At 4/20/13 01:37 AM, LemonCrush wrote:
We;re talking about 2 different things. YOu are referring to technical upgrades that help the player in a convenient manner. The touch screen is not that. It's not an upgrade at all, it's a new technology that doesn't make anything more convenient at all.
And more buttons allow for better game design and controls. A touch screen adds nothing to the experience.
What's so different about having more buttons and more screens? More buttons allow for more forms of input from the player, is that a necessity? No, it's an improvement. NES games were made just fine with 2 buttons to use, and there were plenty of SNES games that only used two buttons. Did that make the four extra useless? No, it didn't. It allowed for innovation and improvement.
nothing wrong with improving where it's needed. A touch screen is an unnecessary feature, as it doesn't really add anything new or interesting in terms of gameplay or design.
What does having a second, touchable screen do? The exact same thing as buttons, and plenty more. It gives the player a new form of input with the game, and also allows them to have more screen space in order to see more information or get multiple perspectives of what's going on in the game. It can add an entirely new dimension to gameplay and design. Saying it doesn't is just plain ignorance.
Now notice I'm not saying that having a touch screen makes every game better. I'm saying it is an improvement on the system itself because it allows the designers to have more to work with. There's nothing wrong with that, and it isn't a gimmick. It's innovation. What is done with the feature is not the system's fault, it's the developers'.
I didn't say it made for bad games, i'm just saying the touch screen does nothing to make the decent games, like Pokemon for example, better.
You're obviously not playing the right games then. Perhaps you should try playing new games designed around the concept instead of using old franchises that are shipped to the latest thing as your examples.
There are plenty of good games on 3DS...which would be just as good without the touch screen.
Another completely ignorant thing to say. I would like to see how Nintendogs, Osu! Tatakae! Ouendan, Wario Ware Touched, Meteos, and Trauma Centre would be "just as good" without the DS' touch screen feature.
It doesn't become a mess, it becomes a good game.
You were just arguing that those games were done poorly for the exact same reason. Will you please make up your mind?
Game design should come first, implimenting new technology should come second.
Ocarina of time, or Banjo Kazooie, for example, were degined and conceptualized on Snes. it was only hafter they saw what the 64 could do, that they moved dev to it instead. They made the games first, and the technology aspect came second. yes, the new tech did allow for some better avenues and more interesting things, but overall, the games werne't created around the 64.
No, Project Dream was conceptualised as an RPG for the SNES, but they completely redesigned the game to work as 3D platformer when the N64 came around and after many, many changes eventually came to be a game we know as Banjo-Kazooie. The game "Banjo-Kazooie" was not even a thought when they were designing a game for the SNES. The game was completely built around the N64 and the idea of 3D platforming, in the SNES days the plan was to be an RPG starring a human boy named Edison.