E3 2015

[MilitantRadical 2,844]

Well E3 is right around the corner and I'm hyped as usual.

 

Do you get hyped for E3?

 

What games do you want to see the most?

 

I really hope Sony finally shows Last Guardian, but I don't have my hopes too high. I also really want to see Kingdom Hearts 3 and some more FF15 wouldn't hurt either. Oh yeah, and anything new from Rockstar.

[The Avatar 1,089]

All aboard the hype train!

 

As usual, I only care about what Nintendo has to offer. I hope they do more Robot Chicken clips in their Digital Event like last year. Those were hilarious.

 

Other things I would like to see:

 

- GameCube games on Wii U Virtual Console

- a new Metroid game

- more on Mario Maker

- more on Star Fox Wii U

- additional DLC for Smash Bros. (stages, fighters, etc.)

- a new Pokemon game

- Super Mario Galaxy 3?

- info on the successor to Club Nintendo

- more on Yoshi's Woolly World

 

More than any of the previous things, I wish Nintendo would reveal more about Zelda Wii U and Fire Emblem If, but it has already been stated that these games won't be presented at E3.

[MilitantRadical 2,844]

More than any of the previous things, I wish Nintendo would reveal more about Zelda Wii U and Fire Emblem If, but it has already been stated that these games won't be presented at E3.

 

Aw, no Zelda? Why not?

[The Avatar 1,089]

More than any of the previous things, I wish Nintendo would reveal more about Zelda Wii U and Fire Emblem If, but it has already been stated that these games won't be presented at E3.

 

Aw, no Zelda? Why not?

 

The developers delayed it to a 2016 release so they could continue to add new features as they come up with new ideas, and Nintendo has said they will only be showcasing 2015 games at E3. A Nintendo rep told IGN this: "As Mr. Aonuma announced, The Legend of Zelda game for Wii U is no longer targeted as a 2015 release. Rather than sticking to a specific schedule, the team wants to make this the most complete and the best game it can possibly be. The new launch timing has not yet been determined. Because we’d like to focus on developing the game, we aren’t planning on showing it at this year’s E3, where we will be highlighting games launching in 2015. We will let you know when we’re ready to share more specifics."

 

I'm happy that the team is focusing on making the game the best it can be, but I wish they would at least give us another trailer or something at E3.

[MilitantRadical 2,844]

 

More than any of the previous things, I wish Nintendo would reveal more about Zelda Wii U and Fire Emblem If, but it has already been stated that these games won't be presented at E3.

 

Aw, no Zelda? Why not?

 

The developers delayed it to a 2016 release so they could continue to add new features as they come up with new ideas, and Nintendo has said they will only be showcasing 2015 games at E3. A Nintendo rep told IGN this: "As Mr. Aonuma announced, The Legend of Zelda game for Wii U is no longer targeted as a 2015 release. Rather than sticking to a specific schedule, the team wants to make this the most complete and the best game it can possibly be. The new launch timing has not yet been determined. Because we’d like to focus on developing the game, we aren’t planning on showing it at this year’s E3, where we will be highlighting games launching in 2015. We will let you know when we’re ready to share more specifics."

 

I'm happy that the team is focusing on making the game the best it can be, but I wish they would at least give us another trailer or something at E3.

 

 

Hopefully they show the new Star Fox. I don't own a WiiU and it wouldn't make me want to own one, but I've been wanting to see a proper Star Fox since the N64. I think it is one of their best properties and they don't do enough with it.

[Snugies 91]

The new Zelda will sell Wii u's. I'm excited for the new Zelda the world will be huge.  

[LexusInfernus 908]

Get hyped by E3? Hell no, I think I've learned by now. All those hyped games never manage to deliver what they promised. 

 

So then what would my ideal E3 look like? 

 

More details for Mass Effect 4 get revealed and launch date is set around March 2016. 

 

More details for Mirrors Edge 2 get revealed and launch date is announced. 

 

EA announces a new strategy that focuses more on quality and staying in touch with the community. 

 

Ubisoft announces new Rainbow Six game that isn't an open world or multiplayer focused game, but goes back to the semi hardcore tactical first person shooting. 

 

Ubisoft announces it will stop developing open world games aside from Assassins Creed. 

 

Ubisoft announces it has learned how to make good open world games, as opposed to the drivel they currently produce. 

 

Far Cry 5 gets announced and following earlier announcements is no longer an open world game. 

 

Beyond Good and Evil revealed, release date set for next year, also won't be a shitty open world game.

 

Square Enix reveals more details about next Deus Ex game. 

 

Square Enix announces Final Fantasy 9 port for PC

 

Microsoft announces that the Halo Masterchief collection gets a port for PC, sets release date to same release day as Halo 5. 

 

Microsoft announces new business strategy that involves doing more stuff for PC. 

 

Microsoft announces a proper sequel for Alan Wake.

 

Sony announces new Killzone for PS4 that lets you play as Helghast. 

 

Rockstar announces new GTA V singleplayer only DLC/add on involving more heists. 

 

Eugen announces new game in the Wargame series, set to be worked on right after they finish Act of Aggression.

 

TES 6 gets announced by Bethesda. 

 

Doom 4 gets announced by Id. 

 

Sega reveals new Total War set between 1930-1990

 

Sega reveals new Warhammer Fantasy Strategy game. 

