Handheld ports.

(LyndonL) #41

Sony NGP

I think you’re a little out of touch mate. The NGP is basically a mini PS3 in terms of everything. They basically want to let the NGP do everything the PS3 does… that’s why it’s coming with wifi/3G to specifically allow it to connect to the internet for gaming/cloud etc.

(Herandar) #42

None of what exactly exists?

You keep insisting that the experience of a video game is watered-down simply because it is on a handheld system, and also (maybe) because there are external stimuli. Am I correct?

That simply isn’t true. You’ve reached your conclusion without trying any complex portable games. Which is fine for you, and no one here is trying to get you to play a portable system.

But don’t tell everyone else it isn’t so, because you never tried. Games can be art. Portable games can be art.

I don’t appreciate abstract art. You don’t appreciate portable gaming. That doesn’t mean that either thing is without merit.

(Nail) #43

let me get this straight, if you play games from the couch, you’re not realizing the true gameplay that is VIDEO GAMING, but if you play at a desk, you are automatically smarter and undestand all the complexities of proper gaming?

what about the kid I work with that plays his PS3 at a desk ?

(.Chris.) #44

Anyone else here found GTA Chinatown Wars to be way much more fun than GTA 4? Guess which one was on a handheld.

(II Captain K II) #45

[QUOTE=Herandar;264092]None of what exactly exists?

You keep insisting that the experience of a video game is watered-down simply because it is on a handheld system, and also (maybe) because there are external stimuli. Am I correct?

That simply isn’t true. You’ve reached your conclusion without trying any complex portable games. Which is fine for you, and no one here is trying to get you to play a portable system.

But don’t tell everyone else it isn’t so, because you never tried. Games can be art. Portable games can be art.

I don’t appreciate abstract art. You don’t appreciate portable gaming. That doesn’t mean that either thing is without merit.[/QUOTE]

Ok careful man, don’t lose your head bro. Gaming is just not art, or at least not of comparable worth to other forms of art. It’s a distraction, a hobby, and sometimes an addiction, but not much more.

(Nail) #46

video games are definately an art form, maybe not art by definition, more entertainment like a movie, but art nonetheless. Only an artist can convey meaning with images

(Auzner) #47

I have failed to convey my precise thoughts on this matter. I have not studied game design and cannot speak further on this. I guess we could go with elitism then. That’s not entirely what I had meant, but I guess it’s the closest. I’m being elitist but am trying to show how that’s not a black and white matter. Show me 1:1 Brink on a pocket console. Show me portable games selling more units or making more profit. Show me competitive groups or single purpose forums. I imagine portable games are muted in all these areas. I equate that to fan sincerity and dedication to the portables. Most of the users will be youngsters who do not create a strong online presence or have high purchasing power. What would the point be of CONVERTING (not copy+paste, it’s not possible) new full fledged games to these when they’re already succeeding on their primary base? I can’t think of much else to say. I thought I would get somewhere with this.

(Nail) #48

I have a feeling that portable users are more in the 20 - 30 year old range, young professionals, they use them on commutes, lunchtime, downtime at work. I always thought that was the target demographic. Obviously Brink would be impossible to port but to negate the value of them is a serious underestimation of their usefulness

(Apples) #49

Go tell that to yoshi island 2 on super NES, it was a piece of art!

Oh god, I want this baby back, need to call my parents for a grouped package with amiga parts + SNES :smiley:

GIEF ME!

Its just a different experience, not that hard to understand is it? While I stopped playing handheld since my gameboy and gamegear I can understand why people love these little pieces of technology, usually the console itself is “beautifull” (ie : the object itself is appealing), you can do multiple tasks with it (music / video / games) and it can be refreshing when you have many travel time between work/home for exemple. To fully judge a game/platform you must go into the skin of the guy playing it, what would be wrong being more casual? It can still be a really immersive experience, just not the same experience.

Peace

(Herandar) #50

Can’t. But the gameplay can be identical on the new handhelds. Only graphics whores would truly care about the differences.

