What is "consolisation" and why does it exist? Or Simulated Skill v Player Skill - by SubJeff
SubJeff on 4/2/2011 at 23:47
I absolutely think that defining skills as Player and Simulated is important, and it is a spectrum even though there are no games that use pure Player Skill, though there are some that pure Simulated Skill (those that present no challenge). Until now the nature of controllers has meant that the mapping of actions across different platforms has been quite varied. The keyboard and mouse combination offered so much that the early D-pad controllers, like the NES ones, just couldn't.
For this reason console games never even tried to be like PC games, for the most part anyway. The gaming ethos was quite different. But with the current console controllers (all the way up to Move) being so close to being K&M equivalents we shouldn't see such a difference anymore.
The ability to action Simulated Skills was much rougher, more raw, before this generation of controllers and, I believe, led to the "I win" buttons. And this is why I think dumbing down was/is the fault of consoles - hence "consolitis". This isn't a platform "war" this is a discussion about the fine differences in gaming that are generated by platform differences.
And Malf - that Killzone 3 vid made the move look great for it. The deadzone size options were very interesting.
Malf on 5/2/2011 at 00:41
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
And Malf - that Killzone 3 vid made the move look great for it. The deadzone size options were very interesting.
There's a Move enabled demo coming out before the main event, so I'll give that a shot. If it convinces me, fine, but I'll withhold judgement for the time being.
Great demonstration vid though, wasn't it? We need more reviews like that, where they go into the technology in-depth.
Dresden on 5/2/2011 at 01:50
Are you insinuating that those were good controllers that people wanted to keep in the first place?
june gloom on 5/2/2011 at 02:04
Quote Posted by lost_soul
Consolization:
*round down textures and make them nice and blurry
*split the maps up into chunks smaller than the block of studio apartments in which I live
*remove any kind of customization from the game, besides control scheme selection
*make sure the fans can't modify or expand the PC game, by having everything stored in one big data file
*Make sure multiplayer is reliant on one central server, which the publisher will turn off in two years to get us to buy their next game
Anything I missed? Oh yeah!
*make sure you leave out some levels to sell them to the gamer later
You're a fucking idiot and you've brought down the level of discourse in this thread. You should be ashamed of yourself.
Renzatic on 5/2/2011 at 02:18
Quote Posted by Dresden
Are you insinuating that those were good controllers that people wanted to keep in the first place?
No, he's insinuating that controllers went from having a shitload of buttons down to 4. Which isn't exactly true, since only a rare occasional game on the Atari 5200-7800 ever took advantage of those multi-button bastards. Most only needed the joystick and one button.
Also, Malf's link has made me a console whore, because after seeing those Killzone 3 videos, I now want to play a console FPS*. That's pretty much it, people. I'm lost. There is no hope for me. Shed your tears and move on.
*but only with the PS move. I ain't takin no dual analog bullshit.
ZylonBane on 5/2/2011 at 02:40
Those keypad-laden controllers came to exist in an era when it looked like personal computers were going to be the future of home gaming. Remember the Coleco Adam? The numerous planned (
http://www.atarimuseum.com/videogames/consoles/2600/a3000.html) computer keyboard add-ons for the Atari 2600? The Atari 7800 (
http://www.atarimuseum.com/videogames/consoles/7800/7800keyboard.html) keyboard? The infamous Bally (
http://alteeve.com/~lance/Z-Grass.html) ZGrass keyboard? The Atari Jaguar controller, with its big keypad, was originally designed as a controller for the Atari Falcon computer.
So in this environment, when console makers were trying to ride the wave and make "computery" games, many of them responded by slapping a little keyboard onto their controllers. Another advantage of keypads is that more buttons allows game creators to write simpler UI code... just assign functions directly to buttons, instead of having to code up a menu. Back when 8K was considered a huge amount of ROM, this sort of space savings could make or break a game's ROM footprint.
So the keypad craze was a freak historical anomaly. Ironically -- or not -- modern controllers have about as many buttons now anyway, just spread all over instead of concentrated in a flat grid.
Dresden on 5/2/2011 at 03:09
Yeah but it isn't a good comparison. Remote style controllers were very awkward to use. Modern controllers usually aren't. The number of buttons has little to do with their success.
SubJeff on 5/2/2011 at 06:43
Quote Posted by Wormrat
Wait, you're saying that consolization happened
before these last couple generations, because those older controllers didn't have as many buttons as current ones? Consolization definitely started with the Xbox, when it finally became easy to port PC games without a total reworking.
No, I'm saying people got used to using console controllers which were perfectly adequate in the past. Then when consoles started getting PC ports galore (and vice versa/multiplatform development) it was a necessity to simplify the controls.
As to controller evolution:
Inline Image:
http://www.avengercontroller.com/images/IMG_0100.jpgSulphur on 5/2/2011 at 08:40
Quote Posted by ZylonBane
Because the arm-flailing body-tracking input method works best for primarily casual games. There's certainly a market for that, but it simply doesn't work for everything. It's inherently imprecise, physically tiring, logistically demanding (gotta clear out that space in front of the couch!), and severely limits the number of "verbs" that can be expressed to the game.
Mostly true, but a couple of those things depend on the implementation.
Accuracy: the Wiimote is quite imprecise, but I've used the Move, and it's quite good when it comes to accuracy. It's definitely not a problem aiming and shooting and pulling off headshots with it.
Verbs: Kinect has no buttons, so it's hard to see how exactly they're going to retrofit older games with it because the game 'verbs' are all going to be limited to gestures and will inherently never be as fast as a button press; so the only future for hardcore Kinect games is a fusion of gestures and the 360 pad.
Move's lost a trigger or so in translation, but the buttons are mostly intact with the 'nunchuk' or navigation controller in your left hand. And it's arguable that you have enough verbs for whatever's missing with gestures, like KZ3's reloading with a quick clockwise/counter-clockwise flick of the wrist (though you can still reload with the square button).
Logistics and physical exertion are issues (with Kinect being the more demanding system for both), but in the case of the Wii and Move physical exertion is minimised by just sitting down and playing.
But I think this is all besides the point. You have the three biggest competitors in the console space all throwing down for motion controls and making wads of money out of them. If it turns out that people will buy this stuff because of the 'cool' factor and sales are a) sustainable and b) profitable, they're going to run with motion controls into the next generation. Maybe not as a replacement for a standard controller, but definitely as part of the package in the box when you buy one of their next-gen consoles.
Eldron on 5/2/2011 at 09:24
I guess this is what the simulation people had in mind when freespace came out.
Game simplified for the masses.
