Eteric Rice
Member
Angeles said:I'm pretty sure there is different between psp and 8 bit systems power though
Oh, if we're talking 8-bit than yeah.
Really Opiate, you should have kind of picked something more recent.
Angeles said:I'm pretty sure there is different between psp and 8 bit systems power though
Kintaro said:Then it won't be the Valkyria Chronicles I experienced. That's all there is to it.
Eteric Rice said:Oh, if we're talking 8-bit than yeah.
Really Opiate, you should have kind of picked something more recent.
Opiate said:Definitely not. My point was that technology does not affect gameplay: it was essential to my point that I pick something more archaic to show that.
However, I'm now convinced that technology can have some effect on gameplay -- although I'd still argue it's a much smaller effect than most would realize, and is nearly imperceptible on a generation-to-generation basis. By far the largest upgrade has been in visuals, not gameplay.
gtj1092 said:I've read all of the post in this thread but are you saying your interaction with the game(visual processing and button inputs) doesn't effect how you play the game.
I have hard time understanding how the game processes and displays data doesn't have an effect on how you play it. Maybe our definitions are crossed somewhere.
PepsimanVsJoe said:I don't think the NES could pull off a respectable version of Gradius III let alone VC.
Just what in the flying fuck did I just read?
I'd wager that a game where you can disembowel your enemy allows you to dispatch your foe in manners that don't involve disembowelment. In that case, you're weighing different tactical options in order to best eliminate a foe, instead of matching button presses. This affects your decision making greatly. Visual displays might also present alternate rewards to the player beyond simple victory (I like seeing the animation of my virtual character disemboweling his virtual opponent), which would also add new dimensions to the calculus of player choice.Opiate said:Why would it? Let's say I have two games, one where pressing A/B/C/A in a specific order and time allows you to disembowel an enemy, while another is just Simon says. What's the difference? Personally, I don't have more fun with one than the other, because the visual input I recieve isn't significant to my enjoyment.
It must be a mistake like at E3.DemonSwordsman said:So VC2 goes to PSP? NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
PepsimanVsJoe said:Nevermind I'm out of here. This is looney toons.
And no Asteroids does not have more individual objects on screen than Gradius III.
Sure. Basically people were just as happy 30 years ago as they are today, which is proof that technology doesn't affect gameplay.Darkpen said:....what the fuck happened in this thread, and can someone summarize Opiate's talking point because I will not read all of that.
sonicmj1 said:I'd wager that a game where you can disembowel your enemy allows you to dispatch your foe in manners that don't involve disembowelment. In that case, you're weighing different tactical options in order to best eliminate a foe, instead of matching button presses. This affects your decision making greatly. Visual displays might also present alternate rewards to the player beyond simple victory (I like seeing the animation of my virtual character disemboweling his virtual opponent), which would also add new dimensions to the calculus of player choice.
Visual feedback for successful player action is incredibly important in many current games. From Resident Evil 4's gory head explosions and flashy roundhouse kicks to Call of Duty's simple "+1 EXP" messages popping up when the player gets a kill, this feedback can consciously or unconsciously guide how a player uses the mechanics in a game, and teach them to play the game better.
Classic board games such as Go already provide all the feedback that they need. Yet while I might have no problem sacrificing a set of pieces in Go in order to secure greater victory
In Valkyria Chronicles, where every soldier I use has a face and a personality, I am always reluctant to let any of them be lost permanently. Even though, mechanically, there is relatively little penalty for losing one of your soldiers, the feedback the game provides makes those soldiers important. Without relying solely on mechanics, it sends the message that the value of your soldiers is greater than their tactical utility.
For one example, your deconstructionist approach to game playing would render the entire "Companion Cube" exercise in Portal meaningless, since you would attach no value to the Companion Cube beyond its ability to progress you through the game.
I can imagine some people playing games strictly for the competition through mechanics, yet I'd expect they play a very small subset of titles.
Wow. :lolOpiate said:If technology had a significant impact on how much fun we have, then you'd essentially be arguing that we're having profoundly more fun with today's games than people had 30 years ago. Even more extreme, our parents must have had no fun at all when they were kids. And our grandparents may have had negative fun.
