WereKitten said:
That's quite an assumption you're making there, that games should necessarily tend to strictly emulate reality (or some subjective reality) and that "we all" would like it. That's quite restrictive in my opinion, as games can be made of abstraction as much as simulation. Monopoly works by throwing dice and moving on squares, its essence is not in simulating people walking around a town. In classic,non-action RPGs the damage you inflict does not depend on a timed and precise input about how you swing your sword, but on abstract concepts such as stats, turns, actions etc. In an RTS the essence of game is about coordination and queuing of abstract orders over an expansion of space, very far from what a person experiences with his/her body actions in any simulated physical reality. And I don't want to get into technicalities about how motion controls are supposed to work when it comes to speed, scope, interaction with virtual objects etc. I'm still not sold on the idea that rejecting abstractions entirely (and controller's buttons are abstractions made physical, as they map an idea to the simplest physical action) does fulfill a real, non-niche need. @JaggedSac: this also pertains to your comment |
I am not sure why you keep bringing up needs. Video games do not fulfill any inherent need. If we were to break down what an RTS is, it makes perfect sense with something like Natal. We could place ourselves into the position that the game itself is trying to convey. That of a being in power over a battlefield. The interface of said being would most likely be a touch table screen which the video output is exactly conveyed to the gamer. The input device of said being would most likely be vocal and touch commands. In fact, more than one person could possibly be interacting with the same tablet. Well, the being could be using a mouse and keyboard, but why? I could definitely move faster with my hands being unemcumbered by something that needs to roll. Keyboard shortcuts could be spoken without the need for my hands to stop directing units.
If you were to place people who had no idea how to play an rts, and told them to select a group of units and make them go somewhere with only your body, I am almost positive that people would figure it out quickly. They would make a gesture with their hands to say, this stuff here, I want to go here. Perhaps even vocally, but that is not necessary. If you think that all game designers are pleased with being strapped to a controller with finite buttons, you are kidding yourself. It might not fit a need, as you put it, but I am quite sure it fulfills some designer's wants.
And sure, this idea will not fit in with all genres. Some genres were made specifically for certain input devices. The idea of having a d-pad and buttons indicated how games must be designed in order to work.
And I am not talking about making games mroe realistic by using Natal, I am saying games can be more natural using Natal. Once again, this does not mean shoe horning certain genres into Natal, such as FPS. It could mean entirely new genres, or current genres that just so happen to go well with Natal, such as RTS games.
