| Page 1 of 2 |
|
|
 Posted: Tue, 26th Oct 2010 14:23 Post subject: Console Shooters No Longer Innovate |
|
 |
Source: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/104675-Console-Shooters-No-Longer-Innovate-Says-Original-GoldenEye-Director
| Quote: | Martin Hollis, director of the classic N64 shooter GoldenEye, thinks that console shooters have lost their way, and any innovation in the genre is happening on the PC.
GoldenEye made such a splash when it was released, that more than a decade later it is still held up as an example of a movie tie-in that didn't suck, not to mention one of the games that defined the modern console shooter. But Hollis doesn't think that modern console shooters are really trying to do anything new anymore and instead are just rehashing the same old ideas.
He said that he always went into FPS games hoping to see something new, but felt that most of the interesting developments were happening in PC shooters, which had different cultures and different gameplay mechanics. He didn't think that console shooters were moving backwards necessarily, but he didn't think that they were moving forwards and that a lot of what he saw wasn't really very new.
He did acknowledge that console shooters had brought about one very big change however, although he didn't think it was a positive one. He felt that playing a shooter on a console had become a solitary activity, whereas when he was making them in the nineties, they had had a much greater social element. Even playing online was still essentially a solitary activity, he said, which was a lot more convenient, but lacked the emotional appeal of gathering with friends to play.
Hollis does have a point that console shooters aren't pushing the envelope with every release, but without some specific examples, it's impossible to know what PC shooters he thinks are doing it so much better. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chiv
Posts: 27530
Location: Behind You...
|
| Posted: Tue, 26th Oct 2010 14:29 Post subject: |
|
|
and the winner of the 'where the fuck have you been for the past decade' award, goes to...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 26th Oct 2010 14:34 Post subject: |
|
|
Most console shooters seem to be the same games that we were getting on pc years ago
I've yet to see any other fps that has the type of targetting system Goldeneye had, shoot them in the hand, they'd hold their hand, shoot them in the ass they'd jump up and down holding their ass, it was great and I really thought everybody would copy it
Most innovative pc fps games would probably be Half Life 2 for the gravity gun, Crysis and probably something like Stalker or Arma
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 26th Oct 2010 14:36 Post subject: |
|
|
Did they ever innovate??? I say NO! I remember back when the first Halo was released... I was facepalming hard because every reviewer and console owner was celebrating like Halo was something unique...The only unique thing about it was that it was the fist console shooter that wasn't total shit. Oh and maybe it was unintentionally "unique" by pitting Space Marines with MotorCross helmets against purple alien pixies...
The only new thing that Halo did, was to convince kids that this was the dawn of a new type of game, and today they continue to poison kids by making it hip to pay for dlc...
Seriously, I think that except for the multiplayer part, there haven't been anything new in ANY console shooter, that hadn't been done before on the pc, in games Like the Quake Series, Duke Nukem, Doom and a shitload of other great shooters, all Pc games.
My hope is that with the release of Duke Nukem Forever, we will see some loyal sequels to the old classics like Blood or No one lives forever an so on. 
"Sometimes when you do things right, people are not sure you've done anything at all." -- God (Futurama)
Last edited by maul_inc on Tue, 26th Oct 2010 15:09; edited 4 times in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WaldoJ
VIP Member
Posts: 32678
|
| Posted: Tue, 26th Oct 2010 14:42 Post subject: |
|
|
it's a pr stunt for the new goldeneye game
| Sin317 wrote: | | I win, you lose. Or Go fuck yourself. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 26th Oct 2010 15:04 Post subject: |
|
|
| WaldoJ wrote: | | it's a pr stunt for the new goldeneye game |
I don't think Martin Hollis praise much the new GoldenEye...
| Quote: | Martin Hollis, the designer of the original GoldenEye game, has spoken out about Activision's decision to revive the Bond classic for Wii, saying he finds it hard to imagine the company wanting to do justice to Rare's N64 game.
