Previously, I wrote about how the next
generation of consoles will not revitalize the industry, but I
suppose I should have put a caveat on that: the next-gen consoles
will not revitalize the industry unless
they manage to include a kind of creative forward-thinking that the
last several generations have lacked.
The
previous few generations, we were still coming out of the leap from
2D to 3D games. However, this has now come to a point where
improvements in technology can only marginally change things as far
as graphics, physics and gameplay are concerned. For some time, the
industry has been gradually making attempts to break the current mold
in meaningful ways, but nothing has truly stuck because the core of
the consumer base likes games that they can enjoy for long periods of
time without feeling too gimmicky.
It is
controversial to bring it up, but hardcore gamers are the lifeblood
of the industry. Casual gamers are important, too, but are far too
unreliable a market to be the sole customers of any group. This is
part of the reason the Wii did so well early on but started falling
behind before long: it appealed to casual gamers, but it was a matter
of time before much of the gameplay utility the motion control had
became old hat and hardcore gamers wanted to sit back down for
something more dedicated.
So,
motion control didn't stick the way some developers were hoping it
would, but that does not mean it is dead. Far from it; the Kinect,
in particular, gave a form of motion control that is promising, but
didn't quite go far enough.
There
is basically one technology short of full on mind control or
holograms that could make the next-gen consoles truly refresh gaming,
and that technology is augmented reality. We have basic augmented
reality capability now, but it has so far only been applied in
limited forms and mostly in mobile devices. It has not been fully
integrated into consoles yet, but I believe the capability is there.
For
those who don't know, augmented reality is something of a middle
ground between virtual reality and, well, “regular” reality. It
is when you are presented with a visual of the real world, either
through a camera-device or lenses with some form of display in them.
It allows you to provide visual augmentations and interaction to
things in the real world, such as, for instance, taking a map placed
on the table and using it for references to play a form of video game
with virtual characters on said map.
We
have seen some use of this form of technology in Microsoft's Kinect,
which can record footage of the player and map their body movements
as they interact with virtual objects in a game. Now, imagine that
same form of interaction, but reversed: the player now has a device
of some sort, perhaps worn on the head, that would allow them to see
interactive objects outside their tv set. This could be used for all
sorts of purposes: HUDs, extra buttons, throwing fireballs into your
tv set; you name it. It would be like the jump to 3D all over again,
except that this time the 3D is both literal and fully interactive.
Sadly,
I don't expect to see this sort of thing any time soon, if ever. The
industry does not seem to have that kind of creativity these days and
simply wants to maintain the status quo. I do not foresee that going
well, but if my prediction is right, I am hoping that things don't
get too much worse, either. In my mind, it seems like we're heading
toward another crash in the games industry similar to the one in the
80's.
For the HTL cross post: http://www.holdtheline.com/entries/what-technology-could-revitalize-the-industry.344/
ReplyDelete