The Future of Gaming!

[juni0rj0hn]

As some of you hardcore gamers or aspiring hardcore gamers may know, there is a vast dimension which surpasses that of 1080p. Yes gamers, it's the world of 4k, a whopping 4,096 Ã- 2,304 which far ecceeds us puny HDMI gamers. Right now 4k tv's are being sold at somewhere around 10,000 bucks online. With the right graphics card(GTX 690, anyone?), and the best processor out there, you'd have a combination of the ages. However, as we're juping into this new, exciting form of gaming, there's also the concern of where the gaming industry is headed. Now I believe there is nothing whatsoever wrong with the gaming industry as of now, but if we want a monster combo with the new 8k tv's, we need to rethink our strategy. Instead of worrying about the 2D graphics, backgrounds, and how many characters you can fit, worry more about trying to improve the gamer's individual experience in movement, animation, fighting, flying etc. I think our graphics is ok, but gaming has SOOO much more potential. I think when the 8k tv's come out in 2020, we need a new, improved, better, faster, stronger, more epic, heart touching, intense gameplay, screw the CGI, and have more money to worry about the player's individual and multiplayer experience. It's odd to me that these people are too worried about money(probably) to make revolutionary changes like I've mentioned to the gaming industry.

[Chdonga]

That post was a mess if I've ever seen one.

[Dean]

I think part of the problem with most of the triple A titles just now is that they're too focused on graphics. Good graphics are nice but they shouldn't be the most important aspect of a game and I think that might eventually cause problems. Some people would already say that it has caused problems.

The other big problem is that since games cost so much to develop and publish, the developers and publishers are less likely to try and do something original and unique because from their point of view it's a massive financial risk. It's a lot easier for them to stick to what they know works and maybe try making their own unique twist on it, but at the end of the day, most of the games still feel very similar. I think this is probably why indie games and mobile games have been getting a lot more popular recently. Most of them are on a considerably lower budget or were just developed by someone as a spare time hobby. Because of that, they have no real financial loss when they're making these more unique, but smaller games.

I think that the future of gaming as we know it could be pretty grim unless the big developers and publishers start taking risks. If they don't it seems likely that indie games and mobile games will become the thing of the future. For that reason, consoles like the Ouya are particularly interesting to me. They're essentially just Android devices dedicated to gaming. Developers can be much more creative and produce games a lot more cheaply. I think these sort of games will probably be the next generation or the next big thing. It's hard to predict though. Maybe the next consoles from Sony and Microsoft will impress us but I honestly doubt it. No more used games? If that is the case, they've lost me as a customer.

[Ceratisa]

Okay, but graphics don't make a game good...

[TheMaster]

The future of gaming.

[Darthdenim]

The future of gaming is thousands more interchangeable first person shooters, sadly.

[SneakyGameBoy]

At 2/13/13 01:41 PM, Darthdenim wrote: The future of gaming is thousands more interchangeable first person shooters, sadly.

I hate to admit it, but its true. These days tons of people prefer FPS games than actually exploring different genres. So when people demand a next gen video game, 90% of game companies will make FPS war game, because they make tons of money off it. I mean really...people eat this shit up.

[Darthdenim]

At 2/13/13 04:15 PM, SneakyGameBoy wrote:

At 2/13/13 01:41 PM, Darthdenim wrote: The future of gaming is thousands more interchangeable first person shooters, sadly.

I hate to admit it, but its true. These days tons of people prefer FPS games than actually exploring different genres. So when people demand a next gen video game, 90% of game companies will make FPS war game, because they make tons of money off it. I mean really...people eat this shit up.

Yep.

I foresee a lot more shooting of arabs, germans, and pretty much any kind of foreigner in the future of gaming.

[naronic]

That's not a revolution in gaming, that's a revolution in graphical display.
Plus once you get past 1080p, going farther seems to cease to be useful.

[orangebomb]

Wow, this is one mess of a post, it's kind of hard to figure out what's what with the lack of spaces and paragraph breaks.

As for the future of gaming itself, I can't really tell for the most part. What I do know is that they will pretty much continue to experiment with motion controls, which will most likely be more of a detriment than any serious advancement, along with rumblings of going all digital games in lieu of physical copies of games, which I know is a bad idea right from the start because of the potential complications. {mostly from collectors}

Also, there are a lot of whining that FPS will take over future consoles and take over big gaming, when they don't realize that there are plenty of other games/genres available if they know where to look, and to have one genre dominate gaming is really nothing new. Everyone forgets that there was a glut of platforming games in the 80's and early 90's, and RPG's {and a certain extent fighting games} from the mid 90s to early 2000's, and a good chunk of those games ranged from average to terrible. History has shown us that genre dominance runs in cycles, and it's only when gaming became a billion dollar industry did some people start to whine about this.

The gaming industry is here to stay, so it's not dying, decaying or anything like that. Not to say that there aren't problems with the game industry, {most of them involve the people and not the games} but these aren't really deathblows, and can be fixed with time and technology.

[Darthdenim]

Everyone forgets that there was a glut of platforming games in the 80's and early 90's, and RPG's {and a certain extent fighting games} from the mid 90s to early 2000's, and a good chunk of those games ranged from average to terrible. History has shown us that genre dominance runs in cycles, and it's only when gaming became a billion dollar industry did some people start to whine about this.

But still, I liked it better when there were tons of platformers, as opposed to tons of FPS's, but that's just me.

[Ceratisa]

But still, I liked it better when there were tons of platformers, as opposed to tons of FPS's, but that's just me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJwFUNHtCJQ
Come on Mario Jump

[Darthdenim]

I'm not too happy with how online multiplayer is taking over everything.

The caliber of people you have to play with is usually really bad. The most despicable people in the world are on Xbox Live.

Before online came along you actually had to have social skills to play games with others, because you had to have friends in the room with you. Online has made real friends obsolete.

[Warforger]

At 2/12/13 07:56 PM, juni0rj0hn wrote: As some of you hardcore gamers or aspiring hardcore gamers may know, there is a vast dimension which surpasses that of 1080p.

This is an amazing development for people who buy games only to look at cut scenes and artwork.

[Darthdenim]

I'm not really huge on modern gaming in general.

Playing Megaman 9 and 10 were the most fun, and the most challenging game experiences I've had in the last few years.

Because they were HARD.

I don't care about playing mindless shooting games with racist people online, I don't care about realistic graphics and detailed stories which are always extremely convoluted and would never work in any other storytelling medium. I just want a game that can challenge my reflexes and brain.

[MintPaw]

The future of gaming.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=L3F m2igvFA4#t=232s

At 3:52.

[Darthdenim]

At 2/14/13 01:52 AM, MintPaw wrote: The future of gaming.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=L3F m2igvFA4#t=232s

At 3:52.

I really don't see how having to shake a remote is some huge travesty for gaming. God forbid a game company try and have innovative controls.

[Darthdenim]

Modern gamers are largely douchebags anyway.

They throw a total hissy fit when a blogger even suggests that some of the dialogue in Arkham City MAY be a little sexist.

That's how they respond to pretty much any criticism of gaming. They fail to realize that there ARE things about gamers that do suck and should be improved.

Why not refuse to play with racist assholes on Xbox Live when they start running their mouths? They make everybody who plays games look bad.

Don't have a complete shitfit when a game has an ending you don't like, and act like you are entitled to have the ending be whatever you want it to be.

You think you REALLY controlled the story in the Mass Effect games? All you did was choose from a list of predetermined choices that the creators put in the game.

[orangebomb]

At 2/13/13 11:10 PM, Darthdenim wrote: But still, I liked it better when there were tons of platformers, as opposed to tons of FPS's, but that's just me.

You know the situation is no different, right? There were a lot of platforming games in the 80's and early 90's that wanted to cash in on the platforming genre that was perfected by Mario, Sonic and to a lesser extent Mega Man, and most of them ranged from average to terrible.

Also, I can't help but notice that you trash modern games mostly because of the fanboys bitching, when you realize that there were plenty of butthurt fanboys back then, the only difference is that there was no Internet for them to complain to others. As for those "online gamers", you do notice that they don't speak for all gamers right? And if you don't like it, then don't go there in the first place and quit your bitching.

Seriously, take off your nostalgia glasses and realize that we came a long way in terms of gaming, and to try to dispute that is completely ignorant, considering how far the industry evolves with every generation.

[Darthdenim]

At 2/14/13 11:46 AM, orangebomb wrote:

At 2/13/13 11:10 PM, Darthdenim wrote:

Also, I can't help but notice that you trash modern games mostly because of the fanboys bitching, when you realize that there were plenty of butthurt fanboys back then, the only difference is that there was no Internet for them to complain to others. As for those "online gamers", you do notice that they don't speak for all gamers right? And if you don't like it, then don't go there in the first place and quit your bitching.

The online gamers ARE the loudest voices of gamers, and we let them be the loudest voice because we don't speak up.

I just think gamers have done a very bad job of presenting a positive image to the world at large.

That's why so many people think of this when they think gamer.

[TheMaster]

At 2/14/13 03:06 AM, Darthdenim wrote: Modern gamers are largely douchebags anyway.

They throw a total hissy fit when a blogger even suggests that some of the dialogue in Arkham City MAY be a little sexist.

The issue isn't that it might be sexist, the issue is who cares if it is sexist? The dialogue is coming out of the mouths of thugs. Being sexist is entirely in character for them, and removing it for fear of offending would be a disgrace.

Don't have a complete shitfit when a game has an ending you don't like, and act like you are entitled to have the ending be whatever you want it to be.

No, but you're entitled to the product as it was advertised. They flat out stated in interviews the ending would not come down to choosing door A, B or C, and then it did. That's dishonest and consumers have every right to demand better.

[DingoWalleyStudio]

Nah, the future of gaming is Increased graphics, Plus Touchscreens! If this is truly the PS4 controller...

[orangebomb]

At 2/14/13 01:03 PM, Darthdenim wrote:

At 2/14/13 11:46 AM, orangebomb wrote:

At 2/13/13 11:10 PM, Darthdenim wrote:

The online gamers ARE the loudest voices of gamers, and we let them be the loudest voice because we don't speak up.

Still, they don't speak to all of us, and most people can tell the difference between online gamer A, who is a regular gamer who doesn't curse and scream, and online gamer B, who is an ITG. Plus, how exactly should we speak up about this, when most people either don't care?

I just think gamers have done a very bad job of presenting a positive image to the world at large.

Once again, they don't speak for all of us as a whole. What most of the media thinks of gamer, it's usually meant to be more poking fun than anything else, and besides, who cares what they think, anyways?

[Darthdenim]

I also kind of wish "harcore" gamers would quit complaining about "casual" games, and the people who play them.

Stop with this exclusion bullcrap. You didn't really want everybody to become a gamer, you wanted everybody to play the games that YOU deem acceptable.

Why is it that the fact that the Wii might have some games on it that grandma and grandpa can play makes some gamers asses tighten up like a 300 pound man wearing a medium sized shirt?

I don't even believe that there are games that are casual or hardcore. It's the PLAYER who is casual, or hardcore. Any game can be played casually, or hardcore.

I don't remember people throwing around these hardcore and casual words back in the 16-bit era. When did this start?

[GamesArmor]

At 2/14/13 12:09 AM, Darthdenim wrote: I'm not really huge on modern gaming in general.

Playing Megaman 9 and 10 were the most fun, and the most challenging game experiences I've had in the last few years.

Because they were HARD.

I don't care about playing mindless shooting games with racist people online, I don't care about realistic graphics and detailed stories which are always extremely convoluted and would never work in any other storytelling medium. I just want a game that can challenge my reflexes and brain.

Holy shit, this. THIS. Modern gaming sucks. Its way too focused on telling a story or having really good eyecandy. Trying to find a game with good, challenging gameplay is hard is hell nowadays.

[TheMaster]

People suggesting the focus of modern gaming is graphics are insane.

This hasn't been the case in years. None of the big mainstream titles are sold on graphics any more, because none of them look particularly good. They're sold on the strength of the brand and the money that goes into the marketing.

[orangebomb]

At 2/16/13 05:53 PM, GamesArmor wrote:

At 2/14/13 12:09 AM, Darthdenim wrote:

Holy shit, this. THIS. Modern gaming sucks.

Let me get this straight, you think modern gaming sucks because of a bunch of foul mouthed delinquents happen to be online? That's just a piss-poor reasoning, considering that you do have the option of not playing online, and still have virtually the same experience with the game.

Its way too focused on telling a story or having really good eyecandy.

And what's wrong with that? A long time ago, people bitched about how games had no storyline in them, and now they're complaining about focusing too much on the story. The primary directive of games is fun and enjoyment first, everything else is gravy.

Trying to find a game with good, challenging gameplay is hard is hell nowadays.

Not really, it's called doing research. There are plenty of challenging games out there, you just need to know where to look, it's not hard to do folks.

[MonsterMMORPG]

24 inc is very enough i believe

1920x1080p :)