Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by CardJoe, 18 Aug 2010.
Wow +rep to you Joe for posting this late
On topic... <insert cynical comment about COD here>
On one hand we have Treyarch. They've released stuff through EA in the past and their man Josh Olin says "Tech for tech's sake sucks!"
On the other hand we have Crytek. They're releasing Crysis II through EA in the near future and are currently sticking pins in their Josh Olin voodoo doll.
I actually like Treyarch to be honest, but I might be in the minority.
A company I hate with a firey passion has said something sane.
"Is technology holding back games development in other areas?"
Consoles - Yes. The internals of the current console gen is old in comparison to PC's. Move and Kinect are just advances of Wii motion gaming. Hardly groundbreaking stuff anymore.
PC's - No, games never seem to be programmed to upscale to whatever we have in our rigs. If they did then I'd have a stupendous amount of cores, RAM and GFX cards inside mine.
Consoles are most certainly holding back games development. The amount of poorly programmed games so they have to work on Xbox360, PS3, Wii and PC is stifling. The current average owners PC is more than likely 2-3 times as fast as the console. And the poorly optimised code ruins what could be achieved.
i don't think that's what they meant by technology.
i would suspect they mean the obsession of getting the latest gimmick into a game (like the current swathe of 3d films in the movie world), at the expense of developing more meaningful aspects to the games, like gameplay itself over what it looks like, and whether it's fun to do stuff or if it just looks pretty.
pretty only goes so far after all
Separate names with a comma.