titles (maybe not Wii sports but certainly Zelda and NMH) actually do give a bit of force feedback to the player by using the Rumble technology we've all loved since the PS1 days. Most death blows and certain movements do have a bit of force feedback and it was actually Miyamoto who said Natal would fail cause it didn't have force feedback. I was completely blown away when my Wii mote started to ring in NMH cause an NPC had called my character and the game asked me to use it as a cell phone while I walked over to the stages boss. All the dialogue came exclusively through the Wii mote itself and I just thought to myself "Well aren't you a clever d$%@". Its been crap like that that has made me a little less skeptical about the Wii, and see it more as missed development opportunity.
Quote:
I disagree actually. Were the developers not able to utilize the technology to make Heavy Rain look as good as it did and build the atmosphere as well as they did I don't think it would have worked as well. Not that lesser hardware can't make immersive games, but I honestly think that the sheer realism of it's settings helped to elevate the immersive qualities inherent in the gameplay.
While I agree that the level of detail adds depth to this particular style of game it doesn't change the fact it could have been exclusively a PC title. would also argue that the detail adds depth for its style but I wouldn't say its impossible to recreate a game like this from slightly older technology. The adventure game scene on the PC is filled with emotional roller coaster titles and only a few of them actually utilize realism on a scale similar to Heavy Rain while others utilize more surreal and extravagant art styles.
Quote:
But for a much better example, I can really just name Portal. By no means is Portal a technical powerhouse, but it couldn't have been made ten years ago in the form it's in. Not only is there some complex physics going on with the portalless games anyway, but I don't think anything could have handled some of the workarounds they had to make to get the physics working through portals if they tried to do it ten years ago, and certainly not 15 or 20 years ago. And even if you don't think GTAIV is innovative (I don't think it is nor do I like it), but it's hard to say it didn't benefit from more power by creating a much more believable and immersive world. And a more recent example of Battlefield Bad Company 2; it literally wouldn't be the game it was without the massive environments, seamless environmental destruction and vehicles, all of which would be difficult or impossible to integrate so seamlessly on 5 year old hardware let alone ten year old hardware. I could probably come up with more examples of games that legitimately benefit from more power, but I just woke up and thinking is hard. :D
I m not saying that some incremental technology improvement are poor means of building games, rather I was saying that it shouldn't be a bad thing to explore new ways to play video games with new technology and really that's what Portal is, its not as elaborate as a new console with a specific controller but it utilized a new technology from a Physics engine that was built. So this goes in a lot of different directions really. Better hardware is not a bad thing, Im just annoyed with what feels like a slow growth rate of interesting games. Portal itself is a PC title and that in itself is an industry that's been making improvements on physics engines and stage layout for nearly fifteen years. The technology that made it came from a terribly slow process which is not a bad thing at all, I'm just saying that we'll never see the next gaming revolution like the 3D one at this pace.
I can't comment on all the FPS (or 3PS) titles cause frankly my issue with them is the same as yours with Motion Controllers, I get no real force feedback and the controller gets in the way of the simplicity of using guns (this is coming from someone who use to regularly shoot real firearms). Obviously, I don't play them and very few have ever caught my attention let alone hold it. This sorta alienates me from a good 3/4ths of the market it seems.
Quote:
But really, I'm not trying to say that hardware is required to innovate, but it certainly removes barriers to innovation so developers can more easily realize their game whether it's an innovative masterpiece or an iterative step forward.
I completely agree with this but I sometimes feel that hardware both hinders and helps innovation. For every Portal, there is and army of samey WWII/space marine shooters, for every No More Heroes, there is an army of "Party Games" for the Wii, for every Halo, there is a mountain of better games (Hey, I'm allowed to slam Microsoft and Halo is just too easy...) I guess I'm ranting at the mountain of developers who lack imagination and are quick to make something pretty with little substance or cutesy and simple with no depth or skill required.
Quote:
I won't disagree with you on that, but given the rise of the indie scene I think we're actually able to see the second coming of more innovative game design since game development is so much more accessible. That said, when it comes to innovation on consoles, I really don't think we're any worse off now than we were even on the SNES as far as innovation. I mean a lot of great games came out in that era, but how many can you think of that were truly innovative and didn't just make incremental steps in already established genres? I'm having trouble thinking of many right now.
I'm kinda hoping but I sometimes fear its going to be something that mostly stays in the realm of downloads and never make the major leaps into the consoles themselves. I feel this way about the handheld market as well cause I've been more impressed with stuff on the DS and PSP tin terms of creativity and just being really fun than on the consoles as of late yet I get frustrated that people like Square-Enix can release tripe like XIII for the consoles when they are releasing stuff like The World Ends With You, Song of Summoner, and surprisingly for me, Dissidia.
