Select an enemy to shoot, then aim your crosshairs onto a target on the guy.
That sounds pretty awkward. Are there any special powers like grenades, magic/biotics?
It sounds that way, but since you're under cover a lot (and the landscape is littered with an absolutely comical amount of chest-high obstructions) it's the way you pop up to shoot.
And yeah, you've got special abilities and such. Even guns you can switch on the fly too, thanks to two dedicated buttons at the top that open a semicircular wheel of options.
To be fair, I wasn't expecting much from the game, especially since the iOS ME2 tie-in game was a horrible, ugly, slow-as-molasses Smash TV clone. But at least it had sweet sweet dialog trees.
The state of things is represented by Epic Games' 2012 version of their show-off session. Every year at GDC, the company's top marketing guy Mark Rein shows a roomful of reporters Epic's latest Unreal graphics tech and talks about how wonderful a toolset it is for game developers big and small to use to make attractive games. But this year, Rein wouldn't show us Epic's best tech. The company's demonstration for Epic's Unreal Engine 4 was for non-press—just for life-signing-away game makers. UE4 is meant to help make games for gaming consoles none of us owns today. Shielded from that, the press got to see another iteration of last year's dazzling "Samaritan" demo for Unreal Engine 3, a better-looking-than-anything-we-have-now Blade-Runner-style sequence that both shows where Epic thinks next-gen gaming should go but is capable of running on today's engine. The point, Rein explained to me, is that, if you were making a game for next-gen systems that you'd also want running on current systems, you would still go with UE3 and try for Samaritan-level sizzle in the next-gen versions of the game. But if you were going purely next-gen, you'd go with UE4. But forget the gens, because Rein was up there showing Unreal Tournament III running in Flash in a web browser, a la Farmville. And he's saying Epic wants to get Samaritan running in that. Somehow. And that is where gaming is going.
But what is needed is some good ol' fashioned doom.
The chart up top is a good companion piece. It's from a stirring talk given late in the day by ngmoco's Ben Cousins, who calmly provoked with an impressive argument that video game consoles are entering their arcade obsolescence moment—their death, as he put it, distinguishing death from extinction in a manner that allowed us all to agree that the car killed the horse-and-buggy but didn't wipe the latter from Earth. I'll have more on this talk and Cousins' ideas in the future—there's data to compare and arguments to examine further—but the gist is that the technical advantages of consoles are fading and becoming less relevant, as mobile gaming proves to be more accessible in all aspects of getting, playing and enjoying video games. It's a strong argument when you stack up the bad news of lost profits of the major traditional gaming companies.
I don't think it'll be the ipad or iphone which finally brings console gaming to an ending
I think it'll be whichever company creates the first mainstream HTPC. Be it apple, or Google, or Microsoft, or even Steam with their steambox spec.
For the record, I'm pulling for Steam. An open standard benefits us all.
I think people who crow about the death of consoles really don't look at the games created for both and realize its a different market. You couldn't do Mass Effect 3 on a touch screen. It'd just be the most strangely awkward thing ever. It'd either be dummied down for touch controls or use horrible virtual buttons.
Actual physical buttons are a surprisingly important part of a lot of games, be it in controllers or keyboards or whatever. Maybe if Microsoft ever perfects that technology that reads muscle spasms in your arm and can link those directly to input or something.
Well, at least on android, there is a noticeable push to include controller support. All the big, console-like games are including either bluetooth controller support, or, in the case of Sonic 4 episode 2, actual Xbox 360 controller support. But controller support won't become widespread I don't believe until a widely supported standard is created.
I absolutely believe there is weight to claims that HTPCs will end console gaming, though. Not overnight, mind you, but once a mainstream, mass produced HTPC shows up, it's going to be a decline for console gaming. I just hope to god that whatever HTPC breaks through first practices an open door police, instead of apple's closed garden policy. Hence why I'm behind valve.
Free to play model makes another company a ton of money.
Or as the internet would put it, OH MAN, TEAM FORTRESS 2 IS UP AGAINST THE ROPES, BARELY ABLE TO STAY AFLOAT AND NOT FAIL
The real objection to F2P, imo, is the effect it can have on design priorities. Even TF2's extra stuff raises the barrier to entry for the game and, worst of all, basically bends the game's previously excellent art direction and violates like an altar boy.
...I don't care if I agree with them (I don't in this case), the instant I hear an alleged expert use the term "fanboy" to describe a device's sales potential I immediately assume he's an idiot.
