It's unfortunate that he doesn't release these games for PC.

I think this could be a really cool opportunity for certain types of games, but maybe not all. I'm sure future gaming platforms could distribute the computing between the player's hardware and the server. So the fast, timing sensitive stuff could be executed locally, while the cloud could serve stuff that takes a lot of disk space or requires very specialized hardware. For instance if you had huge amounts of disk space, you could get some pretty advanced combinations of prerendered and real-time graphics... this could make that feasible.

Shouldn't it be nice for developers too? Make the game on what ever platform fits best, yet it can be played on just about everything with a good connection.

What you describe sounds ridiculously complex. Home PCs are powerful enough now to do realtime or pre-rendered video without much difficulty. I see no benefit to distributing it "in the cloud." The "cloud" is simply yet another in a long line of tech buzzwords. In another few years, it will sound as antiquated as "virtual reality." OnLive would have been a cool if it was a subscription only service. As expensive as it will end up for anyone using the service, you might as well buy a console.

The whole buying the game plus subscribing thing seems like a bad deal to me. If it was a all-you-can-eat service like Gametap, it would be cool. But as is, I'll pass.

It does sort of have the dubious honor of starting the trend of brown and grey color palettes that dominate the FPS genre even to this day but I always loved the grim, dark look of the original Quake. Coupled with Trent Reznor's soundtrack, it was an amazing experience.



Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpas-Yb5HOo


Wipeout series is another beautifully slick package of visuals and sound though nearly 180 turn from the look of Quake. The image below is from the latest in the series, Wipeout HD:



Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjNvlmObjeY&hd=1


And for sheer beauty, it's hard to pass up mentioning the Myst series. This is from Myst V:



Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=og2JlxgdolA&hd=1#t=04m12s


I don't like RTS games but the minimalist graphics, pastel colors and soothing music make for a thoughtful yet laid-back experience in Eufloria:



Video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4y0sruVQU8c&hd=1


Castle of Illusion Starring Mick Mouse. A beautiful 16 bit game and fine example of gorgeous pixel art:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ix1gWkjd1w#t=01m51s

Not a single PC game in there. :/

I don't think it's quite the same. Pac-Man is a game and it's still enjoyable. That would be like saying board games can't mature until we reject chess. It makes no sense.

That is cool! It's a good demonstration. I'm not sure what the point in using something like this would be. I suppose if you wanted to render everything instead of using real-time 3d for some reason. Though, I can't think of one.

( Windows )

Shucks, I wish I could've tried it.

I'm not sure I understand what it is though, in what way is it different from the style of Exile and Revelation?

I never played Revelations but it does look nice and the QTVR is cool but the fades between movement points kind of ruins the immersion.

A lot of people go on about how great the real actors are in most of the Myst series. Except for a couple of one exception (David Ogden Stiers as Escher) most of the acting is direct-to-DVD/SyFy-Original movie quality. I'd rather have good voice acting with stiff 3d physical appearance. But that's just a personal preference I suppose.

Would be interesting to see whether pre-rendering all paths* completely in 360° ( allowing the player to walk around "freely" ) gives you a similar immersion as the same game in real-time 3D.



*Most of the movement in these games is "on-rail" anyway ( see above ).

And while I certainly agree with ghostwheel that the environments could be done in real-time without too much wizardry these days, achieving that level of photo-realism in the actors is a little more tricky

Uru got me into the Myst series, the opposite of most Myst fans. I can't play the old 2d versions. People go on and on about how amazing Riven was. I remember running across a forum thread about how real-time 3d couldn't possibly look as good as Riven (this was only a few years ago). Um, what? Are they playing the same game I played? It's looks terrible - grainy, poor quality video and washed out colors and a complete lack of detail. I think their memory is bumping up the quality quite a bit. CryEngine can easily pump out graphics that blow away anything you think you saw in Riven. In fact most modern 3d engines can. I really like realMYST though! If it isn't obvious, I think real-time 3d is far more immersive than Quicktime videos. I like to explore an environment, not be locked down in one view, especially in a game like Myst where exploration is everything.

http://www.cracked.com/article_18571_5-reasons-its-still-not-cool-to-admit-youre-gamer.html

This is another one of those conversations around the issue of how much game to you put into your not-a-game experience. I've decided to eject all gaminess from my project. It seems to me that half-heartedly putting in some weak game elements into an art project doesn't make it an art project that may attract some gamers, it just makes the experience a crappy game. From what I've seen, Amnesia is, at it's core, a game. This doesn't mean it can't be an interesting and artistic experience. You seem to be putting a lot of thought into it as a game, which is good. I can understand you're frustrations but I don't think you should look at it as gameplay vs experience. If your game is strong, everything will fall into place - make Amnesia that best GAME it can be. It's when the gameplay is secondary that it can be problematic.

I think you're being a bit premature. It's not because Apple has good marketing that they will suddenly conquer the world. Apple has had good marketing, and often good products behind it, for decades and they have only been able to get a relatively small market segment. I don't think the iPad will change that.

