Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Take Two


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
23 replies to this topic

#21 Landfish   Members   -  Reputation: 288

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 24 June 2000 - 06:06 PM

The only fact here is this: We at the forefront of a medium that has exceedingly few rules. Even if you don''t believe games are any kind of medium, you still have to admit this. We just don''t know what is the "right" answer or the "wrong" answer; we don''t even have a firm grasp on the questions yet.

Some of us have decided to ask questions about interactivity. Some have asked questions of reality. Some have asked questions about narrative. It is up to us, the developers, to forge the rules of this new medium. We are not only developing individual games, but each game we make adds to the wealth of techniques and content in the medium. So we are developing the medium.

There is no rule that states "we cannot go in different directions." I for one, would love to see how those developers who aim for complete interactivity fair. I think that due to the variety of different but EFFECTIVE techniques that could and will be used in games in the near future, much splitting and rejoining will occur in theory before we have something concrete. And even then, the "concrete" techniques will only exist to be smashed yet again by those who choose to ignore barriers.

Hows that for philosophy Kylotan?

When I take a stance like I did in this post, and it''s predecessor, I am trying to provoke a conversation. Don''t get me wrong, I''m not *pretending* to be ignorant. I really am. I want to see what is out there, what you guys think. I think many people on this site do a damn good job of learning these things with me.

Yeah, you are probably right. Vast speculation on a distant possible future is pretty irrelevant. But hey, maybe one day they''ll call me a "visionary!"

Sponsor:

#22 Paul Cunningham   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 25 June 2000 - 03:39 AM

quote:
Original post by Landfish
Some of us have decided to ask questions about interactivity. Some have asked questions of reality. Some have asked questions about narrative. It is up to us, the developers, to forge the rules of this new medium.


Well when we ask these questions on interactivity, narrative etc we are setting the foundations of computer games. We are saying that this is where we think its going, right?
The best thing to me about computer games is that there''s no head huncho like hollywood trying to control this medium.Every time i think of this i feel happy and relieved ;-). Which as you said LandFish, it leaves everything up to us to explore.

quote:

There is no rule that states "we cannot go in different directions." I for one, would love to see how those developers who aim for complete interactivity fair. I think that due to the variety of different but EFFECTIVE techniques that could and will be used in games in the near future, much splitting and rejoining will occur in theory before we have something concrete. And even then, the "concrete" techniques will only exist to be smashed yet again by those who choose to ignore barriers.


I don''t think there ever will be rules to making computer games as i believe its an open medium. It can be used for all sorts of purposes like entertainment, eductation, expression, communication (online rpgs) and more.

I''m starting to detest the term Interactive Entertainment, this term must have come from some one that''s probably never even played a game. I get angry thinking about it! :-( (nothing aimed at you LandFish) That''ll make a good debate for a new thread actually.

quote:

When I take a stance like I did in this post, and it''s predecessor, I am trying to provoke a conversation. Don''t get me wrong, I''m not *pretending* to be ignorant. I really am. I want to see what is out there, what you guys think. I think many people on this site do a damn good job of learning these things with me.

Yeah, you are probably right. Vast speculation on a distant possible future is pretty irrelevant. But hey, maybe one day they''ll call me a "visionary!"

(if you were ignorant then you couldn''t answer a question, could you? you''d simply lift your nose and change topic or some crap like that)

Visionary... isn''t that the next thing from initate :-) or is that after avatar. Well i got to say, you do a damn good job at "I am trying to provoke a conversation" /debate/civilized argument.

I call vast speculation on a possible future, wisdom. And we should all exercise it more oftem than not! Period.

[i could sit here typing this crap all night, its fun]



WE are their,
"Sons of the Free"

#23 Landfish   Members   -  Reputation: 288

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 25 June 2000 - 05:32 AM

Amen to that! If we ever have a Hollywoodlike nexus in the game industry telling us what to do, ZI''m so gone. Can you say, "video game underground?"

#24 Paul Cunningham   Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 26 June 2000 - 09:33 PM

quote:
Original post by Landfish

Amen to that! If we ever have a Hollywoodlike nexus in the game industry telling us what to do, ZI''m so gone. Can you say, "video game underground?"


As in "six feet" underground! I think thats what you meant.


WE are their,
"Sons of the Free"




Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS