Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Current Console Transition Far Worse Than Previous 87

Posted by Zonk
from the it's-the-end-of-the-world-as-we-know-it dept.
A report released yesterday indicates that this console transition is far worse than previous hardware iterations. From the Gamasutra article: "This console transition, he said, is 'far worse' than that seen from the years 1999 through 2001. Additionally, Lowell points fingers at the increased popularity of online games, a general lack of creativity in game development, and 'no Halo or Grand Theft Auto-type blowout titles launched in 2005,' echoing the sentiments of many other analysts." Next Generation has an analysis of what makes this transition so bad. (this last piece is satire)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Current Console Transition Far Worse Than Previous

Comments Filter:
  • by Haeleth (414428) on Thursday March 02, 2006 @12:48PM (#14835496) Journal
    Improvement in graphics will be relatively minor.

    People have been saying that for as long as I can remember. There was a time when it was possible to describe Doom as "realistic" with a straight face. But even last year's games look artificial. Even Half-Life 2 and Doom 3 are starting to look dated. Trust me... there's plenty of scope for improvement.

    Games cost a lot to produce now so no one will want to risk anything too off the wall.

    A-list games have cost a lot to produce ever since people found out that spending a lot on a game boosted your profits. And we're still getting off-the-wall titles. Katamari Damacy. Nintendogs. Lumines. None of them sequels, none of them based on expensive licenses, all of them original and addictive. I fail to see the problem.

    And hard core gamers are pushing for games that are too complex.

    You seriously think games are getting MORE complex? You should go back and replay some of the stuff from the 80s and 90s. Try something like Falcon 4.0, where you literally had to read a brick-like manual just to figure out how to get your plane to take off. Or the Police Quest series, where you had to follow real-life police procedures down to the last form. Or classic text adventures, where you had to wrestle with defective natural-language parsers and draw up your own multi-page maps of worlds that only existed as words.

    But there was always Space Invaders too. In other words, there have always been simple games that you can pick up and play, and there have always been complex games that take roughly the same amount of commitment as a full-time degree course to master. Nothing new here. Nothing's changed.

    Combine that with the cost of the new consoles... ...which is pretty much the same as (or cheaper than) the price of the old consoles, when you adjust for inflation? Right. Big problem there, clearly.

    Sorry, but I don't see a single valid complaint in anything you've said. It's all always been that way. Nothing's changed. Nothing will change. Just carry on choosing the games you like from the vast range available, sit back, and enjoy yourself. Because gaming's always been good, and it's going to stay that way.
  • by edwdig (47888) on Thursday March 02, 2006 @01:01PM (#14835619)
    Personally, I've gotten used to the GC controller and like the fact that I'm going to be able to use it with my Revolution.

    The GameCube controller only works for GameCube games. You have to use the new controller for Revolution games. Some of the new games will use a WaveBird-like shell over the new controller, but for the most part you must use the remote control controller.

1 Dog Pound = 16 oz. of Alpo

Working...