Numbers from Wikipedia: NES: Super Mario: 40 million (console pack-in, so numbers are skewed.) Super Mario 2: 10 million. Super Mario 3: 18 million. SNES: Super Mario World: 20 million. SMW2: Yoshi’s Island 10 million. N64: Super Mario 64: 11 million. GC: Super Mario Sunshine 5.5 million. Wii: New Super Mario Bros.: 21.3 million. DS: New Super Mario Bros.: 26.3 million.

www.serebii.net

Do you have kids, or work in retail? Kids often end up geting exactly what they want, and their parents pay for it.

I was hoping you’d say, “Well, it turns out that there are games more sophisticated than Tetris on the portable systems that may be worth playing, even if I don’t personally have any interest in them. Just because I am a Hardcore FPS gamer, and dismissive of other gaming communities and game styles, doesn’t mean that they don’t exist and aren’t without merit.”

Have you heard of Zynga? They are totally casual, have a net worth much greater than EA, and seem to be unashamedly evil. Splash Damage would LOVE to have even a fraction of their userbase for Brink.

(II Captain K II) #51

No, I reject this entirely. By that measure television is art. Video games are usually devoid of meaning anyways, and when they aren’t, they still don’t attain the beauty or sophistication of painting, sculpture, or even plays or books. They just aren’t comparable.

(Herandar) #52

Are you just trolling? I think you are just trolling.

You Danger Seeker, you.

When Aeris is killed in Final Fantasy VII. Still brings a tear to my eye.

In the off-chance that you aren’t trolling, please define ‘art’ for everyone.

(SockDog) #53

Never understood why this has to be so complicated. For me art is something humans can appreciate beyond it’s immediate literal value.

(II Captain K II) #54

[QUOTE=Herandar;264620]Are you just trolling? I think you are just trolling.

You Danger Seeker, you.

When Aeris is killed in Final Fantasy VII. Still brings a tear to my eye.

In the off-chance that you aren’t trolling, please define ‘art’ for everyone.[/QUOTE]

No. You are trying to turn this into an argument of the definition of art, and I’m not going to do that. It gives you far too much wiggle room since art is a term so loosely defined. What I am referring to is the value of video games, as art. I object to calling them art simply because it suggests them being comparable to painting and other forms of (high) art. Video games are art in the same way that banging pots and pans together is music. Video games (given that they are art) are one of the lowest forms of art. The difference is that video games seek to engage the crudest senses and emotions. They tend to evoke satisfaction through violence, sex, and other reptilian means. Just because you cried about a character dying doesn’t mean it’s art. I don’t really care at all about your anecdotes, video games will never be of comparable worth to high art.

However, I still like video games. I play them every day. I just don’t pretend that they are something they aren’t. I don’t have to justify my time spent on games by pretending that they are valuable. They are entertainment. If you seriously think that even the most artistic video game could compare to the works of the great painters, sculptors, writers and composers then you are sorely mistaken. If you are still convinced that video games are truly art, then compare them to other forms of low art like television and hollywood movies, since the two share more in common than they do with high art.

(Nail) #55

and yet video games give employment to probably more Artists, than any other medium, funny huh

(Auzner) #56

But that’s the point. I, the hardcore FPS gamer, would not care if their game goes portable and won’t buy it for that. The portable gamers who are not familiar with my side won’t understand it when it’s introduced to them. I think it would not gain popularity with either side. The immersion level is just another factor to this.

[QUOTE=Herandar;264569]Numbers from Wikipedia: NES: Super Mario: 40 million (console pack-in, so numbers are skewed.) Super Mario 2: 10 million. Super Mario 3: 18 million. SNES: Super Mario World: 20 million. SMW2: Yoshi’s Island 10 million. N64: Super Mario 64: 11 million. GC: Super Mario Sunshine 5.5 million. Wii: New Super Mario Bros.: 21.3 million. DS: New Super Mario Bros.: 26.3 million.
www.serebii.net[/QUOTE]
Okay maybe this also explains why. Adults into portable gaming are Japanophiles. I’m not interested in anime or Japan. Portable gaming is more favored by otakus who are necessarily hardcore gamers for their interest in Japan. Brink is a western style game as are most shooters, so it’s not like they’d have unanimous acceptance amongst the otaku gamers.

You haven’t played Bioshock. With the intense art involved into realizing a game’s creation I don’t understand how it can be argued that games are not art. Many artists get involved with sketches, paintings, sculptures, photos, and 3d modeling. All of that gets combined into an interactive world. Because isn’t static it can’t be art? Film was denied as being art for a time, but that reasoning has changed. Why can’t elements of film be compared to a video game?

Just because board games are viewed as for children doesn’t mean Dungeons and Dragon’s is a children’s toy. Video games currently struggle with that view as well. Most adults today still think every video game is like Pong/PacMan they give to their kids for distraction. Overall society stereotypes adult video gamers as immature and juvenile regardless of the game’s content or play style.

Games cannot just be “entertainment”, there has to be a labeled fundamental that makes it so. What type of entertainment are they? If anything, video games today are more like amateur sports. Each genre is a “sport” and every game that’s released creates a subcategory of that sport. Like how poker or mahjong have many different play styles. But professional athletes would then probably argue that video games are not sports. And why in this age does no one want video games associated with them? BECAUSE THEY’RE CHILDREN’S TOYS.

(II Captain K II) #57

[QUOTE=Auzner;264673]But that’s the point. I, the hardcore FPS gamer, would not care if their game goes portable and won’t buy it for that. The portable gamers who are not familiar with my side won’t understand it when it’s introduced to them. I think it would not gain popularity with either side. The immersion level is just another factor to this.

Okay maybe this also explains why. Adults into portable gaming are Japanophiles. I’m not interested in anime or Japan. Portable gaming is more favored by otakus who are necessarily hardcore gamers for their interest in Japan. Brink is a western style game as are most shooters, so it’s not like they’d have unanimous acceptance amongst the otaku gamers.

You haven’t played Bioshock. With the intense art involved into realizing a game’s creation I don’t understand how it can be argued that games are not art. Many artists get involved with sketches, paintings, sculptures, photos, and 3d modeling. All of that gets combined into an interactive world. Because isn’t static it can’t be art? Film was denied as being art for a time, but that reasoning has changed. Why can’t elements of film be compared to a video game?

Just because board games are viewed as for children doesn’t mean Dungeons and Dragon’s is a children’s toy. Video games currently struggle with that view as well. Most adults today still think every video game is like Pong/PacMan they give to their kids for distraction. Overall society stereotypes adult video gamers as immature and juvenile regardless of the game’s content or play style.

Games cannot just be “entertainment”, there has to be a labeled fundamental that makes it so. What type of entertainment are they? If anything, video games today are more like amateur sports. Each genre is a “sport” and every game that’s released creates a subcategory of that sport. Like how poker or mahjong have many different play styles. But professional athletes would then probably argue that video games are not sports. And why in this age does no one want video games associated with them? BECAUSE THEY’RE CHILDREN’S TOYS.[/QUOTE]

I didn’t read most of what you just said, because you are arguing the wrong point. I don’t care if video games are art, they are not of comparable quality to higher art. Stop arguing about whether they are technically art or not, that is not at issue.

(MrX) #58

Sony new tablet will be better than psp2 in terms of power.Mark my word

Games contain elements of art.That doesnt make them the 8th art.They give prebaked textures with art.Art is using your imagination .Games dont do that,u just play what the developer designed.Imo one game that has so many art elements is assasins creed 2 .Whole towns and chapels are designed but its nothing compared to the emotions u have when u really see them from up close.Games are not art ,they just contain some elements.

(crazyfoolish) #59

Oxford’s definition of the word art;

“the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power”

Surely by this definition video games are art.

Many modern video games such as minecraft and Bioshock are developed with both skill and imagination.

Of course, it is a bit of a stretch to consider games like cod as art.

(II Captain K II) #60

[QUOTE=crazyfoolish;264705]Oxford’s definition of the word art;

“the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power”

Surely by this definition video games are art.

Many modern video games such as minecraft and Bioshock are developed with both skill and imagination.

Of course, it is a bit of a stretch to consider games like cod as art.[/QUOTE]

Your name suits you. We are done arguing about whether video games are art or not. And you cannot cite a dictionary to resolve an issue that is still being debated by scholars, philosophers and everybody else. The point is that they are cheap and crude forms of art.