Find out why you couldn’t shoot your sword again in Deadly Towers in this episode of the gaming podcast. This week we’re getting some community feedback on what they think should go in a collectors edition game pack. For news this week, we’re tackling:
- ID software not convinced PC gaming is dying
- Dance Dance Revolution (DDR) Will Support Move
- Developers concerned about Valve DOTA patent filing
- Sony takes a shot at Apple iPod/iPhone gaming
This weeks Question of the Week: Would a full destructible game environment effect the game industry, breed new experiences and create new genre’s of games? Or just be yet another feature.
@ID software not convinced PC gaming is dying:
Hear hear! PC gamer here 😀
I just don’t see how a console can beat the open system nature of the PCs.
As for piracy, well, the only way you can control that is by having part of the game’s functionality running on the developer’s servers. Like Steam for Valve.
And the most hardcore gamers are using the PC as their platform of choice. In a game like Modern Warfare XBox controllers just can’t beat aiming with your mouse.
@Dance Dance Revolution (DDR) Will Support Move:
“20 licensed tracks along with 25 songs from Konami artists”
I just can’t help it: anybody wants to do DDR on NES music? 😀
@Valve and DotA:
Oh boy … I didn’t hear that many complaints when Valve announced their plans for TF2 (Team Fortress was, just like DotA, a game mod).
Could be the fact that the TF team got hired by Valve, as opposed to the DotA team?
What bothers me more is not the fact that Valve trademarked DotA, but rather the fact that Valce is on a trend on buying existing IPs rather than developing new IPs of their own. Portal, TF2, L4D, all games that existed in another format before Valve stepped in. Why not follow ID Software’s lead? They’re doing a new IP (“Rage”).
@NES cartridge:
Oh my! When the NES clones came in Romania, they also brought pirated copies of the games.
No screws, just plastic.
As for opening it the cartridge, the reason this was done in Romania was to replace a nice game with one that you either didn’t like or you got bored of. Then you’d return the cartridge, with the different ROM.
@Question of the Week:
No. Red Faction tried that. No revolution followed. Far Cry 2 did something similar with their fire system. No revolution followed.
It’ll be a nice feature, but that’s just it.
To be more than just a feature, you’d need to make some sort of game mechanics around it. Who’d like to play a game where you’re a demolitions expert?
@ID software not convinced PC gaming is dying:
Hear hear! PC gamer here 😀
I just don’t see how a console can beat the open system nature of the PCs.
As for piracy, well, the only way you can control that is by having part of the game’s functionality running on the developer’s servers. Like Steam for Valve.
And the most hardcore gamers are using the PC as their platform of choice. In a game like Modern Warfare XBox controllers just can’t beat aiming with your mouse.
@Dance Dance Revolution (DDR) Will Support Move:
“20 licensed tracks along with 25 songs from Konami artists”
I just can’t help it: anybody wants to do DDR on NES music? 😀
@Valve and DotA:
Oh boy … I didn’t hear that many complaints when Valve announced their plans for TF2 (Team Fortress was, just like DotA, a game mod).
Could be the fact that the TF team got hired by Valve, as opposed to the DotA team?
What bothers me more is not the fact that Valve trademarked DotA, but rather the fact that Valce is on a trend on buying existing IPs rather than developing new IPs of their own. Portal, TF2, L4D, all games that existed in another format before Valve stepped in. Why not follow ID Software’s lead? They’re doing a new IP (“Rage”).
@NES cartridge:
Oh my! When the NES clones came in Romania, they also brought pirated copies of the games.
No screws, just plastic.
As for opening it the cartridge, the reason this was done in Romania was to replace a nice game with one that you either didn’t like or you got bored of. Then you’d return the cartridge, with the different ROM.
@Question of the Week:
No. Red Faction tried that. No revolution followed. Far Cry 2 did something similar with their fire system. No revolution followed.
It’ll be a nice feature, but that’s just it.
To be more than just a feature, you’d need to make some sort of game mechanics around it. Who’d like to play a game where you’re a demolitions expert?
As processor power grows in consoles, we will eventually get to a point where environments will be completely destructible AND still have the level of detail like GTA4 had. Red Faction Guerrilla did a really good job letting you destroy literally everything you could see… the problem being that there was very little detail in what was there. Herr Alien is right: no revolution started – and in fact, we are still getting First Person Shooter games where you can’t break neon lights by shooting them.
Full destruction could breed new experiences in FPS games. When the map is constantly changing, you have to adjust your style of play on the fly. “Cover” offers less security in Bad Company 2 when you know the building you are in could collapse on you if it is dealt enough damage.
More than likely, the next iteration of “A-List” games on the next generation of consoles will look at environmental destruction as “just another feature”. Our children will look back at “classic” games of 2010 and wonder why in the heck you can’t take out that wall with a rocket launcher.
As processor power grows in consoles, we will eventually get to a point where environments will be completely destructible AND still have the level of detail like GTA4 had. Red Faction Guerrilla did a really good job letting you destroy literally everything you could see… the problem being that there was very little detail in what was there. Herr Alien is right: no revolution started – and in fact, we are still getting First Person Shooter games where you can’t break neon lights by shooting them.
Full destruction could breed new experiences in FPS games. When the map is constantly changing, you have to adjust your style of play on the fly. “Cover” offers less security in Bad Company 2 when you know the building you are in could collapse on you if it is dealt enough damage.
More than likely, the next iteration of “A-List” games on the next generation of consoles will look at environmental destruction as “just another feature”. Our children will look back at “classic” games of 2010 and wonder why in the heck you can’t take out that wall with a rocket launcher.
@QOTW
We as previously mentioned that Red Faction has attempted at destructible worlds. It worked for the most part and I found it enjoyable. I see destructible worlds just like 3D graphics or 2.5D or the new gimmicky 3D, it will be an option in games, becoming more and more refined, but will be used when it will enhance the experience of the game.
@QOTW
We as previously mentioned that Red Faction has attempted at destructible worlds. It worked for the most part and I found it enjoyable. I see destructible worlds just like 3D graphics or 2.5D or the new gimmicky 3D, it will be an option in games, becoming more and more refined, but will be used when it will enhance the experience of the game.
@ valve + dota
The information your source, Joystiq, left out is that Valve did hire the current developer (and developer since 2005) of DotA mod last year, who goes by the alias IceFrog. Though I still can understand the other side and somewhat agree with them, if anyone has a right to trademark the name it would be the current mod developer. The tricky part of DotA is that it has had numerous developers over the years who have passed it on to each other and that it has also been produced in conjunction with a lot of community input. So having one company hold the rights to the abbreviated name even if they do employ the current developer of the mod is still going to rub many the wrong way. Additionally in response Riot Games (the ones questioning the trademark of DotA) who made the DotA standalone game League of Legends with the previous mod developer before IceFrog, Steve “Guinsoo” Feak, have filed trademark for the full name “Defence of the Ancients”. So we will have to wait and see where it goes from here and what are each companies real intentions are.
In response to Herr_Alien, I guess we will have to agree to disagree about the pros and cons of how Valve chooses IPs. One of my favourite things about Valve is that they support and hire mod teams and not just take inspiration and neglect those who inspired them. Their greater resources and talent pool and experience really help turn a lot of interesting mechanics, ideas and mods in fully fledged AAA titles. And when they want to work on their own IP, I will eagerly anticipate episode 3 or Half Life 3, whichever comes first. At least their customer loyalty and ongoing support is miles ahead of ID software. “Hey look consoles, shiny… screw pc games. (a few years later) Ohh PC games still make money? Umm.. We have decided PC gaming is no longer dead.”
@ QotW
I don’t think fully destructible environments will really be the new big innovation. For many games it is already implemented to varying degrees. Recent RTS’s like Company of Heroes (and Dawn of War 2 to a slightly lesser extent) offered near fully destructible environments with only a few game critical elements or objectives being indestructible. Many FPS’s already have environmental destructibility to varying degrees and if they were to go full on it could vastly detract from the enjoyment and balance of the games and their current mechanics.
Then there are games like Minecraft where every single entity in the game is able to be altered or destroyed. So I really cant see how this is going to be a new innovation if it is already present in so many games already. Maybe some genres or series who haven’t implemented it yet could benefit from it but I would imagine it would be more important to balance the degree of destructibility to ensure balanced and fun game mechanics than just implement full destructibility for the sake of it.
@ valve + dota
The information your source, Joystiq, left out is that Valve did hire the current developer (and developer since 2005) of DotA mod last year, who goes by the alias IceFrog. Though I still can understand the other side and somewhat agree with them, if anyone has a right to trademark the name it would be the current mod developer. The tricky part of DotA is that it has had numerous developers over the years who have passed it on to each other and that it has also been produced in conjunction with a lot of community input. So having one company hold the rights to the abbreviated name even if they do employ the current developer of the mod is still going to rub many the wrong way. Additionally in response Riot Games (the ones questioning the trademark of DotA) who made the DotA standalone game League of Legends with the previous mod developer before IceFrog, Steve “Guinsoo” Feak, have filed trademark for the full name “Defence of the Ancients”. So we will have to wait and see where it goes from here and what are each companies real intentions are.
In response to Herr_Alien, I guess we will have to agree to disagree about the pros and cons of how Valve chooses IPs. One of my favourite things about Valve is that they support and hire mod teams and not just take inspiration and neglect those who inspired them. Their greater resources and talent pool and experience really help turn a lot of interesting mechanics, ideas and mods in fully fledged AAA titles. And when they want to work on their own IP, I will eagerly anticipate episode 3 or Half Life 3, whichever comes first. At least their customer loyalty and ongoing support is miles ahead of ID software. “Hey look consoles, shiny… screw pc games. (a few years later) Ohh PC games still make money? Umm.. We have decided PC gaming is no longer dead.”
@ QotW
I don’t think fully destructible environments will really be the new big innovation. For many games it is already implemented to varying degrees. Recent RTS’s like Company of Heroes (and Dawn of War 2 to a slightly lesser extent) offered near fully destructible environments with only a few game critical elements or objectives being indestructible. Many FPS’s already have environmental destructibility to varying degrees and if they were to go full on it could vastly detract from the enjoyment and balance of the games and their current mechanics.
Then there are games like Minecraft where every single entity in the game is able to be altered or destroyed. So I really cant see how this is going to be a new innovation if it is already present in so many games already. Maybe some genres or series who haven’t implemented it yet could benefit from it but I would imagine it would be more important to balance the degree of destructibility to ensure balanced and fun game mechanics than just implement full destructibility for the sake of it.
Brainfart…
Scrap that negative line about ID software. I mixed up ID with Epic Games 🙁 my apologies to ID and Herr as ID is generally great and very creative. Wish I could edit these comments. 🙂
Brainfart…
Scrap that negative line about ID software. I mixed up ID with Epic Games 🙁 my apologies to ID and Herr as ID is generally great and very creative. Wish I could edit these comments. 🙂