E3 2009 Created 14 years ago2009-05-31 09:25:43 UTC by Penguinboy

But nothing this generation will be a "Wii-killer", because the Wii targets a completely different audience.

Actually, Natal seems to be targeting the casual audience much more than the regular X360. I don't know about "wii-killer", since the wii already has a fairly solid market position, but it definitely looks cool.

Possibly you're right. I probably should have mentioned the installed user-base instead. Natal or Sony's motion thing won't really kick off that much, I think, because Nintendo did it first. And usually the case is that if you get in first, it doesn't matter if somebody does it better.

The tech behind that Natal thingymabob is pretty swish, but when actually using it you look like an even bigger douche than anyone who stands in front of their TV swinging their arms playing the Wii.

I just want to get my hands on halo 4.

I don't know about Halo 4, but there is Halo 3: ODST which is a standalone expansion for Halo 3 coming in the fall 2009.

Just heard that the new "Halo: Reach" has been confirmed by Microsoft not be another RTS, but instead a FPS. This is supposed to be some kind of prequel that takes place before the events of Halo 1. This game ships sometime next year.

If Microsoft ever (key word here being "ever") has plans for a Halo 4, I think they most likely will reserved it for the eventual next generation console that comes along after the Xbox360. In the meantime, they will just milk the hell out of Halo 3 with more expansions and perhaps,....a Halo Wars 2, but that's just a maybe.

^ This is what happens when kraken uses sarcasm incorrectly.

I have to admit I'd feel like a douche infront of that motion thing... and we all know Santa Clause gives no presents to douches.

For production studios the tech is fine, but at home gaming. Maybe not so much... But I wouldn't doubt when virtual reality is injected into my mind and I must roleplay as a character, I would still feel like a douche then too.

And usually the case is that if you get in first, it doesn't matter if somebody does it better.

Do you remember WordPerfect? Do you remember Netscape browser?

They had more than 90% market share at one point...until Microsoft invaded their business.

They're both dead now.

This is what happens when kraken uses sarcasm incorrectly.

Either way, it does not matter if he was using sarcasm or not, I have heard the same thing he said a bunch of times on other gaming forums by other people. As much as some will hate to admit, the Halo series is and will still be a viable franchise for the foreseeable future, after all, it is one of Microsoft's most important cash cows.

They had more than 90% market share at one point...until Microsoft invaded their business.

They're both dead now.

And don't forget, when AOL took control of Netscape way back when, a few years later, AOL bit the dust also, and at one time, they were the biggest ISP and search engine in the world.

The questions is, who's going to own the future? Microsoft or Google?

The way it looks so far, perhaps Google. But That's not necessarily a good thing for Google in the long run, since if they keep getting more dominant on each of the major internet markets (search, advertising, email and so on...) and it looks like they will have a monopoly on some of them, they will get an unwelcome notice by the U.S. Congress, which by the way, has the power to break up the company in to smaller independent units, pretty much the same way when they striped the mighty AT&T out of their land lines and local telephone business back in the 1980's, thus giving birth to the regional "baby bells", which one of them later on became Verizon. In fact, Senator Joe Lieberman once threatened Google with a congressional inquiry that could have lead to Google being broken in to two separate companies.

I like Verizon. Breaking up companies spurs competition and is good for the economy.

They should have done that to GM before it collapsed.

I just want to get my hands on halo 4.

Ah yes. Generic Shooter 4

I hope you mean so you can snap the disk? Or set it on fire? Right?

You can't honestly like that abhorrent example of all that is shit.

And Halo players think Master Cheif is better than Dr. Freeman.
Lesse here... Both kick a lot of alien butt, although;
MC: born and bred for combat.
Gordon: Just a geek in a metal hazmat suit, yet he still has more combat prowess than MC. And no helmet.
Gordon wins.

Half-Life ain't too far from generic either, if you think about it.

Not many aren't, really. Define a non-generic FPS.

Half-Life 1 redefined FPS games with the inclusion of a solid storyline and a sense of purpose to why you were running around killing things.

Half-Life 2 was the first FPS to fully utilise the Havoc physics system well, including a weapon which could manipulate physical objects.

By todays standards both Half-Life games are pretty generic but back when they were released, both brought something new to the table.

Halo on the other hand was nothing more than running around and shooting aliens (like in every other FPS at the time: See Half-Life :rly: ) and the occasional vehicle section (which has been done in every single game ever)

Now, nearly 3 sequels later and they have not changed the formula in any way possible and as such the whole experience feels outdated. Even the Co-op mode in Halo 3 was boring. If a game makes Co-op boring then its doing something WRONG!

Maybe it's just me, but I don't think the first person shooter genre is going to improve again for a long long time. Everybody's just going to do the best they can with proven gameplay techniques, because honestly, what more is there? Everybody has non-linear worlds, vehicles, physics, ultra-realistic lighting, compelling stories... the list of old innovations goes on. We're kind of at a creative standstill here. So when a game comes out that isn't revolutionary in some way, I'm not gonna label it as generic. It's just all there is left.

Not that there's any excuse for Halo.

The only other major thing developers can work on is immersion, and lets face it, there's only so far you can go with that without giving the player a big heavy gun which you have to physically aim and reload. (I don't mean rail shooters like Time Crisis or House of the Dead.)

Soo.. All we've gotten from Valve this year is a sequel no-one cares about/wants. Fucking-a.

Does anyone remember a time when story and gameplay were the dominant aspect of gaming?

yeah rim I totally miss saving the fucking princess over and over.

It's possible to make innovative shooters.

The original Half-Life has some of the best level design out there.

Half-Life 2, as mentioned before, incorporates physics into the gameplay. That's never been done before.

Far Cry 2 has the most non-linear gameplay of any game.

Mass Effect has the best story of any shooters.

They're all innovative.

There are plenty of smart people out there, and someone will come up with a clever idea that changes things significantly.

Far Cry 2 has the most non-linear gameplay of any game.

Ahem, Far Cry 2 doesn't count as non-linear because shit is far too repetitive. Theres a total of 5 missions and they just loop over and over again. It is far from ground breaking.

Fallout 3. Now thats a non-linear game and there are literally thousands of paths to take.

Yeah, but everywhere you go looks the same and is swarming with roaches, I'd call that repetitive.

There aren't roaches everywhere :/

Its not that much of a problem, and fallout 3 also looks gorgeous.

I'm with Urby.

I'm largely alone in my beliefs that Fallout 3 is an over-hyped pile of crap, but I can live with it.

I don't follow hype. I don't get why people do. I saw Fallout 3 and did my research and since I had played Oblivion in the past, I knew I'd enjoy it.

Anyway:

Does anyone remember a time when story and gameplay were the dominant aspect of gaming?

Yeah? That's why I am looking forward to SW:TOR. They are actually trying to make it so you and your friend can choose their own dialogue options so one player, the Sith says I hate you and the Bounty Hunter can be nice. Either way it'll change the outcome of the story.

If you read the previews, they said the demo featured a Sith who was ordered to kill a ship captain for disobeying an order. You can either let him live or kill him which results in either a new captain to take his place and screw up or the original captain lives and evac's the crew which makes the fighting easier.

Fallout 3. Now thats a non-linear game and there are literally thousands of paths to take.

True, I also pretty much enjoy Fallout 3. Although some events are too random for my taste.

For example, when I was supposed to kill an android on a quest, I found out, that it was in Megaton in Craterside Supply. Then I was just running around Megaton, searching for more clues and suddenly, this random woman pops up from nowhere (literally) and starts asking, why I'm searching for that android, taking the quest in another direction - what wouldn't have happened, if I didn't just randomly walk around the city, practically doing nothing. Maybe I just need to get used to RPGs

Mass Effect has the best story of any shooters.

I would hardly say that. It's not bad, but the story wasn't pulling me in like say, Mafia or Deus Ex. Besides, the whole story is just a ripoff of the Heechee saga from Frederik Pohl, so it's not exactly original either. Only here, the writers didn't work on the backstory and intentions of the Reapers, and simply went with the Hollywood approach: "They're wiping out the entire universe, because...errr...they're EVIL!"

Does anyone remember a time when story and gameplay were the dominant aspect of gaming?

I don't get why people say this, because just about any decent game these days is going to have a kickass storyline and good gameplay. I think the reason nobody focuses on these aspects anymore is because it's assumed they'll be there. I always read reviews before buying any game, and I haven't been disappointed by story or gameplay in a long time.

Personally, the storyline is nice, but gameplay is the most important thing in a game for me.

Storyline helps the gameplay be immersive.