Originally posted by Smasandian
How did the XBOX, Gamecube and PS2 changed the way we played games?
As stated before, Playstation 2 introduced backwards compatibility.
Gamecube introduced platform interoperability with its Gameboy player, allowing for its own type of backwards compatibility. Also made use of other GBA-GC interoperability with games such as FF: Crystal Chronicles, Pac-Man Vs. and Metroid Prime/Fusion added material/unlockables.
As for X-Box, well they pretty much did what Dreamcast could have done had the new systems not shown up... it pretty much took platform gaming live. Also introduced the hard drive approach which more or less negated the need to memory cards.
Also this is the first generation of consoles to designing games to make use of HDTV quality visuals.
The newer systems also made use of newer gimmicks with the higher processing power... like DDR (unless you count that Activator back on the Genesis that didn't really do anything) and Steel Battalion for X-Box.
Pretty good resume this go round.
Originally posted by Primitive Screwhead
As stated before, Playstation 2 introduced backwards compatibility.Gamecube introduced platform interoperability with its Gameboy player, allowing for its own type of backwards compatibility. Also made use of other GBA-GC interoperability with games such as FF: Crystal Chronicles, Pac-Man Vs. and Metroid Prime/Fusion added material/unlockables.
As for X-Box, well they pretty much did what Dreamcast could have done had the new systems not shown up... it pretty much took platform gaming live. Also introduced the hard drive approach which more or less negated the need to memory cards.
Also this is the first generation of consoles to designing games to make use of HDTV quality visuals.
The newer systems also made use of newer gimmicks with the higher processing power... like DDR (unless you count that Activator back on the Genesis that didn't really do anything) and Steel Battalion for X-Box.
Pretty good resume this go round.
Well, the whole gameboy thing is basically a controller. Nothing really new there.
Online play has been around for ages, its not a new innovation at all. Harddrives are staples for computers. There is no innovation in taking something from a computer and putting it in a console. Its just commen sense.
All those visual effects in the current generation consoles are all done in PC games first. So natta there.
Originally posted by Smasandian
Well, the whole gameboy thing is basically a controller. Nothing really new there.Online play has been around for ages, its not a new innovation at all. Harddrives are staples for computers. There is no innovation in taking something from a computer and putting it in a console. Its just commen sense.
All those visual effects in the current generation consoles are all done in PC games first. So natta there.
By definition, anything innovative is characterized by being new in approach.
Nothing innovative about playing as a Ghost on a handheld with limited visibility while someone playing as Pac-Man has an entire view of the playing field?!? Or using the screen on the GBA when entering into a building shown on the TV screen a la Zelda: Four Swords?
Nothing innovative about creating features between a handheld game and a console game that allow additional features to be unlocked a la Metroid Fusion and Prime?
And as for having live support with Xbox as not being innovative... it sure as hell is. It's the first CONSOLE to have legitimate success with bringing multiplayer to the next level. Keep in mind that many people didn't have the dollars to afford a computer from a gaming standpoint. Microsoft created an affordable way (as Sega also tried to do with Dreamcast) to play multiplayer that many people may not have been able to do otherwise. If it was just a matter of transferring the concepts from PC and carrying them over to console for on-line gaming, Playstation may have done so back during the last generation of consoles.
I don't buy into the computer argument, either. Computers are a different category, as their function isn't necessarily devoted solely to gameplaying... consoles are primarily meant for gaming (unless you have an unhealthy obsession with Barbie videogame titles). If we're bringing computers in as a legitimate argument, then it could be stated that nothing innovative has ever been introduced by a gaming console by the sole reason that every game developed has required a computer to debug the software before release. And because I don't really think that's a legit defense, I'll stand by the fact that all the the latest generation has certainly developed new traits to the console market... hence making them innovative.
I will retract the hard drive argument... not because of the computer argument, though. I just forgot that 3DO actually had the ability to store game data directly to the console iteslf. And one could make the argument that cartridge based games removed the requirement for memory cards and storage devices.
How can anything innovating when it has already been done.
I admit the connection between Gameboy and Gamecube, but all that online stuff, and graphic settings is not. Its already been done. All they did was take what computer gamers have been enjoying for a decade now, and put it on the console.
If this was a game, it would be like porting a computer game to a console. Its already been done, so now it loses its appeal.
PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best! PS3! Is will be the F ucking Best!
Originally posted by Smasandian
How can anything innovating when it has already been done.I admit the connection between Gameboy and Gamecube, but all that online stuff, and graphic settings is not. Its already been done. All they did was take what computer gamers have been enjoying for a decade now, and put it on the console.
If this was a game, it would be like porting a computer game to a console. Its already been done, so now it loses its appeal.
True, but playstation has been innovative the most, thats not deniable.
Again, the games make the systems.
Originally posted by Smasandian
How can anything innovating when it has already been done.I admit the connection between Gameboy and Gamecube, but all that online stuff, and graphic settings is not. Its already been done. All they did was take what computer gamers have been enjoying for a decade now, and put it on the console.
If this was a game, it would be like porting a computer game to a console. Its already been done, so now it loses its appeal.
As I said before, computers are a different beast... please see my previous argument. While the technology for online gaming itself may not be innovative, the concept of making online play available for those who do not have access to the $$$ for a gaming computer setup definitely is. Innovation does not necessarily have to do with what goes into a particular item in terms of hardware as much as it does what the end effect is intended by the product.... in this case, providing the same online experience at a fraction of the $$$, also without the need for a keyboard or mouse.
You could build a margarita maker into a Playstation... yes, both concepts technologies are well defined, but when have you been able to play God of War and have your system pop out a frosty beverage when you hit the square button repeatedly?
Originally posted by Smasandian
I know what your talking about.
Yes, having online play is new on consoles, but its not innovating at all. Its copying an idea that has already been done.
I was wondering where you went, Sam. Anyway, I got to thinking and I wanted to know what your opinion was on the things that may have been considered innovative in the last generation of consoles as opposed to these. Because it sounds like you're saying things like imporved graphics (HDTV) and processing power, and additions such as live on console gaming do not equate necessarily to innovation with this generation... that would lead me to believe you haven't seen anything innovative in quite some time. So I thought I'd check to see if you felt that the last gen had anything more to offer, or if we've been stuck in an innovation gap since the 16-bit consoles.
Hmm, good question.
I do agree HDTV support is innovating, but anything else to do with graphics is not because it has already been done on the PC for gaming. So, the PC games was innovating for graphics, but not for consoles because it still uses graphic chips that are on graphics cards for PC's.
I cant think of anything because everything comes back to PC's for gaming. CD games, wireless controllers, 3D graphics, ram expanision. There's gotta be something.
Originally posted by CorderaMitchell
Its versatility has set standards for consoles that came after, and when I say playstation, I meant the whole family.Backwards compatibility is also a standard looked at with future systems.
Not at all CM. What Playstation has going fpr it is third party software support, which makes for the biggest variety of games catering for more types of gamer. Playstation is far from the most innovative brand out of the 3. In terms of hardware its the least innovative. Nintendo was the first with the D pad (Game and Watch handhelds), it was the first with shoulder buttons (SNES), it was the first to have an analogue stick on a home console controller (N64, Saturn and PS1 soon followed suit)
In terms of games Playstation isnt the most innovative either. Mario 64 was the first fully 3d game created for a home console, this resulted in many clones on the PS1 and even on the current gen consoles. Ocarina of Times context sensitive controls inspire many games control systems up until this day.
Nintendo has more games in the top ten best games ever than Playstation could ever dream of.
Playstation is where its at for variety and choice because it is the market leader, it has the most support, however Nintendo both in terms of hardware and software has proven to be more innovative generally.
Xbox wins in terms of online play, first person shooters and tactical squad based games etc.
So far im going by the current generation. Ive got no real opinion on the next generation until Xbox 360 is released and the other two are closer to release.
So far i think although PS3 seems the most powerful, its games just dont interest me. Thats why im going to get a Revolution and a 360. The Revolution for all of those Nintendo classics and the innovation its no doubt going to bring to the next generation and the Xbox 360 because although im usually against just prettier versions of the same games every generation, i must admit i am looking forward to the updates of some franchises.