|
The other
day I wrote
an article about the new controllers presented by MS and Sony at E3 this year, but as I see
some people can't understand exactly what I meant with the text - maybe I
forgot to put and "end point "to the text, or something like. So now I hope
I can clear any doubts about my original words.
First of
all, Nintendo showed us the Wii system, promising a complete new way of looking
(and playing) games; but when we get the actual console, we don’t have all the
experiences we were waiting for – most of it because what Nintendo presented to
us, but we didn’t found in the actual play. (Note: I personally think that this
is related with the Wii sales’ recent diminishing we saw by the sales charts, but
that’s another story).
Then, at
this year’s E3, Sony and MS showed us new controller alternatives to the Wii,
and for me it seems that people over the industry is more favorable to the MS
one. I think that Natal
will be more successful than Wii (even because of the console’s processing
power delivering better graphics), but will not offer much more than Wii
offered to us. Sony’s controller to me is the best option to date (with the
information we have about them), but I think their controller will fail as well
when trying to bring us the dreamed “interactivity freedom” in which the game
will mimic (and understand) our moves, opening a huge new room for improvements
on what we now see as videogames and game production.
More than
that, I think we will need maybe 3 or 5 years after the launch of these new
controllers for us to see a new one that really offer us an experience that is
convincing enough to not let us lose the “magic” this kind of user interaction
promises. I say this because for this to happen we will need a completely new
way of thinking how to make games, which I don’t believe can fit with the
actual consoles and game creation processes. Moreover, there is the
space-consumption thing that I said in the other article, in which I think Nintendo could do better
than they actually did with Wii, and I think Sony and MS will not be much more
successful handling with.
If you’re
reading only this piece of text, probably you will only say I’m an idiot. But I
will just recommend you to read
the original article on the subject, where I explain in detail my opinion –
which now I hope is clear enough. After reading everything, feel free to
comment, say what’s still incomprehensible, etc. Thanks for the comments, Ian!
|
Still there are some statements that require more explanation:
"I say this because for this to happen we will need a completely new way of thinking how to make games, which I don’t believe can fit with the actual consoles and game creation processes."
So here you're saying we need a process for making games that can't fit with the actual game creation process? This sentence really needs to be explained, because it doesn't seem to make much sense.
Regarding my English writing, you're right - here in Brazil we don't use to speak or write in English everyday, I'm using to do it more frequently now because of some things that are happening in my life. But for me it's just a matter of time to correct some "twitches" I have translating. Anyway, thanks a lot for all the tips, I really appreciate it - and I will try to write smaller sentences to be more comprehensible! :)