The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
How many ‘steps’ do you think that gaming has taken since it began? Well the first step was (obviously enough) the birth of the home entertainment system. What was that? Well there are many answers to this. The Sinclair ZX81 is the one that springs to my mind but if you picked A) the Atari or B) the Commodore 64… then you have just won £16,000. Er, right. Well yes those three answers are all correct
So what was the next step? Well that would have to be the NES. Or Nintendo Entertainment System. This console revolutionised gaming as we (as a race) knew it. It also saw Mario brought forward from arcades to home consoles. Yep the NES was definitely where proper gaming began. What next? PC’s. Yes they were built primarily for work etc but game manufacturers took advantage of the sheer power of the PC and re-revolutionised gaming. Actual flight simulations were made, Theme Park was born and gaming entered its Bronze Age.
Soon after PCs arrived and colonised the world, the SNES, Nintendo’s follow up to the NES, was revealed to the world. The graphics were considered to be the best in the business and the all round playability of games was raised. I consider the SNES to home my favourite all time game. The Legend of Zelda: Links Awakening. The SNES had competition though. The Sega Megadrive was being sold worldwide on a massive scale and the Great Console Wars began. Who would have guessed that they would go on for more than a decade?
Then, gaming came to it’s silver age. The PlayStation, N64 and Dreamcast. The PlayStation was the first ‘next gen’ console. With games like Metal Gear Solid, Grand Theft Auto and Die Hard, the PlayStation hyped, advertised and pirated it’s way to the position of king of consoles. The N64, released in 1997 brought us GoldenEye. The next step was then taken with the release of GoldenEye. A new playability level was reached. The graphics were silky smooth, the gameplay slick and… well it was James Bond!
The Dreamcast opened up a new window for the great lumbering giant of gaming to fall through. The Dreamcast of course brought us internet gaming. Yeah I know this was already available on PCs but it was a first for consoles. Unfortunately Sega have now spluttered and died. So, the final step that gaming is going to take will be completed with the release of the Xbox and the GameCube.
At this point I believe that gaming can’t get any better. The periphilon will have been reached. Gaming will go into its golden stage. The graphics will look stunningly realistic and won’t be able to be improved. So, after gaming has reached its pinnacle, where the hell is it going to go next?
Well that question is one I have been pondering for a long time and I have come up with only two answers. Virtual Reality, this can be the only way that gaming can get any BETTER. The feeling of actually being there, being in game physically DOING the puzzle, swimming through the lake…etc. This is one way or the other is slightly more interesting. Or haywire. Bizarre…. Call it what the hell you want. The other answer I came up with is slightly better than reality. Actual role-play. The scenery could be made or projected, the enemies would be played by people or employers of the company who are running the game. And you could take the title role. Costume and everything, sword shield… everything. Obviously I’m describing how an adventure game would be. Shoot em ups would be twice as fun. Exactly the same, scenery enemies but with paintball guns. How fun would that be? Legging it around pretending to be James Bond with a paintball gun, catching Trevelyn and Jaws. Strategy games would be much ore fun this way round. Imagine commanding a team of SWAT soldiers. Having maps and paintball guns, trying to work your way into a building. It would be bloody brilliant!
Also this way, new genres could be introduced. Decent war games could be played. With proper scenarios. Played in woodland with certain obstacles and tasks. It would be superb!
Obviously not all game genres could be played like this though. Racing games would be impossible, as would puzzlers. But I think that this is a small price to pay for… well, for what? Reality gaming I suppose it would be called.
Phew! It took a long time to write that! But don’t just *think* about the thoughts that I have provoked (well, I hope I’ve provoked) I would really like to know your thoughts on this
RBS
So what was the next step? Well that would have to be the NES. Or Nintendo Entertainment System. This console revolutionised gaming as we (as a race) knew it. It also saw Mario brought forward from arcades to home consoles. Yep the NES was definitely where proper gaming began. What next? PC’s. Yes they were built primarily for work etc but game manufacturers took advantage of the sheer power of the PC and re-revolutionised gaming. Actual flight simulations were made, Theme Park was born and gaming entered its Bronze Age.
Soon after PCs arrived and colonised the world, the SNES, Nintendo’s follow up to the NES, was revealed to the world. The graphics were considered to be the best in the business and the all round playability of games was raised. I consider the SNES to home my favourite all time game. The Legend of Zelda: Links Awakening. The SNES had competition though. The Sega Megadrive was being sold worldwide on a massive scale and the Great Console Wars began. Who would have guessed that they would go on for more than a decade?
Then, gaming came to it’s silver age. The PlayStation, N64 and Dreamcast. The PlayStation was the first ‘next gen’ console. With games like Metal Gear Solid, Grand Theft Auto and Die Hard, the PlayStation hyped, advertised and pirated it’s way to the position of king of consoles. The N64, released in 1997 brought us GoldenEye. The next step was then taken with the release of GoldenEye. A new playability level was reached. The graphics were silky smooth, the gameplay slick and… well it was James Bond!
The Dreamcast opened up a new window for the great lumbering giant of gaming to fall through. The Dreamcast of course brought us internet gaming. Yeah I know this was already available on PCs but it was a first for consoles. Unfortunately Sega have now spluttered and died. So, the final step that gaming is going to take will be completed with the release of the Xbox and the GameCube.
At this point I believe that gaming can’t get any better. The periphilon will have been reached. Gaming will go into its golden stage. The graphics will look stunningly realistic and won’t be able to be improved. So, after gaming has reached its pinnacle, where the hell is it going to go next?
Well that question is one I have been pondering for a long time and I have come up with only two answers. Virtual Reality, this can be the only way that gaming can get any BETTER. The feeling of actually being there, being in game physically DOING the puzzle, swimming through the lake…etc. This is one way or the other is slightly more interesting. Or haywire. Bizarre…. Call it what the hell you want. The other answer I came up with is slightly better than reality. Actual role-play. The scenery could be made or projected, the enemies would be played by people or employers of the company who are running the game. And you could take the title role. Costume and everything, sword shield… everything. Obviously I’m describing how an adventure game would be. Shoot em ups would be twice as fun. Exactly the same, scenery enemies but with paintball guns. How fun would that be? Legging it around pretending to be James Bond with a paintball gun, catching Trevelyn and Jaws. Strategy games would be much ore fun this way round. Imagine commanding a team of SWAT soldiers. Having maps and paintball guns, trying to work your way into a building. It would be bloody brilliant!
Also this way, new genres could be introduced. Decent war games could be played. With proper scenarios. Played in woodland with certain obstacles and tasks. It would be superb!
Obviously not all game genres could be played like this though. Racing games would be impossible, as would puzzlers. But I think that this is a small price to pay for… well, for what? Reality gaming I suppose it would be called.
Phew! It took a long time to write that! But don’t just *think* about the thoughts that I have provoked (well, I hope I’ve provoked) I would really like to know your thoughts on this
RBS
Page:
anyway this won't win.
R2D2's is better than this, I reckon that will win becuase it is a very good post.
I'm still puzzled at how my CBFD review won though! I didn't think it was that good...
R2D2's is better than this, I reckon that will win becuase it is a very good post.
I'm still puzzled at how my CBFD review won though! I didn't think it was that good...
nintendo is simon wrote:
> Come on RBS you could at least get what i was saying. yoou have a
> 75% of winning doesn't mean you want to win, its just that you have
> a great chance beause this is very good.
thankyou
> Come on RBS you could at least get what i was saying. yoou have a
> 75% of winning doesn't mean you want to win, its just that you have
> a great chance beause this is very good.
thankyou
nintendo is simon wrote:
> RBS be honest, you have never liked me have you?
nope
I was actually
> giving prasie to your forum, but then you try to argue againts me.
Yeah and I appreciate the praise but it was actually you who started the argument.
> All i said againt this is it was LIKE mine, i didn't say it was
> completely like. It's just there has been alot of VR realted topics.
Mine isn't VR related though! I wrote one paragraph on it if that!
> And your RRPG (yes thats right)
*Clap clap clap*
Idea, you might need to explain it
> proberly to get good reconision. But i think i know what your
> getting at. But yours has about at 75% chance of winning. My be less
> if another good forum is started.
**starting to develop repeating annoyance disorder**
I DON'T POST TO F'ING WIN
(lol at your last post)
Why thankyou
> RBS be honest, you have never liked me have you?
nope
I was actually
> giving prasie to your forum, but then you try to argue againts me.
Yeah and I appreciate the praise but it was actually you who started the argument.
> All i said againt this is it was LIKE mine, i didn't say it was
> completely like. It's just there has been alot of VR realted topics.
Mine isn't VR related though! I wrote one paragraph on it if that!
> And your RRPG (yes thats right)
*Clap clap clap*
Idea, you might need to explain it
> proberly to get good reconision. But i think i know what your
> getting at. But yours has about at 75% chance of winning. My be less
> if another good forum is started.
**starting to develop repeating annoyance disorder**
I DON'T POST TO F'ING WIN
(lol at your last post)
Why thankyou
SNIPER wrote:
> Well easier said is gaming has improved in technology but hasn't
> done better in gameplay.
RBS Says:
errrr, nope read that sentence 6 times and it still don't make sense!
> Well easier said is gaming has improved in technology but hasn't
> done better in gameplay.
RBS Says:
errrr, nope read that sentence 6 times and it still don't make sense!
RBS be honest, you have never liked me have you? I was actually giving prasie to your forum, but then you try to argue againts me. All i said againt this is it was LIKE mine, i didn't say it was completely like. It's just there has been alot of VR realted topics. And your RRPG (yes thats right) Idea, you might need to explain it proberly to get good reconision. But i think i know what your getting at. But yours has about at 75% chance of winning. My be less if another good forum is started.
(lol at your last post)
(lol at your last post)
Well easier said is gaming has improved in technology but hasn't done better in gameplay.
FantasyMeister wrote:
> ...but, the steps that RBS pointed out are also valid ones.
The
> steps aren't as large as they used to be though, a bit like PC
> development.
First, we went from 8 bit to 16 bit to 32 bit to 64
> bit to 128 bit, a very natural and physically logical progression in
> sizes.
But the technological advances in other areas have been
> quite small. PCs initially leaped ahead each year in terms of
> technology, but that trend has slowed to an extent that the PCs
> coming out today are not much different from the ones that came out
> a few months back.
Same with consoles, there's not a great deal
> of difference between the graphical quality of a 128 DC and a 64 bit
> Nintendo, the parts inside aren't really that much different in
> terms of what they do.
So as the GC and the X-Box come out, sure
> we'll notice a difference, but the level of gameplay won't take that
> much of a leap forward, we're just not geared up in the hardware
> stakes to achieve that yet.
Maybe in 10 years time we'll see some
> radical new approaches to gaming and peripherals, but for now some
> would argue that you can still get as much gameplay from a 32 bit
> console as a 128 bit one. The only real difference is a tweak of
> the sound and graphics.
exactly what I've been trying to say!
So althought the steps are there, over
> the last couple of years the strides have been getting shorter,
here here
and
> until we take another great leap in technology, the boundaries of
> gaming are only going to expand slowly instead of the fits and
> starts that we had 3 or 4 years ago.
I concur
well I couldn't have put it better myself FM. Oh wait.... I did! hehehe :-)
> ...but, the steps that RBS pointed out are also valid ones.
The
> steps aren't as large as they used to be though, a bit like PC
> development.
First, we went from 8 bit to 16 bit to 32 bit to 64
> bit to 128 bit, a very natural and physically logical progression in
> sizes.
But the technological advances in other areas have been
> quite small. PCs initially leaped ahead each year in terms of
> technology, but that trend has slowed to an extent that the PCs
> coming out today are not much different from the ones that came out
> a few months back.
Same with consoles, there's not a great deal
> of difference between the graphical quality of a 128 DC and a 64 bit
> Nintendo, the parts inside aren't really that much different in
> terms of what they do.
So as the GC and the X-Box come out, sure
> we'll notice a difference, but the level of gameplay won't take that
> much of a leap forward, we're just not geared up in the hardware
> stakes to achieve that yet.
Maybe in 10 years time we'll see some
> radical new approaches to gaming and peripherals, but for now some
> would argue that you can still get as much gameplay from a 32 bit
> console as a 128 bit one. The only real difference is a tweak of
> the sound and graphics.
exactly what I've been trying to say!
So althought the steps are there, over
> the last couple of years the strides have been getting shorter,
here here
and
> until we take another great leap in technology, the boundaries of
> gaming are only going to expand slowly instead of the fits and
> starts that we had 3 or 4 years ago.
I concur
well I couldn't have put it better myself FM. Oh wait.... I did! hehehe :-)
...but, the steps that RBS pointed out are also valid ones.
The steps aren't as large as they used to be though, a bit like PC development.
First, we went from 8 bit to 16 bit to 32 bit to 64 bit to 128 bit, a very natural and physically logical progression in sizes.
But the technological advances in other areas have been quite small. PCs initially leaped ahead each year in terms of technology, but that trend has slowed to an extent that the PCs coming out today are not much different from the ones that came out a few months back.
Same with consoles, there's not a great deal of difference between the graphical quality of a 128 DC and a 64 bit Nintendo, the parts inside aren't really that much different in terms of what they do.
So as the GC and the X-Box come out, sure we'll notice a difference, but the level of gameplay won't take that much of a leap forward, we're just not geared up in the hardware stakes to achieve that yet.
Maybe in 10 years time we'll see some radical new approaches to gaming and peripherals, but for now some would argue that you can still get as much gameplay from a 32 bit console as a 128 bit one. The only real difference is a tweak of the sound and graphics.
So althought the steps are there, over the last couple of years the strides have been getting shorter, and until we take another great leap in technology, the boundaries of gaming are only going to expand slowly instead of the fits and starts that we had 3 or 4 years ago.
The steps aren't as large as they used to be though, a bit like PC development.
First, we went from 8 bit to 16 bit to 32 bit to 64 bit to 128 bit, a very natural and physically logical progression in sizes.
But the technological advances in other areas have been quite small. PCs initially leaped ahead each year in terms of technology, but that trend has slowed to an extent that the PCs coming out today are not much different from the ones that came out a few months back.
Same with consoles, there's not a great deal of difference between the graphical quality of a 128 DC and a 64 bit Nintendo, the parts inside aren't really that much different in terms of what they do.
So as the GC and the X-Box come out, sure we'll notice a difference, but the level of gameplay won't take that much of a leap forward, we're just not geared up in the hardware stakes to achieve that yet.
Maybe in 10 years time we'll see some radical new approaches to gaming and peripherals, but for now some would argue that you can still get as much gameplay from a 32 bit console as a 128 bit one. The only real difference is a tweak of the sound and graphics.
So althought the steps are there, over the last couple of years the strides have been getting shorter, and until we take another great leap in technology, the boundaries of gaming are only going to expand slowly instead of the fits and starts that we had 3 or 4 years ago.
nintendo is simon wrote:
> I didn't mean to upset you, but i thought that Role-playing games
> are out (zelda, ff) and there RPG (role playing games). So i thought
> you was going on about how VR can improve RPG's
No I mean proper role playing games. Reality RPGs, I can't explain it any other way!
. I don't mind if you
> wan to get your views arcoss, but don't you want to win? Will you
> dontate it if you win?
By that I mean I don't write my reviews or post my discussions to win games. If I win it's nice but I don't constantly post stuff because I want a free game. Wish I could still donate it, but the christmas charity run is over now...
NIS, NOT TRYING TO UPSET PEOPLE! :)
yeah, TRYING, not too good at it though are you!
> I didn't mean to upset you, but i thought that Role-playing games
> are out (zelda, ff) and there RPG (role playing games). So i thought
> you was going on about how VR can improve RPG's
No I mean proper role playing games. Reality RPGs, I can't explain it any other way!
. I don't mind if you
> wan to get your views arcoss, but don't you want to win? Will you
> dontate it if you win?
By that I mean I don't write my reviews or post my discussions to win games. If I win it's nice but I don't constantly post stuff because I want a free game. Wish I could still donate it, but the christmas charity run is over now...
NIS, NOT TRYING TO UPSET PEOPLE! :)
yeah, TRYING, not too good at it though are you!
Page: