Support NeoGAF

[Asherdude]

The Wii U has come into its own (as it simultaneously sinks deeper into obscurity), but yeah, the XB1 and PS4 are the most uninteresting consoles yet. Infamous was typically flimsy, Killzone was typically shit and, um, the XB1 has a nice controller. I think we have to be impressed with each platform holder's E3 lineup, and there should be reasons to plunk down money on one of the Big Two come this fall, but I agree... totally unimpressive. When the only meaningful game on either platform is essentially a demo for the next Metal Gear, things are pretty dismal.

Titanfal is the only real innovator in the gameplay area. But I play it on the 360. And, again, it doesn't look that much different that the XB1 version. Yeah, I need my Wii U back.

 

[Zia]

Titanfal is the only real innovator in the gameplay area. But I play it on the 360. And, again, it doesn't look that much different that the XB1 version. Yeah, I need my Wii U back.

Yeah, I actually forgot about Titanfall, I suppose because I played the beta on PC. Very good game.

 

[offtopic]

This gen hasn't been intriguing at all to this point. The jump in graphical fidelity isn't nearly as compelling as it was moving into last generation and there haven't been any sort of gameplay innovations (maybe a bit for Titanfall). Although I've played xb1 and ps4 at some friends' houses I haven't found a need to buy one myself (although either/both are easily affordable). My time has been primarily spent on Diablo3, Dark Souls 2 and Hearthstone...none of which even work on a current gen console. This isn't even a pc gamer superiority thing as I have only played DS2 on my old 360.

 

[StevieP]

While NCL is better than most of the industry - AAA devs and "originality"-obsessed indies alike - in that they don't feel that games need to be a "seriously taken form of art", they have been infected by a different form of insanity. Namely, that games should be about "surprise".

If you ask me, the purpose of a game should be to spark the imagination of the player, and to have a solid feel to the mechanical gameplay. The AAA industry and the indies ("industry") are hellbent on forcing their imaginations down the players' throats, not just giving the player's mind the sparks to light up fireworks, which is what proper content does. NCL doesn't believe in that either. They think games' job is to surprise people. It's why they come up with mechanical gimmick after mechanical gimmick, and then forcibly contort some extant Nintendo property around the gimmick and call it a game. It's why they feel lackluster. To put it in different words, Modern Nintendo would never have made Starfox - they would have made Metroid: Space Combat instead. Old Nintendo instead had an idea and created an entire world around it.

The common thread in both the industry madness and the NCL madness is that they're not about what's fun for the player to play, but what is fun for the developers to make. It's why the AAA dudes make movies - it's fun playing director. It's why NCL loves 3D vision so much - it's surprising, they think, and they've been trying to do it for ages and always failed. Making 3d camera pans and such is fun. Making puzzles for Indie Puzzle-Platformer with Original(tm) Art Style #395639 is easy and fun.

Tuning stages for a fast 2d action game that has to stand on it's flow and mechanics, where you have to communicate things simply and effectively, and can't employ craptons of technical graphical effects to make it impressive? IT'S WORK. You have to spend ages fine-tuning the controls so they feel just right, you have to spend ages fine-tuning the levels so they flow well at different skill levels. You have limited room to do things like spiffy camera angles. You can't do stuff that screams "impressive".

Combine that with our society really pushing creativity as an end in itself, and you end up in a pile of s*** posthaste. It's why when people talk lovingly about abolishing limits to creativity I balk at the idea. Back in the day, "creative" was simply an unusual way to solve a problem. Now, end in itself. Problem is? Being creative is easy. Being good is hard. Example: A Finnish artist once literally put a bunch of blood and s*** in a washing machine and turned it on. This is art. Creativity as an end, and not a path to something good. Another example: Heavy Rain. Cage literally thinks games should stop being games. A bunch of my friends jokingly call him David "Antichrist" Cage because of that. We don't want Heavy Rain. We want games.

It's why indie games have so much potential that ends up wasted. A good bunch just focus on being pretentious, artsy, on being "visionaries". Sorry folks, I want games, I don't want stuff that "makes a statement" or some bs.

Back in the day when hardware limitations were a thing and you got revenue from the arcades, you tried being artsyfartsy and you went bankrupt. Good, simple games that brought new people in were what you simply had to do. Creativity wasn't pouring yourself to the disc in an embarassment that would get laughed out of Hollywood or any big published in two seconds, it was using the same sprite for the clouds and the bushes in Super Mario Bros. Because otherwise there just was no space. A game had to stand on it's merits.

Which brings me to the last part: Bringing in new people. Why? Because, if Nintendo is to be believed*, past gaming growth has been driven by population growth, multiple console ownership and access to new geographical markets. Furthermore, most of the post-NES years have been years of economic growth. That is to say, the portion of the population videogames reach has remained largely static over the past decades, and the industry has just milked more money from the same people.

Now? Economy's looking dire, Europe and Japan are in a population decline, and new geographical markets are pretty slim. Clearly, that can't continue. If the industry is to survive, let alone grow, it must reach a broader amount of people. Back in the NES days when many of us started playing games (the same ones many "hardcores" amusing call non-games now that they're Kool(tm)), adults used to play too. They used to play because games were simpler. Controllers were not monsters and games could be grasped easily. Progress was more about skill, less about raw hours spent. Good for people with not much free time.

Amusingly, everyone and their dog is making "hardcore" games. Let's see the financial reality of it:
1. Massive competition. Check.
2. Massive costs. Check.
3. No prospects of market growth. Check.
End result: Say hello to bankruptcy. It's why midsize devs basically died out last generation. They tried to kill CoD and failed, as everyone did.


