Meodia looks back at the technology and advancements that have changed the face of gaming.
...but there are a couple cop-outs in here: 3D Gaming: Not innovative, this was the natural progression of technology and game design. Super Mario 64 was arguably innovative not because it was in 3D but because it showed developers how to design games in 3D. Analog Stick: Same thing, a natural evolution of the D-Pad (which is an important innovation) and even technically came before the D-Pad (in that sense it IS innovative, but this makes the D-Pad more of a down-grade). CDs: Ditto, natural progression of technology. That's like saying CD decks in cars is a huge automobile innovation. Online Multiplayer: Again, a natural evolution, not innovation. The structure of multiplayer games can be innovative like Team Fortress introducing class/team-based gameplay, or CS creating a hardcore completely skill-based elimination style of competition. Anyway, besides this, I'm glad people are reflecting more on the gaming industry than on flamewars. Good read.
mind games in the Metal Gear series
Nintendo glove virtual boy [nintendo was ahead of its time.] wii nunchucks duck hunt gun (or the one in arcade, which ever came first, if either) motion tilt in controller (believe the warhawk for ps1 did it first) first hand held gaming device (tomagotchie or pocket station) im so wrong lol. PSeye toy ============================= == im not certain on any of these, speak up if you know otherwise. but this would be my list. "anyway, besides this, I'm glad people are reflecting more on the gaming industry than on flamewars. Good read" i agree 100%, thats the way to think, i/we really should be putting the console war aside, +bubs.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik... This came out first
it didnt play games where you see yourself on screen and can touch, interact and move objects with your body parts. it didn't have any games, it was just a camera... my gameboy had a camera... it took funny pictures.
@BakedGoods very well written comment and lots of good points. bubbles
I do have to say that I laughed when I saw the TV they used for the #1 slot. It's the TV I imagine people owning when they say, "HD games/movies aren't needed!"
A natural progression is still innovation. Progress is progress. DOnt see how this is hard to understand.
Innovation is something unexpected like portable music... Going from 480i to 1080p is not innovation, that's just natural evolution.
...using the term 'innovation' simply for progress works in some business circles, but in reality things are determined 'innovative' when they take a current product and derive something new and different which generates new revenue streams. Going from cartridges to CDs didn't get more people into gaming, like say the Wiimote did. People didn't all of a sudden take up gaming because of the analog stick, rather the Nintendo-led unique game design found in 3D games led more people to play--that's innovative.
Not 3D display, in game 3D environments. Like Mario 64.
BakedGoods: Innovation simply means creating something new, it has nothing to do with creating new revenue streams. Starfox on the SNES was innovative. You're right, it was a natural progression for game design, but doesn't mean it wasn't something new a.k.a. innovative. Online Multiplayer - How can you not think playing Doom over a phone line in the early 90's is considered innovative? I think you're too wrapped up in what occurs today, rather then putting yourself in the shoes of the people that saw these things happen firsthand.
Pretty good list.
I think most of this is just evolution in gaming not really innovating.
I'd say the D-Pad and the analogue stick were pretty innovative. I'll put it another way, could you see gaming without them now?
Why not just put "the controller" then? I'm actually surprised the console didn't make the list since it brought games to a much more affordable market for those who couldn't afford a PC. I think adding story to games was an early innovation. I wonder what the first storyline based game was. Question for Colonel-Killzone and others: In a sense, the entire list could be written off as the natural advent of gaming today and you could say none of it was innovative. So, what do you think is innovative about gaming and why is it so different from what you disagree with in the article?
Actually gaming was affordable on my little old Spectrum 48k, and that was far more affordable than a console when they came out. But bringing the controller into gaming (WHICH INCLUDED THE D-PAD WHICH WAS NEW AT THE TIME BECAUSE I'D PLAYED WITH A JOYSTICK UNTIL THAT POINT WHICH WAS JUST A STICK YOU POINTED IN A DIRECTION WITH A SINGLE BUTTON) was quite innovative. But carry on.
The author didnt just say "the controller" because the analogue stick and the D-pad because the came about at different times. The D-pad was on the NES controller in the 80's, but the analogue stick never became mainstream until the PS1 and N64 used them in the mid-90's.
Wireless controllers....honestly did anyone like playing 15 feet away from ur tv? lol
Pretty good list. Agreed with most points.
Have been on PSOne on certain Game, and they ruined gaming. Its a poor excuse for shit games to sell and to add replay value to a crap game.
I didn't know that at all, which ones?
generally they are found in platform games. Like Spyro had "skill points" which are like achiveiments/trophies, but they actually gave goodies not just points.
I forget what PS1 games had accomplishments (@Gun_Senshi, I forgot about Spyro even though I have it on my ps3...), but Ratchet and Clank PS2 games had achievement like concepts within the games - "Skill Points" like "Bash the Bug - Beat Scorpio using only the wrench" or "'Wrench Ninja II: Massacre' - Kill all enemies with only the wrench". They only had an affect within the game, so it was evolution for it to come to the whole system in some way or another.
