The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
When we look at the future of gaming we do not no what to expect. Years ago when the first computer was made (which was the size of room) nobody expected by the 90's we would be playing 3D games with real life graphics like Fifa 2000, Half-Life and Indiana Jones.
Now when a new game like the ones above come out we are not breath taken it is just another run of the mill game that costs £35. Over the past few decades the increase in gaming technology has been so much that we have nearly reached the point that we do not know what to do next.
The gaming companies have just ran out of ideas, we have had games that we are managers of football teams to formula 1. We have had games that you build up old empires to building a city, also we have had the extreme of looking after ants to building an airport.
We have had virtual reality, multiplayer games, games over the internet and enough sequels and expansion packs.
So what do we do now, to me the future of gaming is bleak unless some new idea is going to be found soon, unless we will be stuck with the same types of game forever ( which are not bad infact very good but we are always looking for something new).
Now when a new game like the ones above come out we are not breath taken it is just another run of the mill game that costs £35. Over the past few decades the increase in gaming technology has been so much that we have nearly reached the point that we do not know what to do next.
The gaming companies have just ran out of ideas, we have had games that we are managers of football teams to formula 1. We have had games that you build up old empires to building a city, also we have had the extreme of looking after ants to building an airport.
We have had virtual reality, multiplayer games, games over the internet and enough sequels and expansion packs.
So what do we do now, to me the future of gaming is bleak unless some new idea is going to be found soon, unless we will be stuck with the same types of game forever ( which are not bad infact very good but we are always looking for something new).
Page:
i really tired of the PS2 talk. People saying the graphics look better, and that leads to abuse to the other consoles. Your friends and everyone else, will pick up their PS2 out of their Christmas tree and open it and scream for joy. When I go there, people will crowd around it and say 'WOW!'.
I will be in one corner, looking at how the hype has got to them.
Whenever you say N64 to a shop owner he will chuckle until he dies (luckily).
I will be in one corner, looking at how the hype has got to them.
Whenever you say N64 to a shop owner he will chuckle until he dies (luckily).
The reason games look tired and out of ideas is down to the fact that the publishers don`t really care anymore. If i had something to blame for this then i could pick many targets in both PC and Console markets, but perhaps the easiest example to use is Pokemon.
Pokemon was a wonderful, original idea by Nintendo (something they manage from time to time) for the Gameboy, and noting its appeal to the 5-15 age group, set about a massive marketing frenzy with but one aim - make money. It worked so well, that no-one seems to have noticed that it is a never ending expence for its addicts, that Nintendo happily milk by releasing more titles in the range - all of lesser quality than the last. The point is that there comes a point when little matters except reaching the quota for next months sales figures... compare that to the days when the humble computer geek slaved for hours a day in his bedroom, tapping away on his ZX Spectrum to produce classics like Atic Atak and Jet Set Willy. Money was a motive, but achievement was the real driving force.
Nowadays, with big companies and big money being the keywords, i fear games will continue to be monotone and boring, with imitation following imitation and the scattering of independent software houses still producing quality work.
The future of Gaming....? Gloomy, repetitive with only the occasional bright spot!.
Pokemon was a wonderful, original idea by Nintendo (something they manage from time to time) for the Gameboy, and noting its appeal to the 5-15 age group, set about a massive marketing frenzy with but one aim - make money. It worked so well, that no-one seems to have noticed that it is a never ending expence for its addicts, that Nintendo happily milk by releasing more titles in the range - all of lesser quality than the last. The point is that there comes a point when little matters except reaching the quota for next months sales figures... compare that to the days when the humble computer geek slaved for hours a day in his bedroom, tapping away on his ZX Spectrum to produce classics like Atic Atak and Jet Set Willy. Money was a motive, but achievement was the real driving force.
Nowadays, with big companies and big money being the keywords, i fear games will continue to be monotone and boring, with imitation following imitation and the scattering of independent software houses still producing quality work.
The future of Gaming....? Gloomy, repetitive with only the occasional bright spot!.
Hey, I've only just noticed that...
WHAT DO YOU MEAN THE N64 IS DEAD AND BURIED!
FIRST you ruin RAW for us all AND NOW THIS.
I don't need to say any more. I am happy in the knowledge that you're blowing £300+ on the most overhyped mess up in games industry.
Yes, I know the PS was far more successful than the N64 (like say, the Mega Drive was more successful than the Snes). After making millions on the Mega Drive Sega got a bit cocky and messed up their over priced, and over hyped follow up. Now notice the similarities...
WHAT DO YOU MEAN THE N64 IS DEAD AND BURIED!
FIRST you ruin RAW for us all AND NOW THIS.
I don't need to say any more. I am happy in the knowledge that you're blowing £300+ on the most overhyped mess up in games industry.
Yes, I know the PS was far more successful than the N64 (like say, the Mega Drive was more successful than the Snes). After making millions on the Mega Drive Sega got a bit cocky and messed up their over priced, and over hyped follow up. Now notice the similarities...
Cybernet not cybetnet okay.
Any one watched cybetnet last, night, zero N64, 10 minutes PS2, 5 mins gamecube and 2 mins on the X-box.
Ahem! yes.
N64 dead and buried. I don't think. Playstation selling well only on the strength of it's good games? hm! Don't get me wrong, the Playstation is a good console, but it has been looking haggered around the edges recently and the strain of old age is starting to show.
'Bits' don't mean anything in a console (well hardly anything). In a computer they mean more as the main processor is still the important part, but a console is made up of so many custom built chips that they made the main processor's job so much less significant.
N64 dead and buried. I don't think. Playstation selling well only on the strength of it's good games? hm! Don't get me wrong, the Playstation is a good console, but it has been looking haggered around the edges recently and the strain of old age is starting to show.
'Bits' don't mean anything in a console (well hardly anything). In a computer they mean more as the main processor is still the important part, but a console is made up of so many custom built chips that they made the main processor's job so much less significant.
Hey Grix, your hover car isn't going to add to the ozone problem is it?
The future is dull and unambitious for 10 years or so.
And then I will crawl out of University and work for Rare or Grix and the future will suddenly so bright that everyone will need sunglasses (or that might just be the fact that the ozone layer will have disappeared by then!)
And then I will crawl out of University and work for Rare or Grix and the future will suddenly so bright that everyone will need sunglasses (or that might just be the fact that the ozone layer will have disappeared by then!)
To be honest when you talk about the future of gaming its all about power and specification, and thats all companies seem to care about these days. Just look at the last 5 years. Weve gone from 16 BIT in the SNES, to 32 in the Playstation and Saturn, 64 in the Jaguar and N64 and now 128 in the Playstation 2, Gamecube, X-Box and Dreamcast. Games companies seem to think that the more powerful the system, the more people will be attracting to buy it. That is definately not the case- just look at the Playstation. Its a 32 BIT console. It has sold 75 million units worldwide, bettered only by the Gameboy, which is an 8 bit machine I might add. For 5 years it has done away with all of the competition that has been more powerful. The Saturn, came out at same time- gone. The Jaguar, 64 BIT, gone. The N64, 64 BIT also, dead and baried almost as you dont see any N64 games for sale that are new copies unless they are published by Nintendo in places like GAME do you? The Playstation has been successful, as well as the Gameboy, becuase great games are made for it, not just from in house I might add. To be honest, the future of videogames is not to make machines that are more powerful and untimately more expensive, is to make consoles and games that are cheap to produce develop and buy. I wonder in 5 years time the the development costs of making a console game are so great that the costs will be in the same range as movies. Companies should stick to what works and refine it than develop a new console that pushes costs to buy it even higher I say, that should be the future of gaming.
Page: