Let's think about a killer game...

[ekianjo]

Where does it prove your point?

Look at this: http://www.dadsgamingaddiction.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/PapersPlease-2013-08-09-16-22-39-90.jpg
Does that image grab your attention? If you were scanning around a room of other screens is this the screen that would immediately catch your eye?


Can you honestly tell me that that image is more attractive than this one? http://www.destinythegame.com/content/dam/atvi/bungie/dtg/home/destiny-hp-fb-og-share-img.jpg

That's not the point at all. The point is, this is a game that became hugely popular DESPITE looking "bad" or not really good in the first place. 

It's like saying people play Minecraft because of the graphics or something. Of course not. There are many other reasons why games can be interesting and grab attention, and still become million sellers. And WITHOUT any marketing. Minecraft and Papers Please largely became popular by word of mouth and good reviews. 

 

[ekianjo]

but nothing that shows off the Pandora's graphical and musical capabilities apart from games.

Demos are strongly linked with how widespread platforms are/were. That's why the C64 demo scene still exists. Nobody really wants to make demos on a hardware they don't own, can't get or that almost nobody has. That's the reality. 

 

[ekianjo]

How about listing which unique pandora games are best?  How about "microbes"? http://repo.openpand...microbes.wb&p=1

There are very few unique Pandora games, unfortunately.  

 

[ekianjo]

I'd like to see game studios doing things for the Pyra, but let's face it : we first need to both sell a great number and show it's technical capabilities.

Let's face it. There will be no major commercial support coming from developers anytime soon. The Pyra will be like the last platform they'll invest time on, because there are just so many other platforms out there anyway. That's why big companies who launch hardware usually also have strong 1st party titles developed for it : to drive sales and ensure there is something to play with. 

Even the Raspberry Pi gets no commercial games support (even though it would be capable of running a certain number of games), so this does not give much hope for the Pyra either. 

But I'd like to see something more like Racer. Maybe TORCS, with better graphics and gameplay.

Already ported for the Pandora, by the way.

http://repo.openpandora.org/?page=detail&app=torcs_ptitseb 

 

[levi]

but nothing that shows off the Pandora's graphical and musical capabilities apart from games.

 Demos are strongly linked with how widespread platforms are/were. That's why the C64 demo scene still exists. Nobody really wants to make demos on a hardware they don't own, can't get or that almost nobody has. That's the reality.

It might be why the C64 scene still exists, I dunno, but I'd dispute your assertion that you needed a mainstream platform to have a demo-scene in the first place. I've always been in to off-beat computers, and in the 90s the all had demos, written by people who wanted to prove that their computer was as good as the more mainstream one.

I agree that you can't make a demo if you don't own the hardware (as a coder anyway, musicians and graphic artists are slightly freer), but it strikes me that a demo is something multiple people with different skillsets could collaborate on, as they've traditionally been done that way, with the musician working independently from the artists who work largely separately from the coders working on effects.

I can't really argue that anyone should spend their time making a demo, since they're not even fun to play like games are, but they strike me as something more achievable given a disparate workforce, and something musicians and artists could really provide an input to, as I know we have a few of those in this community, but they are under-represented in the repository as far as I'm aware.

 

[Wrath Of Khan]

Yes. A very rudimentary game with one or two central mechanics and two or three team members only.


It might work. Lowering ambitions and thus expectations makes sense.

 

[bzar]

When I mentioned Unity, I didn't want it specifically to be ported, I was more thinking about a good-already engine, almost ready to be ported over. But open-source.

Like Godot, which is already ported?

 

[WizardStan]

That's not the point at all

Yes it is, that is exactly the point. My exact words were

nothing grabs attention in a shorter period of time than flashy images.

Becoming popular EVENTUALLY doesn't change the fact that if you want to grab peoples attention quickly, if you want to show off as much as you can in as little time as possible, fancy graphics are the way to go.

