New game ideas?

Alienblue · Postby **Alienblue** » February 11th, 2007, 1:18 pm

I recently said I thought the early 80's was the best time for gaming. One reason is that late 70's/early 80's, graphics were so abstract people had to come up with strange and different ideas for games. Surround, Qix, Frogger, Pac-Man and cube quest were all unique concepts. Nowadays, it seems like every 3-D game must be more REALISTIC then the last but doesn't that limit the themes? People just seem to have lost the desire to come up with something completely new and different...heck even KATMARI was set in a "real" 3-D world with a story behind it.

Do you think there's any chance for new game concepts to emerge these days? I'm afraid soon every game will be a racer, war game, stealth game or whatever... just because you CAN make games that look and sound REAL, doesn't mean you HAVE to!

bluemonkey1 · Postby **bluemonkey1** » February 11th, 2007, 4:26 pm

Better graphics capabilities do not lead to more realistic games. This is a bogus claim made by the Wii crowd. I always thought older games were more derivative than those now. While the graphics were more abstract the game mechanics were all too similar. The increase in horsepower has allowed far more creative ideas to flourish and be made possible. As the hardware power grows we will only continue to see more diverse and interesting product.

Zenzerotron · Postby **Zenzerotron** » February 11th, 2007, 4:51 pm

That's a good point.

Best case example...........Centipede

You can see it as a space game(you are using a ship, the black playing feild is in outer space), or you can make it completely midevil fantasy(you're a wizard with a wand, the playing feild is a garden).

I've played this game all my life, and whenever it gets stale, I use my imagination to have a new interpertation of what the graphics are supposed to be.

m0zart1 · Postby **m0zart1** » February 11th, 2007, 4:56 pm

[QUOTE=bluemonkey]Better graphics capabilities do not lead to more realistic games. This is a bogus claim made by the Wii crowd.[/QUOTE]

Brought in by the Wii crowd?!? Sega_saturn_x has been saying exactly that on this forum for as long as I've been posting, and he's certainly not been a Wii man in any of that time.

If anything, it's been the Wii crowd saying the opposite. But, I guess the Wii crowd has to be responsible for just about every major misconception in history, except perhaps moon landing denial theories, and then only because they predate Nintendo.

Conn · Postby **Conn** » February 11th, 2007, 7:51 pm

[QUOTE=m0zart][QUOTE=bluemonkey]Better graphics capabilities do not lead to more realistic games. This is a bogus claim made by the Wii crowd.[/QUOTE]

If anything, it's been the Wii crowd saying the opposite.[/QUOTE]

I think it's just bluemonkey's wording that confused you- it confused me for a second, too. He's saying that the "Wii crowd" is falsely claming that better graphics do not equal realistic games.

bluemonkey1 · Postby **bluemonkey1** » February 12th, 2007, 3:30 pm

Okay let me try again.

Better graphical capabilities do not lead to a greater proportion of the video game market place taking a more realistic visual style. This is something the Wii crowd don't seem to get. Case in point Rayman 3 was just as fantastical and non realistic as Rayman 1.

PB Troy · Postby **PB Troy** » February 12th, 2007, 4:32 pm

I think a DJ mixing or Techno Creator on the DS would be a success. Electroplankton seems cool to me but I don't dig the music you can create on there, also with the lack of save for your songs it's kinda useless.

Paul Campbell · Postby **Paul Campbell** » February 12th, 2007, 5:28 pm

[QUOTE=bluemonkey]

Okay let me try again.

Better graphical capabilities do not lead to a greater proportion of the video game market place taking a more realistic visual style. This is something the Wii crowd don't seem to get. Case in point Rayman 3 was just as fantastical and non realistic as Rayman 1.

[/QUOTE]

I still don't see what the Wii crowd has to do with this. If anything, we are proponents to the claim because the Wii is the least powerful of the current console generation. Don't you think the PS3 or XBOX "crowd" would be more likely to claim that better graphics lead to more realism?

bluemonkey1 · Postby **bluemonkey1** » February 12th, 2007, 6:10 pm

No because the Wii crowd go on about how the better graphics of those systems lead to all the developers trying to make realistic games and the Wii is better because developers make games for it that are less realistic and it is therefore better because the games are more inventive.

a1 · Postby a1 » February 12th, 2007, 6:10 pm

I believe bluemonkey is referring to a specific discussion we had over this. I said I don't want gory games to get more real, and I was worried better graphics would do that. I stated clearly, however, that I did not think the 360 was capable of such incredible realism that it would bother me, and better graphics can help fantasy games as well. This is not an argument that anyone but me has ever presented bluemonkey. You're making a sweeping generalization based entirely upon me.