The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
I believe that in the distant future gaming will become so advanced and lifelike that it will just be like living your life as you do now but in virtual reality. I think that most people will find this boring, so the game developers will have to go back and create games like the ones of years passed to keep gamers interested. Afterall would you pay out £50 for a game version of your life?
Might be fun.
Stick474 wrote:
Afterall
> would you pay out £50 for a game version of your life?
----------
No I wouldn't.
Afterall
> would you pay out £50 for a game version of your life?
----------
No I wouldn't.
Meka_Dragon wrote:
If anyone
> released a game tomorrow in which you went to work, and then went
> home and made dinner, it would have a small novelty appeal, but
> you'd soon realise that you could do this any time you liked
Two words:
The Sims.
If anyone
> released a game tomorrow in which you went to work, and then went
> home and made dinner, it would have a small novelty appeal, but
> you'd soon realise that you could do this any time you liked
Two words:
The Sims.
Meka_Dragon wrote:
> Gone are the days in which you can blow up one guy with a rocket
> launcher, and the guy standing next to him won't notice!
You haven't played Project IGI then? :-)
It's a great game, but that's one of its flaws.
I shot a guy on one side of a military base, and the guy standing on the other side of a wide-open area didn't notice.
It's probably just as well, because the game's hard enough as it is... but still...
> Gone are the days in which you can blow up one guy with a rocket
> launcher, and the guy standing next to him won't notice!
You haven't played Project IGI then? :-)
It's a great game, but that's one of its flaws.
I shot a guy on one side of a military base, and the guy standing on the other side of a wide-open area didn't notice.
It's probably just as well, because the game's hard enough as it is... but still...
The thing about realism in games is that it doesn't have to mean games in which you do real life things.
Some games would benefit from real life physics, others don't so they won't be used.
Some games would benefit from enhanced interaction with the environment, others won't so it won't be partof the game.
If a sports game became so realistic that it was just like playing the sport yourself, would you still play?
I would, as I seriously doubt that I could round up 21 other men right now, and play a decent match of football on a full sized pitch. Besides, I'm not fit enough to run around after a ball for over an hour!
There seems to be this strange misconception amongst many people that the future of gaming will be ultra realism, in which we simply play life sims. This will never happen, because no one would want to do that! People may like to play games in real life environments, maybe having a game set in a nearby city. Just because it was set there, you wouldn't have to go shopping, would you? No1 The developers would still come up with decent games to play. Maybe there would be aliens trying to eat you as you sprint down the street, or maybe you'll skate around knocking over dustbins for extra points!
If anyone released a game tomorrow in which you went to work, and then went home and made dinner, it would have a small novelty appeal, but you'd soon realise that you could do this any time you liked. If however it was a game in which you wen tot your normal place of work only to find that rats hadescaped from the lab downstairs, at they were carrying a highly infectious deadly disease, then that might be interesting!
Personally I feel that realism would certainly benefit some games, but again, it doesn't mean that it has to be set around real life. You can have aspects of realism in a fantasy world. By this I mean simple things, like leaving muddy footprints, and being able to track someone elses, open every cupboard and door, even if nothing relevant is inside. I find it quite frustrating when on a game there are a bunch of crate, but only the ones with useful stuff in will open. Why not open the others too, and just have something irrelevant in there. And when there's a stack of crates, how come you can never smash open the bottom one, making the rest fall on top of you? It would be of no benefit to the game, except that it might makeyou think a little about what you are doing.
In one area 'realism' is already improving brilliantly, and that's in computer controlled characters AI (Artificial Intelligence). Gone are the days in which you can blow up one guy with a rocket launcher, and the guy standing next to him won't notice! Villians respond to your actions better than ever before in first person shooters. In beat 'em-ups you can no longer get away with performing the same move over and again, as the AI 'learns' what you're doing, andwill counter it, and start to gain the upper hand if you don't change your tactics.
So I'd say yes to realism, as I doubt any developer is daft enough to use it to make a 'life' sim!
Some games would benefit from real life physics, others don't so they won't be used.
Some games would benefit from enhanced interaction with the environment, others won't so it won't be partof the game.
If a sports game became so realistic that it was just like playing the sport yourself, would you still play?
I would, as I seriously doubt that I could round up 21 other men right now, and play a decent match of football on a full sized pitch. Besides, I'm not fit enough to run around after a ball for over an hour!
There seems to be this strange misconception amongst many people that the future of gaming will be ultra realism, in which we simply play life sims. This will never happen, because no one would want to do that! People may like to play games in real life environments, maybe having a game set in a nearby city. Just because it was set there, you wouldn't have to go shopping, would you? No1 The developers would still come up with decent games to play. Maybe there would be aliens trying to eat you as you sprint down the street, or maybe you'll skate around knocking over dustbins for extra points!
If anyone released a game tomorrow in which you went to work, and then went home and made dinner, it would have a small novelty appeal, but you'd soon realise that you could do this any time you liked. If however it was a game in which you wen tot your normal place of work only to find that rats hadescaped from the lab downstairs, at they were carrying a highly infectious deadly disease, then that might be interesting!
Personally I feel that realism would certainly benefit some games, but again, it doesn't mean that it has to be set around real life. You can have aspects of realism in a fantasy world. By this I mean simple things, like leaving muddy footprints, and being able to track someone elses, open every cupboard and door, even if nothing relevant is inside. I find it quite frustrating when on a game there are a bunch of crate, but only the ones with useful stuff in will open. Why not open the others too, and just have something irrelevant in there. And when there's a stack of crates, how come you can never smash open the bottom one, making the rest fall on top of you? It would be of no benefit to the game, except that it might makeyou think a little about what you are doing.
In one area 'realism' is already improving brilliantly, and that's in computer controlled characters AI (Artificial Intelligence). Gone are the days in which you can blow up one guy with a rocket launcher, and the guy standing next to him won't notice! Villians respond to your actions better than ever before in first person shooters. In beat 'em-ups you can no longer get away with performing the same move over and again, as the AI 'learns' what you're doing, andwill counter it, and start to gain the upper hand if you don't change your tactics.
So I'd say yes to realism, as I doubt any developer is daft enough to use it to make a 'life' sim!
I believe that in the distant future gaming will become so advanced and lifelike that it will just be like living your life as you do now but in virtual reality. I think that most people will find this boring, so the game developers will have to go back and create games like the ones of years passed to keep gamers interested. Afterall would you pay out £50 for a game version of your life?