Ipod Touch and Iphones - WOW

Telltale Games are also bringing their games like Monkey Island to the iPad - wouldn't it be cool to see games like Tex there?

I'd like to see Tex available for Download for the New DSi... If that little thing can handle Call Of Duty: Black Ops, then it shouldn't have a problem handling Chandler Ave...

And if you make it Available for the Nintendo DSi, then you could probably make it available for download for the Wii as well... We could really expand the Fan base with just those 2 additions...

Joel wrote:I realise my thoughts are a few years behind the 8-ball, but today at the boxing day sales I picked up an iPod Touch to replace my iPod classic. I have to say that this is one impressive unit. I not only refer to all of the various apps and utilities and ability to play music, but just the sheer volume of classic games I have already purchased: Monkey Island, Beneath a Steel Sky and Broken Sword. Classic adventures are returning but not in the way we're used to. Personally, I love the fact that they're adapting to the new technological norms. Developers are clearly aware there are gamers out there like us and really want to give the games the mass-audience attention they deserve.

I also got a first person shooter which seems to work well.

I truly the next big gaming revolution is in hand-held gaming. Console gaming has more or less been accomplished, anything from here on in will just be building upon the foundations they have now set. Handheld gaming is the next and potentially final frontier of true gaming innovation.

I somewhat agree with you, but I have mixed feelings about it. I am actually working on developing a few different games and I know that I'm not going to achieve CoD status, In fact they'll most likely just have cult followings, but there are many different directions that the industry is headed, handheld only being a small portion of it in my opinion.

First off I have to say that the days of buying games from stores or owning physical copies is going to be fading away, not that it needs to, just with the current trends that's where the industry is headed, spelling bad news for console manufacturers and retailers. I consider this a bad thing, true being able to download games has it's benefits and pluses, but I feel that they are outweighed by the downsides to digital distribution. With the popularity of services like Steam or Games For Windows Live, the PC gaming scene is showing growth once more, and even consoles are all starting to sell games for download, with Xbox Live Arcade or Games on Demand, Playstation Store, and WiiWare/Virtual Console. The big companies love it, people are able to buy games without going out and it's so easy and convenient, they are unable to resell unwanted games or borrow to friends meaning that everyone must buy there own copy, no refunds. Consoles may be enjoying there success for now but once they decide to go totally digital they aren't going to be so happy. Pc's are not off the hook either.

With the way things are going there is no longer a need for owning separate devices, it seems people want it all in one, me, I like to keep things separate. Systems like the Xbox and the PS3 are constantly trying to do more and more, with music, pictures, Netflix, Facebook, ESPN, Social networking, Avatars, Acheivements/Trophies, and what started this whole trend DVD playback and Web browsing on the PS2 and Dreamcast respectively. the days of T.V., computer/internet, gaming, DVD player, radio, camera, telephone, and photo album are sadly turning into a strange cobbled together object that eventually I'm sure most will own(maybe even bookshelves will be replaced as well). How long 'till this happens is anyone's guess. But the old Idea of the Desktop Computer is already disappearing, or at least the old Screen-Keyboard/Mouse-Speakers-Tower computer is turning into the more convenient ALL-In-One Desktop (Made popular by Apple), many of which these days are all coming with touch-screen capabilities to go along with the traditional Keyboard and Mouse combo.

Now someone not familiar with gaming might look at the new Motion based control schemes of the Nintendo Wii, Xbox Kinect, PlayStation Move/Sixaxis, or even the DS/ipod Touch/ipad touch screens and smell a revolution, but player's are not going to give up their controllers or Mouses anytime soon, and it's not because the technologies just aren't there yet to provide a good experience with motion based controls it's that the notion of motion based controls just don't appeal to some. I don't want to have to read a book by waving my arms around, I don't need an interactive book to help me to lose weight and make me move when I read it, I don't expect to be burning any large amount of calories when I read, so why would I expect to do that when I'm playing a game? Sure there are work out videos meant to get you in shape, but you don't give a movie fanatic Buns Of Steel for Christmas, people who want to get in shape may seek out a workout video for the convenience of seeing the workouts rather than just reading about it in a Workout Step-By-Step Book, in this sense you can see how a newer medium has improved some aspect of an older one, but it doesn't replace the other medium, after all isn't TV or Cinema just an updated version of Stage Performances and Plays based off of the technology that was spawned from the film camera, which was made into a video camera? And Stage Performances and Plays were just an offshoot of Written Stories mixed with visual arts and Music? So in a sense even the oldest three mediums seem to still be around and are still influencing our newest mediums (I don't know for sure but Drawings/Sculpture, Music, and Written/Told stories seem to be the oldest mediums to me). Still Photography Camera's are still around and very popular even though Video cameras are now a common household technology. So I think that what people may have initially thought would be a technology to replace older input methods of video games are actually starting a whole new medium itself, one which could be considered "Active Interactive" rather than just "Interactive". Whenever I imagine myself actually experiencing an Indiana Jones story myself physically, in some sort of Virtual Reality Game I get really excited, but in no way will this replace me playing games with a controller, not to mention a disabled gamer may not be able to use Kinect, Playstation Move, or even a touch screen, though I'm not saying that there aren't disabled people who experience troubles playing with controllers or mouses now, because even those need some improving (which is why controlling games with your thoughts needs to become more advanced so it may become a common thing to see in stores for disabled people to purchase).

As far as handheld games go yes, you're gonna see a tremendous rise in Popularity of those and for a time they may be the most prominent aspect of the games industry but not replacing all else there will always be variety.

As I said way earlier though, the consoles are in trouble once things all go digital, because suddenly a massive draw of Consoles is gone, many people who refuse to move over to PC love the convenience of just popping in a disc to play, and buying and selling used games or trading with friends. They like needing the disc to play a game, some felt that it was an improvement when games on PC let you play without needing to put the disc in every time but it ruined it for me. But yeah, once this happens to console, the only thing keeping many people console player's has disappeared and PC and Console are now almost the same thing, it will create many suddenly PC gamers. The problem as of now with Steam is that I can't tell if I A) can play a game on my PC (though they say Mass Effect 2 runs on Windows 7, somehow My Brand-New Powerful PC can't run it for some sort of reason/ thank goodness it was just the demo), I need demos for every game in order to tell how a game will run on my pc or if it will run at all (not all steam games have demos) and B) Whether or not a game is fun to me (I will not buy a game on Steam that I am unsure of Unless I can play a demo and see if I like it, if a company wants to not allow returns/refunds than they must provide Demos otherwise this whole digital distribution idea isn't gonna work).

One big thing companies need to understand is that A game is not a service, it's a product. I pay for a painting to hang on my wall and I expect it to stay there, I'm not going to pay an artist for his painting If he tells me in three years it will start to deteriorate and will disappear into thin air (though I'm aware that nothing lasts forever, it should at least last for as long as I take good care of it in my Lifetime). Which is what many video game companies do. Plus, a company who expects to sell things to people for a profit, should be at the service of it's customer's. What is this user agreement nonsense? what about my seller agreement? the one that says if I buy your product, I can expect to use it whenever I want and I can expect it to work for years to come and not have it's servers shutdown two years after release? You know, what is my incentive to buy an xbox game when I know that in 4 years they will make it incompatible to play online like what happened with original xbox games in April. The great thing about Valve is that a game that some people bought in the 90's is still playable today (I'm talking about Counter-Strike) that's good customer service. It's obvious that a multiplayer game's player base is eventually going to die down, but as long as me and my friends in other states still enjoy it or want to play it we should be able to. On the subject of Original Xbox games, there were still quite large followings of players in Halo 2, Crimson Skies, Star Wars: Battlefront 2, and Counter-Strike (Xbox version) playing even on April 14th 2010. When a game is truly a classic or is fun enough that there is a following who will likely always play it, online than companie's should let it be, after all you didn't tell me when I bought it that this would happen, but now I know, but seriously Valve, Id software, and even Activision all do it. Keeping classic games playable is very important, which is why I'm now a PC player for the free online, games that don't get disconnected a few years after purchase and the ability to still play games from the 80's and 90's. Lots of game makers are realizing this need to keep old games accessible, with the release of old games made to run on new consoles and operating systems, just please don't tweak the gameplay or graphics I like the original feel even if they may be extremely difficult to play, but perhaps the worst offense of an old game not being playable by many today is Snatcher and Grim Fandango, both of those need to be released on GOG.com or something, the old copies are really hard to get or just expensive, plus the fact that they may not run.

