Gamers thread

[Klonoa]

What was really odd, I find, is the distinct LACK of SSD-memory in the newest systems. If they were smart, they'd slot in a small 120-gig SSD-drive in order to load games near-instantaneously, and have it so that if a game stored in there isn't played in a month, then it automatically transfers to the regular HDD.

Beyond that, though, there's the 'social' aspect of the new systems, and the easy ability to find friends/brag to them about your achievements...


[...]

Nuts to all that, though. I'm heavily leaning towards a system that I can do everything on, as well as take to work with me. And the only solution is a high-performance laptop that will run the cost of four consoles.

Of course, this little quad-core Acer that I have still has another five years of use out of it, for regular, mundane things... which makes me wonder if I shouldn't just go for a desktop for gaming...

If I can get back into the gaming groove, of course. Right now I'm disinclined to play anything... and I'm quite jaded about the upcoming prospects of wholly-consuming RPGS that promise the moon yet serve up gravel.

*blink* I guess this is why they call me "dirty casual" in most other forums. I have almost no idea what most of any of that meant.

I just want a machine to play games. ;_; I don't care about online, or social aspect, or tropheys, achivements or titles. Just play games. My modded Wii delivered a lot of that, that's reason why I didn't pick either of the HD twins (that and money issues, I'm lucky I won my Wii in a raffle to beging with).

I understand how you feel, though, my gaming groove is just reviving after a MAJOR clinic depression 3 years ago and self-doubts of being called the "dirty" part above several times before in other places made it really hard for me to get attached to gaming again.

My groove came back to me playing Sidescrollers, in specific Donkey Kong Country Returns, and playing some Metroid Prime 2, and then became prominent after replaying some SNES favorites. I still find modern "HD" gaming a bit too... uncanny to me, it manages to drive me away (those character models, even the new Lara Croft, look like moving corpses to me) and it seems only worse to me in this upcoming 8th generation.

EDIT: Take it to work? Why not a moded PSP? Or I didn't understood what you meant well?

 

[Bronson99]

Should be cheap, too, so that's a plus.

But don't worry about elitism for gaming. I've never had a preference between consoles or PCs. I just grew up with consoles, which was the reason to stay with them. Associated fond memories.

Yet the way that the consoles are going, all content is, at some point, going to be online-accessible-only, thus, I've no reason to buy the next-gen systems.

So, yah, I'll be gravitating over to PC gaming at some point. ;p

Tricksy fool ::

The woodsy world returns

 

[DepravedFurball]

I have almost no idea what most of any of that meant.

Take it to work? Why not a moded PSP? Or I didn't understood what you meant well?

'SSD' refers to a Solid State Drive. They're the Hard-Disk-Drive of the future... or... the present. Without going into the specifics on how they work ('cause, honestly, I have no clue), they're super-friggin'-fast, but their capacities are, for the moment, quite limited. There's also been reports (when they were first coming out) that a good knock against the side would erase the entire thing.

But they're seriously fast. If you splurged on a 1-terabyte SSD for your computer, it would power-up and display your desktop within, oh... two to four seconds. For gaming, it would mean no load-times. And they'll only get better as the tech advances.


Beyond the SSD, the cores of the machines got an overhaul. More power with more capacity, which translates to better graphics and more content. Not that most developers try to push the envelope anymore... but at least they have the ability, should they feel the desire.


And why take an all-purpose machine to work? Because my work is boring, and beyond obligatory duties I have to perform when someone enters the site, it's all free time. Not to say that I'd actually do any gaming at work... I might, maybe... if I'm sufficiently motivated. :bigsmile:

 

[Rawz]

Yeah I was surprised to see that neither the PS4 nor the Xbox One have an SSD.

 

[Klonoa]

'SSD' refers to a Solid State Drive. They're the Hard-Disk-Drive of the future... or... the present. Without going into the specifics on how they work ('cause, honestly, I have no clue), they're super-friggin'-fast, but their capacities are, for the moment, quite limited. There's also been reports (when they were first coming out) that a good knock against the side would erase the entire thing.

But they're seriously fast. If you splurged on a 1-terabyte SSD for your computer, it would power-up and display your desktop within, oh... two to four seconds. For gaming, it would mean no load-times. And they'll only get better as the tech advances.


Beyond the SSD, the cores of the machines got an overhaul. More power with more capacity, which translates to better graphics and more content. Not that most developers try to push the envelope anymore... but at least they have the ability, should they feel the desire.


And why take an all-purpose machine to work? Because my work is boring, and beyond obligatory duties I have to perform when someone enters the site, it's all free time. Not to say that I'd actually do any gaming at work... I might, maybe... if I'm sufficiently motivated. :bigsmile:

While no load times would be cool (and we'd game like we did in the ROM cartridge era!), I'd personally wait for the technology to be there in a better state, the whole "knock-to-the-side-deletes-all" thing, I wouldn't want that. D:

But, personally, sometimes I'm not sure if this is good enough. I feel in the older, more limited days, developers tried to work around technical limitations one way or another, or push the console beyond what it should be able to (DKC pre-rendered CGI and Tales of Phantasia fully-sang opening come to mind), now that games are VERY advanced, I feel like most developers take the possibilities as granted and rather go the lazy way (the 2-rehashes-per-year of CoD comes to mind, as well the DLC and micro-transaction abuse).

Of course, that's just how I feel it's been nowadays, I'm sure people here would like to disgress

 

[DepravedFurball]

I feel like most developers take the possibilities as granted and rather go the lazy way (the 2-rehashes-per-year of CoD comes to mind, as well the DLC and micro-transaction abuse).

Oh, Gods, don't remind me about micro-transactions. That's the one thing I hate above absolutely everything.

I consider them to be nothing more than cash-grabs by the developers, and a slap to the face of the gamers that bought their product. Really, they should give those little pieces away to their customers, as a thank you for buying their product in the first place. But no, they prefer the almighty dollars instead of showing their appreciation.

That's not to say that I wouldn't drop $5 on a new mission set or small continuation of the main storyline. But when you're talking about $5 for a single multi-player map or a clip of bullets, then there's something absolutely wrong with their thought-logic.


But you're also right in saying that the developers typically go for re-hashed sequels instead of fresh content... but that's because those re-hashes sell. New games need a lot more time and effort to get up off the ground, and can fail all too easily. By sticking with a licence that they've beaten to death, at least they'll have a core of gamers that they can count on to buy their games time and again.

I look at Assassin's Creed as one such example. I don't even know how many are out there, now, and it's only been about 5 years since the inception. The first game was decent, and certainly unique. The second took everything the first had to offer, and expanded the scope and mechanics to make it something special...

But the third was where things started going back down-hill. For me, at least. That's where I stopped playing, because it was so far out of the scope of running around and killing morally-corrupt sprites. Where it started out being a medieval Hitman, it's turned into an offshoot of The Sims.

And they keep releasing new games for it. And people buy it by the millions. How can you be a bloody assassin when you're roaming around a damned forest in the winter? I mean... seriously? A forest. With a hatchet. Hell, I call that being a lumberjack...

 

[Remus]

Steam sale....

That is all....

 

[Klonoa]

Oh, Gods, don't remind me about micro-transactions. That's the one thing I hate above absolutely everything.

[...]

That's not to say that I wouldn't drop $5 on a new mission set or small continuation of the main storyline. But when you're talking about $5 for a single multi-player map or a clip of bullets, then there's something absolutely wrong with their thought-logic.


But you're also right in saying that the developers typically go for re-hashed sequels instead of fresh content... but that's because those re-hashes sell. New games need a lot more time and effort to get up off the ground, and can fail all too easily. By sticking with a licence that they've beaten to death, at least they'll have a core of gamers that they can count on to buy their games time and again.

I look at Assassin's Creed as one such example. I don't even know how many are out there, now, and it's only been about 5 years since the inception. The first game was decent, and certainly unique. The second took everything the first had to offer, and expanded the scope and mechanics to make it something special...

But the third was where things started going back down-hill. For me, at least. That's where I stopped playing, because it was so far out of the scope of running around and killing morally-corrupt sprites. Where it started out being a medieval Hitman, it's turned into an offshoot of The Sims.

And they keep releasing new games for it. And people buy it by the millions. How can you be a bloody assassin when you're roaming around a damned forest in the winter? I mean... seriously? A forest. With a hatchet. Hell, I call that being a lumberjack...

That really, REALLY rustles my jimmies about DLC is that sometimes it's content that was meant to be on-disc, but last-minute removed by the higher-ups to sell it as DLC, or worse: on-disc locked DLC like Street Fighter X Tekken, I call that scam, and it should be illegal.

I don't mind sequels, I mind rehashes. It's especially offensive when CoD uses even the same collision-map in games, and just changes the 3D models and aesthetics to pretend it's brand new. And even worse when the HUGE IMMERSIVE worlds we supposedly should be able to create nowadays are just a long series of hallways once checking, once again, the collision map.

I actually recent Assassin's Creed a bit... I first played the first one on DS, it was decent, nothing really especial. The second DS AC, Discovey was VERY fun, I loved the mix of stealth and fast side-scrolling action, I figured the 3D HD installements should be EVEN better.

And thus, I finally get to play them on a friend's house, all of them, since his sister is a fan, and my reaction was one, huge MEH.

But the part I recent the most of the fact Ubisoft apparently will shelf Prince of Persia for years to come, since AC sells a lot (for those who don't know, AC began development originally as a multiplayer Prince of Persia game).

Being a fan of Prince of Persia, knowing that nobody put attention to Forbidden Sands despite the fact it was good, and that AC is printing money big ti me...

... Yeah, let's just add Prince of Persia to my list of "favorite franchises that are dead", alongside with Boktai, Mega Man, Klonoa, F-Zero and Metroid.

*sigh*

Hell, let's add Castlevania while we're at it. I just don't understand why people liked Lords of Shadow so much, to me it's a terrible GoW...

I'm still waiting for a sidescroller Castlevania a la Super IV, Konami. One without GoW-esque quick-time events.

 

[squidgee]

Yeah I was surprised to see that neither the PS4 nor the Xbox One have an SSD.

I suppose it might be due to money reasons. SSDs are still quite expensive compared to their HDD counterparts aren't they?
___________

On a sidenote, I'm also interested in the steam controller and steam OS. The controller certainly looks interesting, but I'm skeptical of the level of precision those trackpads are going to offer.

 

[squidgee]

Oh, Gods, don't remind me about micro-transactions. That's the one thing I hate above absolutely everything.

I consider them to be nothing more than cash-grabs by the developers, and a slap to the face of the gamers that bought their product. Really, they should give those little pieces away to their customers, as a thank you for buying their product in the first place. But no, they prefer the almighty dollars instead of showing their appreciation.

Very true, though I think they're acceptable in free to play games. Example being TF2. Not only does Valve gain from it, but also community members who created some of the items. Though, some of the items are pretty ridiculous. If I recall correctly, I think you could purchase a virtual engagement ring for $99.99USD.

 

[DepravedFurball]

I suppose it might be due to money reasons. SSDs are still quite expensive compared to their HDD counterparts aren't they

Oh, they definitely are. Three times the price of a regular HDD for the same capacity.

But if they worked in an SSD/HDD-tandem, using the ultra-fast SSD as a cache-device or temporary loading-space, then the effects would be the same, and the price increase would be nominal.

I can guarantee you, though, that when both systems are re-released in three years as an upgraded form, they'll come with SSD's integrated. They're probably already stockpiling the drives as we speak... aiming for another money-grab from players wanting the absolute best out of their systems.

EDIT: Right now there's videos and guides on the web showing gamers how to replace the HDDs of PS4/XBOnes with SSDs. So you can do it yourself now... but you have to buy the SSD separately.

 

[Klonoa]

Hm, for now I can live with HDD, as long as I have a storage medium akin to a catridge that can last long, I'm happy. I'll wait 'til SSDs become more standarized.

I have a beef with consoles reading discs, you know, since those lenses end up dying and sometimes replacing it costs a pretty penny...

Also, did anyone heard or knows more about the first batch of Xbones smoking or even catching on flames? I just read weeks ago some began to smoke. What.

Also, am I the only one who thinks the PS4 and Xbone are too rushed and they should've waited? A friend who wants to get into the industry once told me, that possibly in 10 years, the industry might become the architect of it's own demise: As they pursue raw horsepower more and more, games become more complex, more expensive to create and a console becomes a lot more expensive. Add to the mix our current economic crisis... Hm... What do you guys think?

 

[O'Killian]

There's an argument to be made that the new consoles are untimely, but on the other hand we are roughly on schedule with the usual turn-around time between consoles. As has been noted, there was a strong focus on the boxes being central to people's living room experiences - presumably trying to reach a demographic that isn't what we traditionally considered a gamer. I'm sure the hardware is improved, though it may not be noticeable at first blush. (Keep in mind, developers build experience on a console over time and learn all the little tricks to get the most out of it - that won't transfer over to new hardware, which miffed more than a few developers this time if I recall correctly). To my knowledge anything remotely techy is going to keep iterating quickly and people are going to keep buying it regardless of whether it makes much sense.

There's a lot of talk that the gaming industry is going to crash, and despite there, well, always being that kind of talk, there might be a point to it now. Apart from games being bigger and costlier to make (though a fair bit of that may be down to inefficiency and waste), the industry is literally burning out its talent. During crunch time people working on a project can be expected to work nearly 'round the clock and without a whole lot of compensatory benefits.

Keep in mind, most of them are 20-somethings who don't mind this at all. The pay's not terrible, and most likely they've always wanted to make games. The thing is, with the exception of artists, they've got a stable of skills that work very well outside the gaming industry at better-paying, better-hours jobs, and when they want to start a family, well... They move on. There's not really any shortage of still-20-something's willing to jump in behind them, so the cycle repeats.

So what you've got left are the folks who make the games really pretty, since there's not a whole lot of other places they can take their skills, and the businessmen. Now the business side is tremendously important and much-maligned, occasionally rightfully so. (Just go look at the DLCs for the Tomb Raider reboot - yeah.) Since most of a given company's experience is on the business end - and they're playing the, again, important money game rather than the video game game - they rarely make the optimum decisions. A lot of times developers get rapidly-changing decisions from on high that they're rarely in a place to say no to, even if it's flat-out bad design.

So basically there's sort of a Stockholm syndrome thing going on, only the victims eventually wake up and leave so maybe that's a bad metaphor.

I just want to stress, if you take nothing else from this post, that games are going to stick around. I'm not talking about a crash like the one in 1983; there'll be plenty of survivors, and it's well established that video games are not a fad. But the industry's probably going to look different within the 5-7 year expected console lifetime of the PS4 and the new X-Box (I really hate that name). I'm not going to pretend I know what it will look like, but it'll probably look quite different under the hood, if not outwardly.

 

[Klonoa]

I remember, sometime in 2008 or 2009, people of Sony and MS said they wanted to extend the 7th generation to 10 years, since technology still helf up, and didn't look dated. There's a theory that, in the system war, Sony sees MS as it's rival, while MS sees Nintendo.

Cue the Wii U coming out, MS follows suit with Xbone, and Sony follows suit with PS4. I wouldn't be very surprised if that happened to be the case.

Sometimes, I think the industry these days is, indeed, very much maligned and I believe MS practices are eeringly similar to those of the original Atari, just "updated" for today's gaming world. As such... I want to believe a crash might not be an entirely bad thing. Might be a new purge.

If a crash were to happen, MS would most likely return to support PC gaming, maybe try compete with Steam through their own exclusives, using the Xbox name for their Steam-esque hypotetical future service or a new brand altogether.

Sony is a multi-media Megacorp. Nothing will ever take them down (except bad decisions in every division, but what are the odds?), it's more possible that they just leave the market altogether and replan strategies, a "wait and see" of sorts.

Nintendo... I grew with it, I might sound fanboyish, but I wouldn't want to see them go down, however the company has been "DOOOMED" since 1889, so they'd probably be alright and simply regress back to their Toy-maker roots, maybe do a Hanafuda based on their IPs (Charafuda?) or even try to become Japan's Pixar with the leftover technology (Other M's CGI cutscenes looked really pretty). Miyamoto once stated, the whole point of the Nintendoland videogame was because he'd like to make a Disneyland based on every IP, so make of that what you will.

Or come out with another magic trick like the original NES and the Wii were...

 

[Klonoa]

Haha, guess who got The Legend of Zelda: A Link Between Worlds?

Can you spell "best Zelda game since the Oracle games"? I sure do!

Honestly, I didnt thought I'd enjoy this game. Unlike the vast, vast majority of other people, I have some hatred torwards A Link to the Past, because I relate memories of that game with frustration, anger and overall suffering, instead of high fantasy enjoyment I get usually from other Zelda games.

Hell, I might give A Link to the Past another chance after I'm done with this game, I got the SNES game here, I should totally boot it up again.

Also, Irene = win. Best witch since Maple. Syrup and Twinrova be damned.

That little, snarky brat. She's an useful character, so I love it!

 

[dannyboy65]

I've been playing a lot of Grand Theft Auto 5 and using cheats haha

 

[Klonoa]

There's a lot of talk that the gaming industry is going to crash, and despite there, well, always being that kind of talk, there might be a point to it now. Apart from games being bigger and costlier to make (though a fair bit of that may be down to inefficiency and waste), the industry is literally burning out its talent. During crunch time people working on a project can be expected to work nearly 'round the clock and without a whole lot of compensatory benefits.

Isn't that how japanese developers have worked since the Famicom era, though? Reportedly, Mega Man 7 was made within 3 weeks of constant work, in which Keiji Inafune and his crew only slept 3 hours a day and only went home to shower and change their clothes, nourishing in instant noodles.

I also know that was the case with Metroid Prime, especially with Shigeru Miyamoto's perfectionism, which led to the game to be re-made from ground on twice, with him and the people of Retro Studios not sleeping and nourishing on Atomic Fireball candy...

... Which supposedly, led to the "talent bleed" of Retro Studios, in which people left to form Armature, supposedly resenting Miyamoto and the other japanese members of Retro who are used to working until they faint, in a scenario similar to Sonic 2's development and the cultural difference on work hours between both countries.

... However, there's no real proof they resent Miyamoto and the rest, or if that crunch time had anything to do with it, so... make of that what you will.

In either way, I agree completely with you, games are becoming far too big and far too expensive than they should, being electronic toys. From the 6th generation, onwards, every console sans Wii has sold at loss, which to me doesn't look like a sustainable business model at all. But rather, looks like a terrible, TERRIBLE idea... And I believe, if the industry crashes again, that will have to do something with it... That techologic race, instead of slow and steady, waiting for technology to be more affordable to people, and to get some profit. That's what they should have done, especially considering the global economic crisis we're dealing with...

Maybe it's time we regress back a bit into more traditional business models for now.

 

[ImNotMyIllness]

I like Halo4. Love playing that with my nephews. But, online is another story. There's some really great gamers out there. I end up getting smoked quick.

 

[Ithior]

What do you guys think about creating a small group of people to play multiplayer games? Just playing a couple of days a week, for a few hours. Not competitively, just for fun. I wouldn't mind buying a few cheap games on Steam for this purpose, but I'm not too comfortable talking to other people online. I guess it would be a good way to push myself out of my comfort zone a bit.

 

[JohnnAY]

omg IM SO IN