The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
What exactly will the future of gaming be like in say 10 years? No body knows for sure at the moment, but this is what I think it will similar to…
The graphics will be astounding, far superior to what they are now. X-box? Gamecube? Pah! Look at all those nasty square pixels, ugly. This will be almost real. Has anybody seen a preview of the movie Shrek? The graphics in it are brilliant. This is the mark videogame graphics will beat easily. Lifelike almost? I hope so.
Although this may not happen in ten years, I am sure this will happen at some point: After slipping on a head set, and have the wires and/or sensors attached to/around your body. You will be able to ‘live’ the videogame, properly. Imagine running around a level with a gun in your hand, killing all in sight. You will be in first person mode, no handsets or controllers, just your body – what you do, the game does, you see everything. Move your head, the game changes what you can see on screen. Like advanced virtually reality, like real life, only better.
You need a friend to play against in a multiplayer battle, yet none can make it over to your house at this time. What do you do? You carry on. Although the thrills of beating a mate will be gone, the thrills of beating a computer will emerge – still not quite the same, as taunting will be out of the question, but this time it will be worth it. At this moment computer players may seem to be a little stupid, walking in walls, building structures in your area. This won’t happen. The AI will be so advanced that it would be just like playing against a human player. You’ll have to double check just to make sure you aren’t!
Online play will thrive. ALL connections will be lightning quick (not just those with ADSL on their PC), you won’t notice the jogging and slow play that games today experience if you possess a 56k modem. All the consoles will come as standard with a built in super fast T1 type modem. You will think that you are playing offline because it plays so fast.
And then there is a bad point. The prices. Consoles today are always going up in price. When the N64 was released, a ‘fairish’ price of £120 was tagged onto it, which quickly fell to £100. The Dreamcast then entered at around £200, quite a lot, but worth it. Then came the PS2, weighing in at a hefty £300, which has now fallen to £270, and that is too much for me. If the future follows the pattern, which I think it will, then consoles could be getting pretty expensive. But by that time people will be richer, as the industry’s expand.
Games, I think, will slowly increase in price. PS2 games have increased by an average of £7.00 to £8.00 over PSX games (from £28.99 to about £36.00), and GBA games have increased by an average of as much as £9.00 to £10.00 from the GBC games (from £22.99 to about £32.99). Could we see games as much as 70, even eighty pounds plus? I really don’t hope so.
I believe I have covered the main aspects of future gaming, but if I haven’t, then perhaps you could fill the rest in.
Thanks for reading,
Swish
The graphics will be astounding, far superior to what they are now. X-box? Gamecube? Pah! Look at all those nasty square pixels, ugly. This will be almost real. Has anybody seen a preview of the movie Shrek? The graphics in it are brilliant. This is the mark videogame graphics will beat easily. Lifelike almost? I hope so.
Although this may not happen in ten years, I am sure this will happen at some point: After slipping on a head set, and have the wires and/or sensors attached to/around your body. You will be able to ‘live’ the videogame, properly. Imagine running around a level with a gun in your hand, killing all in sight. You will be in first person mode, no handsets or controllers, just your body – what you do, the game does, you see everything. Move your head, the game changes what you can see on screen. Like advanced virtually reality, like real life, only better.
You need a friend to play against in a multiplayer battle, yet none can make it over to your house at this time. What do you do? You carry on. Although the thrills of beating a mate will be gone, the thrills of beating a computer will emerge – still not quite the same, as taunting will be out of the question, but this time it will be worth it. At this moment computer players may seem to be a little stupid, walking in walls, building structures in your area. This won’t happen. The AI will be so advanced that it would be just like playing against a human player. You’ll have to double check just to make sure you aren’t!
Online play will thrive. ALL connections will be lightning quick (not just those with ADSL on their PC), you won’t notice the jogging and slow play that games today experience if you possess a 56k modem. All the consoles will come as standard with a built in super fast T1 type modem. You will think that you are playing offline because it plays so fast.
And then there is a bad point. The prices. Consoles today are always going up in price. When the N64 was released, a ‘fairish’ price of £120 was tagged onto it, which quickly fell to £100. The Dreamcast then entered at around £200, quite a lot, but worth it. Then came the PS2, weighing in at a hefty £300, which has now fallen to £270, and that is too much for me. If the future follows the pattern, which I think it will, then consoles could be getting pretty expensive. But by that time people will be richer, as the industry’s expand.
Games, I think, will slowly increase in price. PS2 games have increased by an average of £7.00 to £8.00 over PSX games (from £28.99 to about £36.00), and GBA games have increased by an average of as much as £9.00 to £10.00 from the GBC games (from £22.99 to about £32.99). Could we see games as much as 70, even eighty pounds plus? I really don’t hope so.
