Original GoldenEye Director "Console FPS don't innovate, happens only on PC"

[Zipper5 74]

Found this interesting new article on The Escapist.

Martin Hollis, director of the classic N64 shooter GoldenEye, thinks that console shooters have lost their way, and any innovation in the genre is happening on the PC.

GoldenEye made such a splash when it was released, that more than a decade later it is still held up as an example of a movie tie-in that didn't suck, not to mention one of the games that defined the modern console shooter. But Hollis doesn't think that modern console shooters are really trying to do anything new anymore and instead are just rehashing the same old ideas.

He said that he always went into FPS games hoping to see something new, but felt that most of the interesting developments were happening in PC shooters, which had different cultures and different gameplay mechanics. He didn't think that console shooters were moving backwards necessarily, but he didn't think that they were moving forwards and that a lot of what he saw wasn't really very new.

He did acknowledge that console shooters had brought about one very big change however, although he didn't think it was a positive one. He felt that playing a shooter on a console had become a solitary activity, whereas when he was making them in the nineties, they had had a much greater social element. Even playing online was still essentially a solitary activity, he said, which was a lot more convenient, but lacked the emotional appeal of gathering with friends to play.

Hollis does have a point that console shooters aren't pushing the envelope with every release, but without some specific examples, it's impossible to know what PC shooters he thinks are doing it so much better.

While it's not exactly news to any PC gamer, it does feel good to have a man responsible for one of the greatest FPS games of all time reasserting it. Though the article does have a point - I'd like to hear which games he thinks are so innovative. Would Arma 2 count? :p

[Baff1 0]

It would for me.

But it's kind of a rosey eyed view. It overlooks that the bulk of all the PC shooters back in the day when they were made in number...didn't innovate either.

Certainly technology titles are always and have always been the ones I have had most intrest in. The must buys.

[ben_s 11]

I don't see why theres a thread needed to inform us that console FPS' arn't innovatitve.

We already know this fact.

[celery 8]

Though the article does have a point - I'd like to hear which games he thinks are so innovative. Would Arma 2 count? :p

The Half-Life series has been pretty innovative.

[mic1402 10]

don't forget TF2, it's a great game.

[bangtail 0]

GoldenEye still ranks as one of the best FPS ever made.

It is a testament to 'FPS done right' that I fear may not be surpassed in this age of CoD and it's many clones.

[Zipper5 74]

I'd say that Crysis was pretty innovative technology-wise, and was PC-only. It was the first to really use DirectX10, and it's development also created SSAO, which even OA uses now (and looks fantastic). The rest of the game was as unoriginal as unoriginality gets. :p

[Deadfast 43]

I'd say that Crysis was pretty innovative technology-wise, and was PC-only. It was the first to really use DirectX10, and it's development also created SSAO, which even OA uses now (and looks fantastic). The rest of the game was as unoriginal as unoriginality gets. :p

I always considered Crysis 3D Mark with controls ;)

[Zipper5 74]

Yes, I agree, but at the very least it's development created SSAO, and I'm sure the fact it was the first to crack DX10 helped other developers do the same from then on.

[Deadfast 43]

Oh, I don't dispute its advancement in the technology department. Although I think Martin Hollis was more focused on the gameplay department.

But while we're at the subject of Crysis, look at Crysis 2...

Edited October 26, 2010 by Deadfast

[bascule42 10]

This, sadly, reminds me of an interview I heard on local radio last Sunday with Annie Lennox talking about her disdain for the X-Factor. Every word, as in the article in the OP, was true and what I consider to be a fair viewpoint. Ultimately it's a figure from the industry's past, Martin Hollis on gaming as with Lennox talking about music, saying basically - "Things were better in my day". No doubt they still work, but the golden time for 'em has gone.

Dont get me wrong, I agree - wholeheartedly - and my disdain for the way consoles have affected the gaming industry, (as the X-Factor has affected the music industry - X Factor is the same as the (American, or otherwise) Idol contests btw), knows no bounds - especially when the PC version of the game isn't even a version, but a straight port with nothing to distinguish it from its low spec counterparts.

Innovation can only start when a majority of people demand it. Unfortunately, in todays era of bread and circuses, the lowest comman denominator rules and devlopers will give people what they want. It's the same for movies, music, and gaming - you can even throw food & drink into that too.

PC gaming from it's very first look demands a little thought into using the games developed for it. Even the act of installing software to use, entering the serial, updating, tweaking with the settings, getting it running fine, is condusive to, albeit not much in some cases, an attitude of "Thers a little brain work involved in this" and an intelligent approach, (definitely not much in some cases), to using the software. It's not much, but its there, and it grows. After a couple of years of PC gaming, most people have arsed around with stuff on their PC's and learnt a lot about them. After 10 years, some people know as much about the OS as professionals, and so on...

With consoles, there is none of this. Out the box, in the drive, play.

But, maybe this is just me saying like: "Things were better in my day".**

**Actually, having played a Spectrum 48k emulator recently, I can honestly say, No, things were total shit in my day.

[bangtail 0]

I always considered Crysis 3D Mark with controls ;)

I don't think so at all.

Crysis is a pretty good game in it's own right and it allows you to approach problems in a fairly non-linear way due to the sheer size of the maps, suit modes etc. It's better than most of the FPS dross out there these days.

Far Cry 1 was the same, everyone called it a tech demo but it was way ahead of it's time and had some 'sneaky as hell' AI.

[Tonci87 163]

I would also say that crysis was kind of inovative. It introduced this awesome suit with all of his crazy functions. That was really fun. (But to be honest Crysis without the nano suit and the decent AI would be really bad)

[Richey79 10]

...and Crysis was really ambitious, too, in what they wanted their AI to be able to do.

I do think that all those features that designers wanted to put in, that the marketing department talk up and which never make it into the final build, are just as important for innovation. Look at Stalker for a great example. They really wanted to do things that PC tech just couldn't handle at that time.

[Daniel 0]

Bascule42

I completely agree. Great games are out there (as we all know), but you have to put some time and effort in to see results.

The same goes for good music vs X Factor shite, excellent food vs fast food, etc.

[froggyluv 2136]

What a f'in brilliant game that was :inlove:

Bought the N64 just for that game, never played another game on it and didn't regret it for a moment. After all of these years, I still remember how it played out and the total immersion that it created.

[4 IN 1 0]

Crysis is more like a playable tech demo for their CE2 engine, however so far I only see crysis itself and a few mods working on the engine. I wonder if PR mod had ever think of using their engine instead of Arma2.

[Hans Ludwig 0]

What a f'in brilliant game that was :inlove:

Bought the N64 just for that game, never played another game on it and didn't regret it for a moment. After all of these years, I still remember how it played out and the total immersion that it created.

I did the same thing. lol Except I did buy the sequel of Goldeneye for N64. I forgot the name of it, but had the same levels but just retextured.

[von_paulus 0]

Innovation can only start when a majority of people demand it. Unfortunately, in todays era of bread and circuses, the lowest comman denominator rules and devlopers will give people what they want. It's the same for movies, music, and gaming - you can even throw food & drink into that too.

Amen.

While I don't agree that innovation can only start when a majority of people demand it" the rest it's perfectly true.

IMHO, in most of the times, innovation, starts from a inner impulse and it's not subjugated from other people's will.

[maddogx 13]

I did the same thing. lol Except I did buy the sequel of Goldeneye for N64. I forgot the name of it, but had the same levels but just retextured.

You're talking about Perfect Dark? I know that was pretty much based on Golden Eye 64, same engine and all. One of very few games I owned on the N64, and probably one of the most awesome ones of all time. :)

[bangtail 0]

Yep, PD was another great one.

And slightly OT, but as we've mentioned Crysis, doesn't this move look like it 'borrowed' heavily from Crysis visually?

http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi668403225/

[-)rStrangelove 0]

Imo consoles were invented to provide ppl with cheap & quick & easy entertainment, even to ppl that arent tech savy.

Today it has shifted. Consoles cost a lot and require at least some amount of tech knowledge ( to use wlans, routers, gateways etc). Games are very pricey and the publishers are being paid extra $$$ if they delay the pc versions by a few months.

Today consoles are just a trick to get more cash from gamers and those who think they are, thats all.

[Tonci87 163]

agree on that

[Zipper5 74]

Now Kevin Lavine, creator of BioShock, agrees.

It's nice to see the PC finally getting some love from the mainstream.

[Rime 10]

Bascule42:"Innovation can only start when a majority of people demand it."

Your money is your vote in the game world....they've cast their votes, lets them have their Hollywood grade b action games. :rolleyes: not that they seem to mind.

Also the reason why pc games are Innovative is mostly do to independent developers. most of them don't care if their game sells or flops. its the greed that kills the Innovation.....

IMO

__________EDIT_______________

man, just reading the comments tells you why there's a lack innovation in consoles lol

Edited October 28, 2010 by Rime