Switch: 3947-4890-9293
0
joshgotroDeviled EggThe Land of REAL CHILIRegistered Userregular
Select an enemy to shoot, then aim your crosshairs onto a target on the guy.
That sounds pretty awkward. Are there any special powers like grenades, magic/biotics?
It sounds that way, but since you're under cover a lot (and the landscape is littered with an absolutely comical amount of chest-high obstructions) it's the way you pop up to shoot.
And yeah, you've got special abilities and such. Even guns you can switch on the fly too, thanks to two dedicated buttons at the top that open a semicircular wheel of options.
To be fair, I wasn't expecting much from the game, especially since the iOS ME2 tie-in game was a horrible, ugly, slow-as-molasses Smash TV clone. But at least it had sweet sweet dialog trees.
I'm not going to say it looks like a bad game, but... ...Hm. I dunno. Yes, I know, not in english, I just grabbed the first one I could find that was a proper cam example and not a screen capture.
Select an enemy to shoot, then aim your crosshairs onto a target on the guy.
That sounds pretty awkward. Are there any special powers like grenades, magic/biotics?
It sounds that way, but since you're under cover a lot (and the landscape is littered with an absolutely comical amount of chest-high obstructions) it's the way you pop up to shoot.
And yeah, you've got special abilities and such. Even guns you can switch on the fly too, thanks to two dedicated buttons at the top that open a semicircular wheel of options.
To be fair, I wasn't expecting much from the game, especially since the iOS ME2 tie-in game was a horrible, ugly, slow-as-molasses Smash TV clone. But at least it had sweet sweet dialog trees.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGAJsm_HE_8
Gameplay reminds me of a less on rails form one of those lightgun games where you are in cover and basically only really move when moving from cover to cover. Time Crisis 3, I think.
Reads more like a condemnation of the generic doomsaying when any other game that isn't WoW goes free-to-play.
To be fair, most MMOs went F2P because they did fail at the (at the time) standard MMO model of being subscription-based.
It's just they got lucky and stumbled upon another business model that actually worked.
Sure, but it's more about crowing how WoW is still super-duper awesome. Because paying that monthly fee is like a membership to an exclusive club of people who play a game totally worth that monthly fee. Thus, any game without a monthly fee is worth precisely what you pay-to-play for it.
Select an enemy to shoot, then aim your crosshairs onto a target on the guy.
That sounds pretty awkward. Are there any special powers like grenades, magic/biotics?
It sounds that way, but since you're under cover a lot (and the landscape is littered with an absolutely comical amount of chest-high obstructions) it's the way you pop up to shoot.
And yeah, you've got special abilities and such. Even guns you can switch on the fly too, thanks to two dedicated buttons at the top that open a semicircular wheel of options.
To be fair, I wasn't expecting much from the game, especially since the iOS ME2 tie-in game was a horrible, ugly, slow-as-molasses Smash TV clone. But at least it had sweet sweet dialog trees.
I'm not going to say it looks like a bad game, but... ...Hm. I dunno. Yes, I know, not in english, I just grabbed the first one I could find that was a proper cam example and not a screen capture.
Of all the genres out there, aside from stuff like adventure games, FPS and TPS translate the best to touch screen devices. There are numerous games out there which demonstrate that playing such a game on an iphone or something similar is not a bad experience at all. You essentially slide your left thumb around to move, with a deadzone appearing where ever you press your thumb down, and use the right thumb as though the screen was a touchpad. Tap to shoot, double tap for other abilities, with auxillary buttons for stuff like reloading or taking cover.
It's other stuff, like fighting games or 2D platformers, stuff that really requires precise directional movement, that suffers. But yeah, I wouldn't doubt Mass effect could actually be done on a touch device. As in, not a spin off.
EDIT: If you have a smart phone and want proof of concept, try doom. It's out on virtually everything, and it's a blast to play on a mobile device.
Gameplay reminds me of a less on rails form one of those lightgun games where you are in cover and basically only really move when moving from cover to cover. Time Crisis 3, I think.
Technically you can move around freely wherever you want, but if anyone's shooting you'll probably get massacred if you don't immediately dive for one of the hojillion obstructions.
I absolutely believe there is weight to claims that HTPCs will end console gaming, though. Not overnight, mind you, but once a mainstream, mass produced HTPC shows up, it's going to be a decline for console gaming. I just hope to god that whatever HTPC breaks through first practices an open door police, instead of apple's closed garden policy. Hence why I'm behind valve.
But ultimately, that's just a different type of console gaming. It'll merely move the vetting away from the classic platform holders (Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft).
If I had to guess, Nintendo would be the last "console" style platform holder, with Microsoft being more than happy to license out Windows 8 and have Xbox Live as a gated community affair, not unlike PSN Plus.
Gameplay reminds me of a less on rails form one of those lightgun games where you are in cover and basically only really move when moving from cover to cover. Time Crisis 3, I think.
To be fair, I play an Inflitrator, so that game isn't too far off from my Mass Effect experience in general.
I started watching at about 8:00, and was treated to the guy on the left saying that Origin was making Gabe Newell nervous. When the glasses guy dismissed that idea, the first guy made kissing/sucking noises with his mouth, basically saying that the glasses guy was sucking up or kissing ass.
I started watching at about 8:00, and was treated to the guy on the left saying that Origin was making Gabe Newell nervous. When the glasses guy dismissed that idea, the first guy made kissing/sucking noises with his mouth, basically saying that the glasses guy was sucking up or kissing ass.
Some real fucking pros in that video.
Keep in mind these are the guys that serious investors rely on to decide which companies to buy stock in.
I absolutely believe there is weight to claims that HTPCs will end console gaming, though. Not overnight, mind you, but once a mainstream, mass produced HTPC shows up, it's going to be a decline for console gaming. I just hope to god that whatever HTPC breaks through first practices an open door police, instead of apple's closed garden policy. Hence why I'm behind valve.
But ultimately, that's just a different type of console gaming. It'll merely move the vetting away from the classic platform holders (Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft).
You're correct, but it'll ultimately be the last console -- talking about the theoretical steam box here. A standard that can be freely made by anybody. Once the concept of a game console moves from a tangible good produced by a limited number of people, and turns into a spec which can be freely created by anybody, I think the medium will progress in a lot of good ways.
Look at home video. Imagine if JVC never allowed rival VCRs to be produced. Do you think the home video market would have exploded like it did? I think having these large gate keepers that prevent entry into the market holds the medium back. Openness encourages competition, which benefits everybody in the end.
0
CorehealerThe ApothecaryThe softer edge of the universe.Registered Userregular
I started watching at about 8:00, and was treated to the guy on the left saying that Origin was making Gabe Newell nervous. When the glasses guy dismissed that idea, the first guy made kissing/sucking noises with his mouth, basically saying that the glasses guy was sucking up or kissing ass.
Select an enemy to shoot, then aim your crosshairs onto a target on the guy.
That sounds pretty awkward. Are there any special powers like grenades, magic/biotics?
It sounds that way, but since you're under cover a lot (and the landscape is littered with an absolutely comical amount of chest-high obstructions) it's the way you pop up to shoot.
And yeah, you've got special abilities and such. Even guns you can switch on the fly too, thanks to two dedicated buttons at the top that open a semicircular wheel of options.
To be fair, I wasn't expecting much from the game, especially since the iOS ME2 tie-in game was a horrible, ugly, slow-as-molasses Smash TV clone. But at least it had sweet sweet dialog trees.
I'm not going to say it looks like a bad game, but... ...Hm. I dunno. Yes, I know, not in english, I just grabbed the first one I could find that was a proper cam example and not a screen capture.
Of all the genres out there, aside from stuff like adventure games, FPS and TPS translate the best to touch screen devices. There are numerous games out there which demonstrate that playing such a game on an iphone or something similar is not a bad experience at all. You essentially slide your left thumb around to move, with a deadzone appearing where ever you press your thumb down, and use the right thumb as though the screen was a touchpad. Tap to shoot, double tap for other abilities, with auxillary buttons for stuff like reloading or taking cover.
It's other stuff, like fighting games or 2D platformers, stuff that really requires precise directional movement, that suffers. But yeah, I wouldn't doubt Mass effect could actually be done on a touch device. As in, not a spin off.
EDIT: If you have a smart phone and want proof of concept, try doom. It's out on virtually everything, and it's a blast to play on a mobile device.
You play CoD on an ipad, I'll play it with a kbam, lets see who dies first. Ha ha ha. Or we can do some horde mode Halo or something. I've played doom, and the so called 'Gears of war on android' that is shadow gun and similar. while good games, they lack the kind of precious and ability to touch 4+ buttons at a time like a controller can do (Woo 3 touch limit on most devices.) If I wanted to turn while running, reloading and tossing a grenade I'd be pretty much shit out of luck. Which is wherein I find these type of games come up short. If the experience is tailored, wherein you face fewer enemies in a more controller firefight like this game or Shadowgun? Its a cool experience and I think it's an excellent game.
Try to do something frantic like horde mode? I think it just wouldn't work, and I fuckin love horde mode.
