The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
Whilst leafing through the Argos catalogue a short time ago, I couldn't help but let curiosity get the better of me - I just had to check out the board games section.
What I noticed made me think...
I soon became aware that the board games around nowadays are all exactly the same ones that were around ten years (as long as I can realistcially remember) ago - monopoly, cleudo, scrabble, connect 4, jenga, buckaroo, screwball scramble, twister, etc.
Why?
Has there really been nothing new produced in the last ten years, that can really hold it's own amongst the heavyweights?
What about new possibilities? Surely engineering techniques have improved, allowing or more complex machanisms, cheaper production, more aesthetically pleasing designs, etc...
Apparently not neeeded. The board games around now are the same ones that were around then. Is it because they can't be improved on? - or rather, because they can't be noticably improved upon?
The big guys can't be toppled. Tried and tested, and with each new generation the demand never wanes. As far as board games are concerned, everything is stagnant.
Now, I suspect a large amount of you are expecting, and have already spotted, some sort of computer games related parallel to be drawn here.
Yep. Is the same thing going ot happen in games - and more importantly - has it already happened?
Not a particularly original point, I'll concede, but at least I'm backing it up with a decent hypothesis. Besides which, there will be at least some of you here who haven't discussed this theory yet...
Anyway, I think it's fairly likely that this could well be true. We're seeing fewer and fewer changes in each 'generation' of games - to the point where we will soon have the 'ultimate' game in each genre. A fighting game which offers everything you want - or at least enough so you never want for another.
Despite not being particularly keen on throwing up a counterargument before I've even finished the post, I will point out that there are possible exceptions with regard to adventure games, whereby new levels are needed to quench the lust for exploration. This too, might be irrelevant once level generators can reach an appropriate standard.
A leap in technology is required to keep video games evolving, not a step. Let's hope it arrives soon.
What I noticed made me think...
I soon became aware that the board games around nowadays are all exactly the same ones that were around ten years (as long as I can realistcially remember) ago - monopoly, cleudo, scrabble, connect 4, jenga, buckaroo, screwball scramble, twister, etc.
Why?
Has there really been nothing new produced in the last ten years, that can really hold it's own amongst the heavyweights?
What about new possibilities? Surely engineering techniques have improved, allowing or more complex machanisms, cheaper production, more aesthetically pleasing designs, etc...
Apparently not neeeded. The board games around now are the same ones that were around then. Is it because they can't be improved on? - or rather, because they can't be noticably improved upon?
The big guys can't be toppled. Tried and tested, and with each new generation the demand never wanes. As far as board games are concerned, everything is stagnant.
Now, I suspect a large amount of you are expecting, and have already spotted, some sort of computer games related parallel to be drawn here.
Yep. Is the same thing going ot happen in games - and more importantly - has it already happened?
Not a particularly original point, I'll concede, but at least I'm backing it up with a decent hypothesis. Besides which, there will be at least some of you here who haven't discussed this theory yet...
Anyway, I think it's fairly likely that this could well be true. We're seeing fewer and fewer changes in each 'generation' of games - to the point where we will soon have the 'ultimate' game in each genre. A fighting game which offers everything you want - or at least enough so you never want for another.
Despite not being particularly keen on throwing up a counterargument before I've even finished the post, I will point out that there are possible exceptions with regard to adventure games, whereby new levels are needed to quench the lust for exploration. This too, might be irrelevant once level generators can reach an appropriate standard.
A leap in technology is required to keep video games evolving, not a step. Let's hope it arrives soon.
Why play a family game of Monopoly when you could play a family game of Mario Party.
It's the first board game where you hit your opponents with hammers and compete in lots of mini games to try and win.
lol
Anyway, the next step on for photo realistic super games on the TV consoles?
(And I know I've said this a billion times...)
HOLOGRAMS!! :-)
A little box on the floor projects characters onto your room.
Little men scrapping on the carpet or moving targets for you to shoot.
Dogfights around the lights (giving the moths a thing or two to think about.)
And how will this be improved on?
Firstly a surround system will be used - projectors set up around the room so images can be produced everywhere.
After that, the next step up will be to design the machines so that they interact with your scenery.
Characters will be able to jump on and kick people off the sofa.
Planes will crash into the light (on into your face - remember, all this will mean is that it plays the exploding animation when you hit them, you won't actually get touched!)