* Reggie went over this in a 2005 press briefing that no one paid any attention to. It explained very concretely why Wii and DS were made, yet people thought it was dry business talk and then proceeded to go wtf Nintendo is insane when there 100% was a method to their "madness". Talk was on Youtube once upon a time but I can't find it for now, so here's an IGN transcript:
http://www.ign.com/articles/2005/11/04/reggie-talks-nintendos-future

Remember, whenever something seems strange and doesn't quite make sense, start following the money. Turns out most strange things make a ton of sense the moment you follow the money instead of what's being said publicly. Whether it's politics or war or the video game business.


EDIT: Final amusing tidbit. Nintendo used to not believe in the "casual"/"hardcore" divide the game industry manufactured up to demonize the Wii (which they hated the guts of, after all it's the retardation of gaming and all that's good and holy, main reason they were remotely friendly toward it was because from the old frame of reference it was basically 100% certainly a short-lived fad.) in the eyes of their "hardcore" audience (I find the using "hardcore" or "real game / gamer" to describe the hand-holdy QTE festivals AAA games are to be amusing). They simply made games for people who played games. Now? They've turned into an industry company. They bought the idea of the "hardcore"/"casual" divide hook, line and sinker. Just go through Nintendo's old press conferences from the Revolution/Wii/DS era and now. The way they talk is vastly different. It used to be different from MS/Sony. Now it's they all sound the same.

Time to pay more attention to this poster

 

[Astral Dog]

I am older and cynical than i was 8 years ago , that does have something to do with it, and a few games on the new systems already impress me technically, its just that the game lineup does not interest me enough to buy a next gen system right now , but give it time.

 

[InsaneTiger]

You could replace PS4 and Xbox One with PS3 and Xbox 360 or PS2 and Xbox. It would read the exact same way. I am not sure what everyone was expecting. This happen everytime a new generation begins and we complain again like we have amnesia.

I liked inFamous, you didn't okay and that is fine. I played my PS2 for awhile until the PS3 library really started to grow. I play my PS3 more right now and that is fine.

It will get better but in the future when the next consoles come out, just wait a year or two before you purchase so you can avoid your inevitable disappointment.

 

[TyrantII]

Titanfal is the only real innovator in the gameplay area

Unreal and quake called. They'd like credit for their style being rediscovered.

 

[Skenzin]

PC gaming has spoiled us, or me anyways. New consoles just don't have the leap they used to.

Most console gens are put to shame by PC hardeare. It was just the ps3/360 era was The odd duck. Commodore64>atari2600/coleco, Amiga>nes/SMS, 486VGA>SNES/GENNY, PCgeforce2-3>ps2/GC.... 3dfxPC>>>>>n64/SATURN,PS1

 

[Threi]

While NCL is better than most of the industry - AAA devs and "originality"-obsessed indies alike - in that they don't feel that games need to be a "seriously taken form of art", they have been infected by a different form of insanity. Namely, that games should be about "surprise".

If you ask me, the purpose of a game should be to spark the imagination of the player, and to have a solid feel to the mechanical gameplay. The AAA industry and the indies ("industry") are hellbent on forcing their imaginations down the players' throats, not just giving the player's mind the sparks to light up fireworks, which is what proper content does. NCL doesn't believe in that either. They think games' job is to surprise people. It's why they come up with mechanical gimmick after mechanical gimmick, and then forcibly contort some extant Nintendo property around the gimmick and call it a game. It's why they feel lackluster. To put it in different words, Modern Nintendo would never have made Starfox - they would have made Metroid: Space Combat instead. Old Nintendo instead had an idea and created an entire world around it.

The common thread in both the industry madness and the NCL madness is that they're not about what's fun for the player to play, but what is fun for the developers to make. It's why the AAA dudes make movies - it's fun playing director. It's why NCL loves 3D vision so much - it's surprising, they think, and they've been trying to do it for ages and always failed. Making 3d camera pans and such is fun. Making puzzles for Indie Puzzle-Platformer with Original(tm) Art Style #395639 is easy and fun.

Tuning stages for a fast 2d action game that has to stand on it's flow and mechanics, where you have to communicate things simply and effectively, and can't employ craptons of technical graphical effects to make it impressive? IT'S WORK. You have to spend ages fine-tuning the controls so they feel just right, you have to spend ages fine-tuning the levels so they flow well at different skill levels. You have limited room to do things like spiffy camera angles. You can't do stuff that screams "impressive".

Combine that with our society really pushing creativity as an end in itself, and you end up in a pile of s*** posthaste. It's why when people talk lovingly about abolishing limits to creativity I balk at the idea. Back in the day, "creative" was simply an unusual way to solve a problem. Now, end in itself. Problem is? Being creative is easy. Being good is hard. Example: A Finnish artist once literally put a bunch of blood and s*** in a washing machine and turned it on. This is art. Creativity as an end, and not a path to something good. Another example: Heavy Rain. Cage literally thinks games should stop being games. A bunch of my friends jokingly call him David "Antichrist" Cage because of that. We don't want Heavy Rain. We want games.

It's why indie games have so much potential that ends up wasted. A good bunch just focus on being pretentious, artsy, on being "visionaries". Sorry folks, I want games, I don't want stuff that "makes a statement" or some bs.

Back in the day when hardware limitations were a thing and you got revenue from the arcades, you tried being artsyfartsy and you went bankrupt. Good, simple games that brought new people in were what you simply had to do. Creativity wasn't pouring yourself to the disc in an embarassment that would get laughed out of Hollywood or any big published in two seconds, it was using the same sprite for the clouds and the bushes in Super Mario Bros. Because otherwise there just was no space. A game had to stand on it's merits.