In an exclusive interview that will appear in the new issue of Official Nintendo Magazine which goes on sale on Monday, the former Rare employee argued that Activision's decision to revive GoldenEye for Wii is motivated by profits rather than passion.
|
Source: http://www.officialnintendomagazine.co.uk/article.php?id=19667
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
-=Cartoon=-
VIP Member
Posts: 8823
Location: South Pacific Ocean
|
| Posted: Tue, 26th Oct 2010 15:23 Post subject: |
|
|
Fuck i have so many awesome memories of goldeneye multi splitscreen 4 player games
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 26th Oct 2010 15:37 Post subject: |
|
|
WARNING
-----------------------------
Wall of text containing highly subjective personal opinion incoming. Read it at your own risk.
-----------------------------
I can't say i see the point in that article. It is like whining about day turning into night. Sure you can do it, but you can hardly stop the earth from spinning.
True innovation is rare. Truly new ideas just do not grow on trees. They come from creative people and most of those usually have a handful of true ideas during their life. The rest is just various combinations of already existing stuff.
95% of the time, you are working from already existing ideas, trying to combine them in different ways. Sure, we can call this innovation as well, but it is a different kind of innovation.
You see, there is only so many ways you can combine things. If there are enough people doing the same, you will unavoidably end up with combinations that have been done before. You can then color your combination differently, to make it stand out, but down to its core, it will still be the same thing.
With the growth of the gaming industry, you see more and more people playing around with the same ideas and we are already past the point where you can combine the common game elements in any way that would look new and fresh.
It is not really unique to the gaming industry. It can also be seen in the movies as well, but since there is a huge emphasis on visuals and acting in those, people tend to pay less attention to the actual core of the movie, the story. Would they do it, they would realize that it is the same stories or combination of stories fed to them over and over again.
Also note that for a long time, the entertainment industry was living off the improvements made in the technical department. During the past 10-15 years, the technology was rapidly improving and we went from the blocky characters of wolfenstein 3d to the lifelike faces of medal of honor or call of duty. This poses a real issue, as while people were seeing this as innovation, it really wasnt. It was merely a process of how developers had more and more options to work with. The problem here is that it has slowed down. Not neccessarily the rate of technological improvement, but it's effect on the games. The rate at which technology is transformed into visual improvements is on a logarithmic scale. You get huge leaps in realism initially, but you will get diminishing returns from the work you invest into further improving it.
So why the cry out for lack of innovation? Because we are at the point, where visuals can't really improve in any significant fashion anymore and there are just not enough new ideas around to keep the industry fresh.
Is this a bad thing? Well.. it is a natural and unavoidable thing really. Just as people do not like to grow old and die. You simply have to accept the fact that the more stories you see, the more games you play, the less chance new stories or games have to really make an impression on you.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Tue, 26th Oct 2010 16:34 Post subject: |
|
|
I am sorry, did someone say Crysis was innovative?  In what way? The number of shaders at any given moment? 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chiv
Posts: 27530
Location: Behind You...
|
| Posted: Tue, 26th Oct 2010 17:11 Post subject: |
|
|
well to be honest, i liked the implimentation of the suit... i dont know if other fps games did something similar, but being able to switch between modes was quite cool and fun, especially in multiplayer....
that is, before multiplayer was killed off by the devs... thats another innovative thing crytek did... killed off their own games mulitplayer faster than any other dev, even faster than valve killing off l4d.
but generally no, i wouldnt call it an innovative game as such.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Tue, 26th Oct 2010 17:19 Post subject: |
|
|
What you mean Multiplayer? No body bought Crysis, it was just pirated!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garus
VIP Member
Posts: 34200
|
| Posted: Tue, 26th Oct 2010 17:22 Post subject: |
|
|
snip
Last edited by garus on Tue, 27th Aug 2024 21:34; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 26th Oct 2010 17:58 Post subject: |
|
|
| maul_inc wrote: | Did they ever innovate??? I say NO! I remember back when the first Halo was released... I was facepalming hard because every reviewer and console owner was celebrating like Halo was something unique...The only unique thing about it was that it was the fist console shooter that wasn't total shit. Oh and maybe it was unintentionally "unique" by pitting Space Marines with MotorCross helmets against purple alien pixies...
The only new thing that Halo did, was to convince kids that this was the dawn of a new type of game, and today they continue to poison kids by making it hip to pay for dlc...