As the technology improves further, the scanning equiptment will be able to keep up with your movements, - you'll be able to play "Virtual Swot the Flies" or play tig with a virtual play mate.
The next step up from holograms?
Well by then, scientists will have learnt how to (safely I hope :-D) wire up your brain to a computer, so you'll feel like you're really there.
You'll be in a computer generated world (like the Matrix) and the games will be able to become fully immersive.
Play the new Resident Evil, only this time you're there yourself, not controlling some character from the safety of your TV screen.
Wrestling games would be better.
All that muscule you always wanted could be generated for you on the spot. You get put in the stadium and from there it's up to you.
If would also be a part of education.
Lessons would be learnt. The child will learn the consequences of playing with fire.
Young children will quickly understand the horrors of the trenches.
They will also be able to walk around Mars or go through Jupiter (Devellopers don't have to program the killer atmosphere/gravity/pressure/lack of air/chemicals/etc).
Ofcourse will be saying to our children.
"You're spoilt with all these holograms and brain link ups.
When we were you're age, all we have were flat screens."
At that point, they'll laugh at us.
How did I get onto all this again?
Oh yes, the lack of new board games...
... ahem
It's the first board game where you hit your opponents with hammers and compete in lots of mini games to try and win.
lol
Anyway, the next step on for photo realistic super games on the TV consoles?
(And I know I've said this a billion times...)
HOLOGRAMS!! :-)
A little box on the floor projects characters onto your room.
Little men scrapping on the carpet or moving targets for you to shoot.
Dogfights around the lights (giving the moths a thing or two to think about.)
And how will this be improved on?
Firstly a surround system will be used - projectors set up around the room so images can be produced everywhere.
After that, the next step up will be to design the machines so that they interact with your scenery.
Characters will be able to jump on and kick people off the sofa.
Planes will crash into the light (on into your face - remember, all this will mean is that it plays the exploding animation when you hit them, you won't actually get touched!)
As the technology improves further, the scanning equiptment will be able to keep up with your movements, - you'll be able to play "Virtual Swot the Flies" or play tig with a virtual play mate.
The next step up from holograms?
Well by then, scientists will have learnt how to (safely I hope :-D) wire up your brain to a computer, so you'll feel like you're really there.
You'll be in a computer generated world (like the Matrix) and the games will be able to become fully immersive.
Play the new Resident Evil, only this time you're there yourself, not controlling some character from the safety of your TV screen.
Wrestling games would be better.
All that muscule you always wanted could be generated for you on the spot. You get put in the stadium and from there it's up to you.
If would also be a part of education.
Lessons would be learnt. The child will learn the consequences of playing with fire.
Young children will quickly understand the horrors of the trenches.
They will also be able to walk around Mars or go through Jupiter (Devellopers don't have to program the killer atmosphere/gravity/pressure/lack of air/chemicals/etc).
Ofcourse will be saying to our children.
"You're spoilt with all these holograms and brain link ups.
When we were you're age, all we have were flat screens."
At that point, they'll laugh at us.
How did I get onto all this again?
Oh yes, the lack of new board games...
... ahem
MB Games? Are they still going? good, becuae they might make a newer version of Subbuteo. Regarding Konami, I'm sure they can come up with constan, new ideas including plots that have deceit, backstabbing events. How fun.
If you look at the board games, there are all the old classics like Monopoly and Scrabble, but then look at the new ones. They are all car-boot junk!
It's all about gameplay, just like it is on the console scene. The good games are kept in peoples minds, and the sequels come along (Monopoly new york, monopoly star wars, monopoly manchester united) yet the rubbish games come and go.
Sometimes old games get the next gen update, like speedball (Mr frosty to that penguin thing), but its the original that the majority remembers.
As generations come and go, the cream of the games in that era are remembered, and gets added to the list of classics, (pac-man - monopoly, twister - sonic, kerplunk - tomb raider, etc), and you will see these in the pages of Argos every time the new catalogue comes out.
The trick is to come up with something new that captures the audience in a new way (dingbats - GT series). It's very difficult to think of a new idea when so many have been done before. The bods in the know recon that by 2017 or something every song that could be written will have been.
We just have to hope that the geniuses at Capcom and Konami (MB Games) can still surprise us.