Quite to the contrary, we can see research that shows that people are no happier today than they were 32 years ago (when the census began taking these polls). Happiness has stayed relatively flat for that entire time period.
http://www.livescience.com/health/060227_happiness_keys.html
This is strong evidence that technology in general is not making us happier at all -- let alone something as pithy as "Are my games 8 bit or 32 bit?" Let me repeat that, just for emphasis: we are not getting happier as technology advances. This includes really important things like, oh, medical science advances, so it seems incredibly unlikely that something as comparatively irrelevant as video game technology would be any different.
Darkpen said:....what the fuck happened in this thread, and can someone summarize Opiate's talking point because I will not read all of that.
What's this about technological limitations of a home console VC versus handheld? What's the argument? Because if there's anything to be said, a handheld VC should be relatively similar to its home console kin, based on control scheme alone, and lack of hardware intensity, which even the dynasty warrior games prove wrong anyways.
Hobbun said:What made the first VC such a great game was not just the gameplay, how innovative it was, but beautiful graphics with its excellent sound in music and voice acting. Little things, like with surround sound. Someone is speaking, who is not on the screen yet, and their voice comes out of your back/side speaker.
The entrancing song that Rosie sings (and those of us who have played the game, knows when I am talking about).
The graphics of the game itself, that showed the expression of each of the characters so well.
...
And really, even though the PSP can do these to a decent extent (minus the Surround Sound), it still is less than the 'experience' of what the PS3 can offer. And really, that is what a lot of us are disappointed with in hearing it moving to the PSP. However realistic or logical it is for SEGA.
1cesc said:Wow. :lol
So you went from objectively saying that graphics have no effect on gameplay to subjectively saying that "for me, graphics have no effect on my experience" back to "graphics can't have an effect on enjoyment! Look it's in this vague article misrepresenting a publication!"
Darkpen said:....what the fuck happened in this thread, and can someone summarize Opiate's talking point because I will not read all of that.
sonicmj1 said:
sonicmj1 said:Opiate is taking the complete opposite position, which is that handhelds aren't really different from home consoles, because technology is (or can be, depending on perspective) entirely irrelevant, since it exists independently of core gameplay mechanics.
Dude, I know what you're trying to get at. But you're coming off the wrong way. You can't make one argument objectively and then expect people to treat it as your opinion. I mean, when you post an article citing research on happiness and technology what are people supposed to infer? It's hard to take that as support for an opinion. Anyways, I'm out, good luck, the argument is pretty interesting.Opiate said:Correct. In fact, I had to go through 3 posts to explain why "Game Mechanics" and "Experience" are distinct.
I still contend that graphics have very little (but not nonexistant) affect on game mechanics, because game mechanics can be explicitly and precisely defined. I do not contend that someone is unable to have a different "experience," because that is a subjective position and a very vague term.
Opiate said:All completely reproducable without those representations. These are known more formally as visual queues. Some of them are intense graphical showpieces, a la God of War juggles, where one needs to recognize the precise altitude at which the object is ready to be juggled again. However, all of these could be reduced to timers or simple numbers. RE4, for example, could simply use numerical values displayed how much damage is done: instead of a violent explosion, you could just show a number that is twice as large as normal damage, to show you have hit them particularly hard.
This is an illusion. You believe this because you see the game as is, and not as it could be. As I stated, RE4 absolutely could reduce all models to cubes with absolutely no animation, and use numbers to represent the damage done. On the flipside, Go should represent a stone capture in a highly sophisticated manner: for example, the game could be played as if each stone were a human, and a "captured" group could be represented as people who are killed violently the second they are surrounded. It seems obvious to you that this isn't necessary, because you know what Go is and know that the game doesn't require the more sophisticated visual representation.
I sacrifice my soldiers in VC all the time.
Correct. I don't care about the companion cube.
Yes. That includes me. I've mentioned many times here that I play a small number of games and almost all of these are exclusively multiplayer. The counter examples are, in recent memory: Braid, Flower, and The Path. I also enjoyed Portal, Echo Chrome, and others.
Hobbun said:Not sure exactly why you pointed my post out in particular.
That last part when I talk about the PSP, that was more of a general answer to those on why I would like the game to stay on the PS3 than go to the PSP.
sonicmj1 said:Could you elaborate on some of these? I can sort of understand a few (Echochrome is pretty much pure mechanics, and while I think you'd be missing a lot, Portal and Braid are certainly both enjoyable purely on a mechanical level), I'm not entirely sure about the others. Flower and The Path (both of which, incidentially, I haven't played) seem like they'd be pretty unsatisfying if you boiled them down exclusively to their mechanics. What makes these games stand out to you?
