Extra Punctuation: Getting Innovation Wrong

[geldonyetich]

Having played with 3D shutter glasses on the PC before, I have to say that I like true 3D, I feel that true 3D is a step forward that I'd like to see the gaming industry make. There were relatively few PC games that made really good use of it, but when I found those gems then I was fairly blown away with how much more immersive true 3D made the game feel, Natural Selection and Sinistar Unleashed being some of my better experiences.

Only trouble is, the 3DS may be a rather poor example, what with its tiny screen and very poor app support. A larger screen eliminates the bothersome requirement of having to sit in an exact position to do use it. Good 3D-centric games would be Metroid Prime 3D or StarFox 3D, those would really make gamers aware of what true 3D can do, but there's no sign of them.

As it stands, the 3DS is a platform that makes true 3D look bad, and I'm hoping its poor reception doesn't bury what would be an excellent feature in future games.

 

[timeadept]

I summon...

Spoiler: WALL OF TEXT!

I agree that 3D is just a gimmick and doesn't actually have much, if anything to contribute to my over all entertainment of the medium. I saw Avatar in 3D and every once in a while i would look up and notice it and think "well that's kinda cool" and then get back into the movie and not think about it for a while. Then again, I've heard it said that the best special effects are the ones that you don't notice at all. But in any case, I honestly don't feel like 3D contributed anything to my enjoyment of the movie (and if the 3D were so good that i never noticed it then what's the point? It's not like I find 2D movies inherently distracting due to their unrealistic lack of depth or something.)

In any case I still don't agree that motion controls have nothing to contribute to games. I found using them while playing Twilight Princess to be very entertaining. Though the connection between the wiimote and link's sword were by no means 1 to 1, I found my self mimicking his movements. I would hit button combinations and swing the wiimote(even if i didn't need to) while mimicking what i was telling link to do. Sure I probably looked like an idiot while doing it, and i had to tone down my actual movements due to space limitations, the maximum distance between my two arms (due to the cord), and the fact that the entire house should never be shaking like that while i'm playing a video game (or maybe ever); but i had a great time doing it!

The touch screen is a bit of a grab bag though. When added to a game unnecessarily it is a pain in the ass. The Phantom Hour Glass isn't all that impressive as far as TLZ goes... but it's a little less so when you force the player to abandon their perfectly good D-Pad and make them use the touch screen to move. Clumsy, unresponsive, and unnecessary were three words i used to describe that system, though i had to eat two of those words.

The system is, over all, clumsy until you get used to it. It is always difficult to tap on the edge of the screen to move, and there is something inherently flawed about putting the players hand in between their eyes and the screen where all the action is going on. But at the same time it adds a certain smoothness to the game. Using Items like the Boomerang is more fun because of the touch screen. I also liked being able to add notes to the map, that was a nice touch that allowed memorization puzzles without the need of pen and paper or a lot of going back and forth. Finally, I'm actually glad that they ditched the D-Pad entirely because it's clear to me that it wasn't done in the name of making a gimmicky game. It is irritating as hell to switch between using the D-Pand and touch screen. The DS isn't exactly balanced to be held with one hand, unless that hand is directly below it in the middle. But if one hand is below the DS then you louse access to one of the sets of buttons. At the same time, holding the styles and playing with that hand is difficult to pull off, so i just put it away when I'm not using it. End result is a transition of a few seconds between the two hand positions(and possibly more for a more comfortable sitting position), and if you need to make that transition often, you're in for an extremely irritating game.

So pretty much using the touch screen for everything just makes it unresponsive when it confuses what my styles strokes mean (not to mention the fact that it also restricts me to a single action at a time).

There was a game though Elite Beat Agents, it's kind of a tap to the music game and it's a lot more fun than that might sound. It's difficult to describe so you're better off looking it up on You-Tube if you can find it. It really is a great game though and i recommend it if you can find it. It uses only the stylus to tap points as they appear on the screen in time with the music.

 

[KilloZapit]

Did that picture of the controller say something about streaming video? Cause honestly this is the only way I see the point is if it was using the console as a server for the game and wirelessly streaming the video to the controller to play else where in your house without needing a TV. I can get behind that. I hardly play consoles anymore because I just don't feel like sitting in front of a TV all day and rather lay in bed or something.

 

[CrazyCapnMorgan]

Just because Project Cafe will have superior hardware doesn't mean 3rd party developers will have to use them. As a PC gamer, I still buy, play, and enjoy games that I can't run in 1920x1080 resolution. Sure, it'd be better if they could, but graphics don't make the game.

This. Case in point - Chrono Trigger, Secret of Mana and Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past (or if that isn't good enough for you, then Ocarina of Time).

 

[beema]

Then they'll probably think, "Ah, why not cut out the middleman?" and then just kill us and take all our money.

I thoroughly expect to one day see the headline:
Apple Stores Unveil New Policy: Pay Us Before Entering
and people will just go along with it

I haven't been bothered so much by the 3D thing. It's still expensive enough that it hasn't become immensely widespread and popular, so I don't see it being "mandatory" any time soon. Motion controls freak me out way more since they have proliferated to an astounding degree.

 

[Sicram]

Seeing as I'm one of those rabid PC only "nazi" people I let everything that is 3D and motioncontrolled slide. I won't beleive one squat that 3D is the future until I can play RTS games on a holodeck, an FPS? Maaaaaaybe, if it's done right. Motioncontrols? Not accurate enough even if wearing an exosuit that helps stabilize ones hands.

I for one welcome more oomph in hardware for the consoles. I'm tired of low-res textures and sloppy AA. Even in some cases game mechanics suffer because there's too little RAM, too slow CPU or GPU.

 

[Jumwa]

Usually the "Extra Punctuation" articles are a little more thought-out than the gripe and mock shtick for the videos, but this is just whining. And frankly, it's gotten tedious. Yes, you don't like motion controls. Yes, you have many convoluted reasons for why you think making a gimmicky new controller is a bad thing. We get it.

It's the same old thing repeated over and over on a topic that seems little more than purely personal opinion justified by rambling sort-of-sensical arguments.

 

[shadowmagus]

Yahtzee I expect better from you. Typically you have something that gives your point some validation. While I don't think the 3DS will really take off, bitching about it because you dislike the direction Nintendo is taking for the sake of bitching is beneath you. At least Nintendo had to balls to actually try something different instead of, "oh let's pump more graphics into it". It may not be perfect, but the first steps towards real change never are.

 

[Snowblindblitz]

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.

Some of this I agree with, but the FPS and RTS in a competitive environment seem way too hard to pull off. Muscle memory, yes, but I still feel like it would further alienate the more casual online crowd, the group of people who enjoy non casual games but don't have the time to become the 50 kill "noob haters" like some people are. I always thought the second screen on a dreamcast was neat, and, if anything, they should make it a removable mini game system, so you can bring your games with you, link up outside of the house, etc.

 

[jedizero]

I'm sorry, but am I the only one getting the feeling that Yahtzee wants us all to not go forwards? To not experiment and learn more about video gaming?

He bitches about how people try new things and it ruins everything, and in the same breath he bitches about how everything is so 'samey'.

You can't have it both ways, Yahtzee. If you want the same old games over and over and over again, then go ahead and ***** about how everything keeps changing, but you cannot in the same breath condemn a game for being 'more of the same'.

 

[SovietSecrets]

I don't have a problem with 3D at all really. I think its a cool system to employ in future generations of consoles and handhelds. The 3DS is just a starting point for Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo. I count Sony too because Nintendo found a way to make it work without the glasses and the fact that the option is there makes it better. It feels like too many think 3D is going to become the MUST be in standard in games, but it should just remain an option like we have right now. Course that being said quality of games could be diminished because of the entire putting some 3D elements in the game for those who like it and keeping the game itself regular for those who don't, but thats another story. I don't consider 3D a gimmick at all as of now as its a pretty new idea that's being incorporated into things and some time has to be given before final judgement on it has been passed. Too many are calling it right now with this just barely in development.

 

[Covarr]

Regarding the whole "PDA thing is cool but isn't an adequate substitute for pausing" thing, I think Yahtzee sort of has a point. However, I think what this really shows is that Nintendo is looking back to past failures and trying to build a success out of them.

Look at GBA-GC connectivity. Four Swords Adventures was a great game for single OR multiplayer and it used the dual-screen system quite well in allowing people to enter rooms and caves without all having to do so at once, but the need for a GBA and a cable for each player made it expensive and inconvenient to get a four-player game going, not to mention the original GBA's screen sucked.

The same thing with Crystal Chronicles, letting each player have their own inventory really added a wonderful layer of depth to the game. Where it ran into issues was with the shortage of buttons, lack of analog control, and clunky menu navigation. However, the supposed Project Cafe controller HAS more buttons and dual-analog sticks, not to mention a touchscreen would really help to lessen the difficulty of navigating a menu mid-battle.

In all, reusing this idea but with a lower cost of entry and more convenience, as well as building it in so that other developers will be more likely to use it, is a fantastic idea as far as I'm concerned. Sure, some developers will misuse or abuse it, but hell there's always gonna be someone who can't make decent control schemes, even on a traditional controller (see: about a third of the NES games that AVGN has reviewed).

Instead of merely passing it off as a pointless gimmick, imagine the possible uses for it: Card games can hide players' hands, sports games can hide plays, people can solve puzzles separately in a cooperative game, players can manage their own inventories or spells without everyone else having to pause, and command menus don't have to clutter up the main screen. That's just off the top of my head, I'm sure there's more.

What it boils down to is that this is Nintendo catering to the crowd that they've been serving since the N64: multiplayer. They were the first to have a console with four controller ports without the need of a multitap since the Atari 5200. They released the first handheld game system with any sort of remotely decent online play capabilities. They've launched series after series designed with multiplayer in mind (Mario Part, Mario Kart, Smash Bros, etc). While I don't doubt that this new controller has its uses in single player, I'm almost positive that they were thinking of multiplayer games when they made it.

P.S. Thanks

P.P.S. I hope they remake Pac-Man VS for this system, and sell it as a low-cost downloadable title.

 

[yanipheonu]

Though at least 3D can work alongside normal games and is otherwise unobstructive. YOu can make a perfectly normal game... and have 3D as well, there's not as much of a barrier, and really WHY NOT have 3D? especially if you can turn it off if you have an irrational hatred of 3D or are a cyclops

I love my Wii, but I get that the motion controls get in the way of many devs trying to make normal games.

3D (doesn't) represent the way forward because they both involve making games and movies less immersive

Yahtzee.... WHUT? I mean, WHAT???? How is that even taken as a given?? I have two eyes, I can see 3D in normal life, does that make my life LESS IMMERSIVE????. If I can gauge depth perception in my games it can make it more immersive and actually helps since... well you can perceive depth better, that's the whole point.

And he doesn't even explain what he means. Not that I've taken Yahtzee that seriously, but still, at least when doesn't like something, he usually explains why....

 

[DayDark]

Next console control upgrade should be the Trackball Controller:

 

[demoncub1990]

Now that i'm imagining it yes it would be quite hilarious to see nintendo ripping it's hair out due to frustration. but seriously we really need the dual analog sticks back *goes to play on PS2*

 

[Lagslayer]

I'm not against the HD, 3D, touch screen, etc. just because it is what it is. Higher quality pictures and new methods of interactivity and control are not a bad things inherently. It's when they are used as an excuse not to develop in other areas that it pisses me off. How many 3D movies can you name where it doesn't exist just to say "LOOK! I GOT 3D!!!". The interactive technologies, touch screen and motion sensitivity, I feel are a little better, but are still too frequently used in a similar fashion.

All of these things are being raped for spectacle instead of being worked into the experience properly most of the time.

 

[Mantonio]

I feel you've not given 3D a fair try. Or at least, you haven't looked at what good 3D is.

I recommend this article http://www.cracked.com/article_18877_4-reasons-3-d-movies-dont-have-to-suck.html (yes yes, Cracked just read it.) This article is about movie 3D, but it can just as easily apply to videogames.

3D can be good, but the majority of people don't use it the right way, and only use it to make some quick extra money. In this case, don't hate the game, hate the player.

 

[Volkov]

And you know what? Blu Ray and HD-DVD were exactly the same thing- a technological gimmick that nobody even needed.

I disagree with this. Higher-definition image does, actually, help watch some movies.

BUT:
- Most movies do not benefit from the higher definition.
- An image with EVEN higher definition than Blu Ray would NOT be useful. There is no use for any more pixels than that.
- The sound that both BR and HD-DVD provided is also about as good as is necessary for a home setup. I really don't think that any time in the next few decades sound systems will get so good that they will need higher definition sound than that carried by the blu ray.

 

[itsmeyouidiot]

Nvm

 

[Volkov]

Oh, and on-topic: I pretty much agree with Yahtzee, but with a few caveats:
- 3D is a complete waste, it needs to fucking end. He is 100% right about that.
- Motion control, I think, has some use. But, it needs to be FAAAAAAR more precise than what the Wii can offer, in order to help. The ideal game for motion control, I think, is a fighting game, where the motion controller reads your body's movement and reproduces it on screen. But. That's basically what Wii boxing does... except that if you actually move your hands as fast as you would in a fight, the fucking thing completely fails to register that. Because it's not fast enough for it, so it really turns into a gesture mode, not a true reproducible motion. And gesture-based controls are fucking idiotic.

So I think motion control has potential, but Wii failed to pick up on that potential. Largely because the instrumentation isn't there yet - cheap MEMS accelerometers are not sufficiently accurate to pick up on a boxer's hands.