I'm sure you'd have the top worldwide ranking on Game Center and Open Feint for any of those silly iOS games, because, you know, it's sooooo casual n' stuff. There just isn't any challenge for teh console/PC crowd. :lol:
@Khaid I think that is doing the rounds on just about every forum. There was supposed to be a sequal but its been so long wince enter the fist I can't see it happening even with all the work that goes in to finding the parts from old kung fu movies.
unlike most I don't seperate videogames into such categories as 'casual' and 'non-casual'. I am an equal opportunity game player. My criticism is based on these being little more than flash games, not that their un-fun or anything. They're simply low budget not terribly graphical crap. C'mon that's just pathetic. If your making comparisons to the big boys you'd better be able to bring it.
If we're comparing iphone games with "real" ones we might as well take facebook into consideration. Surely facebook has more "gamers" than apple, that doesn't make them better now does it?
I'm kind of intrigued to know what defines a "real game". What criteria does it need to meet in order to be considered real?
I can't say I'm sold on tablet gaming taking over console gaming. I'm sure it will probably happen, but I see it as a step backwards. Nintendo are probably on to something, but like the Wii, I don't think they way they've implemented it will appeal to core gamers. Oh well, still brings them lots of money. For now I would think the main difference between X360/PS3 and WiiU titles will be that the WiiU titles will run in 1080p. That's probably the only graphical benefit it will have in third party games because it will be treated exactly as PC is now - no content created for it, just displayed better (higher res, AA, AF). Of course come next gen, if 3rd party titles are ported to it, the first thing I'd image to go would be the 1080p resolution. That is if they don't take the current route of creating an entirely separate dumbed down game for that Nintendo crowd.
not a tech demo/ board game knock-off. Yes Alter, you brought it :x. I didn't quite know what the others were other than Carcasson..
Why would it be a step backwards to have a single piece of equipment that is both a portable device and capable of HD output onto your TV? Economically, it would potentially be an advantage for the gaming industry because the consumer would have access to a wider variety of games, from both big and small studios. It's a natural expansion of what is already happening with downloadable games on current gen consoles and the growth of phone/tablet gaming. And there's not much preventing a wireless controller from communicating with the tablet or phone to control traditional console style games on an HDTV. I think what Nintendo is doing with Wii U is kind of a conservative industrial test for themselves to prepare for that kind of eventuality. And like I said, the combination of portables with consoles is something Nintendo was experimenting with before the rise of mobile phone/tablet gaming.
Well, although the Shadowgun video I linked to is definitely more tech demo than game demonstration, it is a literal representation of what the game will look like, so it's legit. And this is a game that I believe was initially developed with the Nvidia Tegra chipset, which has been significantly surpassed by the A5 in terms of graphic capability. That kind of detail will be more of a baseline than the high end for iOS devices with the A5.
I think the problem with Tablet gaming is that it's not ready for prime time. It sets us back to the days of pacman and donkey kong... if not graphics wise than certainly control scheme wise.
What would prevent the tablet from being connected to the TV and separate console style controllers communicating wirelessly with the tablet? That's basically identical to how current consoles work, minus the portable part, so you're not really limited in that respect down the line. They already have tablet games that run through the TV and are controlled by your smartphone. I'm not saying that the current tech of smartphones/tablets is already capable of replacing the experience of a PS3/360, but in another couple of years? Yes.
I'd actually prefer that. Games were cheaper to make, cheaper to buy, more fun and lasted longer. I'll be bored with a CoD game in like 5 hours, meanwhile I was playing Space Invaders on my Atari for YEARS.
I would agree. Tablets are just 5 to 7 years behind full size PCs now. Which is to say PCs as we know them, and consoles, will soon be dead. I predict Intel will continue to produce high end CPUs for servers but the consumer market will go the direction of APUs. Nvidia and AMD will lead the way while Intel may or may not be a leader in the next generation. Microsoft might split into two companies for desktops and mobiles divisions and Apple will soon loose it's dominance in the mobile market.
even if you do that it's still weak... in fact this is the problem that the wii u solves. But does it really solve it?? And even if you do solve it it's innevitable to change quickly. I think we all agree, the day of the console is dawning, just as the day of the pc is threw. The day of the tablet is nigh... but it's just not yet. IMHO. Motion control in itself is an unwelcome guest though... and this is why I say control schemes are shot back into the stone ages with this thing.
Hardware wise. With the console lifespan, using a tablet as the only source of hardware will set things years back. I know the Wii U has a console too, I'm not talking about that. It's somewhat better in the mobile market where a new device is launched every year, but then you get hardware segregation and lose the closed platform advantage that consoles have always had. If they go the traditional route of closed hardware lasting 5+ years, then all we will see is a further lagging behind PC hardware and a much smaller step between next gen and the one after that. If they mimic the mobile market, you get something more like the PC gaming space where everyone has a different experience depending on how new or high end their device is. That's not so bad, but eventually to appease everyone it will hold back the new devices back because of support for older ones. That is if they want the general ~5 year lifespan enjoyed currently. If they want to be a bit more draconian and force everyone to upgrade every 2 years, that's another story and obviously has its own downsides. That's how I see it. Either weaker hardware than before, or weaker hardware initially but upgraded more often causing segregation and throwing away the closed system advantage.
I don't know about any of this. Hasn't AMD been doing horribly ever since they merged with ATI? I thought they were perpetually on the verge of bankruptcy. They haven't produced a decent CPU since the Athlon 64, and they're constantly playing catch up on their GPUs with nVidia. I don't see them being a market leader. Intel is dominating and I don't think that's going to change.