requiem_for_a_starfury said:
Ratty uses this noun to denote people who are going to toil as slaves in his gold mines.
requiem_for_a_starfury said:
Yes, but not as much as those who are using the word "kewl" to denote cool.
To Dare Oblivion
- Thread starter Silencer
- Start date
Ratty uses this noun to denote people who are going to toil as slaves in his gold mines.
Yes, but not as much as those who are using the word "kewl" to denote cool.
Well, these requirements suck for me. I'm nowhere near them and I dont think I'd be able to upgrade my compy in time.
But it's bullshit. Somehow fallout and fallout 2 were kickass games with minimal graphics. It was their mood, storry, concept people like, not the blinging textures.
I guess I'll second what Ashmo said in his first post.
But it's bullshit. Somehow fallout and fallout 2 were kickass games with minimal graphics. It was their mood, storry, concept people like, not the blinging textures.
I guess I'll second what Ashmo said in his first post.
They are morons because they incorrectly interpret the acronym i.e. I.e. means "id est". It doesn't mean "in example". Yet people use it as a synonym for e.g. ("exempli gratia") not because they want to be innovative, but because they are nescient of its true meaning. Innovation is welcome if it enriches the language and makes it more expressive, but in this case it is a result of ignorance and therefore detrimental.requiem_for_a_starfury said:
Look at the good side: considering the relatively slow increase in graphical quality that is happening nowadays (in comparison to the vast improvement in the first years video gaming went mainstream), eye candy will eventually (hopefully) not be much of a selling point anymore.
True, those water reflections will always get a little bit more realistic and that rainbow will always become a little bit prettier, but it won't get anywhere near the earlier "revolutionary" improvements in visual effects.
Neural interfaces are quite a bit off, so until they become cheap enough to qualify for mainstream production, games will have to stick to the displays and interfaces we have and those (the former more importantly than the latter) have limits.
Maybe, just maybe, this will lead to more competition in GAME design rather than just VISUAL design.
The downside is that companies will need to deploy bigger more expensive dev teams to create effects only neglectibly better than those we have now (since more detail => more work => more developers; unless they accept longer development times, which seems unlikely), which in turn means higher stakes and thus even less interest in taking risks, and thus less interest in being creative, let alone "revolutionary".
Then again, if Will Wright's new game (Spore) will be as good as it promises to be, maybe there is hope still. Even if it takes a very successful game developer to convince a company to take that risk.
True, those water reflections will always get a little bit more realistic and that rainbow will always become a little bit prettier, but it won't get anywhere near the earlier "revolutionary" improvements in visual effects.
Neural interfaces are quite a bit off, so until they become cheap enough to qualify for mainstream production, games will have to stick to the displays and interfaces we have and those (the former more importantly than the latter) have limits.
Maybe, just maybe, this will lead to more competition in GAME design rather than just VISUAL design.
The downside is that companies will need to deploy bigger more expensive dev teams to create effects only neglectibly better than those we have now (since more detail => more work => more developers; unless they accept longer development times, which seems unlikely), which in turn means higher stakes and thus even less interest in taking risks, and thus less interest in being creative, let alone "revolutionary".
Then again, if Will Wright's new game (Spore) will be as good as it promises to be, maybe there is hope still. Even if it takes a very successful game developer to convince a company to take that risk.
requiem_for_a_starfury
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
It's not about innovation, but usage and if the mass usage is now in example then that is and will be the correct definition. Like it or not that's the way things go, the only moronic thing is to argue against it. It's one thing to complain about lack of punctuation or capitalisation etc but incorrect usage of an abbreviation when from the context of the sentence it's obvious what the meaning is, is another.Ratty said:
The requirements are about average for a mid priced new pc over here in the UK, virtually any pc advertised in the papers starts around those specs now a days. Is it worth upgrading? Probably not, I don't know about the rest of the world or in London, but it's getting harder and harder to buy pc games over here. There's no place to buy them in my town, console games yes, but not pc games. Even in the nearest big town that has shops like HMV, Virgin, GAME or Gamestation it's hard to get pc games. GAME took over Electronic Boutique and where they used to have pc games that took up 2 walls (one running the length of the shop) as well as free standing shelving units. Now there's only two units in the far back corner of the shop, everything else is console games. They even stock more DVD movies than pc games these days.Frog said:
Yeah well, now everyone should run to the store buying NEW average midpriced compies.
What about gamers that are not after shiny visuals but more after good and entertaining game ? Come on. It's not games system requirements that determines if game is good. Or is it ?
There are some games with quite stunning graphics but that are "user friendly" when it comes to what you got in your compy. Sure, they wont look so nice with minimal settings but they WILL work and be playable. Everyone are happy. But it seems it's not too popular approach.
Seriously, I cant understand why new games simply refuse to work with some older hardware or on weaker systems. It's as if its creators thought "oh noes, if someone sees it without all that uber-blah-blah-filtering-blah-blah-textures-whatever feature the universe will colapse. we cant allow that to happen. quickly, make it so it wont run without it !"
Sigh. I atleast hope that fallout will be made for fans, not for these "monster compy" junkies that all what they notice will be "wow, good graphics ... but whats about all this fallout thing again ?"
What about gamers that are not after shiny visuals but more after good and entertaining game ? Come on. It's not games system requirements that determines if game is good. Or is it ?
There are some games with quite stunning graphics but that are "user friendly" when it comes to what you got in your compy. Sure, they wont look so nice with minimal settings but they WILL work and be playable. Everyone are happy. But it seems it's not too popular approach.
Seriously, I cant understand why new games simply refuse to work with some older hardware or on weaker systems. It's as if its creators thought "oh noes, if someone sees it without all that uber-blah-blah-filtering-blah-blah-textures-whatever feature the universe will colapse. we cant allow that to happen. quickly, make it so it wont run without it !"
Sigh. I atleast hope that fallout will be made for fans, not for these "monster compy" junkies that all what they notice will be "wow, good graphics ... but whats about all this fallout thing again ?"
requiem_for_a_starfury
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Just saying that's what you'll get if you go out to the shops, so that's probally what they aim at.
It's all a conspiracy to get people to constantly upgrade, and spend more money. Like how household appliances seem to be designed to break down 2 days after the warranty runs out, encouraging you to go out and buy a new one.
It's all a conspiracy to get people to constantly upgrade, and spend more money. Like how household appliances seem to be designed to break down 2 days after the warranty runs out, encouraging you to go out and buy a new one.
Actually the problem is that the graphics are the only thing that makes a game sell no matter how little thought is put in the story of the game.
Or at least that's the common prejudice shared by most managers as it seems.
Thus graphics need to be constantly improved and rely on the technology of next Tuesday in order to make the game look good.
Then you release screenshots from the pre-rendered cut-scenes and photoshop the few in-game shots the press will see.
Then you hype the pre-ordering.
Then you sell out.
Simple as that.
In theory, anyway. In practice several games have failed that way. Crappy or rushed games with multiplayer modes obviously sell better than those without -- hence why so many online gamers point out the suckiness of Unreal II but don't care how bad any other single player game is if the multiplayer mode is usable (unlike Deus Ex's -- yes, they added a mulitplayer patch somewhere down the road; and no, it wasn't a pretty sight, it just didn't work out).
Or at least that's the common prejudice shared by most managers as it seems.
Thus graphics need to be constantly improved and rely on the technology of next Tuesday in order to make the game look good.
Then you release screenshots from the pre-rendered cut-scenes and photoshop the few in-game shots the press will see.
Then you hype the pre-ordering.
Then you sell out.
Simple as that.
In theory, anyway. In practice several games have failed that way. Crappy or rushed games with multiplayer modes obviously sell better than those without -- hence why so many online gamers point out the suckiness of Unreal II but don't care how bad any other single player game is if the multiplayer mode is usable (unlike Deus Ex's -- yes, they added a mulitplayer patch somewhere down the road; and no, it wasn't a pretty sight, it just didn't work out).
Well if FO3 is made for us (the fans) it will crash. Big time. Even if we all buy two copies it will still go under and no more fallout.
Have to find a middle ground. Something for us, something for the major public. I'm not saying it should be visuals, but something the majority likes.
Kids "won't be able" to buy this game due to the rating (all the things we like...sex, drugs...). So there is one "lost" majority.
________
Make A Vaporizer
Have to find a middle ground. Something for us, something for the major public. I'm not saying it should be visuals, but something the majority likes.
Kids "won't be able" to buy this game due to the rating (all the things we like...sex, drugs...). So there is one "lost" majority.
________
Make A Vaporizer
frissy said:
No offense, but that logic has no basis whatsoever. Game series do NOT survive when they are streamlined down for trendy or crap reasons to appeal to the Lowest Common Denominator. That mentality was tried by Chuck, was tried by Interplay and MicroForté, and the "middle ground" still turned into a load of shit. Yes, game series die when they lose what the fans enjoy in them, e.g. the design of the game, is empirical evidence, but it's the ONLY evidence in this industry that holds true other than marketing departments and trend-chasers are a bunch of me-too morons. Cheese off those who have been following the series, and the series dwindles down into whored-out Hasbro status. We've seen what happens with Hasbro's continuation of titles, we've seen how EA eventually kills off almost everything it touches except for their moronic dollhouse game.
We simply don't need to listen to someone cook up lamer excuses for why they can't bother to stick to the design, excuses they have crafted in the past with obviously less talent than most of their games, and that is saying something. "It is something we don't do well" or some crap like that, despite every media moron thinking that just because Bethesda bills an action-adventure game as a CRPG when it has barely more "stat-system roleplaying" than BioWare's garbage, then Bethesda is fully able to design a TB P&P CRPG, when they haven't ever developed a combat system worth speaking kindly about since Daggerfall. Sequels are made by keeping to the same great story, the same great setting, and the same great design, but with improvements that do not compromise the title's intended design. Fallout certainly could use a higher resolution, better methods of creating the graphics that does not take so much time but still captures the comic pulp design feel to it, additional combat mechanics for TB akin to the progression Ultima had from Ultima III-VI - making it better instead of skullfucking it into some crappy RT combat system for ultima VII.
Technologically better does NOT mean FP view, RT combat, or any of the lame crap the media and some developer kiddies think constitutes "modern", because FP and RT have existed as long as TB and third-person (maybe a bit longer if you include Akalabeth having both FP and 3rd, and Wizardry as having a FP perspective). The choice to use either depends upon the design, and if Bethesda doesn't want to make a P&P CRPG like Fallout, then they should simply say so, be recognized as trendy console whores, and then we should simply stop wasting our time with this obvious "Fountain of Dreams". Or they will eventually let it leak through the PR bullshit as they have said in the past, and through material that we've been able to obviously identify as bullshit - Chuck Cuevas' pathetic spin-job.
Assuming that you will have a prospective, untapped audience simply because you make the game with common elements from other game series, is perhaps the biggest and most asinine mistake in the industry today. We've seen where new titles try for this and end up being one of the uninspiring messes like Sacred, but if the design doesn't suit an established audience - then you have NO prospective audience because the established will say it's something they don't like, and why should someone else buy the game if it isn't going to try to offer great gameplay like the original? You make money and success by making a great game, not by cheaply whoring out the title. Otherwise, Chuck and Herve would instead be rolling in the money instead of looking for a new job and a new wife (car, company, probably new house, etc), with their mentality of "console + RT + trendy music + Fallout = $$".
Sorry, it doesn't quite work like that, underpants gnomes..