You essentially slide your left thumb around to move, with a deadzone appearing where ever you press your thumb down, and use the right thumb as though the screen was a touchpad. Tap to shoot, double tap for other abilities, with auxillary buttons for stuff like reloading or taking cover.
You will run into problems for more complex games, but most games with mass market appeal aren't that complex. The thing is that having at least shoulder buttons are useful for a lot of games for shit like reloading, grenades, or taking cover that are harder to use as face buttons on the iPhone. Not saying you couldn't do it, just that it would probably lose a bit and have to change some stuff to accommodate it.
Select an enemy to shoot, then aim your crosshairs onto a target on the guy.
That sounds pretty awkward. Are there any special powers like grenades, magic/biotics?
It sounds that way, but since you're under cover a lot (and the landscape is littered with an absolutely comical amount of chest-high obstructions) it's the way you pop up to shoot.
And yeah, you've got special abilities and such. Even guns you can switch on the fly too, thanks to two dedicated buttons at the top that open a semicircular wheel of options.
To be fair, I wasn't expecting much from the game, especially since the iOS ME2 tie-in game was a horrible, ugly, slow-as-molasses Smash TV clone. But at least it had sweet sweet dialog trees.
I'm not going to say it looks like a bad game, but... ...Hm. I dunno. Yes, I know, not in english, I just grabbed the first one I could find that was a proper cam example and not a screen capture.
Of all the genres out there, aside from stuff like adventure games, FPS and TPS translate the best to touch screen devices. There are numerous games out there which demonstrate that playing such a game on an iphone or something similar is not a bad experience at all. You essentially slide your left thumb around to move, with a deadzone appearing where ever you press your thumb down, and use the right thumb as though the screen was a touchpad. Tap to shoot, double tap for other abilities, with auxillary buttons for stuff like reloading or taking cover.
It's other stuff, like fighting games or 2D platformers, stuff that really requires precise directional movement, that suffers. But yeah, I wouldn't doubt Mass effect could actually be done on a touch device. As in, not a spin off.
EDIT: If you have a smart phone and want proof of concept, try doom. It's out on virtually everything, and it's a blast to play on a mobile device.
You play CoD on an ipad, I'll play it with a kbam, lets see who dies first. Ha ha ha. Or we can do some horde mode Halo or something. I've played doom, and the so called 'Gears of war on android' that is shadow gun and similar. while good games, they lack the kind of precious and ability to touch 4+ buttons at a time like a controller can do (Woo 3 touch limit on most devices.) If I wanted to turn while running, reloading and tossing a grenade I'd be pretty much shit out of luck. Which is wherein I find these type of games come up short. If the experience is tailored, wherein you face fewer enemies in a more controller firefight like this game or Shadowgun? Its a cool experience and I think it's an excellent game.
Try to do something frantic like horde mode? I think it just wouldn't work, and I fuckin love horde mode.
By that logic, FPS and TPS games should have never come to consoles in the first place, because you pit a KBM player against someone with a controller and they'll get dominated. The mass market doesn't demand the best controls, they demand controls that are good enough. And that's the sad truth. I think, for many, the sort of controls offered in games like ME on iOS are good enough.
I absolutely believe there is weight to claims that HTPCs will end console gaming, though. Not overnight, mind you, but once a mainstream, mass produced HTPC shows up, it's going to be a decline for console gaming. I just hope to god that whatever HTPC breaks through first practices an open door police, instead of apple's closed garden policy. Hence why I'm behind valve.
But ultimately, that's just a different type of console gaming. It'll merely move the vetting away from the classic platform holders (Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft).
You're correct, but it'll ultimately be the last console -- talking about the theoretical steam box here. A standard that can be freely made by anybody. Once the concept of a game console moves from a tangible good produced by a limited number of people, and turns into a spec which can be freely created by anybody, I think the medium will progress in a lot of good ways.
Look at home video. Imagine if JVC never allowed rival VCRs to be produced. Do you think the home video market would have exploded like it did? I think having these large gate keepers that prevent entry into the market holds the medium back. Openness encourages competition, which benefits everybody in the end.
In agreement.
I think Nintendo will still soldier on for another few generations if such a thing happens, if only because Mario is a bonafide super-brand.
Still wondering if Apple's going to get into the set top box game. Apple TV seems like such a decent vector at only $99, but they don't want to make the jump.
I absolutely believe there is weight to claims that HTPCs will end console gaming, though. Not overnight, mind you, but once a mainstream, mass produced HTPC shows up, it's going to be a decline for console gaming. I just hope to god that whatever HTPC breaks through first practices an open door police, instead of apple's closed garden policy. Hence why I'm behind valve.
But ultimately, that's just a different type of console gaming. It'll merely move the vetting away from the classic platform holders (Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft).
You're correct, but it'll ultimately be the last console -- talking about the theoretical steam box here. A standard that can be freely made by anybody. Once the concept of a game console moves from a tangible good produced by a limited number of people, and turns into a spec which can be freely created by anybody, I think the medium will progress in a lot of good ways.
Look at home video. Imagine if JVC never allowed rival VCRs to be produced. Do you think the home video market would have exploded like it did? I think having these large gate keepers that prevent entry into the market holds the medium back. Openness encourages competition, which benefits everybody in the end.
Also, Hi, I'd like to introduce you to the video game era of the 70s and 80s! Welcome to the open era of roughly 12 different consoles and the chance for anyone to make a game! Surely that should have blossomed like a limitless garden of perfection wherein nothing could go wrong.
Sarcasm aside, some gatekeeping is pretty damn important. As much as people complain about consoles holding technology back, the platforms have also churned out some incredibly high caliber developers and taught a lot of people how to produce games not simply with raw power (Hello Crysis.) but by actual optimization and careful planning.
0
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
I don't understand how they have so much conviction.
I'm not Nintendo's biggest fan, they don't float my boat but man most of the kids at school LOOOOOOVE Nintendo, i don't understand how that guy can just write off the WiiU with such certainty?
I started watching at about 8:00, and was treated to the guy on the left saying that Origin was making Gabe Newell nervous. When the glasses guy dismissed that idea, the first guy made kissing/sucking noises with his mouth, basically saying that the glasses guy was sucking up or kissing ass.
Some real fucking pros in that video.
Keep in mind these are the guys that serious investors rely on to decide which companies to buy stock in.
I wonder how Mr Kevin Dent thought the Wii was going to perform before it came out. That guy sitting next to him looked petrified at times. It reminded me a bit of Mike Myers standing there horrified as Kanye West said his infamous line about Bush.
The game initially failed certification for Windows 95, but for a very strange reason. Namely, Fallout failed Windows 95 cert because the game worked on Windows NT. To get certified on Windows 95, the game was supposed to "fail gracefully" on WindowsNT. Instead it worked. Cain said he called microsoft and said "It fails so gracefully that it doesn't fail at all." Which didn't fly, The solution? Go into the game and code it to detect Windows NT and just sort of… fail. Heh.
o_O
0
MorninglordI'm tired of being Batman,so today I'll be Owl.Registered Userregular
edited March 2012
Vanquish is one of the most demanding shooters on the market in terms of action requirements and while I would enjoy keyboard and mouse for a while on it, I think it has too many action components to really play it on anything but a controller.
And you can rocketslide turn while reloading and throwing a grenade in that game. It's got very well set up controls.
So really, even keyboard to controller doesn't fly too hard as a real difference because it completely depends on how well the developer programs the game to accommodate for the input device.
Morninglord on
(PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos here.
0
CorehealerThe ApothecaryThe softer edge of the universe.Registered Userregular
The game initially failed certification for Windows 95, but for a very strange reason. Namely, Fallout failed Windows 95 cert because the game worked on Windows NT. To get certified on Windows 95, the game was supposed to "fail gracefully" on WindowsNT. Instead it worked. Cain said he called microsoft and said "It fails so gracefully that it doesn't fail at all." Which didn't fly, The solution? Go into the game and code it to detect Windows NT and just sort of… fail. Heh.
Vanquish is one of the most demanding shooters on the market in terms of action requirements and while I would enjoy keyboard and mouse for a while on it, I think it has too many action components to really play it on anything but a controller.
And you can rocketslide turn while reloading and throwing a grenade in that game. It's got very well set up controls.
I was actually thinking of Vanquish when I said that, and trying to think how you'd play that game on an Android or iPhone. Probably tap a spot and your character moves and dodges for you while you just... tap enemies to shoot or something lame.
As cool as a Steambox sounds, unless it's gated off in some way you'll end up with your box no longer running things it's supposed to because the high school kid in the house used it to browse to some websites when you weren't home and it now is clogged down with a virus. Consoles are closed formats for a reason - to ensure consistency and ease of use across the board - if these Steam Boxes are too open, that might be compromised by the end user.