It's all about gameplay, just like it is on the console scene. The good games are kept in peoples minds, and the sequels come along (Monopoly new york, monopoly star wars, monopoly manchester united) yet the rubbish games come and go.
Sometimes old games get the next gen update, like speedball (Mr frosty to that penguin thing), but its the original that the majority remembers.
As generations come and go, the cream of the games in that era are remembered, and gets added to the list of classics, (pac-man - monopoly, twister - sonic, kerplunk - tomb raider, etc), and you will see these in the pages of Argos every time the new catalogue comes out.
The trick is to come up with something new that captures the audience in a new way (dingbats - GT series). It's very difficult to think of a new idea when so many have been done before. The bods in the know recon that by 2017 or something every song that could be written will have been.
We just have to hope that the geniuses at Capcom and Konami (MB Games) can still surprise us.
Like e-books.
Whilst leafing through the Argos catalogue a short time ago, I couldn't help but let curiosity get the better of me - I just had to check out the board games section.
What I noticed made me think...
I soon became aware that the board games around nowadays are all exactly the same ones that were around ten years (as long as I can realistcially remember) ago - monopoly, cleudo, scrabble, connect 4, jenga, buckaroo, screwball scramble, twister, etc.
Why?
Has there really been nothing new produced in the last ten years, that can really hold it's own amongst the heavyweights?
What about new possibilities? Surely engineering techniques have improved, allowing or more complex machanisms, cheaper production, more aesthetically pleasing designs, etc...
Apparently not neeeded. The board games around now are the same ones that were around then. Is it because they can't be improved on? - or rather, because they can't be noticably improved upon?
The big guys can't be toppled. Tried and tested, and with each new generation the demand never wanes. As far as board games are concerned, everything is stagnant.
Now, I suspect a large amount of you are expecting, and have already spotted, some sort of computer games related parallel to be drawn here.
Yep. Is the same thing going ot happen in games - and more importantly - has it already happened?
Not a particularly original point, I'll concede, but at least I'm backing it up with a decent hypothesis. Besides which, there will be at least some of you here who haven't discussed this theory yet...
Anyway, I think it's fairly likely that this could well be true. We're seeing fewer and fewer changes in each 'generation' of games - to the point where we will soon have the 'ultimate' game in each genre. A fighting game which offers everything you want - or at least enough so you never want for another.
Despite not being particularly keen on throwing up a counterargument before I've even finished the post, I will point out that there are possible exceptions with regard to adventure games, whereby new levels are needed to quench the lust for exploration. This too, might be irrelevant once level generators can reach an appropriate standard.
A leap in technology is required to keep video games evolving, not a step. Let's hope it arrives soon.
What I noticed made me think...
I soon became aware that the board games around nowadays are all exactly the same ones that were around ten years (as long as I can realistcially remember) ago - monopoly, cleudo, scrabble, connect 4, jenga, buckaroo, screwball scramble, twister, etc.
Why?
Has there really been nothing new produced in the last ten years, that can really hold it's own amongst the heavyweights?
What about new possibilities? Surely engineering techniques have improved, allowing or more complex machanisms, cheaper production, more aesthetically pleasing designs, etc...
Apparently not neeeded. The board games around now are the same ones that were around then. Is it because they can't be improved on? - or rather, because they can't be noticably improved upon?
The big guys can't be toppled. Tried and tested, and with each new generation the demand never wanes. As far as board games are concerned, everything is stagnant.
Now, I suspect a large amount of you are expecting, and have already spotted, some sort of computer games related parallel to be drawn here.
Yep. Is the same thing going ot happen in games - and more importantly - has it already happened?
Not a particularly original point, I'll concede, but at least I'm backing it up with a decent hypothesis. Besides which, there will be at least some of you here who haven't discussed this theory yet...
Anyway, I think it's fairly likely that this could well be true. We're seeing fewer and fewer changes in each 'generation' of games - to the point where we will soon have the 'ultimate' game in each genre. A fighting game which offers everything you want - or at least enough so you never want for another.
Despite not being particularly keen on throwing up a counterargument before I've even finished the post, I will point out that there are possible exceptions with regard to adventure games, whereby new levels are needed to quench the lust for exploration. This too, might be irrelevant once level generators can reach an appropriate standard.
A leap in technology is required to keep video games evolving, not a step. Let's hope it arrives soon.