Ahhh console evolution its a very unappreciated science people just know the next one will be better but dont ever take time to look at the evolution of this magnificent industry.
Consoles differ so much today from those in the 60s and i dont mean in the obvious way that being performance i mean in design the look the style you can almost guess the decade simply by looking at a consoles exterier casing slightly sad really lol.
Any way down to the tasks... and its plain and simple for the first part yes the industry was focused completely on the interfaces and getting the most out of what was extremely primative technology at the time in other words if you were to take my list of 3 from the previous blog on storylines this is as it was then.
1,gameplay ( extremely simple mostly involving just left and right or up and down motions)
2,graphics ( even more simple and mostly just blocks on the screen that either moved or didnt)
3, storyline (non existant but thats because the industry was more focused on development visually and getting the most out of the primative machines which really doesnt differ much from today).
I cannot argue thought at the time with this being new technology, it did fasinate people much as the realism of todays games compel it was impressive for its time and nobody cared what it looked like on the outside or as a matter of fact what the graphics were full stop. They were perfectly happy with there little white blocks moving on screen ^_^.
These days standards have definatly changed. People like nice looking consoles and it brings me back to my first impression of the N64. Im not sure why but i thought the console was the best looking one i had ever seen as it gave options in colours and even transparent designs, but it was more than that... It wasnt box'y like other consoles of the 90's it had more about it and id go as far as saying it was the the first pretty console lol, that at least started the idea of variations on a commercial level as opposed to sonys silver playstation that was released as a special edition.
Ive always said curves are the future for any design simply because there is nothing cool about a brick. Id definatly count XBOX 360 as a brick but with its custom templates it makes it a bit more acceptable ontodays markets as does the Wii, however the PS3 is a look to the future in almost every way though Sony lack the motivation and innovation of Microsoft and Nintendo to come up with anything different but better graphics.
When it comes down to personal opinion on the user interfaces through all of the consoles i have played, id have to say the the best one i have seen is the Xbox 360's latest one which is just so lush but even the old one was nicely layed out and very easy to navigate. I know many would say the PS3's or a more primative one such as the Dreamcasts or PSX/1 but im thinking of it in terms the most features yet the easiest to navigate and still looking nice and 360's interface has all of that. I cant even knock the controller it may look a freak but its so much better designed than the PS3 controller. It would seem that Microsoft admired the Gamecube controller alot and always said the gamecube controller was one of the best.
By far the worse interface i have ever seen is that of the Gamecube! Although it has a good controller design as most of Nintendos consoles do, its interface just isnt nice to look at though admitedly its got a bit more about it than that of the PS2 or PSX/1. Nethertheless its still harder to navigate than other consoles but at least they ammended this with the Wiis nice and simple interface.
The future of video games is definalty heading in a game pad free enviroment and personally i already think the joystick is dead and buryied! Wii has pathed the way for a new generation in gaming where interactivity is the new major factor and i think hand free gaming is coming in the near future.
Monday, 29 December 2008
Saturday, 27 December 2008
Christianity, Religion and Destruction? thoughts
On with the theory now, yes it is very controversial and if you are deeply religious then i am sorry if it offends you!!
My theory involves several factors which more than likely will either confuse you or make you think either way it still leaves more questions than answers so lets dive straight in!
The first part of the theory is that religion served two purposes and neither of them involved the creation of life on our planet however they gave a reasoning to a blank subject. The first real reason is that they need answers to unanswerable questions that only science could answer but the lack of technology prevented the answers from being given although now we have some answers now all they have done is produced more questions...
Obviously this doesnt help answer the questions that bug us deep down for every day of our misrable existance on this floating rock in the endless void of space.
The second reason is the most logical reason behind religion and that is that it was used as an early form of law and order. If people believed they were going to hell if they commited a crime well they were less likely to commit a crime!
The problem is at least in Christianity one guy takes advantage of the system and claims he is the son of god when he could have just been a very clever magician of his time, afterall with the likes of Houdini and David Blaine and Darren Brown who are we to think that these clever tricks were not possible back the times of jesus. Not to mention people were extremely nieve and gullable in those days a few party tricks and you could be the new messiah.
This introduces the possibility of possibly one of the biggest hoaxs of all time! Was jesus out to decieve the jewish people into thinking he was the son of god.. to pull the the illusion of being killed via crucifiction all in the effort to unbalance both the jewish faith and the roman religion!
His methods make sence Houdini was famous for his escapology in which jesus could have done a similar trick when placed in the tomb the crucifiction could have been nothing more than a illusion including the so called holy spear which was the the final blow to Jesus in the bible. In order to gain the following in the masses a simple psychological trick could be used and that is follow the crowd!.
We still do it today we follow a crowd because we know theres a reason and curiocity gets the better of us if not we all get the urge and not one person can deny it. So Jesus simply gained a small following of people these would be known as the 12 appostles, but what if in fact they were merely a means of drawing a crowd in the early days with the later intent to spread the hoax across the country and then the world.
however thats obviously missing more proof before something like that could count as a true theory so ill be sure to research and think more on the matter.
Back to Religion in general they say stopping religion would stop wars but thats not true.. we would still fight because we wouldnt have a reason for our existance! So it would be like 2 Cocketals in a small pen without any chickens, when they are left without a purpose or any meaning they fight and we are the same.
Besides religion is the driving force behind finding the answers as once again it provides the questions and to keep sanity provides answers but the answers produce more questions in a sence we will never know the meaning of life through science thats something religion can decide but if we made it up unintentionally then we will never know the answers.
Either way this theory spells destruction and that is true well its tru if we follow religion we will fight , if we dont have religion we will fight.. if the hollocaust comes we are boned because of science as it questions god therefore it can be seen as evil. But then annoyingly that would lead someone back to thinking what jesus said would actually prevent disaster as it would bring peace, to bad its something humans are not capable of, magician or not the guy may have thought the same thousands of years before me now.
TBC+Amended...
My theory involves several factors which more than likely will either confuse you or make you think either way it still leaves more questions than answers so lets dive straight in!
The first part of the theory is that religion served two purposes and neither of them involved the creation of life on our planet however they gave a reasoning to a blank subject. The first real reason is that they need answers to unanswerable questions that only science could answer but the lack of technology prevented the answers from being given although now we have some answers now all they have done is produced more questions...
Obviously this doesnt help answer the questions that bug us deep down for every day of our misrable existance on this floating rock in the endless void of space.
The second reason is the most logical reason behind religion and that is that it was used as an early form of law and order. If people believed they were going to hell if they commited a crime well they were less likely to commit a crime!
The problem is at least in Christianity one guy takes advantage of the system and claims he is the son of god when he could have just been a very clever magician of his time, afterall with the likes of Houdini and David Blaine and Darren Brown who are we to think that these clever tricks were not possible back the times of jesus. Not to mention people were extremely nieve and gullable in those days a few party tricks and you could be the new messiah.
This introduces the possibility of possibly one of the biggest hoaxs of all time! Was jesus out to decieve the jewish people into thinking he was the son of god.. to pull the the illusion of being killed via crucifiction all in the effort to unbalance both the jewish faith and the roman religion!
His methods make sence Houdini was famous for his escapology in which jesus could have done a similar trick when placed in the tomb the crucifiction could have been nothing more than a illusion including the so called holy spear which was the the final blow to Jesus in the bible. In order to gain the following in the masses a simple psychological trick could be used and that is follow the crowd!.
We still do it today we follow a crowd because we know theres a reason and curiocity gets the better of us if not we all get the urge and not one person can deny it. So Jesus simply gained a small following of people these would be known as the 12 appostles, but what if in fact they were merely a means of drawing a crowd in the early days with the later intent to spread the hoax across the country and then the world.
however thats obviously missing more proof before something like that could count as a true theory so ill be sure to research and think more on the matter.
Back to Religion in general they say stopping religion would stop wars but thats not true.. we would still fight because we wouldnt have a reason for our existance! So it would be like 2 Cocketals in a small pen without any chickens, when they are left without a purpose or any meaning they fight and we are the same.
Besides religion is the driving force behind finding the answers as once again it provides the questions and to keep sanity provides answers but the answers produce more questions in a sence we will never know the meaning of life through science thats something religion can decide but if we made it up unintentionally then we will never know the answers.
Either way this theory spells destruction and that is true well its tru if we follow religion we will fight , if we dont have religion we will fight.. if the hollocaust comes we are boned because of science as it questions god therefore it can be seen as evil. But then annoyingly that would lead someone back to thinking what jesus said would actually prevent disaster as it would bring peace, to bad its something humans are not capable of, magician or not the guy may have thought the same thousands of years before me now.
TBC+Amended...
storytelling + games = winning formula
Right with this blog im going to dive right into the thick of it and say the best games are always the ones with the best storylines of course thats my opinion and maybe not yours but my order of priority for games it
1 - Storyline
2 - Game play
3 - Graphics
please feel free to post your order of preference but i wont take notice because im stubbern lol.
A few links im suppose to review... well i have had a read through the Maz Payne 2 link which is a review that it featured on Wikipedia so i presume its done by a normal user but any way the focus is primarily on its storyline which means that this is a classic example of what i said above graphics didnt even really come into the equation it even features a picture of 'Sam Lake' who wrote the plot which is rare though granted it was his face used in the original max payne but still he is a well known script writer himself.
It does seem to me now that the seriousness of a decent storyline has hit home with developers as they now hire professional novel writers and the other link i read reinforced this as the half life writer is in fact a graphic novel writer and was very well established before his involvement with Half Life 2 in which dare i say could possibly be one of the best games when it comes to story (along side final fantasy 7 of course ;) ) .
For the first question 'Does a strong storyline make a better game?', Of course it does! people like storys and think about games such as Half Life 2 without its story it would just be a run around and shoot enemys in a 3d world similar to the system using in Unreal Tournament. However not to say that games without a storyline cant be good as rewinding back to my list of three earlier.. crap storyline but excellent game play and graphics can swing a games popularity but a compelling storyline can easily carry both of them and make a game decent get all three of them and you have the same formula Max Payne had and it couldnt have failed.
Back in the days when consoles were primative most games followed what i would call a traintrack when it came to storyline and the player had no choice in what happen in the story in otherwords it was fate whatever happened to the character was always going to happen no matter what the player did this is best shown in final fantasy games which give the illusion of freedom but always follow a set path but these days with more powerful consoles and demand for more clever games the developers have delievered a choice system giving the player the control over the fate of the character usually involving a choice by either motion or dialogue.
A great example of this is in Fable 2 in which at many points of the game the story line direction is left to the player however in a sence its still on a rail its just like a track switch really. The most biggest choice in my opinion is where you are acting as a guard and you have the choice to feed the prisoners or not this leads the direction for your personality and the storyline the game also cleverly tells alot about a person as when i played it i genuinely took pity on the little sprites >_<.
Now this is what i hate is games like Second Life and World Of Warcraft... Second Life in particular as it serves no real purpose but to be a online get away for sad people wanting to escape reality... its graphics are poor and its game play is dier and the storyline is only really what the players play out so in other words there isnt any in fact more storylines come from second life in real life with all the divorves in the papers that have been caused by so called "cheating" in the game whcih i thinks pathetic and its typical that most of its happening in America them and their cultures *sighs*.
World of Warcraft is slightly more excusable but only because of the quests which follow story lines to a degree plus the game looks nice and the game plays pretty good.
I cant believe that question has been raised ' Is Call Of Duty a War Story'. Yes yes yes it is and even if it doesnt follow actually events it still lives out the same or similar lifestyle and storys of every soldier of that era however in the case of number 3 where it followed actually real historic events naturally the storyline was more like an interactive movie which made it quite good but 4 is very different bas its set in near enough the present day and since its made up i cant really call it a war story its more of a representation compared to 1,2 and 3 and now 5.
overall i hope i have got it across that at least im a passionate person about storylines in games and have increased awareness even slightly, if not next time you play a game like fable,COD,mass effect,Half life 2 etc. The list is endless think for just one minute what makes this game so dam good im sure you'll come to the same conclusion as me.
1 - Storyline
2 - Game play
3 - Graphics
please feel free to post your order of preference but i wont take notice because im stubbern lol.
A few links im suppose to review... well i have had a read through the Maz Payne 2 link which is a review that it featured on Wikipedia so i presume its done by a normal user but any way the focus is primarily on its storyline which means that this is a classic example of what i said above graphics didnt even really come into the equation it even features a picture of 'Sam Lake' who wrote the plot which is rare though granted it was his face used in the original max payne but still he is a well known script writer himself.
It does seem to me now that the seriousness of a decent storyline has hit home with developers as they now hire professional novel writers and the other link i read reinforced this as the half life writer is in fact a graphic novel writer and was very well established before his involvement with Half Life 2 in which dare i say could possibly be one of the best games when it comes to story (along side final fantasy 7 of course ;) ) .
For the first question 'Does a strong storyline make a better game?', Of course it does! people like storys and think about games such as Half Life 2 without its story it would just be a run around and shoot enemys in a 3d world similar to the system using in Unreal Tournament. However not to say that games without a storyline cant be good as rewinding back to my list of three earlier.. crap storyline but excellent game play and graphics can swing a games popularity but a compelling storyline can easily carry both of them and make a game decent get all three of them and you have the same formula Max Payne had and it couldnt have failed.
Back in the days when consoles were primative most games followed what i would call a traintrack when it came to storyline and the player had no choice in what happen in the story in otherwords it was fate whatever happened to the character was always going to happen no matter what the player did this is best shown in final fantasy games which give the illusion of freedom but always follow a set path but these days with more powerful consoles and demand for more clever games the developers have delievered a choice system giving the player the control over the fate of the character usually involving a choice by either motion or dialogue.
A great example of this is in Fable 2 in which at many points of the game the story line direction is left to the player however in a sence its still on a rail its just like a track switch really. The most biggest choice in my opinion is where you are acting as a guard and you have the choice to feed the prisoners or not this leads the direction for your personality and the storyline the game also cleverly tells alot about a person as when i played it i genuinely took pity on the little sprites >_<.
Now this is what i hate is games like Second Life and World Of Warcraft... Second Life in particular as it serves no real purpose but to be a online get away for sad people wanting to escape reality... its graphics are poor and its game play is dier and the storyline is only really what the players play out so in other words there isnt any in fact more storylines come from second life in real life with all the divorves in the papers that have been caused by so called "cheating" in the game whcih i thinks pathetic and its typical that most of its happening in America them and their cultures *sighs*.
World of Warcraft is slightly more excusable but only because of the quests which follow story lines to a degree plus the game looks nice and the game plays pretty good.
I cant believe that question has been raised ' Is Call Of Duty a War Story'. Yes yes yes it is and even if it doesnt follow actually events it still lives out the same or similar lifestyle and storys of every soldier of that era however in the case of number 3 where it followed actually real historic events naturally the storyline was more like an interactive movie which made it quite good but 4 is very different bas its set in near enough the present day and since its made up i cant really call it a war story its more of a representation compared to 1,2 and 3 and now 5.
overall i hope i have got it across that at least im a passionate person about storylines in games and have increased awareness even slightly, if not next time you play a game like fable,COD,mass effect,Half life 2 etc. The list is endless think for just one minute what makes this game so dam good im sure you'll come to the same conclusion as me.
Thursday, 4 December 2008
Design documents argggg
Ahhh Game design, the design process of a game... most of this is decided in numerous meetings consisting of brainstorming with the input of countless ideas till the project leader says ah haa yes i like that.
The ideas are then forwarded to designers to come up with a structure for them and is displayed in the form of Design Document which details everything from the game play to the character designs all the way to story lines.
Right so what is this game play thing that was mentioned? well game play is what it says on the tin its how the game plays mostly considering the consumers experience while playing the game. This may be the interactivity of characters,objects and graphics in short it the rules of the game.
Most of a games design is handled by Game designers and it is these people who are paid to come up wit the ideas for games and define how they will work. However this is not always the case and in smaller company's games design may be done by the entire staff who have their input in the game.
All games follow similar principles but some may vary slightly for example a first person shooter's design document is not going to be the same as a 3rd person strategy game because the game play style is different how ever certain elements may be similar such as storyline for instance and a big example of that is between Halo the new Halo Wars game which follows the same storyline in a sence but has different gameplay.
'What's important for you, when you play?' Hmmmm that is possibly the most annoying question i have ever been asked as i cant give a direct answer to it but i know when i play games i have never been one to pick on a game for its graphics i nearly always however have a go if i think the way the game is layed out before me is rubbish and its the only reason i liked halo so much. The graphics in Halo are nothing special but the story and game play are fantastic so i guess thats what i deem important really.
The ideas are then forwarded to designers to come up with a structure for them and is displayed in the form of Design Document which details everything from the game play to the character designs all the way to story lines.
Right so what is this game play thing that was mentioned? well game play is what it says on the tin its how the game plays mostly considering the consumers experience while playing the game. This may be the interactivity of characters,objects and graphics in short it the rules of the game.
Most of a games design is handled by Game designers and it is these people who are paid to come up wit the ideas for games and define how they will work. However this is not always the case and in smaller company's games design may be done by the entire staff who have their input in the game.
All games follow similar principles but some may vary slightly for example a first person shooter's design document is not going to be the same as a 3rd person strategy game because the game play style is different how ever certain elements may be similar such as storyline for instance and a big example of that is between Halo the new Halo Wars game which follows the same storyline in a sence but has different gameplay.
'What's important for you, when you play?' Hmmmm that is possibly the most annoying question i have ever been asked as i cant give a direct answer to it but i know when i play games i have never been one to pick on a game for its graphics i nearly always however have a go if i think the way the game is layed out before me is rubbish and its the only reason i liked halo so much. The graphics in Halo are nothing special but the story and game play are fantastic so i guess thats what i deem important really.
Tuesday, 25 November 2008
Why the Art Director is so important? no really why?
Till now i never thought about this! For some reason i always assumed that everything always just fell into place and worked but i suppose its not the case as ideas can wonder and not fit in with the general style of the game, i guess this is where the art director comes in.
Art Directors are in charge of making sure the visual essence of a game and artistic vision is maintained during the development process. They oversee the project from its design document all the way through production till release when im sure there is much relief.
They Work very closely with the Art Manager to ensure consistancy in the style and feel of the game this even stretchs to the interactivity of the game.
The job of Art Director does not necessarily have to be creative though seeing as the job would be taken up by an expierenced artist anyways that would probably come standard.
Its a well known fact that games and films are becoming very similar in the sence of structure and even production times but on a artistic level in game cut scenes and story lines are becoming very similar to that of films and more and more art directors are having to follow similar development methods.
The role of Art director seems no walk in the park and really requires years of artistic experience and the ability to know what will work and what will not while at the same time thinking from the perspective of the consumer. So overall a very demanding job with the need for good, motivation, innovation and communication skills.
With me personally the skills i would need to develop are my motivation in which for an artist in general is a key componant and something i will be sure to work on not sure if the job would be good for me though if i was a chess piece i would definatly be a pawn.