I don't get why people hate achievements/trophies. If you don't go for them fine but it shows people how good someone else is at a game which is good for friendly competition.
I still get comments to this day from friends/family walking by, along the lines of " Who are you talking to? You are playing with other people? Real people online? Instantly? Amazing!" This goes to show that we gamers take certain things for granted. I've been gaming online since 1998 ( with star-craft, neo-pets, and a couple years later, counter-strike). The fact that , in 2010 , regular/less tech inclined people are still shocked that we can have 4v4, 8v8, 32v32 and even 128 v 128 online games is a testament to our ability to make incredible things seem normal.
same here when I explained to my mother i was played killzone 2 with another 31 people that all had ps3s hdtvs and the game she was amazed :P
Lock-On system was invented by tomb raider nintendo even copy lara backflip when she was lock on. why?
Because it worked very well for OoT.
Should we leave features like that solely to Tombraider or can we make it better?
Would an improvement like that really be called innovation? If so, then every time a dev borrows an idea from another game and makes it more fluid = innovation? And not just your run of the mill type, but such that it's considered one of the most innovative things ever in gaming?
It's either the times or nostalgia googles, but it seems that some of those "innovations" just somewhat ruined the fun I had with games sometimes, and my overall perception of the gaming community.
Awards: Ruins gaming, its all anyone cares about. DLC: New content is good, but it feels like devs focus too much on it and abuse its money making ability. Lock-On: Terrible, its a downgrade from actually aiming. Motion Control: Physical controllers allow for more control and precision, downgrade from the controller.
DLC: Good when it extends the game, but bad when dev's make it before the game is even shipped and have people download unlock keys to use it... Lock-On: Its good for some games, terrible for anything MP. Red Dead has a somewhat good lock-on, you can have it just snap to the guy for when you're facing like 30 people at once but then you actually have to adjust the cross hairs after wards to get a good shot. Motion Control: Socom 4 says hello. The DS3 testers get beat by the Move testers, you can do some sick stuff with it. Awards: Yah, they ruin the experience and take away from some of the suprises in games by having events that you'll fight in being listed as achievements... Only one I've seen that has been good with that was Heavy Rain, all the trophies for it were hidden and you'd only get a pop up notice after you beat the section of the game you were on.
Sorry, but the lock-on in RDR takes all need of aiming on the game. I played the game on Expert because of that, and I seriously think playing on Normal or Casual made it Autoaim: The Game. And it's even worse on multiplayer. Lock on for games like Zelda or such is a good idea, lock-on for shooters is a bad, BAD idea.
I doubt a motion controller could be more precise than a mouse though. Achievements also ruin multiplayer. People don't play right just to try and get the achievements or they bitch if they don't get a weapon.
@Zatrox, I play on expert as well. Normal is just fun for when you're surrounded / feel like killing a whole town Hell, Dead Eye takes away any challenge as you can paint and kill just about everyone around you before you run out of it without getting hit once. Even if you run out you can refill it with moonshine or such. And I did say any lock on is terrible for multiplayer. @TheBuIIetSponge, probably not, but the article is about console games pretty much.
Insomniac beat Microsoft to "achievements". Fail article.
I would put DLC as one of the worst things in gaming history. Since it was invented we buy half game and then DLC. Rip-off.
i agree. problem is most, not all, console gamers are lemmings and will continue to buy it, used game sales will hurt developers and they will continue to put it out, and console gamers need to take a stand and not be nickeled and dimed to death like they are right now.
very crappy list... wireless anyone? voice chat?
Voice chat and chat in general goes hand in hand with online multiplayer, but wireless would have been a great addition. And i agree that online mutliplayer is #1. I still remember playing Red Alert 2 online on my PC, and hooking up my PS2 with a phone line to our Dial-Up to play Offroad Fury 2 online. Its so easy now; so much faster.
I think in the scope of all-time video games, wireless and voice chat didn't affect the entire genre as profoundly as some of the things he listed.
The biggest innovation is a gpu, a cpu, disk drive(isnt really needed anymore for PC gaming on steam), & broadband everything has it!!! & through these all is possible!!! thank you PC I heart you!! all these technologies are my friendds & http://farm1.static.flickr....
could that be the Vectrex controller there in the middle in the article pic.? My cousin had one of those when we were kids, while I didn't have any games myself at the time, that is probably one of my earliest gaming experiences.
Yes it is, one of the earliest consoles to use the analogue stick in 1982.
Pretty fun article to read. Very informative, and I liked how it credited Dreamcast for its innovation in Downloadable Content. Many people tend to get that wrong when crediting Xbox instead. There are other innovations that were not mentioned, but I sorta expected them(forgetting about the article's title, of course): The Hard Drive: The original Xbox, to my knowledge, was the first home console to effectively use a hard drive for game saves aside from memory cards. This made saving games a whole lot easier, and made losing memory cards a thing of the past. 3D gaming: this is a tricky one, and one that will take a while, but with all considered, I believe the potential for innovative game design is there, and the 3DS will be the first handheld gaming platform to demonstrate that.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.