That being said, I'm not a fan of desktop PCs at all. I much prefer a games console, actually. But games consoles are proprietary devices (like iPads) and therefore the range of entertainment they offer is very limited. If the open environment offered by PCs (open as in allowing self-publishing) ceases to exist, it means we're returning to the age of the television, where the big corporations decide what we should be watching. It's a return to broadcasting: with producers on one end and consumers on the other. I'd rather not.

PC games have been a small niche of the games market compared to consoles for a long time. And they've managed to survive and continue to be the place where most experimentation happens. PC games are good at being small. So I'm not too worried. As long as there is a small place in the world where we can dream, I'm happy.

I might be a little premature. However, I'm not saying the iPad alone is going to conquer all. It's simply providing the model for what an easy-to-use, handheld device should be.

The starting price for a Mac pro is $2499 USD. This is fairly expensive. I think that or an even higher price will be what ALL desktops will go for in the near future. And yes, the big corporations will be the only players. Affordable home computing is going to be netbooks and slates. Low cost desktops are going to disappear. I don't like it either. I hate it. Unfortunately, I have a feeling that is where things are heading. We are in the golden age of indie game development and it will be gone all too soon. Enjoy it while it lasts.

Limitations and boundaries aren't a bad thing. They force you to think creatively and make better art. Unlimited does not mean better. However, sometimes you hit a wall no matter what and need to stretch the limits or push them further. That's the nature of both art and technology.

There was an interesting email exchange last week between a Gizmodo employee and Steve Jobs. There was one quote from Jobs I thought was extremely relevant to this topic:

The time's they are a 'changin, and some traditional PC folk feel like their world is slipping away. It is.

I agree. PCs and PC gaming are going to die. Don't count on better (cheaper) hardware. In 5 years, PC hardware costs will rise and low cost PC hardware will not be available - home PCs will be rare. In 10, there won't be a such thing as a home desktop computer at all. The only place you will find hi-def, photo-realistic 3d graphics will be on consoles and services like OnLive. Of course, slate technology will improve as well so you may see some stuff on those but it will probably lag behind, as portable technology always has.

The technology landscape in changing again. I hate to see desktops go away but it's not really up to me.

It's funny how humans always keep making inferior technology more popular.
With the kind of work we do, we need computers to become 1000 times faster, not slower. But that's what happens when computers become mobile: they become slow.
I'm sure this will not affect most independent developers, since they work in 2D and mostly make games that, frankly, could be made on the computers of 20 years ago. But the research into immersive 3D may indeed completely stagnate and humankind will have lost one of the most powerful media it ever created.

However, good entertainment made with this technology would give the public a reason to hang on to it, and support it and demand it. That's where we come in!

I think you might be overlooking why the iPad is becoming so popular - ease of use. The iPad represents the beginning of the sort of computing we were promised at the dawn of PC computing in the 70's: computers anyone can use. A 1 GHz processor is more than enough to run 3d games. Perhaps not the latest and greatest hi-def, normal mapped, bloomy stuff but it can do it. But very very few developers are doing the sorts of games I'm interested in with the latest and greatest 3d tech. Cyan Worlds and their clones have all but disappeared. In fact, the only companies I can think of off the top of my head trying to create photo-realistic 3d experiences that aren't shooters are Frictional Games, Ice Pick Lodge and to an extent, your company. Though your stuff tends to be more stylized and not so much photo-realistic. I'm rambling now.

Sorry for hijacking your thread Erik!

My original thought was if the iPhone is a good way to reach more non-gamer people than through the PC. I guess it's impossible for anyone to answer but maybe someone more qualified could make a guess?

We chose to release Vanitas for the iPhone to test this theory. But I have a feeling that, while the audience may be more diverse, the desire for -relatively deep- entertainment is not wide-spread. When distributing through PC, it's almost impossible to reach non-gamers. But among the gamer audience, there's a small niche that is very interested in the kinds of apps we want to make. And in the end, it seems that that small niche of the PC gamers audience is a lot bigger than the small niche of interested non-gamers in the diverse iPhone audience. This is just guesswork based on superficial observation. I'd like to hear examples that contradict this.

This is an interesting anecdote and one I'm not entirely surprised with. While the niche for "art" games is currently present on the PC, I suspect things will change drastically in the next 5 years. I feel that home computing is going to move away from desktops to slates (like the iPad). Affordable desktop/workstations may very likely disappear except for business and technology use. Consequently, the price of desktops will go up. I wouldn't be surprised if Apple eliminates their consumer computers and only sell their Pro machines. And the iPad can't be used for development. The price of development is going to climb.

Unfortunately, gaming consoles aren't that great of a choice for alternative types of gaming either. And like the iPad, they are closed systems and to a certain extent, even more so than the iPad. Slates with Android, webOS and similar systems may be a more viable option. Some professional indie developers will survive of course. But again, if you don't have access to low cost hardware you're not going to be developing indie games in your bedroom. The current, active and exciting indie game scene will evaporate.

It sucks, I'm not happy about it and I hope I'm wrong. Maybe I'm just being a pessimist.