Grampy said:
Sorry if I'm late to the party but I've been writing for a few hours and I've read all the posts and I still will have to disagree with you my friend although in the past I have often agreed. First I think your genre definitions are way too narrow. If you go through my game library I like and have owned and played many racing games, Auto Modellista, Colin McRae Rally, Ridge Racer and every version of Need for Speed and Burnout. But Mario Karts (all version) have alwaysbeen my favorite RACING games. If you want to call them something else be my guest. Call them a prune danish and it won't take away one bit of my enjoyment or their popularity. But now, the definition of Cutting Edge,is being in the forefront of progress and innovation in its area and then Merriam Webster defines innovation as 1 : the introduction of something new 2 : a new idea, method, or device : novelty I have seen a lot of nice refinement (higher resolution) more shading, better light effects but none of these qualify as anything new. They are later improved version of things that already existed. In fact I have only seen two examples of true innovation, something completely NEW and that is the Wiimote as a device and motion control as a method and the balance board as a device and Wii Fit as a method. I exclude the DS since it just added a second screen. You are welcome to disagree but I have so far seen nothing new from either Sony or Microsoft and quite frankly I found that surprising and rather disappointing. I remember that E3 when I first realized that the PS3 was predictably going for better graphics and that was all, I kept waiting for the other shoe but it never fell. |
This is a well presented argument unlike most tonight...but I do disagree. Means of controls can be considered innovations but they become a routine within months and then they are no longer innovations. Wii sports was cool...and now we have wii fit which is revolutionary(like it or not) But so is rock band...on a scale that surpasses anything avaialble on the the wii as every accessory in rock band fits the gameplay...graphics are up to date...it has song downloads...online play...its basically perfect as is. Just like wii mote fits Wii sports perfectly and the white board fits wii fit. Now how about we start playing Gran Tourismo with the rock band drums...or we start playing gears of war with the guitar?
This is what wii is doing...its forcing a perepheral that works with 50% (works well with even less) of the games down our thorat and developers throats. Anyone designing a game has to consider how they will make the wii version stand out using the wiimote and this may not be something they want to do or that is part of their vision. And for what? To get same results as with a standard controller once the novelty of holding the wiimote is worn off?
People recomended to me that I try godfather on the wii as its revolutionary in terms of controls...the game is playable...thats it...just becuase a 3rd person game is playable using the wii mote its supposed to be revolutionary?
So I'll take my high budget games with great production values, pixel shaders and level design innovations as revolutionary any day over the same old games with new ways to control them. Sometimes there is no need to reinvent the wheel...cause the round one works just fine.
I see a game like portal revolutionary...