Art Directors are in charge of making sure the visual essence of a game and artistic vision is maintained during the development process. They oversee the project from its design document all the way through production till release when im sure there is much relief.
They Work very closely with the Art Manager to ensure consistancy in the style and feel of the game this even stretchs to the interactivity of the game.
The job of Art Director does not necessarily have to be creative though seeing as the job would be taken up by an expierenced artist anyways that would probably come standard.
Its a well known fact that games and films are becoming very similar in the sence of structure and even production times but on a artistic level in game cut scenes and story lines are becoming very similar to that of films and more and more art directors are having to follow similar development methods.
The role of Art director seems no walk in the park and really requires years of artistic experience and the ability to know what will work and what will not while at the same time thinking from the perspective of the consumer. So overall a very demanding job with the need for good, motivation, innovation and communication skills.
With me personally the skills i would need to develop are my motivation in which for an artist in general is a key componant and something i will be sure to work on not sure if the job would be good for me though if i was a chess piece i would definatly be a pawn.
Thursday, 6 November 2008
Let me tell you a Joke... Video game reviews!!!
Right im on my lunch break at work so i decided to continue my blogging though after reading a couple of the reviews i seriously wish i hadnt neithertheless admittedly they where intriging (especially the second XD).
The first one was on Metal Gear Solid 2 and the guys love for the game but to be honest he said metal gear solid 2 confused him well his review on it confused me more than that game ever has.
You know what actually im going to skip to the second and re read the metal gear solid for a third time!
Right the second was the Rez one and needless to say it turned an inspiring music shooter game into an erotic tale of one womans love for the game, well i say the game i mean more the vibration device that comes with it. Suffice to say alot of blokes probably had to cross their legs by the end of this but if you get past all the sexual nonsence it makes a good point about game reviewing in modern times.
So whats this point you ask? well its simple game reviewing is becoming more personal and less about the games themselves! People are using there experiences while playing the games to review as opposed to old fashion methods which tell you whats in the game and why its good because it has this and that feature. These experiences go right down to to even what they are feeling at the time for example the metal gear solid reviewer felt confused and bewildered which are both mental where as the other one i need not go into details but it was all physical.
But these are not commercial reviewers and although less about the look and gameplay they give an actual sence of what the game is like without the dull details in other words its clear whether its fun or not.
On to the commercial issues with professional game journalists and there is quite alot of them. The obvious problem is lack of staff which of course puts alot of pressure on other employees as they are often under strict deadlines that bump the pressure up even higher and to make it worse they know once one magazine is finished its straight back to the pain of the next issue so its no wonder they rush and cut corners.
Its this pressure that really shows the difference between the user made ones above and the professional writing, because its rushed it lacks any feeling and is based on a generic template which is what really gives the impression that the journalists are lazy and stupid in which they probably arnt.
The objective ranking system well personally i think its phish ive played games before that have been at the bottom half of the list and found them fantastic but it brings us right back to the feeling of the games which is not something the objective style of writing take account for its all graphics and gameplay so the real message gets lost.
All in all SUBJECTIVITY FOR THE WIN!! its more interesting to read and really makes you want to buy the game more or naturally in some cases less but either way most of these people dont get paid for thier opinion of these games except for those on the likes of 'gamespot.com' yet they still do it and thank god otherwise we would all be subjected to continuous nonsence you see in mainstream magazines..
oh yeh and ive re-read the metal gear one and still dont fully understand it but you know it doesnt matter really becuase i know the guy felt passionally about the story and the game in general.
As for my style of writing ill let you decide that thouugh i think its fairly obvious...
The first one was on Metal Gear Solid 2 and the guys love for the game but to be honest he said metal gear solid 2 confused him well his review on it confused me more than that game ever has.
You know what actually im going to skip to the second and re read the metal gear solid for a third time!
Right the second was the Rez one and needless to say it turned an inspiring music shooter game into an erotic tale of one womans love for the game, well i say the game i mean more the vibration device that comes with it. Suffice to say alot of blokes probably had to cross their legs by the end of this but if you get past all the sexual nonsence it makes a good point about game reviewing in modern times.
So whats this point you ask? well its simple game reviewing is becoming more personal and less about the games themselves! People are using there experiences while playing the games to review as opposed to old fashion methods which tell you whats in the game and why its good because it has this and that feature. These experiences go right down to to even what they are feeling at the time for example the metal gear solid reviewer felt confused and bewildered which are both mental where as the other one i need not go into details but it was all physical.
But these are not commercial reviewers and although less about the look and gameplay they give an actual sence of what the game is like without the dull details in other words its clear whether its fun or not.
On to the commercial issues with professional game journalists and there is quite alot of them. The obvious problem is lack of staff which of course puts alot of pressure on other employees as they are often under strict deadlines that bump the pressure up even higher and to make it worse they know once one magazine is finished its straight back to the pain of the next issue so its no wonder they rush and cut corners.
Its this pressure that really shows the difference between the user made ones above and the professional writing, because its rushed it lacks any feeling and is based on a generic template which is what really gives the impression that the journalists are lazy and stupid in which they probably arnt.
The objective ranking system well personally i think its phish ive played games before that have been at the bottom half of the list and found them fantastic but it brings us right back to the feeling of the games which is not something the objective style of writing take account for its all graphics and gameplay so the real message gets lost.
All in all SUBJECTIVITY FOR THE WIN!! its more interesting to read and really makes you want to buy the game more or naturally in some cases less but either way most of these people dont get paid for thier opinion of these games except for those on the likes of 'gamespot.com' yet they still do it and thank god otherwise we would all be subjected to continuous nonsence you see in mainstream magazines..
oh yeh and ive re-read the metal gear one and still dont fully understand it but you know it doesnt matter really becuase i know the guy felt passionally about the story and the game in general.
As for my style of writing ill let you decide that thouugh i think its fairly obvious...
Friday, 17 October 2008
My Gaming waming History!! part 2 the future!
Ahhhh fingers hurt from so much typing never mind though right to the point because im really tired and modelling with clay is tedious.
My demands in what i want from games are fairly small in number but big in demand! As with any gamer the constant push for better graphics is always going to be one of them but it isnt my main need in a game, in fact the thing i want most is huge online battles... It has been a dream of mine for the last few years now to see a game that gives you this ability and im not just talking about 15 per team like on Halo! Im talking about 1000 per team in one huge online blood fest.
I know im not alone in this and i also know its not down to the developers so much its more down to finding servers and a efficent system that can handle that many players and the constantly changing data.
Id play them the old fashion way although with Nintendos rather interactive view of the future i still think virtual reality in the home would be a far to ambitious vision for anytime soon but i dont think its to much to ask for to have a team fortress type game but just with huge numbers i just love the idea of full scale war online, hell who knows maybe even one day they'll abandon this stupid waste of life we call modern warfare and decide wars and arguements with a good fight online with no loss of life (well its an idea anyways).
My demands in what i want from games are fairly small in number but big in demand! As with any gamer the constant push for better graphics is always going to be one of them but it isnt my main need in a game, in fact the thing i want most is huge online battles... It has been a dream of mine for the last few years now to see a game that gives you this ability and im not just talking about 15 per team like on Halo! Im talking about 1000 per team in one huge online blood fest.
I know im not alone in this and i also know its not down to the developers so much its more down to finding servers and a efficent system that can handle that many players and the constantly changing data.
Id play them the old fashion way although with Nintendos rather interactive view of the future i still think virtual reality in the home would be a far to ambitious vision for anytime soon but i dont think its to much to ask for to have a team fortress type game but just with huge numbers i just love the idea of full scale war online, hell who knows maybe even one day they'll abandon this stupid waste of life we call modern warfare and decide wars and arguements with a good fight online with no loss of life (well its an idea anyways).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)