|
If you want to talk about it, what was your vision for [cancelled project] Shenmue Online?
YS: I wanted to do something MMO-like.
And how would you make that work within the Shenmue world, with everyone going about their daily life? Would you be able to play as a shopkeeper or something like that?
YS: I would have liked to have everyone living together in the same world, yeah. It's a town that players create as they enter the game and play it -- something like a multi-CPU system, with each player serving as a CPU.
How important do you think technology is to the design of a game? As you were evolving your designs, 3D was evolving, arcade boards were getting faster, and so on. Do you feel like game design pushed the technology; or did you feel constrained by tech in your designs?
YS: That's a hard question to answer, but the best way to do it, I suppose, is to say that you can make any game you like without the technology. Having advances in technology, however, does make it easier to evolve games, to take them to the next level.
Personally, I always want to make games that go hand-in-hand with new technology. Let's say there was some calculation that used to take two hours or so to finish. Then, suddenly, you find a new way to do it in software and hardware. That, in itself, opens up new doors and opportunities for games -- in AI, for example. It creates more opportunities for fun, the more CPU power you have. I think it can inherently lead to better games.
 Virtua Fighter
In the past, when Sega was also a hardware company, you perhaps had the ability to help shape that technology. Do you see yourself doing something like that in the future again?
YS: At the time, arcade hardware was the best out there in terms of performance, but after a while, that obviously ceased to be true. Sega proceeded along those lines for a while, but eventually they stopped, so certainly there's no way Sega is going to produce new high-performance hardware all of a sudden.
There's always the possibility of a partnership or something in the future, however. We can go to a hardware maker with a game concept they don't have, then we can work on it together. I started out as a programmer, on the software side, but by and large we were making hardware for the express purpose of the games I and everyone else at Sega were working on. It'd be nice if we could take that approach again sometime.
This is a silly side question, but who do you think was the best assembly programmer at the time?
YS: There were about four of five programmers at Sega who were really good -- I was the best, of course. [laughs] Or, at least, I was probably the best when it came to speed and optimization tricks.
That was a similar skill set to Naka. He did that Sega Master System Space Harrier port that was really crazy.
YS: Right, yeah. There were also Katagi [Hidekazu Katagi, coder of Fantasy Zone and Columns and chief programmer on Sakura Taisen] and someone who was behind the scenes on a lot of Sega [projects], Tojo, and Ikebuchi [Tooru Ikebuchi, co-programmer on Virtua Fighter, who later co-founded Dream Factory]. They were all really good at machine code. Mark Cerny, too.
We were talking about arcade boards for a minute -- what are you thoughts on the present state of arcades?
YS: That market certainly shrank too, didn't it? Well, it can't be helped! [laughs] You can't do much about it. There's lots of other fun things to do now -- YouTube, the internet, all kinds of things.
One of the main attractions of arcades is getting together with other people to play games in the same place. Do you see any similarities to online games in that regard?
YS: Network games allow you a larger base of players to interact with, is the thing. With an arcade, you had anywhere from a dozen to around a hundred people you could theoretically have as partners or opponents -- maybe 10 or 20, depending on the genre. With network games, though, there are tons more people, and a lot of opponents you never would've met offline either. It's really a different scene like that.
I'm also curious about your thoughts on the evolution of the fighting game genre; how it's evolved in 3D form since you were involved with it.
YS: It's really amazing that they've advanced the genre up to this point, I think. I mean, the first hardware we had to work with, we could generate only 300 polygons at the same time if we wanted to keep it at 60 frames per second.
|
Sega showed us that skateboards could actually be used to play games. It gave us glimpses into the future, where our controllers interacted with us as much as we with them. Now their only 'innovative' arcade game in the last few years is a generic on rails shooter with a glasses free 3d screen.
Suzuki used to care, Sega used to care. Nintendo even cared (surprising enough), addressing the massive controller-software evolution discrepancy with the Wii. Noone speaks about controllers, but
Gaming companies dont care about pushing innovation at the risk of financial ruin, even though their expensive marketing and subpar products might bring about just as much financial ruin. They should have pushed into video eyewear and head trackers a long time ago, and our motion controls should be intertial.
But ours is a fashion industry, not a video game industry. Its an industry that idolizes film and literature at the expensive of hard science and engineering. Who will take the mantle next generation, or should we all be making games for Kinect and Razer?
a gaming vest with haptic feedback for only $139.... yet no compatibility with gaming consoles as of yet (launched Nov 2007).
Why is Hollywood Cinema still considered the "Master Medium" when in so many ways games are a superior art form? Don't get me wrong, film is an amazing medium and has it's own special charm and storytelling capabilities native to it's format, just like novels, comic books, music, live theater etc.
I just feel it's a bit foolish, and really shows a lack of faith in the medium that here we are 30 years later and we're still locked in this mindset of making chintzy action movies that can be controlled with a gamepad.
It's like Alan Moore said about comics that try to emulate film; at best they end up being movies that do not move... and I think this observation can apply to games in a lateral manner. As long as we hero-worship and emulate films in development of interactive entertainment, at best they will be movies that move at the pace of the player...
So instead this generation the needed growth had to come from elsewhere which was the large pool of people who do not play games. Because movies are such a universal part of modern culture everyone can get behind the concept of not only watching a movie, but controlling one too, being in the middle of it deciding how things progress.
That is the motivation at the heart of the movement really, and it is also at a heart of a lot of movement in the medium which has moved away from its core competency toward trying to ape the alien and incompatible functions of other mediums, such as cinema.
The cinematography/graphics have become a big part of gaming and the mechanics have taken a back seat or we would have first person shooters with mechanics better then UT2004. UT2004 is pretty much near the pinnacle of first person shooter game mechanics.
Id see the "better mechanics" in mw as a way to act a bit more realistic within its "army" setting, but also a way to slow the pace of the game to an unrealistic level so its more accessible to average gamers.
The UT series is based on things that are concepts from the future.
We wont likely need any guns with iron sights in 50-100 years in the future so its appropriate thinking of future science, not a lack of "better mechanics".
WW2 fps games have shittier mechanics by trying to tie their games to realism, so that naturally constrains the possibilities. The iron sights is not a step forward but a giant step back by catering to gun nut culture of the US.
The reason why FPS games are so popular is because get get those gun luvvin murricans. Most WW2 fanatics wouldn't know a good FPS if it hit them in the face given how much they sheepishly buy military shooters.
As much as i admire the imagination of science fiction, when a video game doesn't make its control scheme sci fi, then its just lost in translation. Thats why i regard Vanquish as more of a Sci Fi game than Halo. You're looking at the surface details, but i'm looking at the actual mechanics. Sting would have us all firing from the hip, but i'd rather the dynamic option of either thank you very much.
Thats the most intresting sentence in the interview to me. Wisdom, it's a good thing.
My question ends up being a bit rhetorical I suppose ;)