 

Sega reveals new Warhammer 40k Strategy game. 

 

Warhammer 40k rpg gets revealed. 

 

Warhammer 40k shooter gets revealed. 

 

Warhammer 40k Battlefleet Gothic gets a game. 

 

All Warhammer games turn out to be very promising, being made by quality studios. 

 

GW turns up and surprises everyone by announcing that they will no longer be farming out the Warhammer license to people who can't make games, no more mobile games. 

 

 

I know I know, its more likely that the exact opposite will happen at E3, but a man can dream right?

 

 

EDIT: It turns out that I didnt need to wait for the E3 for half of these things. Awesome

[MilitantRadical 2,844]

Get hyped by E3? Hell no, I think I've learned by now. All those hyped games never manage to deliver what they promised.

 

No, not hyped by E3. Hyped for E3. Sure a lot of promises are made and then broken but it's been like that since the dawn of E3. I'm excited for the shows regardless of the fact that they're once again going to show things that "look better" than the final product.

 

More details for Mass Effect 4 get revealed and launch date is set around March 2016.

 

Would be cool but I doubt the game is ready for a Q1 or Q2 2016 release.

 

More details for Mirrors Edge 2 get revealed and launch date is announced.

 

As a huge fan of Mirror's Edge 1 I'm excited to see more of the Mirror's Edge reboot, but I'm also a bit skeptical. I need to see something that really blows me away; something like the original Mirror's Edge trailer. So far nothing they've shown has impressed me. Also, it's going to be an open world game.

 

Ubisoft announces new Rainbow Six game that isn't an open world or multiplayer focused game, but goes back to the semi hardcore tactical first person shooting. 

 

Does the new Rainbow Six not have single player?

 

Ubisoft announces it will stop developing open world games aside from Assassins Creed. 

 

Ubisoft announces it has learned how to make good open world games, as opposed to the drivel they currently produce. 

 

Far Cry 5 gets announced and following earlier announcements is no longer an open world game. 

 

Beyond Good and Evil revealed, release date set for next year, also won't be a shitty open world game.

 

Hah! Never going to happen. Well, they might announce a new Beyond Good and Evil but chances are very slim. The original just didn't sell enough and even though it has a cult following Ubi might be afraid of investing in something that isn't for a mass market. Then again they did release Child of Light so maybe there is some hope.

 

Microsoft announces that the Halo Masterchief collection gets a port for PC, sets release date to same release day as Halo 5. 

 

Dream on lol.

 

Microsoft announces new business strategy that involves doing more stuff for PC.

 

I'm sure they'll pay a lot of lip service to the PC but you can't guarantee they'll mean it.

 

Microsoft announces a proper sequel for Alan Wake.

 

Alan Wake was an awesome and underrated game, but I don't think we'll see that until Remedy releases Quantum Break in 2016.

 

Sony announces new Killzone for PS4 that lets you play as Helghast.

 

I'd much rather see a new IP from Guerrilla Games.

 

Rockstar announces new GTA V singleplayer only DLC/add on involving more heists.

 

That would be pretty darn cool.

[LexusInfernus 908]

No, not hyped by E3. Hyped for E3. Sure a lot of promises are made and then broken but it's been like that since the dawn of E3. I'm excited for the shows regardless of the fact that they're once again going to show things that "look better" than the final product.

Eh, I see what you mean, fair enough. The shows themselves are pretty fun to follow. And see how Sony and Microsoft are dissing each other. Also, perhaps that this will make my choice for next gen console a bit easier, because right now, neither of them really attracts me. 

 

 

As a huge fan of Mirror's Edge 1 I'm excited to see more of the Mirror's Edge reboot, but I'm also a bit skeptical. I need to see something that really blows me away; something like the original Mirror's Edge trailer. So far nothing they've shown has impressed me. Also, it's going to be an open world game.

 

I agree and I'm a little worried about it being an open world game. I'm mostly afraid that EA will follow Ubisofts way of designing open worlds and we just get a big map with 'content' vomited all over it. But who knows, perhaps when they reveal more of the game it turns out to be good. 

 

 

Does the new Rainbow Six not have single player?

 

So far Ubisoft has focused on talking about multiplayer. I think there is a single player but I haven't seen anything from it. 

 

Hah! Never going to happen. Well, they might announce a new Beyond Good and Evil but chances are very slim. The original just didn't sell enough and even though it has a cult following Ubi might be afraid of investing in something that isn't for a mass market. Then again they did release Child of Light so maybe there is some hope.

 

Eh if they just announce Beyond Good and Evil 2 I'm happy. And Ubisoft is one of the few big publishers that occasionally tries something smaller, indeed like Child of Light. As long as they don't give BGE some massive bloated budget that needs to sell millions in order to break even I think were good. 

 

 

Alan Wake was an awesome and underrated game, but I don't think we'll see that until Remedy releases Quantum Break in 2016.

 

Actually I read somewhere that they are already in talks with people about setting up a sequel for Alan Wake. So while its not officially announced and they gotta finish Quantum Break first, at least we know they are sorta working to get a sequel lined up. 

 

I'd much rather see a new IP from Guerrilla Games.

 

I don't know. I personally think that as far as spectacle shooters go, Killzone is actually one of the best. And I love the setting, I just wish they did more with it. 

