Extra Punctuation: Getting Innovation Wrong

[dfjdejulio]

One awesome thing about a display on the controller is private info for multiple players around a shared TV.

My wife and I play Carcassonne together on the XBox while sitting on the same couch, and it works because that game has no per-player secrets (like a hand of cards). But the XBox version of "Settlers of Catan" is network-multiplayer-only, no on-couch multiplayer, because you'd leak info if you shared a screen. Heck, you could build a pretty good "bar trivia" game on a system like that too.

(Yeah, we *could* play real board or card games... but my XBox can store more of them than my game cabinet can, and there's no setup or cleanup when you just wanna play for a little while before the pizza is delivered.)

Basically, there's plenty of non-insane uses that I'd welcome -- now let's see if any of it comes true, and if any developers actually build non-bulshit-gimmick-crap on top of it. (I'm not betting either way.)

 

[UnSub]

"That means that the future of consoles has to lie in one of the lesser aspects, such as the controller or the visual."

The controller and visuals are hardly lesser aspects to any game or console compared to console hardware or third party titles.

I also disagree that 3D or motion controls make games less immersive, especially given the success of motion controls in making games accessible to an entirely new set of people who look at dual analogue sticks as something like a Picasso sculpture. This is the first generation of using them, so there will be hiccups, but with a bit more time they will improve further.

 

[ShenCS]

Actually, Yahtzee's slightly off here with the "Nintendo bringing people kicking and screaming" thing. The 3D on the 3DS is entirely optional and thus will encourage developers to not make it a main focus of a game. It makes me sad knowing that new 3DS games will be judged on how good the 3D is. Too me, the 3DS seems to be more a marketting strategy. Ultimately, the 3DS isn't about the 3D. It's a DS with higher processing power and an analogue stick (a better one than the PSP at that), with the variety of the DSi plus one 3D. But because 3D is all the rage these days, Nintendo put that in the name to help it sell more and, especially, to differentiate it from the DS.

 

[ZehMadScientist]

The only good I see in these controllers is a good remake -or even a sequel- of Zelda Four Swords

 

[Tulks]

for example saw Thor last Friday in 3D (only had that in my town) and it worked really well. It felt natural and not tacked on in the last minute like say ......ehm *name of movie with bad 3D here*

Here at least I agree with you, if only to a point.

I also saw Thor last Fri, and while I felt that the 3D worked better than in some other 3D films I've seen, I think I still would've preferred to watch it "normally".

There's just something about it that messes with my cinema experience.

For those who like it, go ahead. It's just not my cup of char.

 

[Aiddon_v1legacy]

whatever Yahtzee; it seems that your bitching about Nintendo does nothing but make them stronger and better as a game company.

 

[Latinidiot]

But surely making a button for the pinkie will alienate our british friends!

Think of the tea drinkers!

 

[Dastardly]

Extra Punctuation: Getting Innovation Wrong

Yahtzee thinks that Nintendo may have taken a wrong turn with its hardware.

Read Full Article

Video games have always been about finding new ways to engage the eye. 3D is a (re-)experiment in trying to engage it further, and it fails now for the same reason it did before--it's an inconvenient gimmick that only partially engages just one sense, and thus utterly fails to immerse.

Before this, it seemed like games had given up on trying to further impress our eyes, and were going after our hands and feet instead. Vibration, dance pads, motion controllers... And some of it was working pretty well. Vibration used to be awkward and ill-received, but now I tend to miss it when it's not there. Motion controls... eh. Using a remote to point at the screen to select things, that part I like. Trying to approximate real world actions, though? Failure.

Now they seem to think they've capped out on engaging the body... so they go straight back to the eyes? Enter the newest 3D craze (as mentioned above). The 3DS is going to do poorly, so let's just set that conclusion aside.

Now there's talk of Nintendo going after our hands with that bizarre texture-sensing technology. Seriously, it's all hand-eye-hand-eye... We have other senses!

How many real attempts at innovation have their been in sound? Why not a system that includes seven small wireless speakers that can be placed around your room, and games that capitalize on this soundscape? Not everyone has a 7.1 surround-sound system, so this could really bring some people into that world.

When we deal with the eyes, it's only working in the forward direction. When we use motion controls with very limited force feedback, we're really only dealing with that sense in the outgoing direction. Sound, however, is omnidirectional. It's the sound that makes movies feel bigger, not the screen. Sound gives us far more sense of depth than any image. There's a lot of great innovation left to be done there, yet no one seems to be trying. Engage a different sense for once, and you might be surprised.

We can leave smell and taste out, I think.

 

[mjc0961]

It can be, but in both cases the 3D is not necessary to your enjoyment, much like HD quality graphics.

This is such a load of crap and I don't know why people keep saying it. HD quality graphics are absolutely necessary. HD quality graphics don't just make things look nicer and more realistic if that's the art style chosen (which is a + for immersion right there), but they also effect things like draw distance and pop-in. You go try to make a GTA IV or Saints Row for the PS1 and see how well that works out for you when you can only see a yard or two down the road before everything turns into a indecipherable white mess in the background.

If you like 3D, fine, but you need to come up with something relevant to say when people say they don't like instead of spewing this nonsense about how HD quality graphics are not needed, because that's simply not true.

Finally, this: "I'm trying to think of ways to employ a touch screen and a TV, and the problem I keep bumping against is that the player can only look at one screen at a time." You're right, they can only look at one screen at a time, that explains why the Nintendo DS has flopped completely... oh wait, it's the highest selling handheld of all time (if you use the numbers for all its iterations).

tl;dr - Maybe I've missed the entire point of this particular article, but the fact stands that the statements and projections from Yahtzee (the serious ones anyway, not the "kill us and take our money" ones) are not based in reality.

I think you missed the point because you didn't read all of it. If you had, you would have noticed the part where he said that the touch screen for the DS works because it's right below the other screen and you can see what's on both at the same time, but the same doesn't hold true when one is a TV that's far away and the other is a controller in your hand. Remember, there were a few games on GameCube that had you use GBAs for controllers instead, and you really can't easily switch between the TV and the GBA screen as you can with the two DS screens.

Sorry, but it seems that your post is what is not based in reality here. That or you just purposely ignored parts of the article to hate on it a little more.

 

[RadiusXd]

should i feel bad about the 120Hz screen I am typing this on?

 

[Dastardly]

Actually, Yahtzee's slightly off here with the "Nintendo bringing people kicking and screaming" thing. The 3D on the 3DS is entirely optional and thus will encourage developers to not make it a main focus of a game. It makes me sad knowing that new 3DS games will be judged on how good the 3D is. Too me, the 3DS seems to be more a marketting strategy. Ultimately, the 3DS isn't about the 3D. It's a DS with higher processing power and an analogue stick (a better one than the PSP at that), with the variety of the DSi plus one 3D. But because 3D is all the rage these days, Nintendo put that in the name to help it sell more and, especially, to differentiate it from the DS.

But it's also a $100 upcharge. Most of that is the 3D. And I'd love to know how much more of that power goes into making that 3D happen--which would mean turning off the 3D essentially means you're not using that extra power.

It was marketed poorly, based on a dying gimmick, and it's just too expensive to justify the non-3D improvements.

 

[Toeys]

3D is the same as blueray, HD and everything else... just new ways to sell an invention generations old.

What i like with Nintendo is that they are atleast innovating. Yeah their designs are insane and undoubtably japanese... but they atleast do SOMETHING rather than play it safe like Sony or milk the gamers with faceplates and paid multiplayer like microsoft(yeah i know theres alot of exclusives and games are often released earlier for xbox but really.. you pay for it so many times over)

And whatever you want to say about it: the Wii sold way more than any other console, and so did the DS versus the PSP.

I didnt buy the wii or the DS, the remakes of final fantasy and the new zelda games didnt justify that on their own. And even if i own all the other consoles and a PC to play with... i still think Nintendo is doing the right thing. They are toying with the medium in a way no one else dare or wanna spend money on. And if people dont get fooled into buying all the shovelware they are sure to get a bit of fun out of Nintendos innovative machines. They deserve that much.. even if i dont get the same pleasure as them

 

[Falseprophet]

N.B. Escapist editors: If you want to bring back Extra Consideration, you need to have Yahtzee and Bob debate the merits of Nintendo hardware. That would spark a real debate.

The only use for a controller screen I can think of would be a local multiplayer game where you have information you want hidden from other players, like strategy (turn-based or RTS), card games or football. Does anyone make these kinds of games any more?

 

[Hitman Dread]

I disagree. I love 3D, and I love it mainly because of the level of depth it adds to the picture. It makes whatever you're viewing much more like you're experiencing it.

I realize that a ton of people do not share this view, and do not appreciate 3d. Good for them. But at least let me enjoy my 3d, okay?

I agree with you

But it's a shame it doesn't always work the way it should

for example saw Thor last Friday in 3D (only had that in my town) and it worked really well. It felt natural and not tacked on in the last minute like say ......ehm *name of movie with bad 3D here*

That's because most 3D has been added on after the fact.

People focus far too much on what is essential in their non-essential luxury items.

 

[zjspeed]

"suggestive and vaguely insulting gesture"

 

[rje5]

"But with the Wii and 3DS innovation one-two punch that dismally failed to connect, what kind of hardware will Nintendo lead their next blow with?" - Another factually false statement for at least the first half. The Wii is still the highest sold console, meaning it definitely connected with a large group of people. The 3DS has been out for a little more than a single month and the numbers are lower than expected, so I'll not argue this point, even though I personally disagree.

Finally, this: "I'm trying to think of ways to employ a touch screen and a TV, and the problem I keep bumping against is that the player can only look at one screen at a time." You're right, they can only look at one screen at a time, that explains why the Nintendo DS has flopped completely... oh wait, it's the highest selling handheld of all time (if you use the numbers for all its iterations).

tl;dr - Maybe I've missed the entire point of this particular article, but the fact stands that most of the statements and projections from Yahtzee (the serious ones anyway, not the "kill us and take our money" ones) are not based in reality. [Edit - Fixed a few blanket statements.]

Your point about the DS working with two screens is a flawed argument. It works alright because the screen are the same size and the same distance from the player. If you have a 3 inch screen and a 60 in screen 10 feet apart your eyes will strain trying to keep both in focus. Also who plays with a controller in a place where they can look at it?

Also the Wii is the highest selling console, but it's also the most resold console. I have no numbers for that but I've known about 10 people who bought a Wii and 8 or them have gotten rid of it and the other 2 barely play it.

 

[eniac0]

Dear Yathzee, you surprise me with this article. Clearly you are un-woo'ed by this whole 3D thing trend and you've decided to take a whack at whoever does 3D. I can't blame you, I'm not totally into it myself just yet, being old school (like i am) i bet you prefer good ole 2D games too.

But as an (e)Journalist, I wish you had been more objective on your evaluation of the facts at hands. If anything, Nintendo has been paving the way of innovation for years while others just wait to see if its gonna pickup, and clone it if it does. Haven't always been successful, i'll give you that, N64 was rather a failure than even a product. The wii on the other hand had more success than anyone dare anticipate prior to its release. Among the big three (even four back when Sega was still there), only Nintendo believed in motion sensor in a remote. Now look, tremendous success. MS rushed to get Kinect out and get its bib too, then Sony "moved" into that market as well.

3D, let me put it this way, is a when, not an if. The deciding factor will be "who can do it right". just enough to add the "whoa" factor and not too much to avoid the "huh, so dizzy" factor.

The sooner you get on that trend, the sooner you'll start being able to experiment with that line.

And now, its history repeating. Nintendo wants to get out before everyone. Everybody is busy speculating why in their own opinion its not a right move...again, bashing the big N on this, on that, on what they speculate they should do. Future can only tell what will happen. My opinion is that Nintendo will rack up fuckloads of money while MS & Sony catch up the train that just left.

A more journalistic approach to your article should have understood the obstacles and challenges ahead, what pieces are in place, what's missing and try to survey the 3D market along with other hot trends in gaming and how the three leaders are positioned to address that.

