Quote:

Original post by badbrain That's right. I am more interested in the human/computer interface than I am the PC game.

Not me, to me the interface is almost irrelevant. Then again, I don't think I enjoy games in the same way you do. Realism and even physical immersion have little to do with how immersed I get in a game. I'm here for the game.

Or, put another way:

Quote:

The game technology is so advanced that a whole new world/dimension is really opened up. Gameplay has actually become deadly wherein players come back to reality either 'brain dead' or in complete shock and die. Something Pac-Man surely couldn't do.

I don't see anything revolutionary in that. I can think of a couple games wherein players may come back to reality either 'brain dead' or in complete shock and die, only you don't need a computer to play them. Basically, it's been done.

Quote:

I think he is simply reliving a chapter in his life. This feature is common in old folks and also those who lack the funds to purchase and explore the new world of gaming.

You snipped it, but I respectfully disagree with your assessment of The Never Ending Story.

And you needn't be so cynical about why he feels that way. Old games are good for the same reason classical music is good: the bad ones have been forgotten. I've explored "the new world of gaming". It's a stretch to say there's no innovation, but it's equally a stretch to say it's any better than the old.

I know. My post was just off-topic.
I also wanted to be mean to him.
I disagree with the topic starter. There is plenty of originality in today's games.

Please explain what game(s) you were talking about when you said: "I don't see anything revolutionary in that. I can think of a couple games wherein players may come back to reality either 'brain dead' or in complete shock and die, only you don't need a computer to play them. Basically, it's been done."

Following up on your last paragraph: I bring up Ray Kurzweil again and his prediction of a 'Technological Singularity'.

I believe there will soon be things out in this "new world" that we can't imagine from where we are now.

Quote:

Quote: Is it just me? Does anyone else feel this way? It's not just you, but you're all wrong. More specifically, you're all suffering from selective memories seen through the hazy glow of nostalgia.

Finally, somebody else said it! If more people figured this one out, there would probably be more innovation out there... people would stop thinking that the industry is now some mindless clone factory and start thinking about how they can avoid the mindless clones themselves. Learn from our past, instead of just bitching about the present.

Wait. Watch this movie clip of a japanese video game: http://ruliwebfile.dreamwiz.com/mpeg3/e3_2005/xb/ruliweb_e3_kufh_01.wmv

How do american developers compete with, let alone stray away from something like this?

@edit
Correction JBourrie. It's a Korean game from the 5 teens who created "Double Dragon".

Quote:

Original post by badbrain Wait. Watch this movie clip of a japanese video game: http://ruliwebfile.dreamwiz.com/mpeg3/e3_2005/xb/ruliweb_e3_kufh_01.wmv How do american developers compete with or even stray away from something like this?

Edit: I'm still downloading the video. The title of the file suggests Kingdom Under Fire: Heroes though (after searching Google for it)

An idea americans can't seem to fully grasp...

The wii is coming!

Quote:

Original post by badbrain Wait. Watch this movie clip of a japanese video game: http://ruliwebfile.dreamwiz.com/mpeg3/e3_2005/xb/ruliweb_e3_kufh_01.wmv How do american developers compete with, let alone stray away from something like this? @edit Correction JBourrie. It's a Korean game from the 5 teens who created "Double Dragon".

Did you link the wrong file? Because the file you linked WAS Kingdom Under Fire: Heroes... Edit: Nope, it seems like you meant to link KUFH

"Phantagram Co., Ltd., the leading Korean game developer, was founded in 1994 by 5 teenagers. As high school students, they had developed 10 commercial video games, such as Double Dragon and TDS, for the popular MSX computer since 1987. In the mid-80's, when computer was not as widely used as nowadays and video game industry was at a very primitive level, they were recognized for being the first-generation developers in Korea."

Credits for the previous Kingdom Under Fire

This is not made by 5 guys, nor is it terribly original (being the fourth in the series, and being an on-foot version of Battlezone (an American game), an RTS crossed with Dynasty Warriors...). Americans have no trouble competing with this (though it is an impressive game)

Next... :)

I don't really agree with the original post. I think there is quite a lot of diversity in the games coming out right now. Look in the magazine reviews. Chances are you'll see a lot of animals, a few creatures which don't exist, and plenty of new ideas that are not working.

Part of the shift, if one exists, may be that game players are growing up. Not just in age, but in maturity. Little kids don't want pandas. They want SMGs with blood spraying. I'm also a serious gamer. I prefer the serious games. But I'm not in any need to request more of them. My only request is less fantasy clones with elves and dwarves. I'm so sick of trees.

Quote:

Original post by Way Walker I miss the good old days of threads where people discussed the pros/cons of permadeath... topics where newbies want to make a MMORPG... Crazy stuff like a horny squirrel who can't keep his nuts to himself... Learning, growing weapons named by the players that love them.

I have to admit fault here. I definitely brought up my share of heated no-save permadeath discussions. I also brought up a favorite weapon topic with my old username, which seems to have been banned since I abandoned it. Not sure what caused that, but the page doesn't seem to be reachable from GameDev anymore. I'm pretty sure I started another topic about death being more meaningful, but I can't find it.

I also found a topic about character classes, which has been recently brought up again. The funny thing is that my reply seems a lot more useful there. That's bad, right? Same idea in the reply, but much more detail.