[MilitantRadical 2,844]

 

No, not hyped by E3. Hyped for E3. Sure a lot of promises are made and then broken but it's been like that since the dawn of E3. I'm excited for the shows regardless of the fact that they're once again going to show things that "look better" than the final product.

Eh, I see what you mean, fair enough. The shows themselves are pretty fun to follow. And see how Sony and Microsoft are dissing each other. Also, perhaps that this will make my choice for next gen console a bit easier, because right now, neither of them really attracts me.

 

I really hope Sony keeps it classy this E3 and doesn't take any jabs at Microsoft. It was funny in 2013 after Microsoft totally botched the XB1 one launch but right now Sony doesn't have that much to brag about. I mean they did release a couple of big games in 2014 (The Order and Bloodborne), they are technically still ahead in terms of sales, but that's it.

 

I also hope that Sony doesn't spend too much time talking about Project Morpheus because if you ask me the VR trend is a dud. It's going to be just like motion controls - a gimmick. Very few gamers are going to buy a headset on top of a console, TV, and speakers.

 

 

As a huge fan of Mirror's Edge 1 I'm excited to see more of the Mirror's Edge reboot, but I'm also a bit skeptical. I need to see something that really blows me away; something like the original Mirror's Edge trailer. So far nothing they've shown has impressed me. Also, it's going to be an open world game.

 

I agree and I'm a little worried about it being an open world game. I'm mostly afraid that EA will follow Ubisofts way of designing open worlds and we just get a big map with 'content' vomited all over it. But who knows, perhaps when they reveal more of the game it turns out to be good. 

 

The thing that worries me is that so far they haven't really shown how they're going to improve on the 1st one. I really wish they focused a bit more on 1st person hand to hand combat and some sleeker parkour. Also, of all the 1st person franchises, I've always thought that the world of Mirror's Edge could lend itself very well to multiplayer and modes that aren't all about shooting each other.

 

 

Alan Wake was an awesome and underrated game, but I don't think we'll see that until Remedy releases Quantum Break in 2016.

Actually I read somewhere that they are already in talks with people about setting up a sequel for Alan Wake. So while its not officially announced and they gotta finish Quantum Break first, at least we know they are sorta working to get a sequel lined up.

 

Yeah, but who knows if they'll follow through. I'd personally love to see AW2 but I think it's a bit risky for Remedy since the first one wasn't that successful. I guess if they make it multiplat they can mitigate the risk a bit.

 

 

I'd much rather see a new IP from Guerrilla Games.

 

I don't know. I personally think that as far as spectacle shooters go, Killzone is actually one of the best. And I love the setting, I just wish they did more with it. 

 

I'm mostly neutral when it comes to Killzone. Don't love it, don't hate it. But I do hate to see when good studios focus on making only one franchise. I want to see Guerrilla Games take a small break from the franchise and do something new. There are rumors that they have some MMORPG in the works, but that wouldn't interest me anyway.

 

One thing I really want to see at E3 is a release for Rime. I've been anticipating that game for a while. I also hope there is some more info on No Man's Sky cause my hype for that game is falling fast.

[LexusInfernus 908]

I really hope Sony keeps it classy this E3 and doesn't take any jabs at Microsoft. It was funny in 2013 after Microsoft totally botched the XB1 one launch but right now Sony doesn't have that much to brag about. I mean they did release a couple of big games in 2014 (The Order and Bloodborne), they are technically still ahead in terms of sales, but that's it.

 

I also hope that Sony doesn't spend too much time talking about Project Morpheus because if you ask me the VR trend is a dud. It's going to be just like motion controls - a gimmick. Very few gamers are going to buy a headset on top of a console, TV, and speakers.

And The Order was a bit of a let down for most people, given how utterly generic and mediocre it was. 

 

I'm kinda on the fence about VR. I think it could be a very nice addition to certain games if implemented correctly. I mean, how cool would it be to play say Ace Combat with a VR headset, putting you literally in the cockpit of a jet fighter. Or in games like ArmA (the hardcore players already use headtracking devices to allow for greater situational awareness in game without having to wave your gun around). Or just for experimental stuff. But I'm also worried about motion sickness and the cost. I'm not willing to ever spend more than maybe a 100 euros on something like a VR headset at best. And when Im hearing talks about setting up one of those sort of walking pads that you need as well as a VR headset I'm starting to fear that its just entertainment that only the 1% is willing and able to buy. 

 

 

The thing that worries me is that so far they haven't really shown how they're going to improve on the 1st one. I really wish they focused a bit more on 1st person hand to hand combat and some sleeker parkour. Also, of all the 1st person franchises, I've always thought that the world of Mirror's Edge could lend itself very well to multiplayer and modes that aren't all about shooting each other.

 

Eh, the first one already was damn near perfect in a lot of ways. All they need to do is make the game itself a few hours longer, perhaps do a better story, and maybe make it less impossible to disarm enemies. Also you're right, you could do some truly fantastic multiplayer in that game that doesn't involve shooting. Oh man. you put ideas in my head and now Im probably gonna be disappointed if they are not in there. 

 

 

Yeah, but who knows if they'll follow through. I'd personally love to see AW2 but I think it's a bit risky for Remedy since the first one wasn't that successful. I guess if they make it multiplat they can mitigate the risk a bit.

 

Can they go multiplatform? Isn't the Alan Wake property owned by Microsoft? 

 

 

One thing I really want to see at E3 is a release for Rime. I've been anticipating that game for a while. I also hope there is some more info on No Man's Sky cause my hype for that game is falling fast.

 

Yeah we need to see more information about that game. And actual information, not those trailers that look great but in no way tell you how the game actually plays. 

[MilitantRadical 2,844]

 

I really hope Sony keeps it classy this E3 and doesn't take any jabs at Microsoft. It was funny in 2013 after Microsoft totally botched the XB1 one launch but right now Sony doesn't have that much to brag about. I mean they did release a couple of big games in 2014 (The Order and Bloodborne), they are technically still ahead in terms of sales, but that's it.

 

I also hope that Sony doesn't spend too much time talking about Project Morpheus because if you ask me the VR trend is a dud. It's going to be just like motion controls - a gimmick. Very few gamers are going to buy a headset on top of a console, TV, and speakers.

And The Order was a bit of a let down for most people, given how utterly generic and mediocre it was.

 

Yeah, I played it and thought it sucked too. I just meant it's a big game in terms of it being a big budget, flashy, AAA style game. Sony is probably disappointed with the sales, but I still think they consider it to be an important new franchise. Regardless of how good it was, it was still important for Sony's lineup and some people seemed to like it at least.

 

 

I'm kinda on the fence about VR. I think it could be a very nice addition to certain games if implemented correctly. I mean, how cool would it be to play say Ace Combat with a VR headset, putting you literally in the cockpit of a jet fighter. Or in games like ArmA (the hardcore players already use headtracking devices to allow for greater situational awareness in game without having to wave your gun around). Or just for experimental stuff. But I'm also worried about motion sickness and the cost. I'm not willing to ever spend more than maybe a 100 euros on something like a VR headset at best. And when Im hearing talks about setting up one of those sort of walking pads that you need as well as a VR headset I'm starting to fear that its just entertainment that only the 1% is willing and able to buy.

 

I only think it's a niche thing. I'm sure it could be implemented correctly. I just question how many people are actually interested. Sure, some hardcore gamers maybe. But will it appeal to a mass market? I don't think so.

 

 

The thing that worries me is that so far they haven't really shown how they're going to improve on the 1st one. I really wish they focused a bit more on 1st person hand to hand combat and some sleeker parkour. Also, of all the 1st person franchises, I've always thought that the world of Mirror's Edge could lend itself very well to multiplayer and modes that aren't all about shooting each other.

 

Eh, the first one already was damn near perfect in a lot of ways. All they need to do is make the game itself a few hours longer, perhaps do a better story, and maybe make it less impossible to disarm enemies. Also you're right, you could do some truly fantastic multiplayer in that game that doesn't involve shooting. Oh man. you put ideas in my head and now Im probably gonna be disappointed if they are not in there. 

 

It's like that for me too cause I've been dreaming of what the sequel could be like for a very long time.

 

 

Yeah, but who knows if they'll follow through. I'd personally love to see AW2 but I think it's a bit risky for Remedy since the first one wasn't that successful. I guess if they make it multiplat they can mitigate the risk a bit.

 

Can they go multiplatform? Isn't the Alan Wake property owned by Microsoft?

 

There is a slim chance. Some people are speculating that it depends on the success of Quantum Break and if Microsoft will want to keep Remedy as a 1st party developer. Paul Tassi at Forbes talks about it in this article.

 

 

One thing I really want to see at E3 is a release for Rime. I've been anticipating that game for a while. I also hope there is some more info on No Man's Sky cause my hype for that game is falling fast.

 

Yeah we need to see more information about that game. And actual information, not those trailers that look great but in no way tell you how the game actually plays. 

 

I've got a feeling that No Man's Sky isn't going to live up to the hype. But time will tell I guess.

[LexusInfernus 908]

I only think it's a niche thing. I'm sure it could be implemented correctly. I just question how many people are actually interested. Sure, some hardcore gamers maybe. But will it appeal to a mass market? I don't think so.

 

I've got a feeling that No Man's Sky isn't going to live up to the hype. But time will tell I guess.

I think it depends. If it doesn't cost much extra, can be implemented in a wide number of games and significantly enhances the way you experience those games, it could have mass appeal. Also, unlike say motion control, this gimmick is rather unobtrusive. You don't have to flail around to get stuff done in game. I think thats why a lot of people didn't care much for motion control, when they want to play a game, they just want to sit down, get a controller/keyboard and mouse, and just play the game. They didn't want to wave their arms around. So motion controls sort of fundamentally clash with how people want to play their game. Something like this you just put on your head and your done. You can still sit on your chair or couch, you still have a controller or keyboard and mouse, you don't have to move around a lot, so it matches and enhances the way most people play their game. 

 

Of course, if the thing costs way to much and only a handful of games use it, then it won't succeed. But I do think it has the potential for mass market appeal. 

 

And sadly I agree with you on No Man's Sky. But who knows, maybe they got more publisher support since the initial reaction was promising. 

[MilitantRadical 2,844]

I think it depends. If it doesn't cost much extra, can be implemented in a wide number of games and significantly enhances the way you experience those games, it could have mass appeal. Also, unlike say motion control, this gimmick is rather unobtrusive. You don't have to flail around to get stuff done in game. I think thats why a lot of people didn't care much for motion control, when they want to play a game, they just want to sit down, get a controller/keyboard and mouse, and just play the game. They didn't want to wave their arms around. So motion controls sort of fundamentally clash with how people want to play their game. Something like this you just put on your head and your done. You can still sit on your chair or couch, you still have a controller or keyboard and mouse, you don't have to move around a lot, so it matches and enhances the way most people play their game.

 

I agree, cost is a major factor. However, one of the big problems I see with VR is that it's so isolating. If video games want to be as ubiquitous as TV shows and movies I think they have to be more inclusive. Movies and TV shows bring people together, but a device like the Occulus Rift or Project Morpheus divides people; it puts barriers between them. With VR, you can't just play a game with your wife, girlfriend, boyfriend, or friends around. Well you can, but you can't share the game with them. They can't sit down with you and watch or play. This is why I think Wii was so successful - not because of the motion controls, but because it promised experiences that could be shared with friends and family. Also, with VR you can't see what's happening outside of the game and I can guarantee this will lead to a lot of accidents (spilled drinks, knocking stuff over). I'm imagining some story right now of a person who has their house burglarized while they are in the living room with their VR headset and earphones on lol.

 

Another limiting factor is that games have to be specifically developed for the device. I don't know if publishers and developers are willing to invest to make their games compatible. Why spend all that money to make your game compatible with a device that only 10% of gamers own? So it's going to be very hard to create that initial market. Well, there is already a small base of VR enthusiasts, but that doesn't translate to a mass market - yet.

 

And sadly I agree with you on No Man's Sky. But who knows, maybe they got more publisher support since the initial reaction was promising. 

 

I think Sony is giving them a lot of support which may have been part of the timed exclusive deal they made, but who knows. My biggest fear is that there isn't anything to do in the game. I mean so far we've seen the exploration aspect and some space dogfights, but I don't know how it will hold people's interests for long. They've said that you will rarely encounter friends or people in the world which strikes me as kind of strange. It's an online game that doesn't seem to have a social aspect and I think that will be a turn off to most people. What's the point of an online game if you don't interact with your friends?

[LexusInfernus 908]

I agree, cost is a major factor. However, one of the big problems I see with VR is that it's so isolating. If video games want to be as ubiquitous as TV shows and movies I think they have to be more inclusive. Movies and TV shows bring people together, but a device like the Occulus Rift or Project Morpheus divides people; it puts barriers between them. With VR, you can't just play a game with your wife, girlfriend, boyfriend, or friends around. Well you can, but you can't share the game with them. They can't sit down with you and watch or play. This is why I think Wii was so successful - not because of the motion controls, but because it promised experiences that could be shared with friends and family. Also, with VR you can't see what's happening outside of the game and I can guarantee this will lead to a lot of accidents (spilled drinks, knocking stuff over). I'm imagining some story right now of a person who has their house burglarized while they are in the living room with their VR headset and earphones on lol.

 

Another limiting factor is that games have to be specifically developed for the device. I don't know if publishers and developers are willing to invest to make their games compatible. Why spend all that money to make your game compatible with a device that only 10% of gamers own? So it's going to be very hard to create that initial market. Well, there is already a small base of VR enthusiasts, but that doesn't translate to a mass market - yet.

Hmm, it helped the Wii get a lot of success in a completely different market, namely the market of parents/grandmothers/little kids, aka the people that aren't 'gamers'. And it showed because most people that bought the Wii never bought anything more than Wii sports. And they never bothered to move on to the WiiU which was aimed more at 'gamers'. And I think there is still a decent sized market of people that play games mostly on their own or who 'share' their game experiences through Twitch/Youtube. Even the people that are married and like to play games with their wife/family might not be playing games together all the time. 

 

In the end though, I think its success depends on three things. The first is cost, the second is how many games support it and the third is whether it actually adds something to the experience. If its to expensive, no one is going to bother. If there aren't enough games that support it, no one is going to bother. And if the games that do support it aren't substantially better with a VR headset, no one is going to bother. I think the third thing is pretty much covered, but the first and second are the real problems. 

 

 

I think Sony is giving them a lot of support which may have been part of the timed exclusive deal they made, but who knows. My biggest fear is that there isn't anything to do in the game. I mean so far we've seen the exploration aspect and some space dogfights, but I don't know how it will hold people's interests for long. They've said that you will rarely encounter friends or people in the world which strikes me as kind of strange. It's an online game that doesn't seem to have a social aspect and I think that will be a turn off to most people. What's the point of an online game if you don't interact with your friends?

 

It depends on what you want people to do with your game. I thought the whole thing was meant as an exploration of an universe game, and not really a social experience like say EVE online. It makes sense that if you want people to explore an actual galaxy (we are talking about millions of planets then) its unlikely and counter to the game experience that you run into other people. Also, if you are simulating an entire galaxy, the computing requirements probably mean that no single console or pc can run the whole thing on their own. You probably need a bunch of servers to simulate the whole thing. 

[MilitantRadical 2,844]

 

I agree, cost is a major factor. However, one of the big problems I see with VR is that it's so isolating. If video games want to be as ubiquitous as TV shows and movies I think they have to be more inclusive. Movies and TV shows bring people together, but a device like the Occulus Rift or Project Morpheus divides people; it puts barriers between them. With VR, you can't just play a game with your wife, girlfriend, boyfriend, or friends around. Well you can, but you can't share the game with them. They can't sit down with you and watch or play. This is why I think Wii was so successful - not because of the motion controls, but because it promised experiences that could be shared with friends and family. Also, with VR you can't see what's happening outside of the game and I can guarantee this will lead to a lot of accidents (spilled drinks, knocking stuff over). I'm imagining some story right now of a person who has their house burglarized while they are in the living room with their VR headset and earphones on lol.

 

Another limiting factor is that games have to be specifically developed for the device. I don't know if publishers and developers are willing to invest to make their games compatible. Why spend all that money to make your game compatible with a device that only 10% of gamers own? So it's going to be very hard to create that initial market. Well, there is already a small base of VR enthusiasts, but that doesn't translate to a mass market - yet.

Hmm, it helped the Wii get a lot of success in a completely different market, namely the market of parents/grandmothers/little kids, aka the people that aren't 'gamers'. And it showed because most people that bought the Wii never bought anything more than Wii sports. And they never bothered to move on to the WiiU which was aimed more at 'gamers'.

 

You're right, but there are still a lot of core gamers who bought it because of what it promised despite that fact that it didn't deliver. Heck, even I considered buying one early on. I guess the price was also a huge factor cause it was pretty cheap compared to the other two consoles at launch.

 

And I think there is still a decent sized market of people that play games mostly on their own or who 'share' their game experiences through Twitch/Youtube. Even the people that are married and like to play games with their wife/family might not be playing games together all the time.

 

That's true. If I think about it I probably do 70-80% of my gaming alone (these days). Then again I'm not in a relationship and I know most people who are (the people I know) have trouble finding the time to game because it doesn't include their partner. Lets face it, despite that fact that 40-50% of "gamers" are women, most of them don't play core AAA games. Here is a neat little info-graph on gender and game preference (you may have already seen it).

 

Sharing media with your partner is a very important part of a relationship. Also, it is great when you can have someone sit with you and take turns playing a game. My brother and I do that once and a while and I love to do that when I have friends over. I remember Heavy Rain was a great game for having multiple people take turns (but it didn't sell that well so it doesn't really prove my theory). I just think a device or game that brings people together will always be more successful than one that separates people (physically).

 

I think Sony is giving them a lot of support which may have been part of the timed exclusive deal they made, but who knows. My biggest fear is that there isn't anything to do in the game. I mean so far we've seen the exploration aspect and some space dogfights, but I don't know how it will hold people's interests for long. They've said that you will rarely encounter friends or people in the world which strikes me as kind of strange. It's an online game that doesn't seem to have a social aspect and I think that will be a turn off to most people. What's the point of an online game if you don't interact with your friends?

It depends on what you want people to do with your game. I thought the whole thing was meant as an exploration of an universe game, and not really a social experience like say EVE online. It makes sense that if you want people to explore an actual galaxy (we are talking about millions of planets then) its unlikely and counter to the game experience that you run into other people. Also, if you are simulating an entire galaxy, the computing requirements probably mean that no single console or pc can run the whole thing on their own. You probably need a bunch of servers to simulate the whole thing. 

 

I suppose. I still think it's kind of strange to have an online game that doesn't have a social component. You're probably right about the game requiring a bunch of servers to run their fictional galaxy and I guess that's why it's online.

 

Did anyone see the Fallout 4 trailer? Is anyone interested in that game?

[LexusInfernus 908]

You're right, but there are still a lot of core gamers who bought it because of what it promised despite that fact that it didn't deliver. Heck, even I considered buying one early on. I guess the price was also a huge factor cause it was pretty cheap compared to the other two consoles at launch.

Thats true, I've had multiple friends who got one and then sold it in less than year again because they didn't like it. But, I think we should ask what it was that the Wii didn't deliver for core gamers. Was it the motion control that they didn't like, or the lack of interesting games. I know that for my friends, it was the lack of interesting games that killed it. They preferred an Xbox 360 and a PS3 because those had Halo and Uncharted. And also better graphics. 

 

 

That's true. If I think about it I probably do 70-80% of my gaming alone (these days). Then again I'm not in a relationship and I know most people who are (the people I know) have trouble finding the time to game because it doesn't include their partner. Lets face it, despite that fact that 40-50% of "gamers" are women, most of them don't play core AAA games. Here is a neat little info-graph on gender and game preference (you may have already seen it).

 

Sharing media with your partner is a very important part of a relationship. Also, it is great when you can have someone sit with you and take turns playing a game. My brother and I do that once and a while and I love to do that when I have friends over. I remember Heavy Rain was a great game for having multiple people take turns (but it didn't sell that well so it doesn't really prove my theory). I just think a device or game that brings people together will always be more successful than one that separates people (physically).

 

I don't think anyone ever marketed Heavy Rain as a game you should play with friends. More as a game with a serious story and uncanny valley realistic graphics. Also, I agree, something that brings people together is probably more successful than something that separates. Still, it doesn't mean it has to be unsuccessful. 

 

Oh well, I guess time will tell. 

 

Did anyone see the Fallout 4 trailer? Is anyone interested in that game?

 

Yes and no. But that has more to do with personal preference than the trailer itself. I've never been a fan of the Fallout franchise (or the post apocalyptic genre in general). I would have rather seen an TES 6. 

[MilitantRadical 2,844]

 

You're right, but there are still a lot of core gamers who bought it because of what it promised despite that fact that it didn't deliver. Heck, even I considered buying one early on. I guess the price was also a huge factor cause it was pretty cheap compared to the other two consoles at launch.

Thats true, I've had multiple friends who got one and then sold it in less than year again because they didn't like it.

 

Hah! I had a friend who got a WII and the box just sat in his living room for at least half a year before he even opened it. I would always tease him by saying he'd never open it.

 

I think we should ask what it was that the Wii didn't deliver for core gamers. Was it the motion control that they didn't like, or the lack of interesting games. I know that for my friends, it was the lack of interesting games that killed it. They preferred an Xbox 360 and a PS3 because those had Halo and Uncharted. And also better graphics. 

 

It probably was more a lack of games that appeal to core gamers then it was the motion controls. However, the games that were marketed to that demographic and used motion controls were pretty bad. Microsoft and Sony both tried their hand at a form of motion controls and pretty much failed. Granted none of the games they made were really good but I think that kind of highlights the limitations of motion controls themselves.

 

I don't think anyone ever marketed Heavy Rain as a game you should play with friends.

 

It never was, but it should have been.

 

 

Square Enix just announced FFXV isn't going to be at E3. Me so sad . At least they said they're focused on actually making the game instead of making a trailer for E3.

[LexusInfernus 908]

It probably was more a lack of games that appeal to core gamers then it was the motion controls. However, the games that were marketed to that demographic and used motion controls were pretty bad. Microsoft and Sony both tried their hand at a form of motion controls and pretty much failed. Granted none of the games they made were really good but I think that kind of highlights the limitations of motion controls themselves.

 

It never was, but it should have been.

 

Square Enix just announced FFXV isn't going to be at E3. Me so sad . At least they said they're focused on actually making the game instead of making a trailer for E3.

 

I agree about the motion controls. I should add that they never really made games (except Nintendo sports) where motion controls transformed normal games into something more, which couldn't be achieved with normal controls. I mean, even if you port regular shooters like CoD to the Wii and make it work with motion controls, the game doesn't get better because of it. Wii sports on the other hand, gets a lot more fun if you swing around. The same I suppose is true for 3D games. Aside from costly hardware requirements, all it does is make games look a little different, but it doesn't affect how you can play the game. In that sense, I do think something like the Oculus Rift has a bit of an advantage. It can quite easily massively expand the way you play or experience certain games (provided that you mitigate the earlier stated effects of increased seclusion of players). 

 

I guess motion controls could have been more than just a gimmick if the games industry hadn't tried to just make regular games and jam motion controls in there somewhere, but instead designed games around motion controls from the ground up. But thats the problem with the current games industry, its incredibly conservative. 

 

And meh, I don't think putting FFXV on E3 would have really added anything. They pretty much told people everything there is to know about the game already. I suppose it would have been nice if they had showed off a new area or something but meh. 

[MilitantRadical 2,844]

And meh, I don't think putting FFXV on E3 would have really added anything. They pretty much told people everything there is to know about the game already. I suppose it would have been nice if they had showed off a new area or something but meh. 

 

I've been anticipating this game since 2006 so I get excited about any new news. Thankfully they're releasing an update to the Duscae demo which in a way is kind of better than showing something at E3.

[LexusInfernus 908]

I've been anticipating this game since 2006 so I get excited about any new news. Thankfully they're releasing an update to the Duscae demo which in a way is kind of better than showing something at E3.

 

I must say I haven't really been invested in a Final Fantasy game since 10 was such a huge letdown for me. Although I admit this one looks pretty cool, and I like the idea behind it. Perhaps I'll try this one when it comes out. 

[Snugies 91]

...Zelda?

[MilitantRadical 2,844]

...Zelda?

 

Yup, Zelda.

 

 

 

I've been anticipating this game since 2006 so I get excited about any new news. Thankfully they're releasing an update to the Duscae demo which in a way is kind of better than showing something at E3.

 

I must say I haven't really been invested in a Final Fantasy game since 10 was such a huge letdown for me. Although I admit this one looks pretty cool, and I like the idea behind it. Perhaps I'll try this one when it comes out. 

 

I've never really been a super huge fan of Final Fantasy. I played FF8 but never beat it and I played Kingdom Hearts but never beat it. I liked them both but at the time I wasn't a super huge gamer anyway. I've always been a fan of the art and that's what draws me to FF15. I loved FF7: Advent Children and FF15 looks pretty similar which is why I'm so excited by it.

[LexusInfernus 908]

It appears the old quotes are missing lol. 

Anyways, this E3 was surprisingly good. Actually a lot of stuff from my wishlist sorta happened (although not all of it during E3).

I love how Microsoft has announced backwards compatibility for the Xbox, which definitely means that if and when I'm going to go for a next gen console, it will be Xbox again. Also more details about the new Mass Effect, Mirrors Edge, Deus Ex and Doom 4 which all look great. 

I did notice that Ubisoft couldn't help themselves and made ANOTHER open world game. That game will have to do a lot of things right in order to impress me.  

[The Avatar 1,089]

I only watched Nintendo's stuff, and I must say I was pretty disappointed. The highlight of the whole E3 experience for me was the Nintendo World Championships, which wasn't technically a part of their presentation. The Mario Maker round showed off a lot of cool new features which got me hyped for what they had in store for the Digital Event, but the other games just didn't do it for me. Granted, my hopes were too high, and it's hard to live up to the announcements of Zelda, OR/AS, Mario Maker, and Splatoon from last year's E3, but still, I think Nintendo had a good idea of what it's fans wanted to see, and they didn't deliver.

Of the stuff that I wanted, we did get more on Star Fox (which looks good, but I have some concerns), way more on Mario Maker, a new Metroid game (but not in the form that I hoped), more on Woolly World (but nothing new, more like filler), DLC for Smash, and a translated trailer for Fire Emblem (which was nice, but didn't really show much that was new).

In my opinion, Nintendo should have saved more of the news they revealed outside of the Digital Event, like Smash DLC and Mario Maker features, for the actual presentation, to preserve more of the hype. They also really needed to show more of the big games coming out in 2016, like Zelda and Fire Emblem. The Digital Event would have been much more exciting and fulfilling had they done so, but I digress.

[Mr Saturn64 742]

As for the Nintendo stuff, Fire Emblem: Fates was epic.  I've watched the trailer over and over.  Will buy on release.  Same goes for Xenoblade Chronicles X. 

Mario Maker and Wooly World were OK, I have nothing else to say. 

Zelda Triforce Heroes is a definite no.  It's Four Swords all over again, and for someone who never plays games with friends, it's not necessary.  Neither is Hyrule Warriors on 3DS.

And I wholeheartedly agree Ryu and Roy announcement for Smash should have come later.  I will be buying them, though.

[MilitantRadical 2,844]

It appears the old quotes are missing lol. 

Anyways, this E3 was surprisingly good. Actually a lot of stuff from my wishlist sorta happened (although not all of it during E3).

I love how Microsoft has announced backwards compatibility for the Xbox, which definitely means that if and when I'm going to go for a next gen console, it will be Xbox again. Also more details about the new Mass Effect, Mirrors Edge, Deus Ex and Doom 4 which all look great. 

I did notice that Ubisoft couldn't help themselves and made ANOTHER open world game. That game will have to do a lot of things right in order to impress me.  

Gotta hand it to Microsoft, they had a really good show. The highlights for me were the announcements of that VR/augmented reality thing and the "backward compatibility" (I put that in quotes because it technically isn't actually backward compatible). However, no games really blew me away. Rise of the Tomb Raider looked good, and at first I thought it was on a pretty level playing field with Uncharted, then I saw the new Uncharted 4 footage and I can't help but feel Tomb Raider is a step behind. I also find Lara Croft has become a boring character (but that is for another thread). ReCore seems like an interesting concept but I can't tell because it was just a CGI trailer. The most disappointing thing was the Halo 5 trailer; it just didn't impress me. I'm not a Halo guy and I'm not much of a FPS person these days, but I was expecting more.

Sony had a great show too. It wasn't as consistent as Microsoft's but the highs were much higher. LAST GUARDIAN!!! My wish finally game true. Uncharted 4 looks out of this world. Horizon surprised me and I'm pretty excited for it. FF7 and Shenmue (long way away)! Holy crap! Firewatch, which will also go to XB1, looks quite interesting. I'm disappointed they didn't have Rime and a release date for it but I assume they're holding a few things back for the Paris Gameshow. The No Man's Sky demo didn't really blow me away. I don't care about the new partnership with Activision and Call of Duty. I'd much rather they didn't make that deal but if they didn't then Microsoft would still have it. I think it would have been smarter for Activision to just cancel their exclusivity deals and release DLC at the same time for all platforms.

The new Mass Effect trailer still didn't really tell me what I wanted to know which is the story and the characters. Kinda looks like more action shlock.

Mirror's Edge Catalyst looks pretty neat.

Not really feeling the new Deus Ex. The story just doesn't seem very interesting and I'm not as impressed by the visual style as I was the last game.

Don't know about Doom, have no interest.

The new Hitman game looks pretty darn cool.

Adr1ft looks sweet. I hope it isn't only for VR.

Kingdom Hearts 3 looks sweet gameplay and graphics-wise.

StarFox Zero looks terrible. I don't expect it to have realistic graphics, but come on! The art design is so bare bones. It could get better as it develops but what I've seen doesn't really inspire confidence. So the ship can transform into a robot chicken? Wow! It doesn't really feel like they're bringing the franchise forward.

Didn't watch the Nintendo thing, but consensus seems to be that it was disappointing. From the things I've heard and seen they come off as tone deaf. They aren't in tune with what their consumers want. I feel one of the problems is that Nintendo doesn't take kids and gamers seriously. Just because you make something for "kids" or "all ages" doesn't mean it always has to be bright and colorful. Kids like scary stuff too. They can handle a little bit of grit. They can handle serious social, philosophical, and political themes.

Overall, amazing E3, but we still need to wait and see if the games announced are as amazing as we imagine them to be.

[LexusInfernus 908]

Eh, the Mass Effect trailer was a bit bare bones. Then again, it is to be expected from a teaser for a game that won't launch before the holidays of 2016. But being a big Mass Effect fan, I'm just happy to know that the project is being worked on and progress is made. 

Also, I'm wondering how generic the new Ghost Recon is going to be and if it will have people climb towers in order to unlock the map. 

[MilitantRadical 2,844]

I'm wondering how generic the new Ghost Recon is going to be and if it will have people climb towers in order to unlock the map. 

I read in a headline on IGN (i think) that there is no tower climbing. lol.