Well anyway, i felt i had to share because you're usually so good at describing what a game did right, what it did wrong, what it should have been and with good humor. In this one, it felt like you where bashing Nintendo pure and simple.

 

[Raeil]

Finally, this: "I'm trying to think of ways to employ a touch screen and a TV, and the problem I keep bumping against is that the player can only look at one screen at a time." You're right, they can only look at one screen at a time, that explains why the Nintendo DS has flopped completely... oh wait, it's the highest selling handheld of all time (if you use the numbers for all its iterations).

tl;dr - Maybe I've missed the entire point of this particular article, but the fact stands that the statements and projections from Yahtzee (the serious ones anyway, not the "kill us and take our money" ones) are not based in reality.

I think you missed the point because you didn't read all of it. If you had, you would have noticed the part where he said that the touch screen for the DS works because it's right below the other screen and you can see what's on both at the same time, but the same doesn't hold true when one is a TV that's far away and the other is a controller in your hand. Remember, there were a few games on GameCube that had you use GBAs for controllers instead, and you really can't easily switch between the TV and the GBA screen as you can with the two DS screens.

Sorry, but it seems that your post is what is not based in reality here. That or you just purposely ignored parts of the article to hate on it a little more.

Thank you for pointing that out. It's true, I did not see that explanation, but mostly that was because the entirety of my first post had already been fleshed out and I was skimming at that point. Forgive me for making a single mistake of reading.

Also, the whole "post is what is not based in reality" applies to one point of five. I don't mean to start a flame war, but when you refute a single point of an argument it does not invalidate the rest unless the other points are tied to it. Thank you again for point out the flaw, but it hardly invalidates the remainder of my points.

 

[Mr. Omega]

I like to think of the 3D in the 3DS like the Rumble Pack for the N64. A nice little addition that I choose to ignore that Nintendo decided to try to make ]marketable point despite it not really being that important to the actual system (the 3D was just marketed even more). Honestly, every just seems to think the 3D is the ONLY thing there is about the 3DS. There are better complaints to be had... and yet everyone focuses on the ones that's easiest, and in this case, unlike the Wii, one that can be completely ignored: "GIMMICK GIMMICK GIMMICK!"

As for Project Cafe: You want to know what a SMART dev would do? Just ignore the touch screen unless it can genuinely contribute to the game, and focus on making a game with the whole standard layout. With the exception of the touchscreen, with the updated graphics and now standardized (for the most part) controller, there can be better 3rd party support. The only real concern I have now is how their currently abysmal online service could be improved.

As for the bit where he clearly doesn't know about the whole "feel" thing (Which will probably end up just being another optional or just bonus feature), I think it's more likely he wrote the article before it was announced, considering we just found out about it last night. Simple matter of bad timing.

 

[Hitman Dread]

The only use for a controller screen I can think of would be a local multiplayer game where you have information you want hidden from other players, like strategy (turn-based or RTS), card games or football. Does anyone make these kinds of games any more?

You are rather simply minded if that is truly all you can think of. A 2nd screen opens up a world of options. Allow me to go through some current gen games and showcase how they could be improved with this alleged controller.

Metal Gear Solid 4: You now discuss with Otocan during battle, drastically cutting down on cutscene time (something the game needs) as well as increasing emersion. The visuals were rarely essential in those cam calls anyway, so they video could play while you continue scoping out the level. Now Metal Gear Solid has finally successfully fused it's story with it's gameplay, instead of them being two separate entities.

Multiweapon FPS: Your items are all on the touch screen, allowing you to call them in on the fly. The basic UI on this could be done a number of different ways, and done correctly the player could easily commit this to muscle memory as he already does many other things. There's actually quite a bit that can be done with FPSes and this 2nd screen, from simple item interface to calling an air strike.

RTS: RTS's have never worked with consols, but this may give them a chance. Having this screen could allow for dealing with complex interfaces that RTS's require.

These are just basic UI enhancements too, from an artistic standpoint there's a flurry of ideas that could be brought to the table.