"The SNES is home to some of the finest video games of all time, including Super Mario World, Zelda 3, Super Mario Kart, Chrono Trigger, Secret of Mana, ActRaiser, Axelay, Legend of the Mystical Ninja, Street Fighter II... we're sure you have your own personal favourites to add to that tiny list."
Again, this is the kind of thing in principle (creation software and tools) that I think should have been officially built into the likes of 3DS and Wii U day one—it just makes so much sense with the touchscreen and stylus input—and I really think it would be something awesome if it were actually built into NX. I've been saying this exact thing for a while now:
It's this kind of creation suite that really would be a killer App (and service) for any new videogame system imo. It could literally be paradigm shifting in the industry as far as I'm concerned, much like the App Store has been on Apple's devices, or basically how the Internet works in general.
I can definitely appreciate the sheer amount of effort that it's obviously taken to make this game but these types of games have never really been my thing.
@Wendigo Well, like I said, I don't know exactly what the issues are. I thought it was just people going out and cheating to collect all the Pokemon quickly that seem to be getting banned left, right, and centre—which, for me, I'm just like "So what; let them cheat to get the Pokemon early if they really want to. They're kinda only ruining the game for themselves."—but guess not.
I'd only see the point in banning people if it affects other players negatively, otherwise I don't really see the point. I mean, obviously it probably all just comes down to money at the end of the day, but that's really a case of pure corporate greed causing a lot of stupid problems for many users just to ensure they can monetise all users imo. I say fish the whales, as is par for the course with these types of Apps, and let other people play how they want to play. Because it's all getting a bit stupid at this point. But hey, I don't know anything about how all this works beyond the most basic stuff, so there may be a much bigger issue here that I'm not really aware of.
@BiasedSonyFan I only know a handful of scores that metacritic has given games so I can't really say, and generally the games I like are almost universally acclaimed anyway, because I think I have pretty good taste.
See for yourself and tell me if you think I have good taste or not:
If it weren't for the stupid bobble-heads, which I simply cannot get past (yes, this kind of aesthetic stuff is THAT important to me), I might even think this game was pretty cool. It certainly seems to be well produced in most of the ways that matter, from the presentation to the music (and least from the final boss and ending video I just watch on Gamexplain). But those stupid frkin' bobble-heads . . .
@Jeronan Yeah, don't take what the actual gamers are saying seriously. They're just venting their emotions half the time. I'm talking about the professional videogame journalists.
@huxxny It seems to me that Nintendo has this terrible habit of late, where it takes random game ideas that often don't really feel very much like they belong in a particular series (strange spin-offs basically), and then it forces some of the characters and lore from that franchise into the game to make it a new entry in the series. I really don't like that most of the time, unless it's done exceptionally well and actually adds to the franchise rather than detract from it. Bobble-head characters and strange gun football in the Metroid universe just doesn't add to the franchise for me (and I know there's other modes and stuff in the game, but still). Although, I think the gun football could still be fun, but I simply can't enjoy stupid bobble-head characters in a Metroid game, unless it were clearly trying to be some kind of kiddie and silly take on things just for fun (like a bonus giant-head mode after you beat the level in the best time or something).
If this were some random indie game on Steam I'd be indifferent, but it's not, which means I'm even less excited. It doesn't mean it's bad but it's just some typical-looking indie game with that same budget level of indie development and resources behind it, which we see hundreds of games like this every month on services like Steam and the various App Stores these days it seems. Seeing lots of indie-level stuff on Nintendo's platforms doesn't excite me, and I'll only be happy to see it there if it's alongside a lot of AAA first part and third party support too. But, it can't be the majority of the stuff on the platform, which it feels like it is now that even Nintendo's own games have been largely totally meh this year. I expect this will be one of Nintendo's lowest rated years ever on an aggregate site like metacritic. Is this what Nintendo's consoles are to become: Places where you get maybe one or two genuinely good first party games a year and the rest of the catalogue is composed of average-ware?
It's a worrying trend that none of the big AAA third party developers appear to be fully on board with NX yet, and even the ones that are have mostly only really announced half-way efforts to date.
Apparently IGN and Gamespot, two multi-format gaming sites, seem to disagree with both Nintendo Life and GoNintendo, two predominantly Nintendo fan sites. I'm seeing a bit of trend possibly developing here.
If you buy that fugly thing for $27,000 you've let yourself be ripped off. Maybe if it actually looked like someone took more than five mins to slap together the Mario stuff on the face and that's about it.
These examples looks slicker and cooler, imo, and they're both an order of magnitude cheaper too:
And, I actually think the full creation firmware/software aspect of the idea is more important than the hardware in many ways, because it opens up the potential for a sort of Steam or App like "store" on NX, or even Nintendo's own kind of "internet" in a way, where all users as free to create and share some potentially amazing content but also just random fun stuff from user created art to full games.
But, other than the stuff we've all heard about by now, I haven't really thought of anything particularly different for what NX might actually be outside of my own idea. I basically believe the rumours about it being a mostly portable console than can stream to your TV in some way and that has detachable controllers of some kind. I just hope Nintendo has figured out how to do something like this right and not just turn it into some kind of convoluted gimmick.
It definitely looks to be coming along a lot better than I initially thought it would. Maybe it will deliver of some of that classic Rare magic after all.
It would be truly awesome if someone could make one of these that sat flush with the likes of the GBA SP and Game Boy micro—one day I'm sure it will be possible—but this is still cool.
Now THAT is frikin' brilliant pricing for these often great games and doubly brilliant 3D Classics versions of them. And even the standard $6 that they go for normally craps in the face of Nintendo's bloated pricing for its own Virtual Console titles that, in terms of the effort put into the versions, totally and utterly pale in comparison to Sega's efforts here.
If I had the means, I'd lap these titles up at that price.
@MrGawain It could actually all be done rather easily, if the designers are very smart about it. For example, I'd have each of those interchangeable controllers sections be double sided (so, imagine a d-pad on one side and face buttons on the other, or an analog stick on one side and a touch-pad on the other), and you'd just flip them to use what's on the other side, so you technically would have 8 separate control inputs and loads of possible configurations without having any loose control sections lying around (they'd always be attached stored on the machine, with very little need for more than those 8, so you'd be less likely to lose parts). And, if it's just a case of sliding and clicking them into place, as simply as it looks in the patent, it really wouldn't take more than a couple of seconds at most to setup whatever configuration. Also, you'd obviously go with the common setups be default the vast majority of the time anyway. It could be done, and it could very cool if done right.
See how my controller has a circular swappable control section on the front. Look at the image with the white controllers near the bottom, and then the black design above where it mentions the faceplates are interchangeable with other layouts.
And note, I submitted this design to IGN as an idea for the original Wiimote way back in 2005:
I predicted the Wiimote before the Wiimote was shown (I had the idea long before I submitted that image to IGN). I predicted the analog grip brakes on the handles of the controllers before the recent Nintendo patent with similar grip brakes was shown. I predicted swappable circular faceplates before this patent above was originally created. I predicted circular touch-pad like the ones on the Valve controller before they were a twinkle in Valves eyes (except mine were also customisable and reconfigurable too). And more besides; some stuff people still haven't used on game controllers yet. And, importantly, I did so all in one simple and intuitive but extremely versatile controller.
Now, send me my badge in the post, thanks.
PS. So yeah, I like the idea in general principle. It all comes down to how it's handled, because it needs to be real simple to switch the plates and there needs to be some easy way to store them too (I had a novel idea for this in my design that isn't mentioned anywhere).
@ThanosReXXX I do respect your opinion. I just happen to totally disagree with it and think it's wrong, and I believe that its based on a slight lack of true understanding of the thing you've formed an opinion on. Again, that's not me trying to offend you; it's me saying exactly what I believe. As I see it, there's kinda no other way you could come to the exact opposite view to me in this situation otherwise. Because, you are talking about gaming with both of these techs, as far as I'm aware, and that requires certain things to actually work well and be of a certain high quality (unless you're a casual noob who doesn't care about such quality, and I don't think you are). If you were saying "AR is better for looking at the weather update while you're jogging" . . . BAM! You win! But you're not.
You'd be very surprised that near zero people will ever try to end a conversation the way you think, because most people are not actually that true to their convictions, and most people are kinda wusses too when all is said and done. Sure, they can talk the talk and play social games and wear the mask all day, but that's just an illusion. Most people aren't as tough, bold, or assertive as they pretend to be at their jobs or wherever. Most people bluff, even the tough ones. I don't bluff, and many a bluffer has learned this truth just a little too late.
Hey, I'm not questioning your sanity. You seem like a very sane guy. But, I question your judgement in certain things, like AR vs VR. lol
Of course, you surely know that I question most people's judgements of most things most of the time anyway, so this shouldn't be a shock to you.
@ThanosReXXX And, similarly to how you must think I'm not listening to you, you're obviously not listening to me. I can't stop; it's not how I'm built. As long as something is disputed, as I see it, I feel compelled to dispute it. But, you are free to ignore me and click away from this particular conversation. I'm not gonna follow you into another thread or something—I'm not THAT compelled. But I won't quit as long as I believe one thing and someone is basically claiming something else is the truth of it.
Basically, you think AR is better, sometimes in some very specific ways too, and I totally disagree. And, I very rarely "agree to disagree" in situations like this, as I'm sure you are well aware of by now. It doesn't mean you can't walk away and still hold onto your belief 100% though.
I just don't like to see people being so easily duped, especially when they then evangelise that dupage to other people too.
Right now AR isn't even sniffing VR, and anyone that believes otherwise has been duped. But, they're free to be duped; I'm not saying they aren't. I will, however, say they're been duped as long as that's what I believe. It's not my job to let you live in a fantasy land. It's my job to tell the truth; or, at least that's how I choose to roll. Although, you're free to live in the fantasy, but it just means you have to choose to ignore my comments rather than try to tell me to stop speaking, because I won't.
As long as someone is talking crap about something, as I see it, I'll feel compelled to talk truthfully about it, as I see it. It's just how I am built.
@ThanosReXXX But you're not really grabbing and manipulating stuff. Your faking it by putting your hands somewhere in the air, making a basic gesture (pinching, pointing, swiping, whatever), and then hoping the AR object follows close enough to not look crap. And there's absolutely zero tactile feedback or feeling there too.
With VR you actually are grabbing something, the controller. And when you pinch your fingers you actually feel resistance. And when you shoot a gun there's actual rumble feedback to simulate recoil. When you swing that virtual lightsaber you're holding something that feels like the handle of a lighsaber to a degree. And more besides.
I'm honestly not sure you really grasp what the actual reality of these two different controls are going to be like, as opposed to the marketed fantasy of them on some nice YouTube video—despite your claims about understanding all the marketing stuff these guys pull.
Basically, it's like all those people that bought into the bullshot that was Kinect. All the controls you've seen on any kind of upcoming commercial AR so far are quite literally glorified Kinect, and in some cases will likely be less accurate. If you honestly think using Kinect was better than using a Wiimote or traditional controller, then fine. But, I don't believe that for one second. You seem smarter than that—than to drink the Kook Aid that is waving your hands about like a plonker and pinching thin air and pretending you're actually having fun playing a game like that.
PS. You know I'm gonna keep coming back with comments, right? lol
@ThanosReXXX Are you unable to tell what's actually going on in these videos or something?
You say the Toybox demo is unimpressive but you're impressed with someone pinching their fingers to complete an action on the likes of Hololens or whatever (because that's pretty much the only real control and interaction with seen with commercial AR so far)?
Do you actually fully understand what's happening in both examples?
Trust me, the Toybox demo utterly blows away any similar control demonstrations we've seen for the upcoming consumer AR devices, by a long way. And, there's definitely more "feeling" with these motion controllers than waving your hand in thin air and pinching your fingers like you do with any AR stuff I've seen; those motion controllers actually give you real tactile feedback, and not just gripping the controller, pressing buttons, or pushing the sticks, but rumble feedback too. There's currently zero of that on any upcoming consumer AR solutions, that I've seen. And I doubt Magic Leap will be any different. I expect to see something very similar to Hololens actually, but maybe the thing stick on your face will be a little smaller and ideally have a larger field of view.
Show me an AR control solution that's coming to consumer AR headsets in the near future that even sniffs what Oculus is doing with the Touch controllers. . . .
"unless you consider everything computer generated in a real world as floating"
When it comes to AR, basically yes, I do. But, there's obviously better versions of it than others, and I can see the likes of Hololens and Magic Leap are going to be much better than how it's done in Pokemon go at least. When done right, like with the Minecraft Hololens demos (even though most of that was still bullshots), it can be pretty convincing that it's not just floating over your real world view and is actually interacting with it to some degree.
Those sentences are me calling it as I see it, as I said. I don't give offence in saying that; if offence is taken it is taken by the other person in how they respond to what I've said. They could choose not to be offended by it and just take it for what it is; me disputing their claims and saying exactly what I feel about them.
I know what I'm doing; I'm not sugar coating how I think and feel about something just to create some kind of artificial situation where no one ever actually says anything real just in case someone cries—it's one of the things I utterly hate most about the now totally OTT PC internet. Everyone has to speak as though they're talking to fiver year olds who might cry if you disagree with them. Well, I don't play that game (see what I did there? I said "game" . . . in a video game site ).
I'm not trying to be cruel or intentionally be offensive when I say stuff like that; I'm just really blunt and saying exactly what I thougt about that particular thing (within the limitations of the fourms posting rules of course), and I don't like how internet is trying to force everyone one like me not to be blunt. That's how I am; the internet can go try to program someone else to think and act the way it wants. lol
This is what all fan-developers should do: Keep the game kinda quiet while they're working on it, release it before Nintendo (or whatever company) has anything to say about it, and then go from there.
At least this way the companies won't stop this stuff from ever getting out there.
@Aurelis NES games never looked that crap on my TV. And, you don't want them to emulate stuff they didn't intend in the first place anyway. They didn't intend for the whites to look wrong (dull and grey) or for all the colours to be muted; that was just an issue with some crap TVs (and maybe how people had set their settings too). It would be stupid to try to replicate that, especially without at least offering an option to play without that kind of junk (which is not the case with the current VC games). I mean, it's cool having the option to play with scan lines for that authentic retro experience for example, but in 2016 you obviously also has to have the option to play with perfectly clean and clear pixel visuals too. That's just good practice. And, if you look at a game like SMB3 that has all the visual artifacts at the edge of the screen, which would often be hidden on old CRT TVs, you'd actually want to try to clean that up on modern displays, because clearly you really weren't meant to be seeing that stuff in the first place. But, they can always leave in an option to turn it on for those people that want it. This is just like how they added an option to have sprite flicking in Mega Man 9 and 10 (normally caused by hardware limitations but not something the developers actually wanted), but you wouldn't want to have sprite flickering without any option to turn it off in 2016, that's just stupid, and if you can fix stuff like that it would make sense to do so. Same goes for things like unintended slowdown and all that kind of stuff. In 2016 you'd really want to include that as an option but definitely give players the choice to get rid of it all if they actually want the best possible game experience; if it's possible to do so.
And, with emulation they can get the aspect ratio correct if they want. They can pretty do it however they want on PCs these days. It's all about choices. Emulation still blows away anything Nintendo has done on the VC; it's not even close.
Given how old games looked on my TVs back in the day, Nintendo's Virtual Console is doing it wrong.
@ThanosReXXX Well, I think you're being duped when it comes to AR.
I mean, there you go basically saying that manipulating stuff with your hands in AR is better than manipulating stuff with a controller in VR (and I have to presume you mean in terms of the tech that's currently available in both cases; or else this debate is totally meaningless). That's just a total and utter joke that you're even saying such a thing. The precision, quality, accuracy, responsiveness, versatility, etc., of the current VR motion controllers like the Oculus Touch totally and utterly craps over any current AR gesture based input, so much so it's not even funny.
You can't get anywhere close to this with any current AR control solutions I've seen (that consumers will be using in the next year or two):
Maybe in some future version of the technology where AR is combined with a physical object, like holding an actual gun prop, it will be as good as or better than the current motion controllers available for Vive and Rift, but right now it's not even close. Again, it's all basically bullshots you've seen if you seen any such examples so far (like that Magic Leap video where the guy picks up a gun and stats blasting enemies in the room). At best these AR solutions will be far less accurate and responsive than the likes of a first-gen Wiimote or first-gen Kinect, because the AR tech simply isn't good enough at tracking them plus any other gestures you make for now. It's just a kinda rubbish head camera doing all the work for now, at least as far as we've seen on Hololens for example (and we've not really seen Magic Leap's control interface).
Magic Leap, right now, is basically all a bullshot. None of us have even seen the device or anything more than very simple tech demos of the visuals being displayed in best case scenarios—in video footage that just like Microsoft's Hololens videos can totally and utterly lie to you about things like the field of view and the lad on the tracking—and none of those have particularly impressed me. Again, it's some footage of a "holographic" object floating in front of you in most cases, with some minimum interaction with the 3D world at best. That we've seen so far. The idea of the tech is cool, but the reality of any current-gen AR headsets that we might be using in everyday use is completely unimpressive to me right now.
The AR demo with C3PO is a very specific setup that you simply cannot have at home. It's an expensive demo room and little more at this point. If you're just talking about bullshot stuff that some Hollywood studio is going to set up for only a couple of journalists to use that is totally and utterly impractical in any other scenario for normal home consumers, then we're just going off into stupid territory imo. I mean, if that's the case, we should be talking about VR with a 200 degree plus filed of view, a full warehouse to walk around in, and multiple physical controllers to pick up, which is just stupid—no one is going to be using VR like that.
I don't know about you here but I'm talking about AR vs VR as these technologies are going to be available to consumers in the next couple of years (and is already available with VR), not some imagined best-case scenario ten years down the line or whatever, which may or may not come close to what we'd like to imagine these technologies are capable of when they realise their full potential.
Again, AR is going to mostly give you glorified HUDs/UIs (for activity and productivity type stuff) and VR is going to give you full blow and fully immersive game experiences, the likes of which simply cannot exist in other mediums and with any other technology currently available—and I'm talking about it doing that now. You can play some genuinely awesome VR games right now. You can look at some pretty boring tech demos of floating 3D objects with AR right now.
Show me anything on current AR that is giving you this kind of gaming and entertainment experience right now (that's actually because of the AR as opposed to some other tech that also happens to use a tiny bit of AR):
@ThanosReXXX The actual visuals in these rendered demos are often lovely, but that means nothing in terms of it selling AR to me. Because, I'm not talking about rendering nice graphics here; I'm talking about AR. An AR game having some nice renders of whatever does not impress me in the slightest at the end of the day, just as it wouldn't on if I saw a lovely rendered whale on PS4 either. We've been capable of photo-realistic renders for years—look at almost any screen of Forza or whatever for examples of cars that literally look real in most cases. Virtually every machine is capable of rendering graphics could render a near-lifelike whale in this day and age, even the 3DS (if that's all you asked it to render for a cool bullshot demo).
The problem is not that I can't see what the tech brings to Pokemon Go, it's that people like you are confusing what the tech is actually bringing and what can and does exist independent of the the tech. Almost nothing in Pokemon Go really needs or is enhanced by the AR part. In fact, I'd even argue the times you see a Pokemon awkwardly floating over your couch would probably be better if you just saw some nice game graphics instead. You could still use the location stuff to have to go to your couch to find the Pokemon though, but that is not AR; that's just location based tech that is readily available in all modern handhelds and mobile devices and has little to do with AR. AR, is literally augmenting visuals over reality with a bit of realtime motion tracking.
Here's what I think: I think a whole lot of you have allowed a bunch of marketing men to dupe you into believing AR is going to far better for gaming and entertainment than it ultimately is—unless you seriously believe that simply overlaying a Pokemon in front of a McDonald's store front is what makes a game experience special. I 1000% don't find that impressive; a computer character floating in front of a shop or couch or tree or whatever—it is a glorified HUD/UI. It's like the video above: While it's kinda cool, it ultimately is just a standard 2D Mario game projected in front of you with the background colour removed to show your room as the background instead—and that is literally it. AR has added absolutely zero hero, it's just a kinda cool gimmick. And not that all AR games will be so simple and gimmicky, but most of them actually won't be that far off imo.
AR is only more versatile in terms of where you can practically use it. It's not even open for debate; VR can do an order of magnitude more things that AR once you're inside that virtual world. VR is basically limitless in terms of what it can create before you once you've got the headset on; AR, by its very nature, will alway be something projected of the same old real world around you (and that world is matter-of-fact finite), or else it's not AR.
And, you seem to be very confused about AR vs VR graphics: VR can render graphics that look every bit as photo-realistic as any AR projection you've seen (aside from the actual resolution of the display screen, obviously; but that has nothing to do with the actual thing being rendered, just the output), because it's just a typical PC rendering the visuals. Right now, if I had the means, I could go get someone to render that exact whale you saw in that AR video inside VR. But, again, you're allowing yourself to be duped into believing that AR is somehow rendering something you can't render in VR, which is quite simply wrong.
The one thing I can agree with, however, is that mixing both AR and VR, allowing developers to do whatever, whenever, be it full VR or AR, or even a mix, is the best of both worlds—and that is coming in time, so great. But, what it will likely do is make people forget just how limited and gimmicky AR actually is on its own (specifically when it comes to games and entertainment, as opposed to activity/productivity type applications). What they'll likely do is start attributing all the amazing things VR can do to AR too.
Basically, I think many of you guys are just going to have to see both technologies released as actual products in the near future before you realise that VR does exactly what it purports to do and AR is actually a bit useless for most of the things I presume you are imagining it's so amazing for (gaming, basically). Again, that's unless you truly believe that the AR aspects of something like Pokemon Go are the best gaming experience you seen in generations—which I personally think would be really sad and such a kick in the teeth for all the actual/genuinely high quality games out there (and I'm talking specifically just the AR parts, not the tracking software and whatever else that isn't AR at all).
@ThanosReXXX I've seen all of them and none of them impress me. Most of the stuff is a mixture of bullshot and just nothing particularly impressive, and certainly not for gaming (which is the main criteria I'm judging it by). Again, it's ultimately all just glorified HUDs/UIs for the most part that I've seen.
I really think people are drinking a lot of Kool-Aid here, at least if they're thinking about this tech in terms of actual gaming and entertainment as opposed to maybe overlaying some weather updates or telling you how far you run and other totally unexciting junk like that, which it will be great for (activity and productivity type stuff).
What I will continue to say until shown otherwise is that the very thing that makes AR what it is, overlaying it over the real world, is what's ultimately makes it generally boring and unimpressive to me. By its very design, it is always inherently limited by having to be augmented over the real world.
And I guess it comes down to this: People who think something like Pokemon Go is impressive because of the little bit of AR that it uses might find AR as a tech extremely exciting, but people who actually look for quality games in there, which do things in AR that could only be done in AR and are better for it, will likely not be particularly impressed with AR after seeing what VR is capable of—I'm one of those people.
For proper gaming and entertainment, I see AR as a total gimmick right now (although it's great for some of the more activity and productivity type stuff I alluded to earlier), and I have no doubt VR is going to revolutionise how we play games and enjoy entertainment (even if not everyone is going to want to stick a VR headset on their head and totally immersive themselves in these virtual worlds; but those are the same people who likely don't play on proper consoles right now either, which isn't us, so that's basically a mute point).
Note: I'm not questioning the impressiveness of the technology at work here, in either case—it's all impressive stuff technically (the video where AR objects can subtly move stuff in the real world is neat). I actually think the tech in something like Magic Leap is pretty cool, but I assert we'll mostly be using it to check stats and graphs projected onto a wall at the end of the day, or view projected computer screens, or look at floating heart-rate monitors while we're running and cycling, or looking at floating "holographic" maps, and other activity/productivity stuff like that—and I really don't give a toss about that kind of thing.
@aaronsullivan AR is like gaming on an iPhone; VR is like gaming on a PS4. There may or may not be more people who ultimately use AR—it's up for debate—but VR is simply a better gaming and entertainment platform from every single thing I have ever seen of both technologies. And we're on a gaming site, not some running site or whatever, so that is pretty much the only thing I care about right now. There's very little stuff I've seen on AR that makes it a truly compelling gaming or entertainment platform, and almost everything I've seen that is kinda cool on it doesn't really need the AR aspect to be so, such as the games in the video above (which don't actually use the AR in any way at all), or Pokemon Go (I'd argue it could be just as much fun with the App showing normal game graphics with no AR but still making you go outside and stuff to actually find the Pokemon). With VR, however, there's stuff you can do there that gives you experiences you basically could not have with pretty much any other medium (and certainly none we can anywhere near practically use just now), and they're better experiences for it (like actually standing directly inside some full scale alien world that's wrapped all around you in 360 degrees).
Comments 6,304
Re: Anniversary: The Super Nintendo Is 25 Years Old Today
"The SNES is home to some of the finest video games of all time, including Super Mario World, Zelda 3, Super Mario Kart, Chrono Trigger, Secret of Mana, ActRaiser, Axelay, Legend of the Mystical Ninja, Street Fighter II... we're sure you have your own personal favourites to add to that tiny list."
You bet I do:
http://www.inceptional.com/2016/01/18/kirks-top-10-super-nintendo-games-in-pics/
The SNES is pretty much the most satisfying all-round console of all time imo.
And yeah, the American SNES is a bog beast; this is where it's at:
Re: The Nintendo 3DS Is Getting A New RPG Maker Game
@argh4430 Interesting.
Re: The Nintendo 3DS Is Getting A New RPG Maker Game
Again, this is the kind of thing in principle (creation software and tools) that I think should have been officially built into the likes of 3DS and Wii U day one—it just makes so much sense with the touchscreen and stylus input—and I really think it would be something awesome if it were actually built into NX. I've been saying this exact thing for a while now:
http://www.inceptional.com/2015/06/26/heres-the-gist-of-my-idea-for-nintendos-nx/
It's this kind of creation suite that really would be a killer App (and service) for any new videogame system imo. It could literally be paradigm shifting in the industry as far as I'm concerned, much like the App Store has been on Apple's devices, or basically how the Internet works in general.
Re: Review: Armikrog (Wii U eShop)
I can definitely appreciate the sheer amount of effort that it's obviously taken to make this game but these types of games have never really been my thing.
Re: Here's The Machine Sega's Artists Used To Bring Some Of Its Best Games To Life
Very cool.
Re: Forget The NES Classic Edition Mini, Here's The Analogue Nt Mini
Pretty sweet.
Re: Dragon Quest XI Confirmed For Nintendo NX, For Real This Time
His comments are certainly interesting.
Re: Pokémon GO Player Apparently Gets Belgium's Biggest Mobile Network Banned
@Wendigo Well, like I said, I don't know exactly what the issues are. I thought it was just people going out and cheating to collect all the Pokemon quickly that seem to be getting banned left, right, and centre—which, for me, I'm just like "So what; let them cheat to get the Pokemon early if they really want to. They're kinda only ruining the game for themselves."—but guess not.
Re: Pokémon GO Player Apparently Gets Belgium's Biggest Mobile Network Banned
I'd only see the point in banning people if it affects other players negatively, otherwise I don't really see the point. I mean, obviously it probably all just comes down to money at the end of the day, but that's really a case of pure corporate greed causing a lot of stupid problems for many users just to ensure they can monetise all users imo. I say fish the whales, as is par for the course with these types of Apps, and let other people play how they want to play. Because it's all getting a bit stupid at this point. But hey, I don't know anything about how all this works beyond the most basic stuff, so there may be a much bigger issue here that I'm not really aware of.
Re: Review: Metroid Prime: Federation Force (3DS)
@BiasedSonyFan Not one that's on metacritic but probably outside of that, although none are immediately popping into my head as I type.
Re: Review: Metroid Prime: Federation Force (3DS)
@-DEMISE- Hey, at least I'm consistent.
Re: Review: Metroid Prime: Federation Force (3DS)
@DrRandle 70/100 is decent enough, but for a Metroid game . . .
Also, nothing makes the bobble-heads not a completely stupid design/art decision imo, and I honestly can't get past it.
Re: Review: Metroid Prime: Federation Force (3DS)
@BiasedSonyFan I only know a handful of scores that metacritic has given games so I can't really say, and generally the games I like are almost universally acclaimed anyway, because I think I have pretty good taste.
See for yourself and tell me if you think I have good taste or not:
http://www.inceptional.com/2016/08/18/my-top-games-of-all-time/
http://www.inceptional.com/2016/08/04/the-top-10-game-boy-advance-games-according-to-me/
http://www.inceptional.com/2016/01/18/kirks-top-10-super-nintendo-games-in-pics/
Maybe there's a few games on that list that have lowish scores on metacritic, but I can't be bothered checking.
Re: Review: Metroid Prime: Federation Force (3DS)
@BiasedSonyFan Dunno.
Re: Round Up: Metroid Prime: Federation Force Predictably Divides Opinion
If it weren't for the stupid bobble-heads, which I simply cannot get past (yes, this kind of aesthetic stuff is THAT important to me), I might even think this game was pretty cool. It certainly seems to be well produced in most of the ways that matter, from the presentation to the music (and least from the final boss and ending video I just watch on Gamexplain). But those stupid frkin' bobble-heads . . .
Re: Review: Metroid Prime: Federation Force (3DS)
@Jeronan Yeah, don't take what the actual gamers are saying seriously. They're just venting their emotions half the time. I'm talking about the professional videogame journalists.
Re: Review: Metroid Prime: Federation Force (3DS)
@huxxny It seems to me that Nintendo has this terrible habit of late, where it takes random game ideas that often don't really feel very much like they belong in a particular series (strange spin-offs basically), and then it forces some of the characters and lore from that franchise into the game to make it a new entry in the series. I really don't like that most of the time, unless it's done exceptionally well and actually adds to the franchise rather than detract from it. Bobble-head characters and strange gun football in the Metroid universe just doesn't add to the franchise for me (and I know there's other modes and stuff in the game, but still). Although, I think the gun football could still be fun, but I simply can't enjoy stupid bobble-head characters in a Metroid game, unless it were clearly trying to be some kind of kiddie and silly take on things just for fun (like a bonus giant-head mode after you beat the level in the best time or something).
Re: Review: Metroid Prime: Federation Force (3DS)
@AlexOlney Or, I've only seen four reviews so far and that was the potential trend I saw, which is all I stated.
Edit: Let me go to metacritic and see. . . .
Edit 2: Well, it's currently sitting at 64/100 (as I check it), with every review on there being "mixed" - http://www.metacritic.com/game/3ds/metroid-prime-federation-force
I guess we'll see how it all pans out once more reviews come in.
Re: Check Out Giga Wrecker, a New Puzzle Platformer from Game Freak
If this were some random indie game on Steam I'd be indifferent, but it's not, which means I'm even less excited. It doesn't mean it's bad but it's just some typical-looking indie game with that same budget level of indie development and resources behind it, which we see hundreds of games like this every month on services like Steam and the various App Stores these days it seems. Seeing lots of indie-level stuff on Nintendo's platforms doesn't excite me, and I'll only be happy to see it there if it's alongside a lot of AAA first part and third party support too. But, it can't be the majority of the stuff on the platform, which it feels like it is now that even Nintendo's own games have been largely totally meh this year. I expect this will be one of Nintendo's lowest rated years ever on an aggregate site like metacritic. Is this what Nintendo's consoles are to become: Places where you get maybe one or two genuinely good first party games a year and the rest of the catalogue is composed of average-ware?
Re: EA's Peter Moore: We've Never Said We Won't Develop For Nintendo
It's a worrying trend that none of the big AAA third party developers appear to be fully on board with NX yet, and even the ones that are have mostly only really announced half-way efforts to date.
Re: Review: Metroid Prime: Federation Force (3DS)
Apparently IGN and Gamespot, two multi-format gaming sites, seem to disagree with both Nintendo Life and GoNintendo, two predominantly Nintendo fan sites. I'm seeing a bit of trend possibly developing here.
Re: Video: It's Amazing How Many Great Mega Drive Games Genesis Owners Missed Out On
Some cool games on that list. I've played quite a few of them via ahem . . . ulation.
Re: Luxury Watchmaker Romain Jerome Shows Off Super Mario Watch At Mitsukoshi's Annual Watch Fair
@samuelvictor I think it's just a skin or whatever for some Android watch, but it's def cool.
Re: Luxury Watchmaker Romain Jerome Shows Off Super Mario Watch At Mitsukoshi's Annual Watch Fair
If you buy that fugly thing for $27,000 you've let yourself be ripped off. Maybe if it actually looked like someone took more than five mins to slap together the Mario stuff on the face and that's about it.
These examples looks slicker and cooler, imo, and they're both an order of magnitude cheaper too:
Re: EA Talks Possible Plans for NX
It's worrying that once again the big third parties don't seem to be commited to Nintendo's new console that's about to launch.
Re: Updated Nintendo Patent For Modular, Customisable Control Options Gives Another Spin on NX Reports
@Turbo857 At this point, Christ knows. Here's my old idea for what I thought it would be cool for NX to be:
http://www.inceptional.com/2015/06/26/heres-the-gist-of-my-idea-for-nintendos-nx/
And, I actually think the full creation firmware/software aspect of the idea is more important than the hardware in many ways, because it opens up the potential for a sort of Steam or App like "store" on NX, or even Nintendo's own kind of "internet" in a way, where all users as free to create and share some potentially amazing content but also just random fun stuff from user created art to full games.
But, other than the stuff we've all heard about by now, I haven't really thought of anything particularly different for what NX might actually be outside of my own idea. I basically believe the rumours about it being a mostly portable console than can stream to your TV in some way and that has detachable controllers of some kind. I just hope Nintendo has figured out how to do something like this right and not just turn it into some kind of convoluted gimmick.
Re: Video: Yooka-Laylee's Gamescom 2016 Trailer Contains Transformations, New Enemies And Farting
It definitely looks to be coming along a lot better than I initially thought it would. Maybe it will deliver of some of that classic Rare magic after all.
Re: Hardware Review: Everdrive GBA X5
It would be truly awesome if someone could make one of these that sat flush with the likes of the GBA SP and Game Boy micro—one day I'm sure it will be possible—but this is still cool.
Re: SEGA is Putting on a 3D Classics Sale in North America
@XyVoX I totally agree.
Re: Pokémon GO Has Set Five Guinness World Records
Well, we certainly can't dispute it's a massive success—at least.
Re: SEGA is Putting on a 3D Classics Sale in North America
"All the discounted games are available for $3"
Now THAT is frikin' brilliant pricing for these often great games and doubly brilliant 3D Classics versions of them. And even the standard $6 that they go for normally craps in the face of Nintendo's bloated pricing for its own Virtual Console titles that, in terms of the effort put into the versions, totally and utterly pale in comparison to Sega's efforts here.
If I had the means, I'd lap these titles up at that price.
Re: Updated Nintendo Patent For Modular, Customisable Control Options Gives Another Spin on NX Reports
@MrGawain It could actually all be done rather easily, if the designers are very smart about it. For example, I'd have each of those interchangeable controllers sections be double sided (so, imagine a d-pad on one side and face buttons on the other, or an analog stick on one side and a touch-pad on the other), and you'd just flip them to use what's on the other side, so you technically would have 8 separate control inputs and loads of possible configurations without having any loose control sections lying around (they'd always be attached stored on the machine, with very little need for more than those 8, so you'd be less likely to lose parts). And, if it's just a case of sliding and clicking them into place, as simply as it looks in the patent, it really wouldn't take more than a couple of seconds at most to setup whatever configuration. Also, you'd obviously go with the common setups be default the vast majority of the time anyway. It could be done, and it could very cool if done right.
Re: Updated Nintendo Patent For Modular, Customisable Control Options Gives Another Spin on NX Reports
Again, I got there first (although, I'm sure someone else probably got there even before that too):
http://www.inceptional.com/2016/01/20/ahead-of-the-nintendonx-curve-again/
See how my controller has a circular swappable control section on the front. Look at the image with the white controllers near the bottom, and then the black design above where it mentions the faceplates are interchangeable with other layouts.
And note, I submitted this design to IGN as an idea for the original Wiimote way back in 2005:
http://uk.ign.com/articles/2005/08/24/predicting-the-revolution-reader-submissions?page=6
I predicted the Wiimote before the Wiimote was shown (I had the idea long before I submitted that image to IGN). I predicted the analog grip brakes on the handles of the controllers before the recent Nintendo patent with similar grip brakes was shown. I predicted swappable circular faceplates before this patent above was originally created. I predicted circular touch-pad like the ones on the Valve controller before they were a twinkle in Valves eyes (except mine were also customisable and reconfigurable too). And more besides; some stuff people still haven't used on game controllers yet. And, importantly, I did so all in one simple and intuitive but extremely versatile controller.
Now, send me my badge in the post, thanks.
PS. So yeah, I like the idea in general principle. It all comes down to how it's handled, because it needs to be real simple to switch the plates and there needs to be some easy way to store them too (I had a novel idea for this in my design that isn't mentioned anywhere).
Re: Discuss: What Next For The Nintendo 64?
@ThanosReXXX See, we do agree sometimes.
Re: Discuss: What Next For The Nintendo 64?
How about all of the above options.
Re: Random: Metroid Prime's Opening Boss Battle Has Been Recreated Using Lego
'Tis pretty cool.
Re: Video: Augmented Reality NES Gaming Finally Gives Us A Reason To Want Microsoft's HoloLens
@ThanosReXXX I do respect your opinion. I just happen to totally disagree with it and think it's wrong, and I believe that its based on a slight lack of true understanding of the thing you've formed an opinion on. Again, that's not me trying to offend you; it's me saying exactly what I believe. As I see it, there's kinda no other way you could come to the exact opposite view to me in this situation otherwise. Because, you are talking about gaming with both of these techs, as far as I'm aware, and that requires certain things to actually work well and be of a certain high quality (unless you're a casual noob who doesn't care about such quality, and I don't think you are). If you were saying "AR is better for looking at the weather update while you're jogging" . . . BAM! You win! But you're not.
You'd be very surprised that near zero people will ever try to end a conversation the way you think, because most people are not actually that true to their convictions, and most people are kinda wusses too when all is said and done. Sure, they can talk the talk and play social games and wear the mask all day, but that's just an illusion. Most people aren't as tough, bold, or assertive as they pretend to be at their jobs or wherever. Most people bluff, even the tough ones. I don't bluff, and many a bluffer has learned this truth just a little too late.
Hey, I'm not questioning your sanity. You seem like a very sane guy. But, I question your judgement in certain things, like AR vs VR. lol
Of course, you surely know that I question most people's judgements of most things most of the time anyway, so this shouldn't be a shock to you.
And I told you, I can't stop—it's like a disease!
Re: Video: Augmented Reality NES Gaming Finally Gives Us A Reason To Want Microsoft's HoloLens
@ThanosReXXX And, similarly to how you must think I'm not listening to you, you're obviously not listening to me. I can't stop; it's not how I'm built. As long as something is disputed, as I see it, I feel compelled to dispute it. But, you are free to ignore me and click away from this particular conversation. I'm not gonna follow you into another thread or something—I'm not THAT compelled. But I won't quit as long as I believe one thing and someone is basically claiming something else is the truth of it.
Basically, you think AR is better, sometimes in some very specific ways too, and I totally disagree. And, I very rarely "agree to disagree" in situations like this, as I'm sure you are well aware of by now. It doesn't mean you can't walk away and still hold onto your belief 100% though.
Re: Video: Augmented Reality NES Gaming Finally Gives Us A Reason To Want Microsoft's HoloLens
@ThanosReXXX See above. lol
I just don't like to see people being so easily duped, especially when they then evangelise that dupage to other people too.
Right now AR isn't even sniffing VR, and anyone that believes otherwise has been duped. But, they're free to be duped; I'm not saying they aren't. I will, however, say they're been duped as long as that's what I believe. It's not my job to let you live in a fantasy land. It's my job to tell the truth; or, at least that's how I choose to roll. Although, you're free to live in the fantasy, but it just means you have to choose to ignore my comments rather than try to tell me to stop speaking, because I won't.
As long as someone is talking crap about something, as I see it, I'll feel compelled to talk truthfully about it, as I see it. It's just how I am built.
Re: Video: Augmented Reality NES Gaming Finally Gives Us A Reason To Want Microsoft's HoloLens
@ThanosReXXX But you're not really grabbing and manipulating stuff. Your faking it by putting your hands somewhere in the air, making a basic gesture (pinching, pointing, swiping, whatever), and then hoping the AR object follows close enough to not look crap. And there's absolutely zero tactile feedback or feeling there too.
With VR you actually are grabbing something, the controller. And when you pinch your fingers you actually feel resistance. And when you shoot a gun there's actual rumble feedback to simulate recoil. When you swing that virtual lightsaber you're holding something that feels like the handle of a lighsaber to a degree. And more besides.
I'm honestly not sure you really grasp what the actual reality of these two different controls are going to be like, as opposed to the marketed fantasy of them on some nice YouTube video—despite your claims about understanding all the marketing stuff these guys pull.
Basically, it's like all those people that bought into the bullshot that was Kinect. All the controls you've seen on any kind of upcoming commercial AR so far are quite literally glorified Kinect, and in some cases will likely be less accurate. If you honestly think using Kinect was better than using a Wiimote or traditional controller, then fine. But, I don't believe that for one second. You seem smarter than that—than to drink the Kook Aid that is waving your hands about like a plonker and pinching thin air and pretending you're actually having fun playing a game like that.
PS. You know I'm gonna keep coming back with comments, right? lol
Re: Video: Augmented Reality NES Gaming Finally Gives Us A Reason To Want Microsoft's HoloLens
@ThanosReXXX Are you unable to tell what's actually going on in these videos or something?
You say the Toybox demo is unimpressive but you're impressed with someone pinching their fingers to complete an action on the likes of Hololens or whatever (because that's pretty much the only real control and interaction with seen with commercial AR so far)?
Do you actually fully understand what's happening in both examples?
Trust me, the Toybox demo utterly blows away any similar control demonstrations we've seen for the upcoming consumer AR devices, by a long way. And, there's definitely more "feeling" with these motion controllers than waving your hand in thin air and pinching your fingers like you do with any AR stuff I've seen; those motion controllers actually give you real tactile feedback, and not just gripping the controller, pressing buttons, or pushing the sticks, but rumble feedback too. There's currently zero of that on any upcoming consumer AR solutions, that I've seen. And I doubt Magic Leap will be any different. I expect to see something very similar to Hololens actually, but maybe the thing stick on your face will be a little smaller and ideally have a larger field of view.
Show me an AR control solution that's coming to consumer AR headsets in the near future that even sniffs what Oculus is doing with the Touch controllers. . . .
"unless you consider everything computer generated in a real world as floating"
When it comes to AR, basically yes, I do. But, there's obviously better versions of it than others, and I can see the likes of Hololens and Magic Leap are going to be much better than how it's done in Pokemon go at least. When done right, like with the Minecraft Hololens demos (even though most of that was still bullshots), it can be pretty convincing that it's not just floating over your real world view and is actually interacting with it to some degree.
Those sentences are me calling it as I see it, as I said. I don't give offence in saying that; if offence is taken it is taken by the other person in how they respond to what I've said. They could choose not to be offended by it and just take it for what it is; me disputing their claims and saying exactly what I feel about them.
I know what I'm doing; I'm not sugar coating how I think and feel about something just to create some kind of artificial situation where no one ever actually says anything real just in case someone cries—it's one of the things I utterly hate most about the now totally OTT PC internet. Everyone has to speak as though they're talking to fiver year olds who might cry if you disagree with them. Well, I don't play that game (see what I did there? I said "game" . . . in a video game site ).
I'm not trying to be cruel or intentionally be offensive when I say stuff like that; I'm just really blunt and saying exactly what I thougt about that particular thing (within the limitations of the fourms posting rules of course), and I don't like how internet is trying to force everyone one like me not to be blunt. That's how I am; the internet can go try to program someone else to think and act the way it wants. lol
Re: Pokémon Uranium "More Alive Than Ever" Despite Removal Of Official Download Links, Claims Developer
Good. Good.
This is what all fan-developers should do: Keep the game kinda quiet while they're working on it, release it before Nintendo (or whatever company) has anything to say about it, and then go from there.
At least this way the companies won't stop this stuff from ever getting out there.
Re: Video: Take a Closer Look at Koroks in Breath of the Wild
The more I see of this game the more I do really want to play it.
Re: Retro-Bit's Next System Aims To Challenge The NES Classic Edition Mini Console
@Aurelis NES games never looked that crap on my TV. And, you don't want them to emulate stuff they didn't intend in the first place anyway. They didn't intend for the whites to look wrong (dull and grey) or for all the colours to be muted; that was just an issue with some crap TVs (and maybe how people had set their settings too). It would be stupid to try to replicate that, especially without at least offering an option to play without that kind of junk (which is not the case with the current VC games). I mean, it's cool having the option to play with scan lines for that authentic retro experience for example, but in 2016 you obviously also has to have the option to play with perfectly clean and clear pixel visuals too. That's just good practice. And, if you look at a game like SMB3 that has all the visual artifacts at the edge of the screen, which would often be hidden on old CRT TVs, you'd actually want to try to clean that up on modern displays, because clearly you really weren't meant to be seeing that stuff in the first place. But, they can always leave in an option to turn it on for those people that want it. This is just like how they added an option to have sprite flicking in Mega Man 9 and 10 (normally caused by hardware limitations but not something the developers actually wanted), but you wouldn't want to have sprite flickering without any option to turn it off in 2016, that's just stupid, and if you can fix stuff like that it would make sense to do so. Same goes for things like unintended slowdown and all that kind of stuff. In 2016 you'd really want to include that as an option but definitely give players the choice to get rid of it all if they actually want the best possible game experience; if it's possible to do so.
And, with emulation they can get the aspect ratio correct if they want. They can pretty do it however they want on PCs these days. It's all about choices. Emulation still blows away anything Nintendo has done on the VC; it's not even close.
Given how old games looked on my TVs back in the day, Nintendo's Virtual Console is doing it wrong.
Re: Video: Augmented Reality NES Gaming Finally Gives Us A Reason To Want Microsoft's HoloLens
@ThanosReXXX Well, I think you're being duped when it comes to AR.
I mean, there you go basically saying that manipulating stuff with your hands in AR is better than manipulating stuff with a controller in VR (and I have to presume you mean in terms of the tech that's currently available in both cases; or else this debate is totally meaningless). That's just a total and utter joke that you're even saying such a thing. The precision, quality, accuracy, responsiveness, versatility, etc., of the current VR motion controllers like the Oculus Touch totally and utterly craps over any current AR gesture based input, so much so it's not even funny.
You can't get anywhere close to this with any current AR control solutions I've seen (that consumers will be using in the next year or two):
https://youtu.be/iFEMiyGMa58
Maybe in some future version of the technology where AR is combined with a physical object, like holding an actual gun prop, it will be as good as or better than the current motion controllers available for Vive and Rift, but right now it's not even close. Again, it's all basically bullshots you've seen if you seen any such examples so far (like that Magic Leap video where the guy picks up a gun and stats blasting enemies in the room). At best these AR solutions will be far less accurate and responsive than the likes of a first-gen Wiimote or first-gen Kinect, because the AR tech simply isn't good enough at tracking them plus any other gestures you make for now. It's just a kinda rubbish head camera doing all the work for now, at least as far as we've seen on Hololens for example (and we've not really seen Magic Leap's control interface).
Magic Leap, right now, is basically all a bullshot. None of us have even seen the device or anything more than very simple tech demos of the visuals being displayed in best case scenarios—in video footage that just like Microsoft's Hololens videos can totally and utterly lie to you about things like the field of view and the lad on the tracking—and none of those have particularly impressed me. Again, it's some footage of a "holographic" object floating in front of you in most cases, with some minimum interaction with the 3D world at best. That we've seen so far. The idea of the tech is cool, but the reality of any current-gen AR headsets that we might be using in everyday use is completely unimpressive to me right now.
The AR demo with C3PO is a very specific setup that you simply cannot have at home. It's an expensive demo room and little more at this point. If you're just talking about bullshot stuff that some Hollywood studio is going to set up for only a couple of journalists to use that is totally and utterly impractical in any other scenario for normal home consumers, then we're just going off into stupid territory imo. I mean, if that's the case, we should be talking about VR with a 200 degree plus filed of view, a full warehouse to walk around in, and multiple physical controllers to pick up, which is just stupid—no one is going to be using VR like that.
I don't know about you here but I'm talking about AR vs VR as these technologies are going to be available to consumers in the next couple of years (and is already available with VR), not some imagined best-case scenario ten years down the line or whatever, which may or may not come close to what we'd like to imagine these technologies are capable of when they realise their full potential.
Again, AR is going to mostly give you glorified HUDs/UIs (for activity and productivity type stuff) and VR is going to give you full blow and fully immersive game experiences, the likes of which simply cannot exist in other mediums and with any other technology currently available—and I'm talking about it doing that now. You can play some genuinely awesome VR games right now. You can look at some pretty boring tech demos of floating 3D objects with AR right now.
Show me anything on current AR that is giving you this kind of gaming and entertainment experience right now (that's actually because of the AR as opposed to some other tech that also happens to use a tiny bit of AR):
https://youtu.be/W0b_wfVzpWI
https://youtu.be/8VQKVv5Atr0
https://youtu.be/CJ1wjwgTZNk
https://youtu.be/u47uN544HYQ
https://youtu.be/iFEMiyGMa58
https://youtu.be/7ijGiZRfTRU
https://youtu.be/O9qghITvZYE
https://youtu.be/XoL1uLS1HQ4
https://youtu.be/KirQtdsG5yE
https://youtu.be/bwNoLs3SIR0
https://youtu.be/qIh2MraniZg
And none of that is bullshot.
I'm very rarely offended and I hope the same is true for you, because I'm not trying to offend you; I'm simply calling stuff as I see it.
Re: Video: Augmented Reality NES Gaming Finally Gives Us A Reason To Want Microsoft's HoloLens
@ThanosReXXX The actual visuals in these rendered demos are often lovely, but that means nothing in terms of it selling AR to me. Because, I'm not talking about rendering nice graphics here; I'm talking about AR. An AR game having some nice renders of whatever does not impress me in the slightest at the end of the day, just as it wouldn't on if I saw a lovely rendered whale on PS4 either. We've been capable of photo-realistic renders for years—look at almost any screen of Forza or whatever for examples of cars that literally look real in most cases. Virtually every machine is capable of rendering graphics could render a near-lifelike whale in this day and age, even the 3DS (if that's all you asked it to render for a cool bullshot demo).
The problem is not that I can't see what the tech brings to Pokemon Go, it's that people like you are confusing what the tech is actually bringing and what can and does exist independent of the the tech. Almost nothing in Pokemon Go really needs or is enhanced by the AR part. In fact, I'd even argue the times you see a Pokemon awkwardly floating over your couch would probably be better if you just saw some nice game graphics instead. You could still use the location stuff to have to go to your couch to find the Pokemon though, but that is not AR; that's just location based tech that is readily available in all modern handhelds and mobile devices and has little to do with AR. AR, is literally augmenting visuals over reality with a bit of realtime motion tracking.
Here's what I think: I think a whole lot of you have allowed a bunch of marketing men to dupe you into believing AR is going to far better for gaming and entertainment than it ultimately is—unless you seriously believe that simply overlaying a Pokemon in front of a McDonald's store front is what makes a game experience special. I 1000% don't find that impressive; a computer character floating in front of a shop or couch or tree or whatever—it is a glorified HUD/UI. It's like the video above: While it's kinda cool, it ultimately is just a standard 2D Mario game projected in front of you with the background colour removed to show your room as the background instead—and that is literally it. AR has added absolutely zero hero, it's just a kinda cool gimmick. And not that all AR games will be so simple and gimmicky, but most of them actually won't be that far off imo.
AR is only more versatile in terms of where you can practically use it. It's not even open for debate; VR can do an order of magnitude more things that AR once you're inside that virtual world. VR is basically limitless in terms of what it can create before you once you've got the headset on; AR, by its very nature, will alway be something projected of the same old real world around you (and that world is matter-of-fact finite), or else it's not AR.
And, you seem to be very confused about AR vs VR graphics: VR can render graphics that look every bit as photo-realistic as any AR projection you've seen (aside from the actual resolution of the display screen, obviously; but that has nothing to do with the actual thing being rendered, just the output), because it's just a typical PC rendering the visuals. Right now, if I had the means, I could go get someone to render that exact whale you saw in that AR video inside VR. But, again, you're allowing yourself to be duped into believing that AR is somehow rendering something you can't render in VR, which is quite simply wrong.
The one thing I can agree with, however, is that mixing both AR and VR, allowing developers to do whatever, whenever, be it full VR or AR, or even a mix, is the best of both worlds—and that is coming in time, so great. But, what it will likely do is make people forget just how limited and gimmicky AR actually is on its own (specifically when it comes to games and entertainment, as opposed to activity/productivity type applications). What they'll likely do is start attributing all the amazing things VR can do to AR too.
Basically, I think many of you guys are just going to have to see both technologies released as actual products in the near future before you realise that VR does exactly what it purports to do and AR is actually a bit useless for most of the things I presume you are imagining it's so amazing for (gaming, basically). Again, that's unless you truly believe that the AR aspects of something like Pokemon Go are the best gaming experience you seen in generations—which I personally think would be really sad and such a kick in the teeth for all the actual/genuinely high quality games out there (and I'm talking specifically just the AR parts, not the tracking software and whatever else that isn't AR at all).
Re: Video: Augmented Reality NES Gaming Finally Gives Us A Reason To Want Microsoft's HoloLens
@ThanosReXXX I've seen all of them and none of them impress me. Most of the stuff is a mixture of bullshot and just nothing particularly impressive, and certainly not for gaming (which is the main criteria I'm judging it by). Again, it's ultimately all just glorified HUDs/UIs for the most part that I've seen.
I really think people are drinking a lot of Kool-Aid here, at least if they're thinking about this tech in terms of actual gaming and entertainment as opposed to maybe overlaying some weather updates or telling you how far you run and other totally unexciting junk like that, which it will be great for (activity and productivity type stuff).
What I will continue to say until shown otherwise is that the very thing that makes AR what it is, overlaying it over the real world, is what's ultimately makes it generally boring and unimpressive to me. By its very design, it is always inherently limited by having to be augmented over the real world.
And I guess it comes down to this: People who think something like Pokemon Go is impressive because of the little bit of AR that it uses might find AR as a tech extremely exciting, but people who actually look for quality games in there, which do things in AR that could only be done in AR and are better for it, will likely not be particularly impressed with AR after seeing what VR is capable of—I'm one of those people.
For proper gaming and entertainment, I see AR as a total gimmick right now (although it's great for some of the more activity and productivity type stuff I alluded to earlier), and I have no doubt VR is going to revolutionise how we play games and enjoy entertainment (even if not everyone is going to want to stick a VR headset on their head and totally immersive themselves in these virtual worlds; but those are the same people who likely don't play on proper consoles right now either, which isn't us, so that's basically a mute point).
Note: I'm not questioning the impressiveness of the technology at work here, in either case—it's all impressive stuff technically (the video where AR objects can subtly move stuff in the real world is neat). I actually think the tech in something like Magic Leap is pretty cool, but I assert we'll mostly be using it to check stats and graphs projected onto a wall at the end of the day, or view projected computer screens, or look at floating heart-rate monitors while we're running and cycling, or looking at floating "holographic" maps, and other activity/productivity stuff like that—and I really don't give a toss about that kind of thing.
Re: Video: Augmented Reality NES Gaming Finally Gives Us A Reason To Want Microsoft's HoloLens
@aaronsullivan AR is like gaming on an iPhone; VR is like gaming on a PS4. There may or may not be more people who ultimately use AR—it's up for debate—but VR is simply a better gaming and entertainment platform from every single thing I have ever seen of both technologies. And we're on a gaming site, not some running site or whatever, so that is pretty much the only thing I care about right now. There's very little stuff I've seen on AR that makes it a truly compelling gaming or entertainment platform, and almost everything I've seen that is kinda cool on it doesn't really need the AR aspect to be so, such as the games in the video above (which don't actually use the AR in any way at all), or Pokemon Go (I'd argue it could be just as much fun with the App showing normal game graphics with no AR but still making you go outside and stuff to actually find the Pokemon). With VR, however, there's stuff you can do there that gives you experiences you basically could not have with pretty much any other medium (and certainly none we can anywhere near practically use just now), and they're better experiences for it (like actually standing directly inside some full scale alien world that's wrapped all around you in 360 degrees).
Re: Hardware Review: PocketCHIP
The idea's great! The devices is FUGLY!
Re: Monster Boy's Gamescom 2016 Trailer Looks Amazing, Nintendo Release Confirmed
Pretty sweet.