Not many can claim 25 years on the Internet! Join us in celebrating this milestone. Learn more about our history, and thank you for being a part of our community!
JoeJ said:
once you have that, new ideas and options appear just out of nothing. Don't you think?
I actually don't. Anything that can come from “new tech” is likely to be a gimmick, rather than truly new mechanics or gameplay (or even setting.)
Did the shadow tech from the original Doom 3 engine somehow change how horror games were made? No.
Did the seamless level loads from Skyrim somehow change how RPG quest chains work? No.
hplus0603 said:
I actually don't. Anything that can come from “new tech” is likely to be a gimmick, rather than truly new mechanics or gameplay (or even setting.) Did the shadow tech from the original Doom 3 engine somehow change how horror games were made? No. Did the seamless level loads from Skyrim somehow change how RPG quest chains work? No.
Does realtime GI or spatial audio enable new games? No.
Does character simulation or speech synthesis + procedural stories enable new games? Yes.
I'm also adding to the Doom example from before HL2 with physics simulation to the list historical proofs.
Adding physics adds new kinds of games. Adding procedural stories adds new kinds of games. So, yes, some tech can enable new kinds of games! But the ones listed look, to me, more like extensions of current tech, rather than gameplay-enabling new tech.
It's up to you to prove me wrong and create the next billion-dollar franchise, and when you do, I will say I was wrong and congratulate you on your foresight and success!
I'll take the wager. : )
But with some changes: You do not evaluate by billion dollar success, but only from your personal opinion.
It will take some time. Til then, gaming won't be a billion dollar business anymore.
JoeJ said:
Til then, gaming won't be a billion dollar business anymore.
You just need two major console games to get to a billion dollars these days, so I don't understand the reasoning behind that statement at all.
hplus0603 said:
You just need two major console games to get to a billion dollars these days, so I don't understand the reasoning behind that statement at all.
Never mind. I just think, i'f i'll be able to work on a game at all, it will take really many years to show off. (We'll probably see the robotics features i have in mind long before that, and i'll lose the wager.)
However, after that time i guess AAA will rarely still exist, and instead we'll see more but smaller studios, making more but smaller games. The return of A and AA, millions not billions.
Average gamer is 35? They may even serve this niche, and offer grown up games instead power fantasy for teens. :D
As you see, wishful thinking to no end. ; )
JoeJ said:
after that time i guess AAA will rarely still exist, and instead we'll see more but smaller studios, making more but smaller games
That's not the trajectory of history, in any venue, be it book publishing, music venues, theme parks, movies, or games.
If you know some economic theory I've missed that would counteract this (other than “global warming collapses the global food supply chain, so everyone just lives in little disconnected villages,”) then let's hear it!
Btw, that global warming thing seems more likely than the metaverse being a place where almost everybody lives almost all the time in the next 30 years IMO. In that timeframe, I give the former a 5% chance, and the latter a 0.05% chance. And the main reason the global warming is only at 5%, is that it might take 50 years to get there, if that's where we're going :-/
hplus0603 said:
If you know some economic theory I've missed that would counteract this
‘Titanic’, for example :D