Seriously, I think that except for the multiplayer part, there haven't been anything new in ANY console shooter, that hadn't been done before on the pc, in games Like the Quake Series, Duke Nukem, Doom and a shitload of other great shooters, all Pc games.
My hope is that with the release of Duke Nukem Forever, we will see some loyal sequels to the old classics like Blood or No one lives forever an so on. |
I didn't like it much ether, but you can't deny that it was the first shooter that worked on consoles. Consoles already had Doom, Duke3D, Quake and Unreal Tournament. The difference was that playing those games on gamepad was a nightmare. Halo was designed for gamepads from ground up and that in its self was a huge innovation.
Pretty much everything that it did (huge aiming cross, swaping of weapons, button configuration) is still the same in other shooters. Only addition was cover that was made popular with Gears of War.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 26th Oct 2010 19:46 Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Halo was designed for gamepads from ground up and that in its self was a huge innovation. |
that's not really innovation as much as it is about fixing the "how the fuck do we get around these limitations with a controller and still make the game enjoyable" problem.
i mean i wouldn't call someone who's able to make the wii remote/nunchuck not completely useless in something like fighting games for being innovative either.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 26th Oct 2010 20:22 Post subject: |
|
|
| asucahayashi wrote: | | Quote: | | Halo was designed for gamepads from ground up and that in its self was a huge innovation. |
that's not really innovation as much as it is about fixing the "how the fuck do we get around these limitations with a controller and still make the game enjoyable" problem.
. |
Offcourse it is, thats the definition of innovation.
| Quote: |
–verb (used without object)
1.
to introduce something new; make changes in anything established.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 26th Oct 2010 20:23 Post subject: |
|
|
By that definition 80% of FPS are innovative since most of them make some small change..
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 26th Oct 2010 20:32 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 26th Oct 2010 20:43 Post subject: |
|
|
| fawe4 wrote: | | What small changes? |
Exactly.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Tue, 26th Oct 2010 20:50 Post subject: |
|
|
Exactly what? Ether your small changes are non existing or nobody cares about them because they are negligible. Halo spawned whole horde of console shooters that use same control scheme and shooting system.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Tue, 26th Oct 2010 21:00 Post subject: |
|
|
Stranglehold had this Tequila Bombs concept - omfg the innovation!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wawrzul
Posts: 2336
Location: Cracow, Poland
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 27th Oct 2010 11:00 Post subject: |
|
|
| iNatan wrote: | | I am sorry, did someone say Crysis was innovative? In what way? The number of shaders at any given moment? |
well in what game could you jump on a shack and kill everyone ? or turn invisble and just play with those dumbfucks ? or jump on a shack and then jump some more and thrown some grenades ?
or run really fast towards them grab them by the neck and throw em into the air ? or kill them with trees ?
or any other crazy shit that you could come up.
in that tank mission you could exit the tank at any given moment and do what the fuck you want. you guys blame MOH for being scripted but on the other hand neither Crysis is good enough. talk about derpiness 
Crysis is a great shooter that  cannot understand due to their natural lack of imagination in using the powers and environemnt given by the game.
>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ♪ Viva La Vida ♪ <<<<<< <<<<< <<<<<< <<<
Last edited by Laurentiu499 on Wed, 27th Oct 2010 11:00; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 27th Oct 2010 11:00 Post subject: |
|
|
when did they? (innovate)
I like men now
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LMLM
Posts: 825
Location: Meta Cortechs
|
| Posted: Wed, 27th Oct 2010 11:32 Post subject: |
|
|
I think the main way console shooters might innovate is in regards to the controller and simplifying the user interface. Maybe also the peer-to-peer BS was an innovation as far as developers/publishers were concerned except that we had that on PC with Doom1/2 and other shooters back in the early 90's. But the consoles brought a lobby system to p2p of course (haven't played them myself) but again, that was done for PC over ten years ago too with apps like Kali.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Wed, 27th Oct 2010 12:15 Post subject: |
|
|
@Laurentiu499 I bet Lost was also innovative.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73196
Location: Ramat Gan, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Wed, 27th Oct 2010 14:47 Post subject: |
|
|
Lean? Cover "pop & pop" mechanics are there to actually replace leaning, because derps don't have enough buttons on the controllers. 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 2 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
