SMBC Comics Forum

Seriously, who? I will find you.

Not only did Microsoft do this but also Sony?

Nintendo is exempt from this because they were always very experimental

People have always liked having minimal action represent a bigger action (ex: pressing A for punch, B for kick). When you drive a car, do you want to literally spin the wheels and angle them for turning? Remember, in the future only epileptics will be able to button mash (they're sure to have a seizure because it says so on in the damn instructions manual).

Plus industries don't want to admit it but as soon as we finish this whole 3D motion sensing virtual reality then rule 34 will take over.

TL;DR: Moving is bad.

Maybe this is because most games have the plot of a B-Movie?

And people are still excited about graphics and shit. You need to get the men with beards and berets interested in games and then they'll be good and stop with the gimmicky nonsense.

Motion sensors are the gimmick right now and these companies think that's how they'll get money. My prediction is that it won't really take off and it'll die just like the eye-toy and everything else, but honestly if it does take off and they make piles of cash, then that's a good thing for them. This is actually really simple.

Maybe they need the gimmicky stuff to finance more games that men with beards and berets like?

Cirtur wrote:And people are still excited about graphics and shit. You need to get the men with beards and berets interested in games and then they'll be good and stop with the gimmicky nonsense.

What you said sounds a lot like the music industry. As in it's run by business men and people who like new gimmicks. For example the newest thing in music is autotune. But yes your right, we need more indie games (and music). When I read things like this I realize the world is evil. Did you know that 1/4 of the people who have that game bundle (that you can pay for as little as 0.01$) pirated it.

Also graphics used to be the topic du jour but then the wii came along with power efficiency and less graphic horsepower. Sadly, they started this new trend as well.

Maybe it's because you can't slap a number on story.

I'm going to repeat arguements smarter people have made and pretend they are opinions of my own, or that my thought process is somehow valid.

The fact is that we, the gaming audience, have been looking for the grandiose. Just googled it, spelt and used correctly. Cool. However, they had been selling consoles at a loss to profit on their games to begin with. Having to put MORE and MORE into games while charging the same amount while factoring in inflation doesn't cut it. The fact is that making it cheaper made it better. Look at fucking pacman, galaga, tetris. Man those games are good. And mario's jumping games made me want to jump with the pad before they could make everything look realistic or put motion controls. In fact, being able to ACTUALLY SAVE YOURSELF BY SHAKING THE CONTROLLER IS GENIUS. Finally, all those childhood death warning that I could have avoided, my prayers have been answered! But really, Paper Mario is beautiful, and my only graphics complaint with pokemon is that they let you dress you pokemon up for retarded pointless dances and they let you build a secret room to decorate with pointless crap with no purpose at all, but they can't give you a customize trainer feature. Although there's a slight chance that might happen with some co-op mode they seem to be adding!

Once motion detection gets cheap and easy to implement, it will not be standard on every game. No one thinks it's a good idea to have a rave party while gaming. However, the quote "obsession with maturity is in itself a sign of immaturity" because it's being insecure about being seen as childish. Our REALISM and our HARDCORE SPACE MARINES and stuff aren't all that better than if they played the entire game tossing flowers towards smiling children in a field if the gameplay was fun and rewarding. Scott's "Understanding Comics" set art into three basic directions: Iconic, realistic, and abstract. All art varies and follows them to different degrees. It seems we are thinking the best graphics possible are ones that max out the realism corner while bothering as little as possible with iconism or abstraction? I disagree. Brown everywhere is boring. That hill in the background with those eyes that follow you are MUCH scarier if you think about it.

I read a pretty interesting discussion about this lately. Basically, photorealistic games are guaranteed to age poorly because they're bound to look inferior when graphics become more sophisticated, whereas games lacking realism will always look kinda nice. For the record, I think that graphically, Okami is one of the most impressive games I've seen lately that's guaranteed to look good for years.

I remember a video from E3 by a woman playing mario 64 or something, and she's all like, this is not computer generated, unbelievably, this is the real gameplay. Look at how detailed it is" and now we call it blocky shit that, if anything resembles it, we immediately dismiss.

However, the validity of a game's ability to grab our easily tricked and fascinated minds needs to be considered. Our capitalistic culture relies on our ability to grab onto these things and rate them, and if we don't fall for the trick, it would just be percieved as a task rather than a game.

AHMETxRock wrote:my only graphics complaint with pokemon is that they let you dress you pokemon up for retarded pointless dances and they let you build a secret room to decorate with pointless crap with no purpose at all, but they can't give you a customize trainer feature

I love pokemon. I mean what other game teaches kids statistics/probability. I mean it's probably the best RPG i've ever played and it's popular even as a nearly-text based replica (Shoddy Battle). This game was so good when my friend was playing it in 3rd or 4th grade and some kid ripped out the cartridge WHILE HE WAS PLAYING he got soooo pissed because his single save file (the only flaw of pokemon red other than missingno.) was erased. I still think doing such a heinous act is worse than raping babies you've just killed.

to this day we still play pokemon when we have the chance.

Sony was doing motion sensing before Nintendo, to the point where Nintendo has admitted that eyetoy was the inspiration for Wii.

I hate the move towards motion sensing. Replacing a quick precise button press with a longer/less accurate gesture is backwards. Like using hand writing recognition as a game controller. They can't even get it right(write) in 2D, now they want to do it in 3D? Kinect is 26 (or however many points it tracks) worse, with that much more lag.

I do because now they are trying to be like computers in a sense. Plus they can play movies and some games are rather cool

Well technically computers are gaming consoles, but they're rather expensive ones because they don't specialize only in gaming. Now i'm sure everyone knows it's cheaper to make software than hardware and that if everything were centralized towards computers we wouldn't need 3 pieces of hardware to play our favorite games. Computers are having trouble producing cheap quality graphics (also they lack cheap controllers) while gaming consoles are having trouble being versatile without having to cost as much as a second computer.

dudeofea wrote:Well technically computers are gaming consoles

Pretty sure you've got that backwards there, chief.

dudeofea wrote:Computers are having trouble producing cheap quality graphics

What do you mean by this?

dudeofea wrote:(also they lack cheap controllers)

Okay now I am certain you don't live in the same universe I do.

a keyboard and mouse is fucking expensive these days, ed.