IrishNinja
Member
to be fair, both AR and madden games on dreamcast were both simply awful
to be fair, both AR and madden games on dreamcast were both simply awful
And people complain that the industry is stale and repetitive...
Have we entirely forgotten the Dreamcast era already? They talked about this shit thirteen years ago and nobody gave a fuck.
We're running in circles.
That's not the point.
We're acting so wide-eyed and bushy-tailed like this shit is somehow new and industry-changing.
It ain't.
It's going to be some flash-in-the-pan that we'll look back on and say, "huh, well that was kind of neat."
We're not even trying anymore. We're already to a point where we're trying to convince ourselves that technology that existed over a decade ago will somehow change the way we play games. Nobody gave a fuck then, and we won't now.
Why is it that we're relying so much on hardware to motivate change in gaming, when - at the end of the day - it's the software that dictates the direction? We've had a ridiculous number of great, industry-shaping software titles that didn't need an etch-a-sketch to prove their point.
We're acting so wide-eyed and bushy-tailed like this shit is somehow new and industry-changing.
It ain't.
It's going to be some flash-in-the-pan that we'll look back on and say, "huh, well that was kind of neat."
We're not even trying anymore. We are already to a point where we are trying to convince ourselves that technology that existed over a decade ago will somehow change the way we play games. Nobody gave a fuck then, and we won't now.
Why is it that we're relying so much on hardware to motivate change in gaming, when - at the end of the day - it's the software that dictates the direction? We've had a ridiculous number of great, industry-shaping software titles that didn't need an etch-a-sketch to prove their point.
I don't understand, what about touchscreens are a flash in the pan at this point?
Nobody cared back then because the technology simply wasn't functionally ready. Touchscreens are now built into everything, they have been proven to be functionally useful in other gaming machines, as has having a secondary screen.
Why should hardware remain stagnant? More importantly, why would this have an adverse effect on software. Ignoring that though, I just don't understand your argument here. I did not claim that a screen in a controller will be something earth shattering, but it clearly can have many useful applications to a gaming console as well as many non-gaming applications. What are the downsides to this?
Nintendo innovate. Microsoft and Sony follows. Nothing changed.
That's not the point.
We're acting so wide-eyed and bushy-tailed like this shit is somehow new and industry-changing.
It ain't.
It's going to be some flash-in-the-pan that we'll look back on and say, "huh, well that was kind of neat."
We're not even trying anymore. We are already to a point where we are trying to convince ourselves that technology that existed over a decade ago will somehow change the way we play games. Nobody gave a fuck then, and we won't now.
Why is it that we're relying so much on hardware to motivate change in gaming, when - at the end of the day - it's the software that dictates the direction? We've had a ridiculous number of great, industry-shaping software titles that didn't need an etch-a-sketch to prove their point.
If there wasn't a reason to laugh at this industry yet, there is now. We have been utterly bamboozled.
tl;dr - did the VMU fuck you up in the dreamcast days? i bet when it beeped you ignored that chao and just kept playing. personally, im down for the industry to try for more stuff than just photorealism and sequels, and even if most companies don't seem to know what the fuck to do with these setups to separate them from gimmicks, as long as nintendo and a few good devs do, i'm cool.
Pulling these shit gimmicks out is not the answer. Creative games is.
If the Wii U controller has all of the elements of a great controller pad plus a touch screen then i'm fine with it... as long as the price of the controller isn't ridiculous.
Seriously guys, what is so bad about this?
Excellent point. And it's another testament to how we're being sold something we don't even necessarily need. How much is the Wii U's or Xbox 720's touch screens going to alter precision in the way we control our games? Probably not a fuck of a lot. It's an excuse for hardware developers to say, "Hey, you need this now!" to play games. When in reality the regular ole' 360 gamepad would serve just as fine.
I believe the Wacom Cintiq uses resistive screens. Not cheap I think its $2000.
Agreed. However, I don't think that change needs to always come in the form of hardware. Like I said, true innovation doesn't come in the form of hardware. It's first and third-party developers, and their software. And it always will be. What good is the Wii U screen if all it's going to serve as is a map or an inventory screen?
Now, how many WiiU tablets can be connected to a console at one time?
Price of the controller.
Please Microsoft. Don't ruin the greatest controller ever with a screen. Make it an attachment if you have to, like the chatpad.
Why bother with the 360 pad, it's just a step ahead of the N64 pad, why even bother with that we have a Snes pad or a Nes pad or an Atari joystick.
Your logic is flawed.
Why bother with the 360 pad, it's just a step ahead of the N64 pad, why even bother with that we have a Snes pad or a Nes pad or an Atari joystick.
Your logic is flawed.
I agree. What's this analog stick bullshit Nintendo's trying to pull with the N64? Atari tried that over a decade ago with the 5200. It was shit then and didn't change anything. This will be shit too and nobody will care in 15 years.We're not even trying anymore. We are already to a point where we are trying to convince ourselves that technology that existed over a decade ago will somehow change the way we play games. Nobody gave a fuck then, and we won't now.
Remind me, how long has the keyboard been a success? Typewriters have existed since the 1800s. Their design has been changed only slightly over the last ~150 years.
If it ain't broke...
Please Microsoft. Don't ruin the greatest controller ever with a screen. Make it an attachment if you have to, like the chatpad.
Excellent point. And it's another testament to how we're being sold something we don't even necessarily need. How much is the Wii U's or Xbox 720's touch screens going to alter precision in the way we control our games? Probably not a fuck of a lot. It's an excuse for hardware developers to say, "Hey, you need this now!" to play games. When in reality the regular ole' 360 gamepad or keyboard and mouse would serve just as fine.
Nintendo innovate. Microsoft and Sony follows. Nothing changed.
A game doing both might be trouble outside of some WarioWare goofiness. But it'd be a shame if one man's wish to dance prevented another man's wish for precise touch controls from happening.I hate to say it...but didn't a similar device put THQ in there current financial troubles?
Kinetic or touch controls...please chose one. The last thing I want to do is play a game forcing me to dance while using precise touch controls.
It's awesome to see the people in this thread crying because of evolution.
Many of you have to remember that the best selling console this gen has had a motion controller and only much later, mcsft and sony made their approach with kinect and move. It's ok if you did not like it, but many more people did and sony and microsoft want this market segment too. Just face it, we are the minority.
Next gen, they won't be late for sure, and if the new selling point for the wii u is the touch screen in the controller, microsoft and sony will have something similar. End of story.
to be fair, both AR and madden games on dreamcast were both simply awful
No, many more people thought "that looks interesting and neat, I'll give that a try" then abandoned it in the closet when they realised it was actually pretty shit for playing games with.
Remind me, how long has the keyboard been a success? Typewriters have existed since the 1800s. Their design has been changed only slightly over the last ~150 years.
If it ain't broke...
My argument is that touch-based systems and gimmick-control-screen pads should be allowed to exist mutually with what has already been established as a functional controller-based system.
We're so quick to adapt the next-big-thing because it's shiny and we're told it will make our games better.
This gimmick shit needs to stop.
Are we buying consoles anymore, or boxes that attach to etch-a-sketches? Either make a fucking console or don't.
The Dreamcast VMU thing was neat in the fact that only a few games supported it, and it was usually just a health indicator of some sort (RE: Code Veronica). Now we're going to have to put the thing on the floor and pretend to swing an invisible golf club at it.
You need both, otherwise consoles just feel like low end PCs and they don't start to be consoles anymore.Pulling these shit gimmicks out is not the answer. Creative games is.