🚀 go-pugleaf

Rin Stowleigh <rstow...@gmail.com> looked up from reading the entrails
of the porn spammer to utter  "The Augury is good, the signs say:

>On Fri, 1 Mar 2013 00:54:28 -0000, "Trimble Bracegirdle"
><no-spam@never.spam> wrote:
>
>><<<"There's a dreadful shortage of new game ideas actually being developed
>>......bean counters in charge all follow
>>the sequels = guaranteed profit mantra......
>>Same thing Hollywood  ...... crappy sequels and "remakes".>>>>
>>
>>True ..."Call Of Duty: Die Hard With Online Elder Scrolls Hobbit" 
>>
>>"The imaginations are out there....."
>>
>>I don't know so much....Comp. gaming is 30+ years old.
>>It can't be 'New' & exciting for ever.
>>A 20 something programmer must see the industry as dull & uninviting
>>
>>The hardware advances drive a lot of new-ness in game design.
>>IMO there has not been any meaningful hardware advances in (say) 10 years.
>>Just bigger, faster, more glossy...not new.
>>If the computers/consoles were (say) ten times faster than now 
>>their ability in terms of A.I. & game structure complexity would be 
>>not much more. Online Multiplayer advances also IMO has hit a ceiling.
>
>The ceiling applies not just to gaming but computing in general.  I
>consider myself lucky to have been alive and old enough to understand
>what was going on as computers went from something that most people
>did not even have in their homes to something that most people on this
>planet interact with on a daily basis now.
>
>It's been something similar to watching the first airplane take flight
>or the first motor vehicle hit the road.  At some point during the
>evolution of those two, someone sat back and said "meh!  Nothing
>really new happening in the plane or car scene, planes still have the
>same runway and landing limitations and cars still require a human
>driver" ...or whatever other disappointment of expectation they can
>think of.  Every technology has those ceilings.  

Well planes in general do, and with the advent of jet engines those
runway and landing limitations increased.
But on the other hand there's stuff like Harriers that could take off
and land in your back yard.

>Mobile computing has been stealing the show over the last few years
>and there have been a number of interesting innovations there -- they
>may not be ones you or I in particular prefer or care about, but life
>goes on and does not necessarily cater to us as individuals or evolve
>in ways we want.

I blame mobile computer for a lot of the stagnation in gaming, since
those mobile devices (portable game players, phones, etc) had
substantially inferior hardware to a PC so the only games that could
possible play on them HAD to be quite limited.

>But how amazing was it that we were alive when the first video games
>were ever made available to consumers (home console systems, arcade
>games, etc).  Some will get into all sorts of elaborate discussions
>and split hairs on what the first true video game really was, but it's
>also fair to say that video games at the consumer level didn't really
>happen until sometime around until the 70s.

I always thought the first real video game was Spacewar!
Available on PDPs in the 60's then as a commercial coin op game in 1971
(shown in the movie Soylent Green if you've never seen one anywhere
else.)

While there were tic-tac-toe and chess games on computer before that,
those aren't really _video_ games, any more than a series of comic
panels, complete with dialog, strung together sequentially on video is a
movie.   A slide show is not a movie.

Xocyll
-- 
I don't particularly want you to FOAD, myself. You'll be more of 
a cautionary example if you'll FO And Get Chronically, Incurably, 
Painfully, Progressively, Expensively, Debilitatingly Ill. So 
FOAGCIPPEDI. -- Mike Andrews responding to an idiot in asr