i guess im in the small percentage of people that loved mirriors edge aside from being a short title i did get a ton of replay out of it(timetrials/hard mode) and hope that a second is on the way anyway fanboyism aside interesting essay/rant and gl on the whole game designing carrier and im definatly on the boat for innovation without it we wouldn't have such great games like condemmed ,stranglehold and so many others without innovation we'd still be playing some 8 bit version of golf or watching paint dry not to mention ungodly amounts of masterbation that would render most people blind .. so in closing go innovation!!!
Innovation a.k.a. Why Many Gamers Are Hypocritical Ass-hats - Essay warning
- Thread starter RYjet911
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Mirror's Edge defeated itself by forgetting that it was not an FPS the controls reflect this. I think we often confuse innovation with "Having the stones to actually try something, and the ability to execute it." when a developer/publisher has the stones to try something and executes it well the "innovation" will come on its own. If they are afraid however the innovation will not come. I think we should also differentiate between "innovation" within a franchise and "innovation" within a genre at large. Metal Gear for example does both, it uses all sorts of neat tricks we see in other games to further the story telling within the franchise itself. Even going so far as to change its core game mechanics by the third entry in the modern product line. It also manages to "innovate" with respect to the genre itself by providing a psuedo open world in MGS4 which will most likely be expanded upon in the next iteration of the franchise.
What makes the Metal Gear games successful at both levels of "innovation" is not only the creativity of the designers and the lack of fear on thier part, it is the ability of the team to execute so many of these ideas well.
What makes the Metal Gear games successful at both levels of "innovation" is not only the creativity of the designers and the lack of fear on thier part, it is the ability of the team to execute so many of these ideas well.
I love your thoughts on the Wii. I love my 360 and Wii to death as well, and my third favorite game of all time is No More Heroes. Plus, I am currently enjoying Resident Evil 4: Wii Edition, which is great because I missed it last generation. All of the consoles have their benefits and flaws, stop bitching and just pick what is right for you!
Although, I do think Nintendo's next console needs to have at least equal processing power, online functionality, and graphical capabilities to the others if it really wants to thrive.
Although, I do think Nintendo's next console needs to have at least equal processing power, online functionality, and graphical capabilities to the others if it really wants to thrive.
Two big flaws in the OT:
1. Gamers do not complain about lack of innovation, rather a handful of intelligent gamers do and they don't influence the gaming masses: there is no hypocrisy here.
2. Innovation is only worthwhile when the idea and execution are both good; there's no point in supporting crap just because it's new.
Score: C-
1. Gamers do not complain about lack of innovation, rather a handful of intelligent gamers do and they don't influence the gaming masses: there is no hypocrisy here.
2. Innovation is only worthwhile when the idea and execution are both good; there's no point in supporting crap just because it's new.
Score: C-
Most people are complaining about the quality of the games not how innovative they are! Sure the Mii games can be fun with some friends and No More Hero's and Mario Galaxy are good but people have noticed that the games on the N64 were alot more fun with better gameplay. They say betrayal because Nintendo is a sellout by dumping it's fans to try and get a new audience!
Alot of people see that the games are not as good as before and are entitled to their opinions. Better graphics and story's do not make games great!
Alot of people see that the games are not as good as before and are entitled to their opinions. Better graphics and story's do not make games great!
It's a good point. Whenever anyone tries anything different, a lot of people turn around and start complaining that it didn't meet their standards, standards which can be only achieved by sticking to something that's been done over and over.
However, whilst I applaud Nintendo for trying something different for the Wii, and congratulate them on their obvious financial success, it is my opinion that whereas some games like Half Life 2 could be considered as works of art, all the majority of exlusive Wii games do is provide simplistic entertainment. Whilst there is nothing wrong with this, you have to feel for the people who bought it expecting the console to really push gaming to its limits as an artistic medium. This simply hasn't happened very much where the Wii is concerened. Overkill and Madworld, along with Nintendo's usual suspects (Metroid and Mario) are some of the only games (along with some Wiiware like World of Goo) that one can sit back and think "Wow, that was trully a labour of love on the developers part". So whilst you could say the PS3, PC and 360 have their fair share of beer swilling idiots, you have to admit their pushing some boundries in terms of art.
However, whilst I applaud Nintendo for trying something different for the Wii, and congratulate them on their obvious financial success, it is my opinion that whereas some games like Half Life 2 could be considered as works of art, all the majority of exlusive Wii games do is provide simplistic entertainment. Whilst there is nothing wrong with this, you have to feel for the people who bought it expecting the console to really push gaming to its limits as an artistic medium. This simply hasn't happened very much where the Wii is concerened. Overkill and Madworld, along with Nintendo's usual suspects (Metroid and Mario) are some of the only games (along with some Wiiware like World of Goo) that one can sit back and think "Wow, that was trully a labour of love on the developers part". So whilst you could say the PS3, PC and 360 have their fair share of beer swilling idiots, you have to admit their pushing some boundries in terms of art.
China wants the wall back, the Horde is getting antsy.
But no really, if there was an opposite of the report button, I'd press it.
Games aren't about Graphics there are about fun.
Apart from Crysis and any game on the PS3. I don't care how bad the game play is, I'd keep dying so much because I thought a wall was pretty that it wouldn't matter if there was even a plot.
But no really, if there was an opposite of the report button, I'd press it.
Games aren't about Graphics there are about fun.
Apart from Crysis and any game on the PS3. I don't care how bad the game play is, I'd keep dying so much because I thought a wall was pretty that it wouldn't matter if there was even a plot.
To me, the big difference is between "NEW IDEAS" and "WELL-EXECUTED NEW IDEAS." Just because an idea is new doesn't mean we should all gather around it for a great big circle-jerk; it has to be groundbreaking and amazing, a la Half-Life 2, to earn its own metaphorical praise-bukkake.
I don't hate my Wii because of its game lineup. I don't hate it because I'm not used to waving a remote around and instantly revile anything new or innovative. I hate it because it seems to willfully misinterpret my commands, even when properly configured.
I don't care how new and innovative your ideas are, if you don't implement them correctly, they're next to worthless and deserve to be scorned.
I don't hate my Wii because of its game lineup. I don't hate it because I'm not used to waving a remote around and instantly revile anything new or innovative. I hate it because it seems to willfully misinterpret my commands, even when properly configured.
I don't care how new and innovative your ideas are, if you don't implement them correctly, they're next to worthless and deserve to be scorned.
As many others have said before me, if the innovative idea is not done well, it can fuck off and die in a hole for all I care. I play games to be entertained, not to wrestle with bugs and bad design choices while trying to desperately stave off boredom just because the game has a startling lack of power-armoured space marines.
The majority of gamers I know are fanboys. There is nothing wrong with being a fanboy, just don't try and shove your biased junk in my face.
case and point:
Most people seem to think that GTA4 was bad somehow because it went for gritty realism and defined characters with a coherent plot. This is the first good thing to happen to the series since GTA3 tried the same thing but just fell short because of the terrible 2001 rendering. Most fanboys are quick to say "San Andreas was better". I usually reply that San Andreas was almost completely different and comparing the two makes no sense. GTA4 is the only example I know of a sequel attempting something new, other than a slight graphical upgrade and a new background with a new nameless faceless player controlled character.
In summary:
I like GTA4 because it tried new things and I hate fanboys, especially PS3 fanboys.
If all you want to do is run down old women I recomend you get psychiatric help.
case and point:
Most people seem to think that GTA4 was bad somehow because it went for gritty realism and defined characters with a coherent plot. This is the first good thing to happen to the series since GTA3 tried the same thing but just fell short because of the terrible 2001 rendering. Most fanboys are quick to say "San Andreas was better". I usually reply that San Andreas was almost completely different and comparing the two makes no sense. GTA4 is the only example I know of a sequel attempting something new, other than a slight graphical upgrade and a new background with a new nameless faceless player controlled character.
In summary:
I like GTA4 because it tried new things and I hate fanboys, especially PS3 fanboys.
If all you want to do is run down old women I recomend you get psychiatric help.