Also, did you look at Dwarf Fortress at all?
Hcoregamer00 said:We just agree to disagree, we will never see eye to eye.
You hate Valkyria Chronicles for the PSP, I love the idea of portable Valkyria with the gameplay possibilities. You think that the console experience should be the only one, I believe that the PSP experience has the potential to be just as good, if not better.
You will sit on the sidelines complaining how horrible it is for Valkyria to go to PSP, I will be importing it from Japan and playing it.
Opiate said:As I stated earlier, my two primary concerns when gaming are 1) Mechanics and 2) Intellectual stimulation. Sometimes the former supplies the latter, but it isn't mandatory.
The games mentioned above are examples of games that I hoped would stimulate me intellectually even if the mechanics were not particularly compelling. Another was Bioshock.
I felt like Braid and The Fall both succeeded in stimulating me intellectually. I felt Bioshock failed. The best example of a single player game I can think of with extremely compelling mechanics is Tetris.
Not only did I look at it, I've played it many times before. I enjoy the game a great deal.
P.S. The Path is GoTY
Darkpen said:Seriously, though, Opiate's talking points are absurdly extreme and even stupid. If you were to make everything a text-based adventure, you'd lose a lot of room that comes with human error, which even dice rolls can't ultimately simulate.
You can take gameplay only as far back as the technology that first gave birth to it allows, not to mention that we are a very visual and aural species. You can't deny the feedback that entertainment is supposed to offer.
Low-salt saltines with a nice glass of room temperature water
Novels written in morse code
White noise CDs
Cave paintings
Deku said:Like I said earlier, extreme examples are extreme.
Opiate just got hussled into a corner by the various thought experiments being postulated in this thread.
Your posts are so terrible. :lol Valkyria Chronicles will work out perfectly fine on the PSP.Angeles said:Opiate says valkyria doesn't really use PS3 power other than fancy graphics and even NES can handle valkyria chronicles by making it TEXT based gameplay
In short he thinks converting this
to this
Will not effect the gameplay but will only change the graphic style
About Yoshi, Shigeru Miyamoto stated that they wanted Mario to have a dinosaur companion ever since Super Mario Bros., however it was not possible because of the limitations of the NES. He said that "we were finally able to get Yoshi off the drawing boards with the SNES."
Kintaro said:I hate a sequel appearing on the PSP, yes. I dislike that idea. It's not even on the comparable to DQ to DS. Am I against VC on the PSP? No. A sequel? Yes. Especially within the same generation. Keep that shit together. Make it PS3/360, whatever. It's a complete switcharoo. It's like if Uncharted was on PS3 and Uncharted 2 was on PSP as a sequel. You don't think people would be pissed? How about Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, then Modern Warfare 2 were to appear exclusively on the DS. Yeah, I'd say people would be ticked. Rightfully so. Mass Effect 1 on 360, then Mass Effect 2 exclusively on iPhone. This making any sense to you?
I can respect your preferences, what kinds of games you play is your business, but I'm saying that each genre has different types of values in how randomness is employed, and despite what you said, that's not having "room," that's being not only overly precise, but much more of an unrealistic "simulation" of a grenade lob than how the game already works to begin with. That sort of gameplay would be restricted simply to something like tank simulation, but without any sort of real feedback.Opiate said:You'd also gain some room. For example, the lob shots in VC discussed earlier could be done much more precisely with text than they could by simply eyeballing it. You can type in a precise angle to get a precise hit.
And of course, most types of human error can be readily simulated through randomization patterns. Oregon Trail had successful randomization back on the Apple IIe (And other systems).
Yes I can. That's precisely what I'm doing. Have you read my posts? How about you say this: I personally care about the way games look and sound, and leave it at that. That's fine. I don't. That's also fine.
But please, please, please don't imply that this is what everyone thinks. Saying "it's human nature" implies that you are "correct" in caring about these things and that I am somehow not human for not caring. If you're wondering why I seem irked at times in this thread, it's this sort of implication that gets to me.
I've tried to avoid -- and failed on a couple of occasions -- calling people who care about visuals/audio "graphics whores" or implying they are superficial (even though graphics are, by literal definition, superficial). You're not, it's more complicated than that. I want to emphasize again that it's completely okay to have your preferences, Dark Pen.
Now please accept that my preferences are okay, too.
Yeah, but the existence of Yoshi didn't make you any HAPPIER did it!Vinnk said:
Darkpen said:There's inherent value in the tactile nature of modern gaming, and you lose something when you take that many steps back.
MechaX said:Not that I don't understand where you're coming from, especially added by how you do not seem that big on handheld gaming to begin with as evident by another topic on GAF. However, as someone who is a fan of RPGs and SRPGs, it is not as if this is an absolute worst case scenario (No VC at all, VC to the DS, VC to the mobile phones) and at least Sega's intentions are clear that the PSP is not the only future for the franchise. I'm sorry that you won't be onboard for this game, but eh. If it sells well enough, maybe it'll be back on the consoles sooner than expected.
PepsimanVsJoe said:Yeesh glad that's over with. I tried envisioning games as nothing but squares and numbers and it was such a depressing sight.
Even if something playable could be created it wouldn't be enjoyable. It took Opiate about a dozen or so posts to make me dislike videogames more than this entire forum has managed to do in years.
Opiate said:I'm saying this is true for me. Because it is true for me. Everyone cares about different things in different amounts. You apparently care about gameplay and graphics: perhaps you care equally about both, 50/50. I, however, care 100% about gameplay and 0% about grahpics -- or near enough that I can't tell the difference. I don't mind if I'm playing new games, 10 year old games, or 10000 year old games. It is irrelevant to me.
You mean a book? Yes it would.
I'm not suggesting that is the case.
And that's fine. I don't agree. Solid mechanics are what I care about almost exclusively: I also care about intellectual stimulation. So, for example, I strongly prefer Go and Chess because they engage my intellect far more than most games. As far as I know, after some serious consideration, those are (almost) entirely all of my concerns when considering a game.
・コンセプトは学校+戦争
Games Concept :- School Life + War
  アバンたちは士官学校に在籍しているが、普段は通常の学生たちと変わらない生活を送ってい る。
  彼らが戦場という非日常世界を行き来するのが本作のコンセプト。
Game will focus around how the officer cadet's life gets turn around when they thrust into the battlefield.
  学校内にある作戦準備室でミッション選択をし、戦場へ。戦況は前作と同じで出撃前のブリー フィングで確 認可能。
The school will act as a mission briefing room where the player choose to select missions before proceeding with oen.
  勝利条件を達成、ミッションクリアすると舞台は再び学校となり、これを繰り返しながら進ん でいくことに 。
After a mission is complete, Player will return to the school. Such the the way the player will proceed with the game.
 ・インタビューより
Interview :-
  より広いユーザーの皆さんに『戦ヴァル』の魅力を知ってもらいたいという思いからPSPで リリースする ことに。
The producer made this PSP release knowing the charm of VC1.
  新作とするにあたって醍醐味のひとつである戦闘システム『BLiTZ』をより遊び応えのあ るものにパワ ーアップ。
The new work will featured a upgraded version of the popular BLiTZ battle system.
  特に自分の部隊の成長やカスタマイズ性を大きく強化。
The growth system will be better since the player will be able to customise their characters.
  またアドホックモードの通信プレイに新しい遊びの可能性を感じたのも大きな理由のひとつ。
An Adhoc mode is included to allow room for new ways to play the game.
  本作をナンバリングタイトルとしたのは我々の本気度をユーザーに知っていただきたいから。
Producer wants the player to know that they are serious about this game being a true sequal,
  単なるスピンオフ作品ではないし携帯機だから質を下げるつもりは無い。
This game is not just a spin off and the fact that this is on a handheld does not mean the game has been downgraded.
  ミッション数は前作の数倍に。ユニット育成要素も奥深く。
The number of mission has increased from the previous title. And the number of units accessible for growth is vast.
  本作でも水彩画のような映像表現のCANVASを採用し、
  携帯機と思えないクオリティに仕上がるようこだわって制作中。
They are still making use of the CANVAS system, but they tried to work it into a manageable level that can be handled by a handheld.
  
ゲーム内で時間が流れると季節が移り変わり、季節ごとに学校行事が発生したり(プールもある 、
  制服が変化するといった要素もあります。
Time will be shown passing in the game by the way the students are dressed for the seasons, events happening and how the Pool is.