Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Console Shooters No Longer Innovate, Says Original GoldenEye Director
Options
Comments
-
Right. Thats exactly right. It takes too much time, energy and money to develop a console game. First you have to decide which consoles you want to develop for, then you have to sell a publisher on your idea, then you need to create thousands of copies to distribute, an ad campaign, etc. and you could still end up with a flop. So you almost wouldn't dare to try something fresh on the console. Only a few games ever rarely fit that description.Developers make uninnovative games because its a Huge risk to do something strange or unfamiliar eg Bayoneta.
Enter PC Gaming. One guy makes a little Java game called minecraft, it's not even done yet, and he's on his way to being a millionaire.
Halo, Call of Duty and Mass Effect? Those developers started life on the PC (or Mac).
At least this is the theory given by the Lead Creator of Bioshock, Ken Livine:
http://kotaku.com/5675559/the-future-of-pc-gaming-according-to-the-lead-creator-of-bioshock"After a long day in front of a PC, the last thing I want to do is come home and sit in front of a PC."
I hear this all the time from game developers.
It is not something you'll hear from me.
When I get home, my wife and I have a routine. We eat dinner together, and then I head upstairs. To my PC.
Email.
Twitter.
Kotaku.
Joystiq.
Fidgit.
Rock Paper Shotgun.
Steam Store.
And so on.
Then, I boot something up. Today, it's Civ 5. Yesterday, it was the Cataclysm beta. The day before, Minecraft, or Torchlight.
Later on in the evening, I'll boot up the 360, or the PS3. And at bedtime, it's the iPad, which I read until I fall asleep. Maybe I'll pass out playing 100 Rogues or Sword & Poker.
But when it comes down to it, as a gamer, I'm a PC. I like the kind of games you can play on it. I like that designers know they have your full attention, so they feel comfortable EXPECTING your full attention. I like the ergonomics of the thing, the mouse and keyboard, the effortless transition from gaming to browsing to typing. I'm an alt-tab kind of guy.
What's the future of the PC? Social games? MMOs? Freemium?
If you want to know the future of gaming, buy a PC.
**** if I know. But I know this: The PC will always be the place that drives innovation. The PC is the place where great game developers are born, even—and maybe especially—where great console game developers are born. Halo, Mass Effect, Call of Duty…PC developers first. And it's on the PC where the leading-edge ideas form, primarily because the barrier of entry is low and you can have an idea that goes like this:
"Hey, I've got an idea!"
"Cool! Who do we need to approve this idea?"
"Umm…nobody?"
And then the idea gets done. Because magic can happen when there are no middle men, no marketers, and no naysayers.
Sometimes it's a disaster. In fact, usually it is. Most ideas are terrible.
But sometimes it's Steam.
And sometimes it's modding.
And sometimes it's Minecraft.
And then we all, gamers and developers, get to high-five the universe and think about how lucky we are.
What's the future of PCs?
Again, **** if I know.
But here's something you can take the bank: If you want to know the future of gaming, buy a PC. And pay attention. Because above all, that thing on your desk is a crystal ball.
Ken Levine is the co-founder, President and Creative Director of Irrational Games. He led the creation of the multi-million unit selling, multiple game-of-the year award-winning title BioShock. He was named 2007 Person of the Year by the 1Up Network and was named the number one game developer of the 2007 by Next-Gen.Biz.0 -
-
-
Join Date:Posts: 50630
The self righteousness of PC gamers continues to sicken me. Who really gives a **** if your PC can add extra shadows or physics to a game? I play games for the enjoyment of them, and a console suits me just fine for that - put the game in and play. No arsing around with driver updates, patches, system requirements etc. I was a PC gamer once upon a time but I got tired of buying games only to find them crashing every 5 minutes or not being able to run the thing at all.
A PC gamer is entitled to feel proud of his expensive gaming machine,just as others like myself are entitled to enjoy consoles for what they are - easy to use gaming systems and instantaneous enjoyment from your purchase without the hassle. Nobody really cares what your PC does better than a console, so get off the horse.
There's no need forthis and you are taking the conversation completely off topic. There's no need to call PC gamers self righteous when the article you are talking about has nothing to do with it. If you really did pay through the nose for a PC and had it crash every 5 minutes then you clearly didn't know what you are doing. No more of this when it's uncalled for or there'll be infractions or worse.
0 -
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
Join Date:Posts: 50630
You know, if this was the A&R forum Retr0 would never have let this one slide by, maybe he's just better behaved over here?
Well if it makes you happy then Halo didn't innovate anything. In the same way GoW gets credit for innovating cover systems despite stealing them from Kill.Switch all of Halos innovations were taken from obscurer games. I'm going to leave it at that.And, regarding the off topic topic of PC's being temperamental, could this by why, when talking of retro gaming on the PC, say playing Dark Forces or Mechwarrior, folks normally red hot enthusiasm wanes somewhat at the prospect of trying to boot games on a 200Mhz mmx machine, with a mighty 16mb of ram and a 500mb HDD, with Windows 95 installed?
What hell it was!
Now, those were the days when getting your new game to play, state of the art it might be, involved spending "one of those days" configuring your system to play the damn thing!
I don't know where people are getting this from. In the old days it was like this but when DOS4GW came along around 1992 which handled memory really well it was simply a case of installing the game and playing it. Windows 95 made it easier again. If your system wasn't up to it you turned settings down in the options.As for the OP about console shooters, sure isn't he talking out of his arse?
I mean, Goldeneyes major innovation was an FPS on a console, everything else had been done everywhere else.
Easy to innovate when there's nothing else in that vein on any consoles.
Sniper Rifle? Done already, even on consoles in MDK.
Multiplayer? Sure Quake and Doom were doning this, amongst a cast of thousands on the PC.
I give Goldeneye a lot of stick about not being playable when it came out but it definitely was very innovative. The control scheme worked really well and eventually led to iron sight aiming. The AI was very advanced for it's time. No other game had enemies with different damage hit boxes and AI that reacted dynamically to being shot in different areas, MDK only had headshots. It didn't have the first sniper rifle but came out very close to the likes of Outlaws, MDK etc. that had the first examples of sniper rifles. Also MDK came out after it on consoles and was a bad port of a better PC game. It was the first game to have a reload button. Multiplayer was done before but never 4 player split screen on the same console. It was also one of the first FPS games were the objectives were something other than find red keycard for red door and reach the exit.
Martin Hollis really hasn't done much else since though.
0 -
-
-
-
-
Retr0gamer wrote: »Well if it makes you happy then Halo didn't innovate anything. In the same way GoW gets credit for innovating cover systems despite stealing them from Kill.Switch all of Halos innovations were taken from obscurer games. I'm going to leave it at that.
I give Goldeneye a lot of stick about not being playable when it came out but it definitely was very innovative. The control scheme worked really well and eventually led to iron sight aiming. The AI was very advanced for it's time. No other game had enemies with different damage hit boxes and AI that reacted dynamically to being shot in different areas, MDK only had headshots. It didn't have the first sniper rifle but came out very close to the likes of Outlaws, MDK etc. that had the first examples of sniper rifles. Also MDK came out after it on consoles and was a bad port of a better PC game. It was the first game to have a reload button. Multiplayer was done before but never 4 player split screen on the same console. It was also one of the first FPS games were the objectives were something other than find red keycard for red door and reach the exit.
I think thats the problem with people that complain about games not being orginal. You talk about these games that were the first to have a sniper rifle, or a reload button.. although they were new, i wouldn't exactly call it thinking out of the box, which is what developers today have to do if they want to create something with innovation, everything has been done before. I think the biggest advancement besides the obvious graphical improvement is AI, there is lots of room for improvement here. You also accuse GoW of "stealing" the cover system from killswitch(Which was a horrible game btw).. I never really considered GoW a game that innovated the cover system... ts just a really good game. I suppose using a reload button is "Stealing" it from other MDK or whatever.
The most innovate thing to come out of this generation of consoles/gaming in general in the last 5 years is the whole wii ****, i guess the obvious step for next gen consoles would be to expand on that a bit(Hopefully not too much
). 0 -
Advertisement
-
Join Date:Posts: 50630
What's killing shooters for me is how they are getting less and less complex. Give me a shooter that's open world, has a proper inventory and RPG elements. It's what makes Stalker so good for me and to a lesser extent Fallout 3. Stalker also had the best AI I've seen in any shooter so far.
I think AI is the next big step forward as already said. However console developers are afraid to introduce better AI because of the processing overhead it represents that would take away from the graphics and bringing out a AAA game with poor graphics is a sure way of releasing a flop. The AI has got to do more than just shoot at te player though and I'd like to see AI that can do other stuff other than try to shoot the player. Stalker so far is really the only game that comes close to this promise.
Even Halo with it's so called impressive AI isn't all that advanced. It's mostly just smoke and mirrors hiding very low level scripting. Bungie have done a good job of disguising it but after playing the games it becomes obvious how all the cause and effect strings are attached together. Gearbox did say that the only clever thing about Halos AI was that it was good at avoiding scenery. Sure even Stalker suffers from this as well. I suppose someday we'll get better AI and it's not as obvious what triggers cause the AI to snap into the next behaviour string and the whole thing is more believeable.
0 -
-
Join Date:Posts: 50630
Well for me I couldn't give a crap about multiplayer. If it's good I'll end up playing it on and off for a week or two and never come back to it. It's all about the single player for me.
I just can't stand playing games online with randomers, I just end up getting board. Saying that I'm always up for some Left 4 Dead with the boards steam group since they are all nice other than marshbaboon but then again playing with him is an 'experience'. It's a different experience playing with people you know which is probably why I enjoy the fighting game meet ups so much and miss them now I've not got the time for them.
0 -
-
-
I can;t help it >.<Think thats the big appeal to console gaming in fairness, pretty much all of my mates play on PSN or Xbox Live. Before when i was playing nothing but PC games, i was pretty much the only one. I personally just find playing with a group of mates, having a laugh and shooting some heads is the best gaming experience you can get.
I suppose I'm lucky enough that my mates are really into gaming thus all have PC's bar one whos a casual gamer PC is the best platform for multiplayer after all.
Magill you keep forgetting about portal, maybe it doesn't appeal to the average console gamer and you find it boring or whatever but that does not mean it wasn't innovative. Innovative games like portal are always gonna be more appealing to the PC market. People don't buy console for innovated games, they buy them to play the straight to the point pick up and play no fuss shooter & sports games generally.
Theres no shame in that.
Also :The most innovate thing to come out of this generation of consoles/gaming in general in the last 5 years is the whole wii ****, i guess the obvious step for next gen consoles would be to expand on that a bit(Hopefully not too much).
Or maybe they'll get smart and finally add proper mouse and keyboard support for all FPS games.
Now that would be a serious blow to PC gaming.0 -
Join Date:Posts: 50630
You also have to remember how Portal came about. It was made by a student team that made an indie PC game called Nebacular Drop that caught Valves eye. It's still the best platform for new indie games. I find Steam much easier to use than PSN or Xbox Live and it also benefits from dedicated servers instead of using someones elses machine to host a game.
0 -
Why are you trying to convince me as if im some sort of PC noob.. did you not read my post on the previous page ?I can;t help it >.<
I suppose I'm lucky enough that my mates are really into gaming thus all have PC's bar one whos a casual gamer PC is the best platform for multiplayer after all.Magill you keep forgetting about portal, maybe it doesn't appeal to the average console gamer and you find it boring or whatever but that does not mean it wasn't innovative. Innovative games like portal are always gonna be more appealing to the PC market. People don't buy console for innovated games, they buy them to play the straight to the point pick up and play no fuss shooter & sports games generally.
What do you mean i keep forgetting about portal..... read my other posts FFS !!
Besides, i would hardly consider portal a shooter.... just because its first person does not = shooter.
And consoles aren't just for casual gamers, if you think that then you're deluded. Theres probably more hardcore gamers on consoles than on the PC... At least if your definition of a hardcore gamer is someone that spends a ****ton of time playing games !
Outside of shooters... there is a huge amount of content available for consoles. From demon souls (Probably one of my favorite RPG's ever...) to heavy rain, assasins creed to mass effect.... etc etc. You've also got huge amount of excellent creative games on PSN and Xbox Live such as shadow complex. The only thing thats lacking on consoles is MMO's and RTS games.Or maybe they'll get smart and finally add proper mouse and keyboard support for all FPS games.
Now that would be a serious blow to PC gaming.
PC gaming has been dealt huge blows in the last few years, theres only 2 big developers left that still cater soley for PC gamers(I think).. valve and blizzard (IMO the best two developers around tho, so its not all bad).
A mouse and keyboard is just not practical tho, you need a desk or table... I guess they could do what they did with UT3 on the PS3 and have seperate lobbies for k/m users. Still, the PC market is tiny compared to the console one so i dont really think its worth there wild.0 -
-
Advertisement
-
Advertisement