next »

[Paul Eres]

it might be worth its own thread / discussion to go into which games/movies actually take advantage of technology of course, it just isn't on topic here (although neither was my original point, except tangentially)

also, about ram, i know ram doesn't mean the same across different architectures, but ram roughly costs the same across them, so it's still weird that, say, the xbox360 only has 512mb of ram

[Glaiel-Gamer]

In other news, directly comparing PC hardware specs to console hardware specs (or even consoles to each other) is dum because they use different architectures.

Also, I could think of at least 20 great games off the top of my head that wouldn't have been possible on the SNES even with "downgraded graphics." Technical innovation is always a good thing because it opens up new possibilities. If you want to make a game "the old way," nothing is stopping you. Hell, even "retro-style" games profit from advances in hardware.

Name them or it didn't happen (despite being so obvious)

Portal, braid, gish, halo (or any other online multiplayer game really), minecraft, angry birds (or any other rigid body physics game), little big planet, eliss, wii sports, guitar hero, starcraft, team fortress 2, farmville, audiosurf, augmented reality 3DS demo games, (unreleased games:) shadow physics, hazard the journey of life.


Ok there's a few classes of game here:

1. 3D games where the 3D adds a significant amount to the concept (portal, minecraft, hazard, shadow physics, etc)

2. Multiplayer games that don't work as couch multiplayer due to needing high numbers of players (tf2) or screen peaking being devastating to the game (starcraft)

3. Games using unique control schemes (multitouch-games like eliss, wiimote games like wii sports)

4. Social games that require something like facebook to work

5. Rigid body physics-based games or other physics based games

6. User generated content focused games

[Superb Joe]

it wouldn't matter, i could name 10 or 100 too -- i didn't say we wouldn't lose good games, or that every good game can be made with a technology level. just that the average quality would have been better if people had focused more on improving things with what they had. i could also name 10 good movies that couldn't be made without computer special effects, but that doesn't mean computer special effects are good for movies

if hardware stagnated then people would simply move on to consuming other forms of media

[Paul Eres]

exactly what happened with books, nobody reads those any more, the technology is ancient. oh wait the book industry makes more than the videogame industry wiseguy

[C.A. Sinner]

Bad analogy. Literature isn't anywhere near as technology-driven as games. You could write War and Peace on a cave wall using a piece of charcoal and the content would still be the same. You could not, however, port Halo to the NES (port, not remake or "demake").

[Paul Eres]

of course it isn't, but it should be. that was my entire point. it won't actually progress until it's not technology-driven

[Superb Joe]

that's very stupid, and you won't make it in television

[C.A. Sinner]

it won't actually progress until it's not technology-driven

Which it will once we have reached the point where technology is good enough to handle any game it's humanly possible to make. Videogames are an inherently technological medium.

Also, your post sort of begs the question whether board games are more advanced than videogames. As a board gamer I'd have to say they probably are, at least in terms of mechanics design. Hmm.

[C.A. Sinner]

k

i split this entire discussion off into a separate thread. if anyone can think of a better title give me a holler.

[Richard Kain]

At the moment I don't think a lack of technological muscle is an issue. There is plenty of back-end hardware power on tap, no matter what platform you are looking at.

The primary issue with technology and video games is that the development of software tools didn't progress at the same pace as hardware. This is actually changing, and platform-agnostic engines like Unreal tech and Unity are paving the way for a greater focus on effective software toolkits. But for the longest time game development solutions were always an in-house effort, and completely customized for each game.

The funny thing is, that is actually the best approach if you want to get every once of power out of the hardware. And back in the days of extremely limited hardware, it was the ONLY real approach. You needed every scrap of processing you could get, so every studio worked to the strengths of whatever hardware they were working for. The hardware side of things took off like a bottle rocket, and in less than thirty years we have hardware in our cell phones that puts our old desktops to shame.

I suppose no one is really to blame for the hardware and software disparity. The hardware side of things has been in such rapid flux and development that it was highly unlikely that any one company would be able to keep up. It's only in the current console generation that the strength of hardware has become a secondary consideration to design.

[Gimym TILBERT]

Also, your post sort of begs the question whether board games are more advanced than videogames. As a board gamer I'd have to say they probably are, at least in terms of mechanics design. Hmm.

That's funny because video games can encapsulate everything board game can do! but board game have two tools game (designer) don't have: maturity and abstraction. wait I'm trolling video game i'm unfair

Also as power becomes more remove from design, technology drive less and less idea. When power was scarce, all you had to do is to find a cool algorithm that do awesome thing and create a fun game with that. As long technology was the toy, you don't need to think too hard for an idea. But as technology power up, the marginal effect it has on gameplay does not generate idea anymore (at least not as much) which lead to idea bankruptcy. Now we need real idea that does not stems from technology but we are still train to think in terms of technology.

Yes 3D brought new idea (and new problem to solve that create new idea too). But it was a significant leap. What leap bloom add to design to foster new idea? more brown except you now sink in light?

[Superb Joe]

k

i split this entire discussion off into a separate thread. if anyone can think of a better title give me a holler.

Cave Story source code released

[DavidCaruso]

Technological advancements are what allow progress in videogames (and at the same time, necessarily enable lower regression). Technology will never stop progressing until either the end of time or the end of the human race. The SNES and your favorite classic games of the 90s did not magically develop in a vacuum, and they themselves were iterative improvements over other classic consoles and games (the most obvious being the NES, but also the Master System, 2600, etc.). Certain genres and games from the 90s kept being improved iteratively as well (e.g. strategy games, FPSes), while others faltered and lost sales power because there really wasn't too much more that could be done with them except gimmickry after their high points (e.g. platformers, adventure games). Some genres even became undead and continued having sales power despite a lack of innovation or refinement (the most obvious example here being modern JRPGs).

The point is that wishing videogames weren't "technology-driven" is like wishing books weren't "language-driven" and declaring that books would not progress (progress to what exactly?) until they stopped relying on language.

Also, your post sort of begs the question whether board games are more advanced than videogames. As a board gamer I'd have to say they probably are, at least in terms of mechanics design. Hmm.

In certain genres an argument could be made for this (e.g. D&D is more complex than a modern CRPG due to the variety of scenarios that can unfold because of human gamemasters, the magnitude and scope of which can't be simulated by a computer right now), but in general I don't think it's true. I'd argue Civilization 5 or DEFCON are more complex than Diplomacy, for example.

EDIT:

What leap bloom add to design to foster new idea? more brown except you now sink in light?

[Gimym TILBERT]

Technology don't evolve game design only the kinetic presentation of it

[DavidCaruso]

Technology don't evolve game design only the kinetic presentation of it

So Civilization 5, StarCraft 2, Virtual On, Sonic Adventure, Shenmue, any modern bullet hell shmup, Deus Ex, Half-Life 2, Fez, Super Mario 64, L.A. Noire, God Hand, Super Smash Bros. Melee, et al. would have all been possible on a SNES without any additional technology?...

Sure, the teams may have had their design ideas written down or something long before the actual dev process started, but the point is that the advancing technology was what enabled the designers, programmers, artists, musicians, etc. to actually make these ideas into reality. (Or a virtual reality even =P)