This creates a problem with Steam Box because to keep the easy, console feel and to make sure the PC used doesn't get messed up you have to use software to prevent bad stuff from happening/getting installed. As soon as you block off the PC functionality in any way the Steam/PC gaming crowd will scream foul and get all in a pucker over it not being a real pc experience or limited in some way.
Even in ME, you are running and shooting while throwing around various special powers and retarded grenades, something that is hard to do while trying to press a button or two on the touchscreen.
I absolutely believe there is weight to claims that HTPCs will end console gaming, though. Not overnight, mind you, but once a mainstream, mass produced HTPC shows up, it's going to be a decline for console gaming. I just hope to god that whatever HTPC breaks through first practices an open door police, instead of apple's closed garden policy. Hence why I'm behind valve.
But ultimately, that's just a different type of console gaming. It'll merely move the vetting away from the classic platform holders (Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft).
You're correct, but it'll ultimately be the last console -- talking about the theoretical steam box here. A standard that can be freely made by anybody. Once the concept of a game console moves from a tangible good produced by a limited number of people, and turns into a spec which can be freely created by anybody, I think the medium will progress in a lot of good ways.
Look at home video. Imagine if JVC never allowed rival VCRs to be produced. Do you think the home video market would have exploded like it did? I think having these large gate keepers that prevent entry into the market holds the medium back. Openness encourages competition, which benefits everybody in the end.
Also, Hi, I'd like to introduce you to the video game era of the 70s and 80s! Welcome to the open era of roughly 12 different consoles and the chance for anyone to make a game! Surely that should have blossomed like a limitless garden of perfection wherein nothing could go wrong.
Sarcasm aside, some gatekeeping is pretty damn important. As much as people complain about consoles holding technology back, the platforms have also churned out some incredibly high caliber developers and taught a lot of people how to produce games not simply with raw power (Hello Crysis.) but by actual optimization and careful planning.
The difference between what valve is talking about, and what you are talking about, is that the video game crash was caused by a flooding of the market of different, proprietary game machines, each which played different games. It confused and angered employees.
I'm talking about the exact opposite. A single standard, which anybody can produce to. Comparing it again to home video - JVC created the VHS tape, and then multiple companies made VHS players. This drove the cost of VHS players down, and they became massively popular. If every home video player maker had their own standard, and took different types of tapes, each of which was compatible only with their machine and no other, the market likely wouldn't have caught on like it did.
There already are gate keepers in PC gaming. I'm talking about the gate keepers of hardware manufacturing.
in fact, your second point about crysis' problem is exactly what valve's steambox aims to solve.
Select an enemy to shoot, then aim your crosshairs onto a target on the guy.
That sounds pretty awkward. Are there any special powers like grenades, magic/biotics?
It sounds that way, but since you're under cover a lot (and the landscape is littered with an absolutely comical amount of chest-high obstructions) it's the way you pop up to shoot.
And yeah, you've got special abilities and such. Even guns you can switch on the fly too, thanks to two dedicated buttons at the top that open a semicircular wheel of options.
To be fair, I wasn't expecting much from the game, especially since the iOS ME2 tie-in game was a horrible, ugly, slow-as-molasses Smash TV clone. But at least it had sweet sweet dialog trees.
I'm not going to say it looks like a bad game, but... ...Hm. I dunno. Yes, I know, not in english, I just grabbed the first one I could find that was a proper cam example and not a screen capture.
Of all the genres out there, aside from stuff like adventure games, FPS and TPS translate the best to touch screen devices. There are numerous games out there which demonstrate that playing such a game on an iphone or something similar is not a bad experience at all. You essentially slide your left thumb around to move, with a deadzone appearing where ever you press your thumb down, and use the right thumb as though the screen was a touchpad. Tap to shoot, double tap for other abilities, with auxillary buttons for stuff like reloading or taking cover.
It's other stuff, like fighting games or 2D platformers, stuff that really requires precise directional movement, that suffers. But yeah, I wouldn't doubt Mass effect could actually be done on a touch device. As in, not a spin off.
EDIT: If you have a smart phone and want proof of concept, try doom. It's out on virtually everything, and it's a blast to play on a mobile device.
You play CoD on an ipad, I'll play it with a kbam, lets see who dies first. Ha ha ha. Or we can do some horde mode Halo or something. I've played doom, and the so called 'Gears of war on android' that is shadow gun and similar. while good games, they lack the kind of precious and ability to touch 4+ buttons at a time like a controller can do (Woo 3 touch limit on most devices.) If I wanted to turn while running, reloading and tossing a grenade I'd be pretty much shit out of luck. Which is wherein I find these type of games come up short. If the experience is tailored, wherein you face fewer enemies in a more controller firefight like this game or Shadowgun? Its a cool experience and I think it's an excellent game.
Try to do something frantic like horde mode? I think it just wouldn't work, and I fuckin love horde mode.
By that logic, FPS and TPS games should have never come to consoles in the first place, because you pit a KBM player against someone with a controller and they'll get dominated. The mass market doesn't demand the best controls, they demand controls that are good enough. And that's the sad truth. I think, for many, the sort of controls offered in games like ME on iOS are good enough.
FPS on consoles only took off when they designed a control system for them that didn't require much/any of a compromise on the core gameplay.
Posts
Sometimes you just need to hear some real talk from someone who really knows what they're talking about, someone with a well-informed opinion.
There are no opinions so reasonable as the ones expressed at 8:30 in this video:
It sounds that way, but since you're under cover a lot (and the landscape is littered with an absolutely comical amount of chest-high obstructions) it's the way you pop up to shoot.
And yeah, you've got special abilities and such. Even guns you can switch on the fly too, thanks to two dedicated buttons at the top that open a semicircular wheel of options.
To be fair, I wasn't expecting much from the game, especially since the iOS ME2 tie-in game was a horrible, ugly, slow-as-molasses Smash TV clone. But at least it had sweet sweet dialog trees.
Well, at least on android, there is a noticeable push to include controller support. All the big, console-like games are including either bluetooth controller support, or, in the case of Sonic 4 episode 2, actual Xbox 360 controller support. But controller support won't become widespread I don't believe until a widely supported standard is created.
I absolutely believe there is weight to claims that HTPCs will end console gaming, though. Not overnight, mind you, but once a mainstream, mass produced HTPC shows up, it's going to be a decline for console gaming. I just hope to god that whatever HTPC breaks through first practices an open door police, instead of apple's closed garden policy. Hence why I'm behind valve.
The real objection to F2P, imo, is the effect it can have on design priorities. Even TF2's extra stuff raises the barrier to entry for the game and, worst of all, basically bends the game's previously excellent art direction and violates like an altar boy.
To be fair, most MMOs went F2P because they did fail at the (at the time) standard MMO model of being subscription-based.
It's just they got lucky and stumbled upon another business model that actually worked.
...I don't care if I agree with them (I don't in this case), the instant I hear an alleged expert use the term "fanboy" to describe a device's sales potential I immediately assume he's an idiot.
I'm not going to say it looks like a bad game, but... ...Hm. I dunno. Yes, I know, not in english, I just grabbed the first one I could find that was a proper cam example and not a screen capture.
The best parts are calling WiiU a retrofitted uDraw when uDraw didn't have a screen, and calling for Iwata to be fired.
Gameplay reminds me of a less on rails form one of those lightgun games where you are in cover and basically only really move when moving from cover to cover. Time Crisis 3, I think.
Sure, but it's more about crowing how WoW is still super-duper awesome. Because paying that monthly fee is like a membership to an exclusive club of people who play a game totally worth that monthly fee. Thus, any game without a monthly fee is worth precisely what you pay-to-play for it.
Do not engage the Watermelons.
Yes.
wow. I was really looking forward to Fez, but you know what? fuck that guy.
Of all the genres out there, aside from stuff like adventure games, FPS and TPS translate the best to touch screen devices. There are numerous games out there which demonstrate that playing such a game on an iphone or something similar is not a bad experience at all. You essentially slide your left thumb around to move, with a deadzone appearing where ever you press your thumb down, and use the right thumb as though the screen was a touchpad. Tap to shoot, double tap for other abilities, with auxillary buttons for stuff like reloading or taking cover.
It's other stuff, like fighting games or 2D platformers, stuff that really requires precise directional movement, that suffers. But yeah, I wouldn't doubt Mass effect could actually be done on a touch device. As in, not a spin off.
EDIT: If you have a smart phone and want proof of concept, try doom. It's out on virtually everything, and it's a blast to play on a mobile device.
...wow. I bailed out before that part.
Technically you can move around freely wherever you want, but if anyone's shooting you'll probably get massacred if you don't immediately dive for one of the hojillion obstructions.
But ultimately, that's just a different type of console gaming. It'll merely move the vetting away from the classic platform holders (Nintendo, Sony, and Microsoft).
If I had to guess, Nintendo would be the last "console" style platform holder, with Microsoft being more than happy to license out Windows 8 and have Xbox Live as a gated community affair, not unlike PSN Plus.
Hurm. There's an article in this idea.