I believe I have covered the main aspects of future gaming, but if I haven’t, then perhaps you could fill the rest in.
Thanks for reading,
Swish
Page:
Really.....
Actually the ex-box isn't that greater than the GC. Has anyone read about the Ex-box liers? The Ex-boxes' stats were only true (Mhz, polygons per second etc...) WITHOUT textures, lighting, colour etc...
Now, when you do put the essentilas on to the polygons, the whole lot of the Ex-box's stats DROP by 90%! Which means that the Ex-box's mhz, polygons per seconds etc... are slightly better than the GC.
Now, when you do put the essentilas on to the polygons, the whole lot of the Ex-box's stats DROP by 90%! Which means that the Ex-box's mhz, polygons per seconds etc... are slightly better than the GC.
Armitage Shanks wrote:
> I hope so... I'm intending to
> grab a GC myself
Me too, if there are any good racing games. Thus, you cannot call me biased as I support all consoles.
It has to be said, though, that the GC and PS2's specs are just about equal.
> I hope so... I'm intending to
> grab a GC myself
Me too, if there are any good racing games. Thus, you cannot call me biased as I support all consoles.
It has to be said, though, that the GC and PS2's specs are just about equal.
turbonutter wrote:
Now the GC
> and Ex-box. That's a different story. Both coming out at the same
> time, and technically, the Ex-box kicks the GC's a**e. But they GC
> will win I think, proving that spec does not matter.
I hope so... I'm intending to grab a GC myself
:)
Now the GC
> and Ex-box. That's a different story. Both coming out at the same
> time, and technically, the Ex-box kicks the GC's a**e. But they GC
> will win I think, proving that spec does not matter.
I hope so... I'm intending to grab a GC myself
:)
Shocktrooper wrote:
> The N64 did have a good amount of games for it. Zelda being the best
> RPG ever!
Sony haven't (admittedly) got a decent RPG yet. They
> simply haven't got the superb mind of Shigsy on their side.
Oh no.. I'm not saying the N64 didnt have its fair share of great titles...
Just that in its first year of release it had as many top titles as the PS2 has...
:)
> The N64 did have a good amount of games for it. Zelda being the best
> RPG ever!
Sony haven't (admittedly) got a decent RPG yet. They
> simply haven't got the superb mind of Shigsy on their side.
Oh no.. I'm not saying the N64 didnt have its fair share of great titles...
Just that in its first year of release it had as many top titles as the PS2 has...
:)
Shanksy is right.
If they all came out that the same time, GC would be better but only just. But the PS2 has come out 2 years before the GC and Ex-box, so they can't be compared.
Now the GC and Ex-box. That's a different story. Both coming out at the same time, and technically, the Ex-box kicks the GC's a**e. But they GC will win I think, proving that spec does not matter.
Like the PSone and N64, it's the games that counts.
And spin, of course.
If they all came out that the same time, GC would be better but only just. But the PS2 has come out 2 years before the GC and Ex-box, so they can't be compared.
Now the GC and Ex-box. That's a different story. Both coming out at the same time, and technically, the Ex-box kicks the GC's a**e. But they GC will win I think, proving that spec does not matter.
Like the PSone and N64, it's the games that counts.
And spin, of course.
The Dreamcast is still a console you know.
The N64 did have a good amount of games for it. Zelda being the best RPG ever!
Sony haven't (admittedly) got a decent RPG yet. They simply haven't got the superb mind of Shigsy on their side.
Sony haven't (admittedly) got a decent RPG yet. They simply haven't got the superb mind of Shigsy on their side.
Shocktrooper wrote:
> Armitage wrote:" Well...you...can't then judge a PS2 against
> any other console" Of course you can , It whipped gthe
> Dreamcast in it's first month or something. And even though a PC
> isn't a console, the PS2 will also have internet capability as soon
> as Broadband is released. The PS2 was purpously built for games.
What?!!? ... Thats a responce to TurboNutters argument man?...
He said that since the PS2 was released so far removed from the other consoels (2 years) that it couldnt be judged with them...
and since the DC was released 2 years before the PS2... then that cant be judged with it either... :)
> Armitage wrote:" Well...you...can't then judge a PS2 against
> any other console" Of course you can , It whipped gthe
> Dreamcast in it's first month or something. And even though a PC
> isn't a console, the PS2 will also have internet capability as soon
> as Broadband is released. The PS2 was purpously built for games.
What?!!? ... Thats a responce to TurboNutters argument man?...
He said that since the PS2 was released so far removed from the other consoels (2 years) that it couldnt be judged with them...
and since the DC was released 2 years before the PS2... then that cant be judged with it either... :)
Page: