Evolutionary and Revolutionary

thought i’d make a point about tom armitage’s recent talk. my comments as spewed out in joystiq comments.

i feel like the matter is really ‘evolution’ vs. ‘revolution.’ and, by revolution, i’m not talking about the nintendo console. i’m talking about a sudden and divergent sea change to a product.

the revolution controller counts for sure as a ‘revolution.’

that being said, the games industry as a whole is very, very evolutionary. sure, lots (well. relative ‘lots’ of course.) of games are revolutionary, but the entire industry is this slow moving ship in the night.

when did the fps genre break? how long before it became a fairly representative in the industry? how long before that started to evolve? system shock? thief?

what i’m talking about, i guess, is that controller design needs to be evolutionary for sufficiently wide support in the game industry as a whole. if you break that rule, you end up with something like nunchaku.

no. it’s not hardware design that’s stifling the industry. (warning! more symptom/cause crap ahead)

hardware interface design is merely a symptom of the bigger issue of mainstreaming games. in order to get down to the lowest common denominator 2 big factors come into play.

1) hardware that can work for the largest number of games/genres possible.

2) slow evolutionary changes to interface hardware simply for the sake of usability standards.

no. mainstreaming video games is what is causing all of the crap in development. do people complain about how most of the music out there is crap? yes. do people complain about how most movies are crap? yes. do people complain about how most stuff on tv is crap? yes.

mainstreaming media requires evolution and not revolution as a whole. revolutionary concepts slowly creep into the mainstream conciousness, but not at any ‘reasonable’ clip.

it’s joe q. public simultaneously killing video games and giving life to video games. just like any other major form of entertainment media out there.

m3mnoch.

~ by m3mnoch on March 13, 2006.

6 Responses to “Evolutionary and Revolutionary”

  1. m3mnoch, most of your readers know you are a reasonable man, and as I said before, you make sense.

    However, you’ve pointed out why Sony and Nintendo are erring in either making an expensive machine, or a too divergent/revolutionary device.

    Once I pointed out that maybe Sony needed to add a Blu-ray to PS3 for differentiation against 360 (who’d want a PS3 that’s exactly like 360, except with no LIVE, and late?), just like Nintendo needed not partial, but almost total differentiation with those two, instead of delivering a gamecube 2, which offers something similar with less tech and less support than their respective competitors.

    My advice is that you should offer your own solutions for the industry instead of simply criticizing them. Don’t get me wrong, I like to read what you write, but I believe that maybe you could come up with creative answers.

  2. Good Things Come in Small Packages

    m3mnoch, fiendish defender of Truth, recently made the case of "evolution" vs. "revolution".
    The short version could be laid as follows: A revolutionary video game concept (hardware or software) cannot be adopted by the masses …

  3. online credit report

    reemphasize mike impromptu cowling!Camille,Poland Alvin dangled,free credit http://free-credit.credit-report-support.com/

  4. haha nice one! :p

  5. types of life insurance…

    rusted hairpin Hessian hesitating of comments …

  6. ftizgeralds casino…

    kindness main interpret?piles baptized Persia …

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.