Which brings me to the last part: Bringing in new people. Why? Because, if Nintendo is to be believed*, past gaming growth has been driven by population growth, multiple console ownership and access to new geographical markets. Furthermore, most of the post-NES years have been years of economic growth. That is to say, the portion of the population videogames reach has remained largely static over the past decades, and the industry has just milked more money from the same people.

Now? Economy's looking dire, Europe and Japan are in a population decline, and new geographical markets are pretty slim. Clearly, that can't continue. If the industry is to survive, let alone grow, it must reach a broader amount of people. Back in the NES days when many of us started playing games (the same ones many "hardcores" amusing call non-games now that they're Kool(tm)), adults used to play too. They used to play because games were simpler. Controllers were not monsters and games could be grasped easily. Progress was more about skill, less about raw hours spent. Good for people with not much free time.

Amusingly, everyone and their dog is making "hardcore" games. Let's see the financial reality of it:
1. Massive competition. Check.
2. Massive costs. Check.
3. No prospects of market growth. Check.
End result: Say hello to bankruptcy. It's why midsize devs basically died out last generation. They tried to kill CoD and failed, as everyone did.


* Reggie went over this in a 2005 press briefing that no one paid any attention to. It explained very concretely why Wii and DS were made, yet people thought it was dry business talk and then proceeded to go wtf Nintendo is insane when there 100% was a method to their "madness". Talk was on Youtube once upon a time but I can't find it for now, so here's an IGN transcript:
http://www.ign.com/articles/2005/11/04/reggie-talks-nintendos-future

Remember, whenever something seems strange and doesn't quite make sense, start following the money. Turns out most strange things make a ton of sense the moment you follow the money instead of what's being said publicly. Whether it's politics or war or the video game business.


EDIT: Final amusing tidbit. Nintendo used to not believe in the "casual"/"hardcore" divide the game industry manufactured up to demonize the Wii (which they hated the guts of, after all it's the retardation of gaming and all that's good and holy, main reason they were remotely friendly toward it was because from the old frame of reference it was basically 100% certainly a short-lived fad.) in the eyes of their "hardcore" audience (I find the using "hardcore" or "real game / gamer" to describe the hand-holdy QTE festivals AAA games are to be amusing). They simply made games for people who played games. Now? They've turned into an industry company. They bought the idea of the "hardcore"/"casual" divide hook, line and sinker. Just go through Nintendo's old press conferences from the Revolution/Wii/DS era and now. The way they talk is vastly different. It used to be different from MS/Sony. Now it's they all sound the same.

Very good post man. Lots of respect for this and it echoes my issues with the current gaming landscape exactly.

 

[bengraven]

Last gen was pretty weak in the beginning, though I quite enjoyed mostly forgotten launch titles like Condemned and Kameo.

 

[megamerican]

You could replace PS4 and Xbox One with PS3 and Xbox 360 or PS2 and Xbox. It would read the exact same way. I am not sure what everyone was expecting. This happen everytime a new generation begins and we complain again like we have amnesia.

I liked inFamous, you didn't okay and that is fine. I played my PS2 for awhile until the PS3 library really started to grow. I play my PS3 more right now and that is fine.

It will get better but in the future when the next consoles come out, just wait a year or two before you purchase so you can avoid your inevitable disappointment.

Not really. Within the first year of last gen we had Oblivion and Gears of War, both of which were miles ahead of anything in the PS2 era.

Initially Killzone did impress me. But yeah, I picked up Infamous last week and have been pretty underwhelmed. Watchdogs isn't looking so hot either, although it will probably benefit from bored early adopters.

 

[impact]

Agreed except when you said 360 launch games were laughable. Had a great first year, too.

Oblivion looks like complete shit on 360, btw

 

[2+2=5]

Is there something wrong on not liking what others like and vice-versa? Not at all, and to be honest it doesn't seems that this generation is blowing minds.

Instead of picking the XB1 why don't you spend those money to buy Vita and/or 3ds?

 

[GrayFoxPL]

I'm waiting for Japanese to wake up for PS4.

 

[StevieP]

I'm waiting for Japanese to wake up for PS4.

Good luck with that

 

[IAmRandom31]

I was impressed with the Voxel GPCPU system used in Res0gun. Still love watching that game play out.

Was impressed instantly with Killzone SP graphically and Infamous. Both games in particular showcased incredible lighting / particle systems.

Was insanely impressed with Deep Down's spell effects

Was impressed with the display when Knack explodes, especially when large. Watching 4,000 or so body pieces flying all over the place with realistic physics is great everytime

Was impressed with AC4's water simulation

The " impressive " things that will occur this generation will be more subtle at first compared the jump last gen. Things are just more polished now, a bit more detailed, a bit broader in scope. But look harder and you see some impressive shit going on already.

 

[Comfort Jones]

While NCL is better than most of the industry - AAA devs and "originality"-obsessed indies alike - in that they don't feel that games need to be a "seriously taken form of art", they have been infected by a different form of insanity. Namely, that games should be about "surprise".

If you ask me, the purpose of a game should be to spark the imagination of the player, and to have a solid feel to the mechanical gameplay. The AAA industry and the indies ("industry") are hellbent on forcing their imaginations down the players' throats, not just giving the player's mind the sparks to light up fireworks, which is what proper content does. NCL doesn't believe in that either. They think games' job is to surprise people. It's why they come up with mechanical gimmick after mechanical gimmick, and then forcibly contort some extant Nintendo property around the gimmick and call it a game. It's why they feel lackluster. To put it in different words, Modern Nintendo would never have made Starfox - they would have made Metroid: Space Combat instead. Old Nintendo instead had an idea and created an entire world around it.