To be fair, I play an Inflitrator, so that game isn't too far off from my Mass Effect experience in general.
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/
I write about video games and stuff. It is fun. Sometimes.
How do these fuck faces even have jobs?
It's going to be awesome when this guy is never, ever hired by a big company.
Some real fucking pros in that video.
Keep in mind these are the guys that serious investors rely on to decide which companies to buy stock in.
You're correct, but it'll ultimately be the last console -- talking about the theoretical steam box here. A standard that can be freely made by anybody. Once the concept of a game console moves from a tangible good produced by a limited number of people, and turns into a spec which can be freely created by anybody, I think the medium will progress in a lot of good ways.
Look at home video. Imagine if JVC never allowed rival VCRs to be produced. Do you think the home video market would have exploded like it did? I think having these large gate keepers that prevent entry into the market holds the medium back. Openness encourages competition, which benefits everybody in the end.
It's like visual Kotaku.
You play CoD on an ipad, I'll play it with a kbam, lets see who dies first. Ha ha ha. Or we can do some horde mode Halo or something. I've played doom, and the so called 'Gears of war on android' that is shadow gun and similar. while good games, they lack the kind of precious and ability to touch 4+ buttons at a time like a controller can do (Woo 3 touch limit on most devices.) If I wanted to turn while running, reloading and tossing a grenade I'd be pretty much shit out of luck. Which is wherein I find these type of games come up short. If the experience is tailored, wherein you face fewer enemies in a more controller firefight like this game or Shadowgun? Its a cool experience and I think it's an excellent game.
Try to do something frantic like horde mode? I think it just wouldn't work, and I fuckin love horde mode.
In agreement.
I think Nintendo will still soldier on for another few generations if such a thing happens, if only because Mario is a bonafide super-brand.
Still wondering if Apple's going to get into the set top box game. Apple TV seems like such a decent vector at only $99, but they don't want to make the jump.
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/
I write about video games and stuff. It is fun. Sometimes.
That should be all you need to know about the quality of the rest of the video.
Do not engage the Watermelons.
Also, Hi, I'd like to introduce you to the video game era of the 70s and 80s! Welcome to the open era of roughly 12 different consoles and the chance for anyone to make a game! Surely that should have blossomed like a limitless garden of perfection wherein nothing could go wrong.
Sarcasm aside, some gatekeeping is pretty damn important. As much as people complain about consoles holding technology back, the platforms have also churned out some incredibly high caliber developers and taught a lot of people how to produce games not simply with raw power (Hello Crysis.) but by actual optimization and careful planning.
This looks great and I'm really excited for it to come out.
Don't judge me.
https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561197970666737/
DOA! THEY ARE SEGA!
I don't understand how they have so much conviction.
I'm not Nintendo's biggest fan, they don't float my boat but man most of the kids at school LOOOOOOVE Nintendo, i don't understand how that guy can just write off the WiiU with such certainty?
Urge to kill rising.
http://kotaku.com/5891665/fallout-couldve-been-about-time+traveling-dinosaurs-and-monkey-murder
And you can rocketslide turn while reloading and throwing a grenade in that game. It's got very well set up controls.
So really, even keyboard to controller doesn't fly too hard as a real difference because it completely depends on how well the developer programs the game to accommodate for the input device.
Umm. Ok.
I was actually thinking of Vanquish when I said that, and trying to think how you'd play that game on an Android or iPhone. Probably tap a spot and your character moves and dodges for you while you just... tap enemies to shoot or something lame.
This creates a problem with Steam Box because to keep the easy, console feel and to make sure the PC used doesn't get messed up you have to use software to prevent bad stuff from happening/getting installed. As soon as you block off the PC functionality in any way the Steam/PC gaming crowd will scream foul and get all in a pucker over it not being a real pc experience or limited in some way.
The difference between what valve is talking about, and what you are talking about, is that the video game crash was caused by a flooding of the market of different, proprietary game machines, each which played different games. It confused and angered employees.
I'm talking about the exact opposite. A single standard, which anybody can produce to. Comparing it again to home video - JVC created the VHS tape, and then multiple companies made VHS players. This drove the cost of VHS players down, and they became massively popular. If every home video player maker had their own standard, and took different types of tapes, each of which was compatible only with their machine and no other, the market likely wouldn't have caught on like it did.
There already are gate keepers in PC gaming. I'm talking about the gate keepers of hardware manufacturing.
in fact, your second point about crysis' problem is exactly what valve's steambox aims to solve.
FPS on consoles only took off when they designed a control system for them that didn't require much/any of a compromise on the core gameplay.