richardhutnik said:
The interface for videogame consoles today is NOT sufficient to fully do what gamers need. There is a reason, for example, you don't really get RTS titles on consoles. The current dual-stick analog console controlers just aren't suited for everything. Motion control does add more, but it isn't there. Innovation has to take place in interface area of gamers. Also, costs need to be kept down, so new play experiences can be added. Costs are so high, that the industry plays it safe on the top end. It is why you see a glut of FPS titles. Gameplay has been dumbed down, as the idea is to get people play through stories. It all needs to be accessible, and easy. Thing is that a game need not be that expensive to produce. What ends up being an issue though is to add a ton of production value on top, and then drive the costs through the roof. |
Don't blame stories for dumbed down gameplay. Stories has been in games for years. It's just lazy / stupid / scary / powerless developers who dumbs down gameplay. There are plenty of games without stories that have shallow gameplay. And there are plenty with stories, that have deep gameplay. There may be some correlation between stories and shallow gameplay, but don't make it seem like story causes shallow gameplay.
Anyway, about innovation and interface. It's pretty clear that Molyneux is referring to software, not hardware. This is made evident when he says PC has seen a recent surge in innovation. He doesn't mean hardware innovation; PC still uses the standard keyboard & mouse. He's talking about games.
Yes, current controllers restrict certain genres, but that doesn't explain why so many games in the action, fps, etc genre have shallow gameplay. These genres have proved to work well with duel-analog sticks in the past (and often, with stories).
