Life After the Video Game Crash

Dups. · Post by **Dups.** » March 15, 2004, 4:02 pm

http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/games/crash.html

Interesting read.

I agree with somethings he says. Such as graphics hitting a plateau. Sure you get a bit of better lloking graphics such as lighting and water ripples and oohh so sexy fog!

Vailex Darkfury · Post by **Vailex Darkfury** » March 15, 2004, 4:28 pm

I agree to a point. Original ideas are what keeps the games going. Unfortunately, there are no timelines or deadlines on when an original idea comes to be. Right now it seems that there are a serious lack of original ideas in the industry. Just look at the many flavors of MMO's. Its kind of sad really. But as long as they are drawing money the companies will produce them. Such is life!

archeiron · Post by **archeiron** » March 15, 2004, 4:54 pm

This is a graphics centric representation of the gaming market. Fortunately for games' developers (and all of us!) the market has somewhat more depth based upon things other than eye candy. There are numerous examples in the industry where there were two competing games and the one with less eye candy won a dominant share.

The insatiable need of human beings to seek entertainment and release from their every day lives is not likely to be quenched suddenly within the next few years. As a result, I suspect that computer games will continue to have a large market regardless of how advanced and lifelike our graphics technology becomes.

Gamei · Post by **Gamei** » March 15, 2004, 11:19 pm

While I freely admit I didn't read the link, based on what you said about graphics and how Archy(though normally an ignorant bastard) described it as graphics centric..I'll point you to the GBA and the plethora of fun games on it. Advance Wars 1&2, the new Metriods and Castlevanias, Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga, something or another about Final Fantasy..etc and so on.

(visit the special forum regarding games!)

Zamtuk · Post by **Zamtuk** » March 16, 2004, 1:13 am

i think people will be more happier when the graphic limit is reached. that will be less money they have to fork out for new consoles.

Sionistic · Post by **Sionistic** » March 16, 2004, 1:22 am

by the time we reach this graphical limit, a new medium for gameplay will already become popular. Also mobile gaming has been steadily getting more and more popular over the years.

Theres tons of time. Hes got his panties in a knit

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » March 16, 2004, 6:42 am

The problem is twofold, really:
1) The original game ideas are out there but publishers are not prepared to take the risk in funding their development. I've seen 3-4 absolutely mouthwatering designs in my 8 years in the industry that have been killed off for exactly this reason. A publisher would rather bankroll Tomb Raider 8 than a new unproven idea.
2) A great many games coders would rather wank themselves off writing fancy graphical effects than focussing on gameplay. Similarly artists want to "express themselves" and don't care too much how their ridiculously bloated geometry and textures bog the game down. Of course a _really_ good games artist can express themselves in 500 polys and 64x128 texture space but try telling most of them that. . .

IMO games graphics have been far beyond acceptable for a couple of years now and we need to step back, make simpler engines with simpler renderers and concentrate on fun and deep gameplay. But everyone in the industry pays lipservice to this ideal and does fuck-all about it.

Deward · Post by **Deward** » March 16, 2004, 11:42 am

Once they get tactile functions to work properly then thigns will go up another degree. I had a TA several years ago who was working on a project wherein you wore a glove that stimulated the nerves in your fingers into thinking they were touching actual objects. When something like that hits the markets then we will see some cool shit.

archeiron · Post by **archeiron** » March 16, 2004, 11:58 am

Gamei wrote:While I freely admit I didn't read the link, based on what you said about graphics and how Archy(though normally an ignorant bastard) described it as graphics centric..I'll point you to the GBA and the plethora of fun games on it. Advance Wars 1&2, the new Metriods and Castlevanias, Mario & Luigi: Superstar Saga, something or another about Final Fantasy..etc and so on.

(visit the special forum regarding games!)

Get back under that rock you crawled out from under, ranger boy.

Chmee · Post by **Chmee** » March 16, 2004, 10:17 pm

I think the author of the article is pretty much wrong about everything.

First, we can't participate in the battle of the Pelannor fields from RotK in real time on a 10' by 6' wall screen, so we aren't getting close to hitting a limit on graphics

.

He dismisses the immersive factor far too easily. Yes it is possible to get frustrated with a point you can not get past in a game, and repition can be a problem as well. But you can also get the feeling of accomplishment that comes with getting past a tough spot. I don't find his argument here very persuasive.

His most absurd assertion in my opinion is that while a few people may still play at 30, nobody can play at 35-40 or older. Given that I am 38, I must disagree

. Not only do I still play vidio games, but most of my friends stiill do as well. According to the Entertainment Software Association the average videogamer age is 29.

I doubt that he is anything close to right.

Siji · Post by **Siji** » March 17, 2004, 11:26 am

Deward wrote:you wore a glove that stimulated the nerves in your fingers into thinking they were touching actual objects. When something like that hits the markets then we will see some cool shit.

Think of the pr0n possibilities..