As foir the SNES, this sorta also brings me back to my point, the SNES was a great system and I love it but let's face it, it was the NES bigger and better. The 3D revolution came along and we were all wowed in the mid 90s. The generation that followed (Gamecube and Playstation 2) then became the new SNES/Genesis era with consoles that were basically the old consoles but better. Now we're in "the next generation" (sadly not Star Trek) and despite being quite a few years into I feel like its just a rehash of the last generation, on all consoles even. I guess I just feel ready for the next big thing and even though its not in the stars for motion controls, I feel it could have a powerful impact on the industry.
Quote:
I can't blame you for getting through FFXIII and not wanting to touch a console (any console). It's pretty easy to lose any desire to play games after too much time with that. :D
But the PS3 has some legitimately awesome and creative titles even if not all of them are over flowing with innovation. I'd be happy to make some recommendations if you'd like (though that's probably best left outside of the thread).
Also, Portal is free on the PC and Mac until the 24th. If you haven't already then get it.
I didn't realize how much that game pissed me off until I had some time away from it and truly, I really did try to like it. I don't necessarily like coming off as the old guy who whines about the "good old days" but no, that game was just bad...
I've picked up Disgaea 3, MGS4, and Fallout 3 for the PS3 and I look forward to picking up Demon's Soul, Super Street Fighter 4, and Valkyrie Chronicles. The problem is my PS3 wish list is in direct conflict with the games I want for the DS and PSP that are coming out this summer and lord knows I still need to play through the crap load of PS2/GBA/DS/PSP games I've been collecting for the last year or two, so I've got a busy gaming schedule it seems... :eep:
You'll have to PM me where to get Portal cause I would enjoy playing it though I doubt my PC is up to spec cause it is in fact pretty old now that I think about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bolivar
Wow, Wolf is back, I love it!!! And he got a PS3!!!
Finals kicked my ass this semester so I blame them on my incoherent ramblings in this thread. I really think I should have taken another week off to unwind before coming back here. :screwy:
Quote:
I'm going to try to keep this short and on point since you and Vivi got through a lot of it.
I can just ask - how many of those games have you actually played? I would absolutely say God of War is different - not just with the stuff going on in the scene, but an item system, weapon diversity, ways to manipulate enemies, and overall deeper combat which the series simply didn't have. A Gran Turismo demo/contest was released on PSN which showcased the new driving physics, and for a game which prided itself on realistic driving for over a decade, it did feel very different. Not to mention cockpit view which you will be able too look around with using the EyeToy :eek:
I can't comment on the 360, but there's been a lot of innovation on the PS3 among, but definitely within genres. MAG didn't just increase the player count, we've "finally achieved real time battlefield control..." (<- SNAKE!) with a tiered leadership infrastructure. Demon's Souls undoubtedly innovated the Action-RPG genre with the use of Havok physics but moreoso online play I haven't really seen anywhere else. Valkyira Chronicles did something for SRPG's which is a wonder it hasn't before. LBP's combination of an in-game editor and community incorporation of it in-game and out-of-it created something genuinely new.
We could even go into FPS like Bad Company 2 deconstructing the entire concept of the action set piece, or how Killzone 2 really changed how I think about FPS. I've been on BC2, MW2, and MAG lately, but going back to Killzone 2 was a painful experience because it plays so differently, it's something that hasn't been done before and it could not have been done without greater processing power of the PS3.
And while you said Heavy Rain is just like the old point-and-click adventures (it is) it's also similar to many different things, it's hard to say exactly what it is.
Have you played Valkyria Chronicles, Demon's Souls and Heavy Rain? If you have I'd really like to know your thoughts on them, just in general, but also for the sake of this thread.
I think there is a difference to a game playing different and feeling different sometimes and perhaps my issue here is that I'm not seeing the "playing different" but rather mostly a "feels different" but then again, I have a terrible habit of being too analytical and a deconstructionist in my titles, and I'm still bitter about XIII. As stated above, I will probably never know about the FPS titles you've listed or even the driving titles cause I frankly don't play those genres much or anymore at all.
I feel there is changes going on in the industry, obviously, it seems like its mostly happening in the genres I don't play sadly enough. I guess it feels to me like its finally time for something big to happen instead of these small little bumps in the road. I'm ready for a change cause while the details are getting better and better I do still question whether we've actually bared witness to a radical change in any genre in the last fifteen years. Maybe I should throw in the towel and final accepted I've become too jaded but its hard to think you can't enjoy something you love cause that doesn't really seem to be my case. Whatever, I'm probably still just burnt out from school and work.
I'll probably start a thread or add to them once I plays some of the games you've listed. I've got a lot on my plate and I still need to play through a few classics I've picked up like Beyond Good and Evil and Silent Hill 2. Course Shinobi is also begging me to play and I do need to finish DQVIII before this decade runs out.