Whether it is handheld or at home in the future, preferably both, there is no doubt that the success of certain games these days worries me slightly, though people such as David Cage at Quantic Dream or Me with my own games I'm working on, are going to continue doing high quality, Unique, thought provoking experiences rather than the same stuff you've had before. I strongly disagree with people like EA's CEO who say that "Online is where the innovation is at" I think that Online games are holding the industry back and that singleplayer games are the only serious game changers to be seen. I am sad to hear that all of EA's future titles will all contain multiplayer, but don't really care to be honest it will just make it easier for me to blow people away with my game once it's out.

Okay, sorry for the rant, but these are my naive thoughts on the Industry, lastly I'd just like to say that I feel there should be a new name for "Video Games" I think it's a proper title for multiplayer games such as Counter-strike or Team Fortress 2, which could be compared to chess or even a sport such as tag or hockey, and "video game" sounds like a proper term for games like Star Craft or Battlefield which are similiar to tabletop strategy games or toys. But games like Heavy Rain even Tex Murphy are more like something else to me, not that I'm bashing any of these games listed, I enjoy Team Fortress just as much as Indigo Prophecy, but they aren't toys and calling them video games gives people the wrong idea, I am glad that there are more intellectual experiences out there now that many who were not gamers in the past can enjoy. As for the "Art" argument, there is no correct answer, games like Ico, Rez, Heavy Rain, Grim Fandango, Shadow of the Colossus, Chip's Challenge (to me it seems like art), Super Mario Bros. 1-3, Metroid, Zelda series, Mass Effect, and even Crackdown, are all very artistic to me, and not just in graphics or presentation, but in general, as gameplay, or meaning or lack of meaning. But when a game is like Call of Duty MW2 to me it feels like how I feel about the movie Iron Man, it seems like a really big blockbuster game that is centered around cool special effects and explosions with familiar controls and an uninspired story and it's made to appeal to the masses and is generally a shallow experience, but that doesn't mean it is a bad game, It just feels like a toy, and isn't anything new or intelligent just something fun, and for some people that's what gaming is all about.




Edit: Consoles such as Xbox and Playstation won't need to worry much once consoles start to die, because both Microsoft and Sony also manufacture computers. But Nintendo is not so lucky, I think they will need to go the iPad route and pull off some crazy stuff whether it is a handheld such as the DSi or 3DS with a lot of features like an iPad and of course that special unique Nintendo Edge which would come either in design or function, or something totally different I have faith in Nintendo's creativity and execution though the Wii has definitely made some wrong turns but it is still the best selling console in the current Gen. I feel though that Nintendo's creativity and general quality could go well with Sega's quirky ideas to create something special, but that's just my old SEGA fanboy dreaming.

Also I forgot to even mention what Sony is doing with this whole "play, create, share" thing I think game's like Little Big Planet, computer Mods, and Indie titles, will have a big part of the industry for many years to come. Player made content will be another one of the gaming industry's growing branches.

And if you disagree with me on the whole consoles will die at the pc's feet thing just look at the Mac Mini, while all-in-one computers, laptops, Tablet/iPad, smartphones, and netbooks have built in screens, once digital distribution is all there is the console crowd who likes to play using their TV and sit on the couch or floor while playing will be able to buy this style of PC or Mac which is essentially a console that is very small that is for downloadable games (sure it still has a disc tray but that isn't going to last for very long, DVD and CD supporters are going to fight it, but there is no doubt that physical copies of DVD's, CD's and Games are on there way out, though there will still be people like me who will continue to buy vinyl or cd music and have books and dvd/vhs movies, just because digital will be the most popular doesn't mean that all companies will cease to use them). So if you look at the fact that PC's and Mac's can be played/operated with a controller and that the Mac Mini hooks up to your TV you can see that Consoles are about to make like optimus prime and turn into PC's.

Alright...do I respond to the whole rant or pick at pieces? I'll pick and summarize where needed.

First off I have to say that the days of buying games from stores or owning physical copies is going to be fading away, not that it needs to, just with the current trends that's where the industry is headed, spelling bad news for console manufacturers and retailers.

There's one major issue in this, and that's size. As games get bigger, as resolutions get higher, file sizes grow exponentially. I like the X-Box Arcade format. Cheap games, usually fun. They tend to be anywhere from 100 megabytes to a gigabyte in size. Now jump up to a full fledged game. I purchased Grand Theft Auto 4 on steam, and that was 16 gigabytes. And games have already been bigger than that.

An example of a choice I made due to game size and download times would be Resident Evil 5, the gold edition. It came out on both the PS3 and the X-Box 360. Both games came with all add-ons. Only the PS3 had all the add-ons already on the blu ray, waiting to be installed. I'd have to download all of them to the 360. With the choice being either have them on a disc or wait for them to download, I chose the disc.

With the way things are going there is no longer a need for owning separate devices, it seems people want it all in one, me, I like to keep things separate.

As long as companies like Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo can maintain exclusive rights to enough separate intellectual properties to stay profitable, there will not be one all exclusive console (even if people want it all on one).

I remember back when Sega first started making games for Nintendo. That was wierd. Mainly because I also remember the rivalry they had back in the 16 bit era. Nowadays I feel the same way towards the current triangular rivalry. I'd be very surprised to see Mario running around on the PS3, or Ratchet and Clank gearing up for a start on the 360. There's no telling where the industry will be a decade from now, especially since this generation of consoles has been around for about five years without a new generation having been announced.

They like needing the disc to play a game, some felt that it was an improvement when games on PC let you play without needing to put the disc in every time but it ruined it for me. But yeah, once this happens to console, the only thing keeping many people console player's has disappeared and PC and Console are now almost the same thing, it will create many suddenly PC gamers.

I've always preffered consoles because they exist as a pure gaming environment. PC's have always given me $#it. It's not that you have to meet the requirements of the game, but sometimes you have to toe the line. You can't be too much better and you definitely can't be worse if you expect Overseer to run. You provide a great example with Mass Effect 2; there's no reason it shouldn't work, but it just doesn't.

That said, these days consoles are allowing themselves to rely on the ability to patch. I remember back in the day, you bought a game for the Super Nintendo and it worked. I don't remember bugs on console games. Maybe the shitty ones. These days I buy Fallout New Vegas and it's got so many bugs, they could probably write in the dodging of bugs as a gameplay feature.

Keeping classic games playable is very important, which is why I'm now a PC player for the free online, games that don't get disconnected a few years after purchase and the ability to still play games from the 80's and 90's.

People also still play Everquest 1. And SOE till makes new expansions. I guess it all depends on the community. As long as a community of playing gamers still exist, than it would be acceptable for game companies to keep their servers running. That said, eventually you have to draw a line.

One day the three or four people who still play Phantasy Star Online on the Dreamcast will look up to Sega and shout, "Save the server!" and Sega will whisper, "No!"