The common thread in both the industry madness and the NCL madness is that they're not about what's fun for the player to play, but what is fun for the developers to make. It's why the AAA dudes make movies - it's fun playing director. It's why NCL loves 3D vision so much - it's surprising, they think, and they've been trying to do it for ages and always failed. Making 3d camera pans and such is fun. Making puzzles for Indie Puzzle-Platformer with Original(tm) Art Style #395639 is easy and fun.

Tuning stages for a fast 2d action game that has to stand on it's flow and mechanics, where you have to communicate things simply and effectively, and can't employ craptons of technical graphical effects to make it impressive? IT'S WORK. You have to spend ages fine-tuning the controls so they feel just right, you have to spend ages fine-tuning the levels so they flow well at different skill levels. You have limited room to do things like spiffy camera angles. You can't do stuff that screams "impressive".

Combine that with our society really pushing creativity as an end in itself, and you end up in a pile of s*** posthaste. It's why when people talk lovingly about abolishing limits to creativity I balk at the idea. Back in the day, "creative" was simply an unusual way to solve a problem. Now, end in itself. Problem is? Being creative is easy. Being good is hard. Example: A Finnish artist once literally put a bunch of blood and s*** in a washing machine and turned it on. This is art. Creativity as an end, and not a path to something good. Another example: Heavy Rain. Cage literally thinks games should stop being games. A bunch of my friends jokingly call him David "Antichrist" Cage because of that. We don't want Heavy Rain. We want games.

It's why indie games have so much potential that ends up wasted. A good bunch just focus on being pretentious, artsy, on being "visionaries". Sorry folks, I want games, I don't want stuff that "makes a statement" or some bs.

Back in the day when hardware limitations were a thing and you got revenue from the arcades, you tried being artsyfartsy and you went bankrupt. Good, simple games that brought new people in were what you simply had to do. Creativity wasn't pouring yourself to the disc in an embarassment that would get laughed out of Hollywood or any big published in two seconds, it was using the same sprite for the clouds and the bushes in Super Mario Bros. Because otherwise there just was no space. A game had to stand on it's merits.

Which brings me to the last part: Bringing in new people. Why? Because, if Nintendo is to be believed*, past gaming growth has been driven by population growth, multiple console ownership and access to new geographical markets. Furthermore, most of the post-NES years have been years of economic growth. That is to say, the portion of the population videogames reach has remained largely static over the past decades, and the industry has just milked more money from the same people.

Now? Economy's looking dire, Europe and Japan are in a population decline, and new geographical markets are pretty slim. Clearly, that can't continue. If the industry is to survive, let alone grow, it must reach a broader amount of people. Back in the NES days when many of us started playing games (the same ones many "hardcores" amusing call non-games now that they're Kool(tm)), adults used to play too. They used to play because games were simpler. Controllers were not monsters and games could be grasped easily. Progress was more about skill, less about raw hours spent. Good for people with not much free time.

Amusingly, everyone and their dog is making "hardcore" games. Let's see the financial reality of it:
1. Massive competition. Check.
2. Massive costs. Check.
3. No prospects of market growth. Check.
End result: Say hello to bankruptcy. It's why midsize devs basically died out last generation. They tried to kill CoD and failed, as everyone did.


* Reggie went over this in a 2005 press briefing that no one paid any attention to. It explained very concretely why Wii and DS were made, yet people thought it was dry business talk and then proceeded to go wtf Nintendo is insane when there 100% was a method to their "madness". Talk was on Youtube once upon a time but I can't find it for now, so here's an IGN transcript:
http://www.ign.com/articles/2005/11/04/reggie-talks-nintendos-future

Remember, whenever something seems strange and doesn't quite make sense, start following the money. Turns out most strange things make a ton of sense the moment you follow the money instead of what's being said publicly. Whether it's politics or war or the video game business.


EDIT: Final amusing tidbit. Nintendo used to not believe in the "casual"/"hardcore" divide the game industry manufactured up to demonize the Wii (which they hated the guts of, after all it's the retardation of gaming and all that's good and holy, main reason they were remotely friendly toward it was because from the old frame of reference it was basically 100% certainly a short-lived fad.) in the eyes of their "hardcore" audience (I find the using "hardcore" or "real game / gamer" to describe the hand-holdy QTE festivals AAA games are to be amusing). They simply made games for people who played games. Now? They've turned into an industry company. They bought the idea of the "hardcore"/"casual" divide hook, line and sinker. Just go through Nintendo's old press conferences from the Revolution/Wii/DS era and now. The way they talk is vastly different. It used to be different from MS/Sony. Now it's they all sound the same.

Way too tired to get in on this discussion right now but I just gotta give this poster props. Goddamn.

 

[KAL2006]

I think we should at least wait for E3 to see if this gen will impress. I'm sure Halo 5 and Uncharted 4 will impress, along with Batman Arkham Knight gameplay as well as The Witchter 3. Then games like Destiny have not been realised yet which should be big. TitanFall and infamous Second Son is a good start. I'm sure we will get some new surprises especially with new IPs from Epic, Media Molecule and etc.

 

[PhilipDoesMatter]

I said this on the other thread and people overwhelmed me. I regret buying the PS4 now. I own a WiiU also and only does that because of the MK8/Smash hype.

The next generation did not started yet. Infamous SS is impressive looking, but as a true game, it struggles a lot. It's repetitive, boring and low in action. The only one game that really impresses me is Killer Instinct, but I'll not buy a system for only one title.

 

[RooMHM]

Unreal and quake called. They'd like credit for their style being rediscovered.

Not unreal no. Still you have to give credit to Titanfall for introducing wall jumps and wallruns or at least giving it a newer version.

 

[Coffeeling]

I think we should at least wait for E3 to see if this gen will impress. I'm sure Halo 5 and Uncharted 4 will impress, along with Batman Arkham Knight gameplay as well as The Witchter 3. Then games like Destiny have not been realised yet which should be big. TitanFall and infamous Second Son is a good start. I'm sure we will get some new surprises especially with new IPs from Epic, Media Molecule and etc.

This gen won't impress. Just like the last one really didn't (though it's worse because the graphical and online jumps are nonexistent). The devs' mentality is f**** up, so it's unlikely they will be able to turn in actual good products, let alone when constrained by the risk aversion 10 million dollar budgets and a requirement to sell a million to break even at all creates.

So support the indies who aren't in it for artsyfartsyness. The more money good, solid, unpretentious low-budget games get, the better for the long term health of our hobby.

Not unreal no. Still you have to give credit to Titanfall for introducing wall jumps and wallruns or at least giving it a newer version.

Beware the creativity/originality for it's own sake mentality. Just credit Respawn for making a good, solid game. That's what the devs need to hear if any are to snap out of it, not neworiginalcreative speak. That's entirely too prevalent already.

 

[TyrantII]

Not unreal no. Still you have to give credit to Titanfall for introducing wall jumps and wallruns or at least giving it a newer version.

Sorry, but parkour isn't anything new.

Good for them though for introducing it to a group that had no idea about it.

 

[Ganondorfo]

Its because there are not so many obscure games like in the old days, nowadays every game is big marketed, which make you bored of it the moment its released. You didnt have that feeling back in the day when internet wasnt that big on hyping games.

 

[Messofanego]

Sorry, but parkour isn't anything new.

Good for them though for introducing it to a group that had no idea about it.

Brink is crying in a corner now.

What other mech + on-foot shooter games are there? Curious now.

Titanfall's strength was in combining all those different mech/FPS/parkour mechanics into a cohesive whole.

 

[Chinner]

Agreed except when you said 360 launch games were laughable. Had a great first year, too.

as i said in my post, launch games. didnt mention the first year.

 

[gatti-man]

Sorry, but parkour isn't anything new.

Good for them though for introducing it to a group that had no idea about it.

It's the implementation of all elements that's new. Using your definition of new it's going to be almost impossible to have something be both new and a good game at the same time.

 

[RooMHM]

Sorry, but parkour isn't anything new.

Good for them though for introducing it to a group that had no idea about it.

I know parkour isnt new but trying to popularize real twitch controls and movement strategy is good enough as every major dev just tries to rip movement off fps games.

 

[Dragon]

It's the implementation of all elements that's new. Using your definition of new it's going to be almost impossible to have something be both new and a good game at the same time.

The game has severe framerate and tearing issues so the implementation is poor to say the least!

 

[Steve McQueen]

Tbh...not very excited either. I could not wait to start this gen, but I haven't turned on my PS4 and X1 for at least 2 weeks.I'm playing more on my Vita and 3DS nowadays and had more fun with ALBW ( never got around to play it properly ) and Tearaway then with any other game I bought on PS4 and X1. I don't know it's some kind of fatique, or maybe better gfx just don't cut it anymore for me.

But then again...we only just started and I have high hopes for E3.

 

[Wolfe]

It's why NCL loves 3D vision so much - it's surprising, they think, and they've been trying to do it for ages and always failed. Making 3d camera pans and such is fun. Making puzzles for Indie Puzzle-Platformer with Original(tm) Art Style #395639 is easy and fun.generation.

I disagree, that may be how the situation appears to you but 3D isn't "surprising" at all to me and the friends I know that have a 3DS, it's just another visual factor that increases our enjoyment of playing these games.

I understand though that a lot of people don't care for it for whatever reason and want to label it things like that it's a gimmick but I feel that's largely just a limitation of the tech it was designed with. Back when they started developing the 3DS the screen tech was at a much earlier stage and some peoples experience with it suffers because of that (3D crosstalk, very precise optimum viewing angle) but if they were to make one with the current technology out right now it would be a much different experience. They've already made glasses free 3D TVs that don't have viewing angle limitations for example (no idea if they've been for sale as it was trade show stuff I was reading about).

Just like 5.1 sound or 60 fps it's something that a lot of people won't care about but at the same time plenty of people will care about it and would love to continue playing games that utilize this particular tool.

The rest of your post felt like a good read though and your arguments/speaking points feel well thought out (as was same with the one you made before it).

 

[KnockOneOff]

I'm enjoying this gen

Just awaiting the titles to start dropping a little faster, normally the 1st year of a launch is a little slow anyway

So yeah I'm happy so far with this gen

 

[Supermanisdead]

I'm not impressed either. The only next gen experience I've seen so far is The Wonderful 101.

 

[Coffeeling]

I disagree, that may be how the situation appears to you but 3D isn't "surprising" at all to me and the friends I know that have a 3DS, it's just another visual factor that increases our enjoyment of playing these games.

I understand though that a lot of people don't care for it for whatever reason and want to label it things like that it's a gimmick but I feel that's largely just a limitation of the tech it was designed with. Back when they started developing the 3DS the screen tech was at a much earlier stage and some peoples experience with it suffers because of that (3D crosstalk, very precise optimum viewing angle) but if they were to make one with the current technology out right now it would be a much different experience. They've already made glasses free 3D TVs that don't have viewing angle limitations for example (no idea if they've been for sale as it was trade show stuff I was reading about).

Just like 5.1 sound or 60 fps it's something that a lot of people won't care about but at the same time plenty of people will care about it and would love to continue playing games that utilize this particular tool.

The rest of your post felt like a good read though and your arguments/speaking points feel well thought out (as was same with the one you made before it).

Hm?

I was speaking about how Nintendo Japan loves 3D so much, not my own feelings on it. Personally, I think the sooner their 3D obsession dies in a fire, the better. It's a poor gimmick with little actual value to most people but Nintendo refuses to believe reality. They think they just need to "communicate the value of" their shitty gimmick "properly".

It would've been lovely if they had just made a Super DS. Better battery life and they could sell it at a lower price point and maybe even make a profit themselves.

 

[prag16]

Titanfal is the only real innovator in the gameplay area.

What? No.

A couple elements plucked almost directly from decade+ old arena shooters stuffed inside an otherwise straight up CoD shell does not equal "a real innovator in the gameplay area". (Yeah yeah there are giant robots too...) More interesting than CoD, and somewhat refreshing? Sure. Some kind of incredible, cutting edge game changer? Come on, let's be serious.

 

[Melchiah]

Another example: Heavy Rain. Cage literally thinks games should stop being games. A bunch of my friends jokingly call him David "Antichrist" Cage because of that. We don't want Heavy Rain. We want games.

Yeah, an Antichrist bent on ruining gaming with his two games, deviating from the mainstream, that gained so huge success, that every major company is now making games with the same formula. [/sarcasm]

Why can't people appreciate the variety in games, eventhough they wouldn't like all the gameplay mechanics? It's not like the existence of those two games would be a threat to the gaming as they know it.

 

[Coffeeling]

Yeah, an Antichrist bent on ruining gaming with his two games, deviating from the mainstream, that gained so huge success, that every major company is now making games with the same formula. [/sarcasm]

Why can't people appreciate the variety in games, eventhough they wouldn't like all the gameplay mechanics? It's not like the existence of those two game would be a threat to the gaming as they know it.

It's one thing to do different stuff and another to advocate for games to not be games anymore, which Cage has done.

 

[prag16]

Yeah, an Antichrist bent on ruining gaming with his two games, deviating from the mainstream, that gained so huge success, that every major company is now making games with the same formula. [/sarcasm]

Why can't people appreciate the variety in games, eventhough they wouldn't like all the gameplay mechanics? It's not like the existence of those two game would be a threat to the gaming as they know it.

I rather enjoyed Heavy Rain and Beyond: Two Souls. Would I want every game to try to be like those games? Fuck no. But they're DIFFERENT, which seems to be a dying mentality in game making; being different in any substantive way.

"Wah, any game I don't like shouldn't exist and the makers of said game(s) must be the antichrist(s)." ...Amazing.

It's one thing to do different stuff and another to advocate for games to not be games anymore, which Cage has done.

It's the way he wants to make games. You'll have to point me to where he plans on going on a crusade to force ALL games to be just like his games...

 

[Chance Hale]

Oblivion looks like complete shit on 360, btw

Bullshit man, there's no way Oblivion looked like that on the 360. NO WAY

 

[Bloodrage]

I've been more impressed by indie games so far. No Man's Sky looks incredible. 1st generation titles of a new gen are always bleh.

 

[Wolfe]

Hm?

I was speaking about how Nintendo Japan loves 3D so much, not my own feelings on it. Personally, I think the sooner their 3D obsession dies in a fire, the better. It's a poor gimmick with little actual value to most people but Nintendo refuses to believe reality. They think they just need to "communicate the value of" their shitty gimmick "properly".

It would've been lovely if they had just made a Super DS. Better battery life and they could sell it at a lower price point and maybe even make a profit themselves.

Hm?

My point was you're stating something as a fact, did you talk to the guys over at Nintendo? Is this something they told you? Marketing and PR are one thing as you're trying to sell your product, not necessarily explain what you love about it or why it's something you're passionate about.

I'm glad you've shown your true "3D is a gimmick" colors though, it's the same way I feel about our vision, can't wait till we're all rocking a single eye.

Spoiler

I'm joking, don't take my "insults" seriously , as I said I just disagree with you but I do respect your opinion.

 

[SirNinja]

Bullshit man, there's no way Oblivion looked like that on the 360. NO WAY

Haha. It certainly isn't the most impressive or flattering screenshot of it, but...yeah, that's pretty much what Oblivion looked like on consoles. For 2006, it was quite a good-looking game most of the time...just as long as you weren't looking at anyone's face.

 

[Melchiah]

It's one thing to do different stuff and another to advocate for games to not be games anymore, which Cage has done.

They are games, just like all the others. This arbitrary distinction, that's clearly based on a personal taste in games, is really growing old.

Funnily enough, Cage seems to have taken inspiration from the gameplay mechanics on the Wii, and I guess Heavy Rain wouldn't exist as it is without the Wii's motion controls. The real difference is, that unlike Nintendo's games, his games rely more on experience than replayability. I'm perfectly ok with that kind of single playthrough experiences. If you're not, don't play his games.

I rather enjoyed Heavy Rain and Beyond: Two Souls. Would I want every game to try to be like those games? Fuck no. But they're DIFFERENT, which seems to be a dying mentality in game making; being different in any substantive way.

"Wah, any game I don't like shouldn't exist and the makers of said game(s) must be the antichrist(s)." ...Amazing.

It's the way he wants to make games. You'll have to point me to where he plans on going on a crusade to force ALL games to be just like his games...

I enjoyed them as well, but I also enjoy a plethora of other kind of games with a various gameplay mechanics. And I find no enjoyment in several genres, yet I don't preach about them being bad for the industry. Variety is always good.

I just don't get this hatred for his games, like they would take something away from those people who don't like them. Seems pretty juvenile black & white mentality to me.

 

[Dregun]

I'm gonna catch some flack for this, but, I blame the Wii!

Both MS and Sony released consoles in the past that put them in the red for each console sold. Meanwhile Nintendo released a console that put them in the black with every console sold. The reasons are simple.

Ms & Sony released machines with hardware BOM that cost more to produce then what they were charging for to put in as much technology as they could afford to bleed.

Nintendo released technology they could make a profit from at the price they were selling it for because of lower BOM.

Fast forward to today and you can see how vastly different Ms and Sony's business plan is this generation. Instead of s $400 & 500 console having $350 & $450 worth of tech in them like now. It would have been a $400 & $500 console with $450 and $550 worth of tech in them instead. That is a $100 difference in the technology budget being used and that could have been the real step we needed this generation.

Nintendo showed Ms and Sony something and they believed it enough that it has spawned this generation. I think it's safe to say if the Wii had been a complete failure this generation would have been much different.

 

[Coffeeling]

I'm gonna catch some flack for this, but, I blame the Wii!

Both MS and Sony released consoles in the past that put them in the red for each console sold. Meanwhile Nintendo released a console that put them in the black with every console sold. The reasons are simple.

Ms & Sony released machines with hardware BOM that cost more to produce then what they were charging for to put in as much technology as they could afford to bleed.

Nintendo released technology they could make a profit from at the price they were selling it for because of lower BOM.

Fast forward to today and you can see how vastly different Ms and Sony's business plan is this generation. Instead of s $400 & 500 console having $350 & $450 worth of tech in them like now. It would have been a $400 & $500 console with $450 and $550 worth of tech in them instead. That is a $100 difference in the technology budget being used and that could have been the real step we needed this generation.

Nintendo showed Ms and Sony something and they believed it enough that it has spawned this generation. I think it's safe to say if the Wii had been a complete failure this generation would have been much different.

The razor and blades model for consoles is utterly idiotic though. It works with razors because people need t buy new razors all the damn time.
A console is a luxury product to begin with, and has little value in and of itself. To quote Yamauchi: "NES is a box to play Mario". Then you have to sell a good number of games to people who have in no way forced to buy many to even recoup the loss you take on the console. Only then do you make a couple dollars of profit. There's a reason Sony and MS took ages and ages to turn a profit last generation.

If you sell the hardware and the games both at a profit like Nintendo did though? You don't actually have to give a damn about the attach rate. As long as your customer is happy, you're fine. Even if they just bought a Wii and Mario Kart. You're making money on all of it anyway. It's the proper way to do business.


Apart from that, the issue is really as simple a devs just making the same damn software over and over and over and over. The console is just a box, it's the games that make it feel amazing or not. How much tech is crammed into the box matters not one iota.

 

[mo60]

While NCL is better than most of the industry - AAA devs and "originality"-obsessed indies alike - in that they don't feel that games need to be a "seriously taken form of art", they have been infected by a different form of insanity. Namely, that games should be about "surprise".

If you ask me, the purpose of a game should be to spark the imagination of the player, and to have a solid feel to the mechanical gameplay. The AAA industry and the indies ("industry") are hellbent on forcing their imaginations down the players' throats, not just giving the player's mind the sparks to light up fireworks, which is what proper content does. NCL doesn't believe in that either. They think games' job is to surprise people. It's why they come up with mechanical gimmick after mechanical gimmick, and then forcibly contort some extant Nintendo property around the gimmick and call it a game. It's why they feel lackluster. To put it in different words, Modern Nintendo would never have made Starfox - they would have made Metroid: Space Combat instead. Old Nintendo instead had an idea and created an entire world around it.

The common thread in both the industry madness and the NCL madness is that they're not about what's fun for the player to play, but what is fun for the developers to make. It's why the AAA dudes make movies - it's fun playing director. It's why NCL loves 3D vision so much - it's surprising, they think, and they've been trying to do it for ages and always failed. Making 3d camera pans and such is fun. Making puzzles for Indie Puzzle-Platformer with Original(tm) Art Style #395639 is easy and fun.

Tuning stages for a fast 2d action game that has to stand on it's flow and mechanics, where you have to communicate things simply and effectively, and can't employ craptons of technical graphical effects to make it impressive? IT'S WORK. You have to spend ages fine-tuning the controls so they feel just right, you have to spend ages fine-tuning the levels so they flow well at different skill levels. You have limited room to do things like spiffy camera angles. You can't do stuff that screams "impressive".

Combine that with our society really pushing creativity as an end in itself, and you end up in a pile of s*** posthaste. It's why when people talk lovingly about abolishing limits to creativity I balk at the idea. Back in the day, "creative" was simply an unusual way to solve a problem. Now, end in itself. Problem is? Being creative is easy. Being good is hard. Example: A Finnish artist once literally put a bunch of blood and s*** in a washing machine and turned it on. This is art. Creativity as an end, and not a path to something good. Another example: Heavy Rain. Cage literally thinks games should stop being games. A bunch of my friends jokingly call him David "Antichrist" Cage because of that. We don't want Heavy Rain. We want games.

It's why indie games have so much potential that ends up wasted. A good bunch just focus on being pretentious, artsy, on being "visionaries". Sorry folks, I want games, I don't want stuff that "makes a statement" or some bs.

Back in the day when hardware limitations were a thing and you got revenue from the arcades, you tried being artsyfartsy and you went bankrupt. Good, simple games that brought new people in were what you simply had to do. Creativity wasn't pouring yourself to the disc in an embarassment that would get laughed out of Hollywood or any big published in two seconds, it was using the same sprite for the clouds and the bushes in Super Mario Bros. Because otherwise there just was no space. A game had to stand on it's merits.

Which brings me to the last part: Bringing in new people. Why? Because, if Nintendo is to be believed*, past gaming growth has been driven by population growth, multiple console ownership and access to new geographical markets. Furthermore, most of the post-NES years have been years of economic growth. That is to say, the portion of the population videogames reach has remained largely static over the past decades, and the industry has just milked more money from the same people.

Now? Economy's looking dire, Europe and Japan are in a population decline, and new geographical markets are pretty slim. Clearly, that can't continue. If the industry is to survive, let alone grow, it must reach a broader amount of people. Back in the NES days when many of us started playing games (the same ones many "hardcores" amusing call non-games now that they're Kool(tm)), adults used to play too. They used to play because games were simpler. Controllers were not monsters and games could be grasped easily. Progress was more about skill, less about raw hours spent. Good for people with not much free time.

Amusingly, everyone and their dog is making "hardcore" games. Let's see the financial reality of it:
1. Massive competition. Check.
2. Massive costs. Check.
3. No prospects of market growth. Check.
End result: Say hello to bankruptcy. It's why midsize devs basically died out last generation. They tried to kill CoD and failed, as everyone did.


* Reggie went over this in a 2005 press briefing that no one paid any attention to. It explained very concretely why Wii and DS were made, yet people thought it was dry business talk and then proceeded to go wtf Nintendo is insane when there 100% was a method to their "madness". Talk was on Youtube once upon a time but I can't find it for now, so here's an IGN transcript:
http://www.ign.com/articles/2005/11/04/reggie-talks-nintendos-future

Remember, whenever something seems strange and doesn't quite make sense, start following the money. Turns out most strange things make a ton of sense the moment you follow the money instead of what's being said publicly. Whether it's politics or war or the video game business.


EDIT: Final amusing tidbit. Nintendo used to not believe in the "casual"/"hardcore" divide the game industry manufactured up to demonize the Wii (which they hated the guts of, after all it's the retardation of gaming and all that's good and holy, main reason they were remotely friendly toward it was because from the old frame of reference it was basically 100% certainly a short-lived fad.) in the eyes of their "hardcore" audience (I find the using "hardcore" or "real game / gamer" to describe the hand-holdy QTE festivals AAA games are to be amusing). They simply made games for people who played games. Now? They've turned into an industry company. They bought the idea of the "hardcore"/"casual" divide hook, line and sinker. Just go through Nintendo's old press conferences from the Revolution/Wii/DS era and now. The way they talk is vastly different. It used to be different from MS/Sony. Now it's they all sound the same.

I really hope nintendo decides to implement their blue ocean strategy again for their next console and handheld. The gaming industry needs to expand and needs to start appealing to more groups of people or it will shrink which is what will most likely happen this gen.I have never cared about the games that focus on cinematics or graphics to much which is one reason to why I'm not interested that much in buying a PS4(and to an extent the xbox one right now)

 

[maneil99]

I really hope nintendo decides to implement their blue ocean strategy again for their next console and handheld. The gaming industry needs to expand and needs to start appealing to more groups of people or it will shrink which is what will most likely happen this gen.I have never cared about the games that focus on cinematics or graphics to much.

Casual Gamers dont want to buy a console to play games that look like ass on there tv.

 

[Yagharek]

Hm?

I was speaking about how Nintendo Japan loves 3D so much, not my own feelings on it. Personally, I think the sooner their 3D obsession dies in a fire, the better. It's a poor gimmick with little actual value to most people but Nintendo refuses to believe reality. They think they just need to "communicate the value of" their shitty gimmick "properly".

It would've been lovely if they had just made a Super DS. Better battery life and they could sell it at a lower price point and maybe even make a profit themselves.

That long post you made earlier - nice musings all round.

I'm wondering if I got the gist of it right though. Are you saying that Nintendo had a clearer vision/purpose of how to grow gaming with the Wii/DS era, or are you going back even further than that with the NES/SNES era?

The first half of the argument leads me to conclude the NES/SNES, the latter half Wii/DS.

The impression I got was that there was more coherency in their expressed belief/confidence in what the DS/Wii could offer for gaming in general, and that is sorely lacking in their presentation of the new systems ("It's just a box" and "Wait til you see it").

 

[mo60]

Casual Gamers dont want to buy a console to play games that look like ass on there tv.

Graphics in the long run won't matter. They are a part of the recipe for success, but in order for the expanded consumers to come back developers(especially nintendo's developers) need to create appealing software that will appeal to this group of people. Gamers want to buy consoles that have the games they will enjoy playing and not because games have to look good on their tv's.

 

[Nealand Liquor]

I have a shit laptop and Second Son impressed me visually... Gameplay was lacking though.

 

[Coffeeling]

That long post you made earlier - nice musings all round.

I'm wondering if I got the gist of it right though. Are you saying that Nintendo had a clearer vision/purpose of how to grow gaming with the Wii/DS era, or are you going back even further than that with the NES/SNES era?

The first half of the argument leads me to conclude the NES/SNES, the latter half Wii/DS.

The impression I got was that there was more coherency in their expressed belief/confidence in what the DS/Wii could offer for gaming in general, and that is sorely lacking in their presentation of the new systems ("It's just a box" and "Wait til you see it").

It applies to NES/Gameboy and Wii/DS both. SNES was actually a decline in many ways, because games started becoming more complex and abandoning the simpler low market games that bring new people into the hobby. SNES is when controllers started turning into monsters and parents started to stop playing. In many ways, NES/GB and Wii/DS are the same. You can literally go through Usenet news posts and find the exact same dismissals 360/PS3 fanboys threw at the Wii directed at the NES by people who played 16-bit computers. I mean, the damn thing literally used a processor from the last decade

I'm not saying Nintendo had a clearer vision with the Wii than now or during SNES/N64/GC, though that is certainly true. What I'm saying is that Nintendo has done a near-complete 180 on the values that gave us the Wii and the DS. Maybe they got complacent, I don't know. All I know is that they don't feel sane anymore like they did back in the Wii/DS days.