Played any of the PlayStation 1 games lately?
I've criticized Microsoft in the past for its limited backward compatibility on the Xbox 360, but the truth is it really doesn't matter that much in the end. I don't think most people go back to several-year-old games that often. I know I don't.
At some point, Microsoft and Sony should focus on getting all their old games online rather than on the backward compatibility. PlayStation 2 and Xbox games are still too big too host online, but they should start figuring out how to solve that problem. Nintendo's Virtual Console is going to be great for Wii because the games are right there on the Wii; it may seem like a small matter, but going back to your closet and finding the old games and putting in the discs probably is more a barrier than we think to replaying old games. It'll be even better for Nintendo because of the revenue it'll bring in, especially once enough games are up for a long tail effect to kick in.
That's what Microsoft and Sony need for the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3. Having lots of old Greatest Hits titles available and playable is nice, but the future is having inexpensive access to everything at one time.




1 Comments:
At 15:35, Ed said…
Around the time eBay started gathering steam, I thought, "If people are paying all of this money for garage sale junk, maybe these old games will be worth something sometime, too." Ummm... not really. PS1 games have not aged very well, I'm afraid.
However, my kids and I play the N64 quite often. Mario, Kirby, Donkey Kong and Star Fox all have good pick up and play mechanics and the graphics have survived by not trying to be photo realistic, but cartoonish and iconic.
As a side rant, I don't think photo realism in video games is all that important. People relate as much and sometimes more to the most simplistic icons than they do of more descriptive mediums. Icons allow people to inject their own meaning and experience, where details create an experience rigidly framed by the author. That's why this: ;-), is more effective than "I am just being sarcastic and witty". It's the mental process that turns this symbol: ;-), into an image of a person, faceless but familiar, winking (which is another symbol itself).
Also, some icons would wither under the move to photo-realism. Would Charlie Brown be funny? No, because cancer is not funny, and that's what a photo real Charlie Brown would look like he has. The same goes for fat plumbers, cartoon racoon burglars, and giant yellow pellet munching heads.
And finally, once you've made the move to photo realism, everything else starts to erode the immersive experience around the edges. For example, once Pedro looks like a midievil warrior, how do you reconcile the fact that he can cure all of his wounds by, say, devouring an entire roasted turkey - bones, plate and all - that appeared inside a rat and was eaten off of the floor in under a second?
Post a Comment
<< Home