Its okay, if we agreed all the time we would never have interesting conversation now would we?Originally Posted by Vivi22
Yes I did play through the game but to be fair to MGS4, I only played it once (I now actually own a PS3 and the game so I'll play it again, maybe I'll find what I was missing and fall in love with the game) but I found it kinda underwhelming and personally I do sometimes wonder if its simply just me. I'm a hopeless fanboy for MGS and I will not deny that even if I didn't like the game I would have a hard time actually saying it. Despite my bitter post, I actually do like MGS4 but I really felt that many of the new elements simply didn't work as well as they sounded on paper or simply just destroyed the games balance for me. So I feel that MGS4 took a few steps back in some ways and simply misfired on others but at the same time this could also be a simple old gamer talk of "they changed it now it sucks" talking and that just goes to show you that despite my idealism I can still be counted as to adding to the problem of the industry.
I chose MGS4, not because I feel its a great example as much as its one of the few examples I have extensive knowledge of. Seriously I could easily hit Nintendo's major franchises as well and I probably should since my post came off a bit "Nintendo fanboy" despite not liking the company personally.
This is my point though, its not that motion controls have proven themselves wonderfully, they frankly haven't and I even said in my original post that Nintendo pretty much sprung this technology about a decade too soon but I feel that just because its bad now doesn't mean it should be left on the waste side and I feel that its kinda silly to say its not going to work ever. We're talking about bringing in a new way to interact and play with games, damn straight its going to be buggy and frankly crappy but that doesn't mean it may never amount to something. I just feel that too many gamers are shutting themselves off from different experiences by giving up on stuff way too early. I think motion controls might have a future in gaming. Will it replace the standard controller? Not very likely but I can see it being a feature built into future console generations, especially something like Natal.Adding in poor motion control that at it's best mimics a computer mouse reasonably well and at it's worst is a laggy inaccurate pile of waggle doesn't lead to more innovative games. The fact that 95% of games don't use it well and the other 5% would be better off with a traditional controller or mouse kind of proves it. I honestly can't think of a single Wii game that really impressed me in terms of motion control implementation. Are they more accessible for those who are afraid of a lot of buttons? Sure. Do they offer any experiences that can't be done just as well with other control methods? Not yet, and I'd say never if they continue in their current form.
I also feel that they create a level of immersion that is lacking in standard controllers. There is just something a bit more satisfying about swinging the Wii mote to instigate the final kill in No More Heroes that I don't feel a standard controller could ever have given me. I also found my time playing Z:TP on the Wii was immensely more fun and satisfying for me than on the Gamcube where I often felt the controller got in the way of making the game flow better. Motion controls to me, work alot like peripherals like steering wheels and band sets. They work great for the games they are built for properly but I don't see myself trying to play Super Street Fighter IV with the Rock Band drum kit just as I don't necessarily feel I may ever use a motion controller to play a turn based RPG.
I feel motion controls can have a place in gaming but I don't necessarily feel it will become the standard. I seriously doubt standard controllers will disappear until gaming becomes us jacking our brains into a terminal and even then I'm sure someone's going to keep making games that create a virtual standard controller.
Wow, I seriously need to re-read some of my longer posts...You don't have to create a new genre to innovate. The existence of Portal alone proves that. But while we're on the topic of how much innovation in terms of gameplay these companies have brought to the table, LBP is more than Nintendo has done in 14 years. The fact that we can also credit Sony with Ico, Shadow of the Colossus, producing Heavy Rain, Echochrome, and probably more that I'm forgetting makes Sony the most innovative console manufacturer out there as far as I'm concerned. If you want to talk about a company who rides the minimal changes sequel wave for all it's worth, Nintendo would be the poster company for it if Activision and EA didn't exist. They haven't made a new game since the N64 died.
I won't argue that Nintendo has done very little in terms of innovating their major franchises and yes, Sony is definetly one of the better companies out there when you start to stack together their indiviadual games but I ask you where does their console design lead the industry? Heavy Rain for example is basically the PC adventure games of old (its been called the spiritual successor to Indigo Prophecy) it is hardly dependent on the technology of Sony or the PS3 to be the game it is. Hardware is getting more powerful but I don't feel like its been making games better overall. Why do I have to wait an entire console generation to get two games like Ico and Shadow of the Colossus when the shelves are lined up with dozens of samey type games. This was what I was trying to point out with my second response about gamers sending the wrong message to developers, when you start to stack the best games from each console and the rare awesome gems like Ico, Okami, Katamari Damacy, and other great titles, you quickly realize they only make up a small percentage of the whole gaming library.
Every console is filled with lost gems and games that got credit for how good they were long after they were released. We as gamers want stuff like Heavy Rain, LBP, NMH, and Ico but at the same time, we are faster to spend our money on the new Madden, Zelda, and Final Fantasy and even quicker to turn around and say how much those games we bought suck because it was either too different or felt like a rehash of the older versions. I feel we are sending very mixed signals here and I feel we tie developers hands especially considering costs of big AAA titles is getting more expensive. Most of the innovative and interesting titles are either coming out of the indie scene or are fun pet projects made for cheap by companies to be sold on DLC.
I think I lost my point somewhere around paragraph 2...Overall, I agree that Nintendo is just as guilty as the rest.
Exercise is good for youWii Fit isn't a game. There I said it.
Calling Wii Music a game is a bit of a stretch too though you could make a better case for it than Wii Fit.
My point is that motion controllers and motions detection technology has some interesting applications that I feel we can explore to make better games. Nintendo talked about creating a heart monitoring sensor for the Wii to go with Wii Fit but I was thinking how neat it would be to use the technology to use your heart rate to calculate game flow. Imagine a horror game that actually based how much action and tension happened by basing it on your pulse? Food for thought...
Meh, I just got bored reading it.I read GamesRadar articles quite often, and one thing you have to realize is even the serious articles are meant to be slightly humorous in nature. It was much more of a 'what if' for fun than something you would base an investment portfolio on.
I understand the main article, I think I mostly talked about crash cause he kept bringing up the Crash of 83. I actually agree his doomsday scenario is very plausible."Crumple", not crash. The main idea was that the rapid industry growth into the 'casual' market, advanced primarily by motion control, is not sustainable. Or in other words 'casual' gaming is a bubble market that will soon see a market correction, resulting in an overall decrease in total value of the video game industry.
I agree but as I began to point out in my response to Vivi22 not many of the high profile titles on other consoles ever got their fare due. Ico, Vagrant Story, Rez, Okami, Beyond Good and Evil are considered by most of the gaming community and some of the industry as excellent titles but all of them were underwhelming in the market. Hell just looking at Clover Studios career or Prince of Persia franchise you see that very few great games actually become smash hits in terms of sales. Some of the best RPGs I've ever played are made by companies that are not known for making games from the genre.The main issue is how well shovelware sells on the Wii in comparison to 'good' games. (I'm using so many quotation marks in this post I feel I should be translating FFT or something) Shovelwar is an inevitability for everything. TV, Books, Movies, it all happens. The main issue is making sure the standout products get the money they deserve.
Yes, Muramasa, Mad World, and NMH had underwhelming sales on the Wii but Nintendo's mainline products are still going strong and Metroid: the Other M is one of the more anticipated titles for the console. Its not that the Wii's shovelware is drowning out the good games as much as this is the problem of all the Nintendo consoles since the N64, third party games sell terribly cause Nintendo fans seem to only want to play the main franchises. About the only shovelware title that has sold remarkably well on the system is Wii Play and that's because it was bundled with an extra Wii mote and about ten bucks cheaper to buy than the standalone.
A quick look at the top ten best selling games for the platform shows the age old problem with Nintendo that Vivi22 pointed out which is that all of them are 1st party games. I wouldn't be surprised if the top 20 were all exclusively Nintendo made. I don't really believe that the casual gamers are actually opening their wallets for every Wii sport clone on the shelves. Nintendo is just doing its old song and dance.
I think there are many ways to innovate but lately it feels sometimes that companies are going too slow out of fear of losing their audiences.I personally don't think that original titles should be offering massive innovations. I like the Mega Man model quite a bit myself. The Mega Man X series, though very similar in nature, offered several different gameplay cornerstones. Adding stuff like the slide and charge in previous MM installments improved the games (imo) but dashing and wall jumping completely changed many aspects of the gameplay. Creating a new series that was still Mega Man was, in my mind, the perfect way to go about something like this. I don't see anything wrong with laying down an old series and starting on something fresh is the gameplay paridigms around which it is based are no longer relevant in the current market. Another example is FFT. The game still felt very 'Final Fantasy-ey', but it would not have been appropriate to continue the main series on as such. A spin of was an excellent way to go. As MMX has shown you can have entire spin off series that continue off in place of the main branch.
My point here really wasn't to slam all the other consoles and make Nintendo out as a hero rather as I was trying to point out that instead of just relegating motion controls as a gimmick, I feel we should look at it as an opportunity to experience something new. I'm not saying motion controls should be integrated into the major franchises either.
I just feel that this technology would allow game designers to think outside of the box and help them become a bit more daring in more established mediums. I think its interesting to see if motion controls, Virtual reality, and other non-mainstream notions of technology can be sued to create new gaming experiences. We'll always have the standard consoles and stuff but I feel it would be silly of us as gamers to ignore other possibilities for the medium. That was really my point, but I got off topic ion some weird Sony, Microsoft, Squenix, MGS4 rant. I guess my brain is still fried from finals...
I doubt will see it until another five or ten years later from now. This is a social change, it doesn't happen overnight you know. What I will say is that I've talked to lots of parents and many of them think games are violent and stupid but are utterly fascinated with the technology. Many of the professors I talk to in computer science and communication technologies are becoming more fascinated with gaming and a lot of it was because of the technology in the Wii and DS. I'm talking old guys who haven't touched a game since Pac-Man are intrigued by what Wii Fit and Wii Sports are doing in terms of technology and a lot of it is because of its social acceptance by people who are not technology hobbyist.That is the thing, I am not seeing this transition from Casual Wii to bigger an better things gaming wise. Everyone I know who owns one keeps it in the closet and breaks it out fors and giggles once and a while. This idea that casuals will come in the door and become interested in the more conventional gaming seems to be wishful thinking. At best. If this were true then titles like Muramasa that are receiving a great amount of industry attention wouldn't be doing so poorly.
Gaming is becoming socially acceptable because all us young tykes were raised on them and now we've grown up but, I feel the Casual market is starting to bridge some gaps between the gamer generation and the oldbies who've been asking us to shut off the damn games and play outside. Even if the market bursts and implodes on itself, I feel its social impact will affect the industry for years to come.
Quoted for the truthAll you tl:dr people suck.
We don't need to make new genres, it would be a little interesting and its going to happen whether or not stuff like Rock Band and the Wii are successful. I just feel like its been awhile since I played something that really defined a genre or changed my perspective on gaming. I just feel that the established franchises are not really getting any better and though some interesting titles have been coming and going, none have really caught my eye.I have never been an FPS fan, the genre is not something that appeals to me at all. Yet with tweaks that were all told relatively minor in the grand scheme of things Borderlands and MAG were able to deliver an experience that I, a decided non FPS gamer, enjoyed thoroughly. The idea that video games have to create a new genre every decade seems a little... ambitious.
I think my rant is partly due to how underwhelmed I am with the PS3. I've played the system off on and on since it came out, finally picked one up for myself a few months back, picked up a few titles I've been interested in and have not felt the desire to touch it since I finished FFXIII. Even going into game stores, I spend less time in the PS3 section cause there is very little in terms of games I want to own. I've played through MGS4 and despite my ranting, I really did like the game but I have no real motivation to go through it again and I have not felt a need to play the game since I finished it. I'm not sure what's up with me lately...
Reply With Quote