15th March 2005, 1:25 AM
HD generation.... that's stupid... Higher definition imagery is just an upgrade to the look of a game, a touchup, not some massive overhaul of how games are played. NES to SNES? That wasn't a revolution, that was an upgrade. A pretty big one to me back then, but nothing new, and as the Gameboy later proved, nothing that couldn't be done on the old NES with a little work (Mario COULD have ridden Yoshi back then, it just wouldn't have been easy, for example, Donkey Kong Land for GB wherein you can ride the animals). Now, moving to 3D, THAT was something. I mean, when gaming overall did it. I had already played a few 3D games before the next generation came out, but making EVERY genre 3D and making it WORK, that was something new. Moving to the next level, again nothing new, basically just getting other tools like online play or a hard drive, and a power boost. This next generation, save the not yet unveiled Revolution (that BETTER actually be revolutionary, they better not stick some touch pad on the controller and call it the end of gaming! Ugh, I just know it's going to be some stupid cheap gimic dangit!), seems merely evolutionary. HD generation my arse!
As to the actual article, regarding putting the players in control instead of the designers, that is an interesting idea.
As to the actual article, regarding putting the players in control instead of the designers, that is an interesting idea.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)