 

[ekianjo]

Becoming popular EVENTUALLY doesn't change the fact that if you want to grab peoples attention quickly, if you want to show off as much as you can in as little time as possible, fancy graphics are the way to go.

Except that every AAA game out there has fancy graphics and nobody is impressed by graphics anymore.

 

[WizardStan]

Except that every AAA game out there has fancy graphics and nobody is impressed by graphics anymore

I'm pretty sure the first comments spoken when a trailer is released are along the lines of "that looks amazing".

 

[Ziz]

Except that every AAA game out there has fancy graphics and nobody is impressed by graphics anymore

I'm pretty sure the first comments spoken when a trailer is released are along the lines of "that looks amazing".

Amazing enough to spend 500€?

 

[ekianjo]

I'm pretty sure the first comments spoken when a trailer is released are along the lines of "that looks amazing".

You mean on reddit? From people who think cats are amazing too ? Sure. Does that prove anything?

 

[klapse]

I'm pretty sure the first comments spoken when a trailer is released are along the lines of "that looks amazing".

You mean on reddit? From people who think cats are amazing too ? Sure. Does that prove anything?

It proves that people judge games first by looks alone. Has been this way since videogaming started. You are wrong, sir.

 

[ekianjo]

It proves that people judge games first by looks alone. Has been this way since videogaming started. You are wrong, sir.

Oh then that explains probably why indie games are so popular right now. Because you know, they are definitely looking JUST AS GOOD as AAA games, right ?

 

[WizardStan]

Amazing enough to spend 500€?

Probably not, that's why you need substance, not flashy images. Pretty pictures will grab someone's attention, I don't care what you say, you can't debate that, but compelling gameplay is needed to hold it.

Oh then that explains probably why indie games are so popular right now.

No it doesn't. Long term popularity has nothing to do with instant attraction. You're completely missing everything being said.

 

[fusion_power]

It's not that easy to make a "system seller" killer app, I doubt there will be a single one that alone raises the Pandora/Pyra sales.

However, I see the entire Pandora software library already as killer apps (not only the games), it's the sum of all, that makes the Device good. There is one "killer game/app" for every taste I'm sure, alot of good ports and emulators etc. I'm sure it will be even better for the Pyra. But one single game alone? I doubt it. Not even major companies have a patent recipe to make the ultimate system seller game, especialy not if they plan to make one (recent example: Sunset Overdrive for XBox One ).  Nintendo had no system seller game for the Wii U for a long time, afaik it took until Mario Kart 8 came out to have one.

 

[ekianjo]

No it doesn't. Long term popularity has nothing to do with instant attraction. You're completely missing everything being said.

Yeah, and you are completely missing the fact that "pretty graphics" have plateau-ed for like 5 years already. Crysis 1 still is not outdated.

 

[WizardStan]

Yeah, and you are completely missing the fact that "pretty graphics" have plateau-ed for like 5 years already

I'll say it again: long term popularity has nothing to do with instant attraction. I don't understand how you aren't getting this.It's very very simple: imagine two things exist, a pretty looking thing and a boring looking thing. You are shown pictures of each. Your eyes will be drawn to the pretty thing. Always, every time. Humans have evolved to be very visual creatures, our eyes tell us more about the world than any other sense. Two minutes introduction it is likely to change, you've been given some details on the differences between the two things and realize that pretty thing is actually boring and boring thing is actually really fun, but that doesn't change the fact that the very first thing that your brain registered when presented with the two choices is that one was pretty and the other not.

 

[ekianjo]

Yeah, and you are completely missing the fact that "pretty graphics" have plateau-ed for like 5 years already

I'll say it again: long term popularity has nothing to do with instant attraction. I don't understand how you aren't getting this.
It's very very simple: imagine two things exist, a pretty looking thing and a boring looking thing. You are shown pictures of each. Your eyes will be drawn to the pretty thing. Always, every time. Humans have evolved to be very visual creatures, our eyes tell us more about the world than any other sense. Two minutes introduction it is likely to change, you've been given some details on the differences between the two things and realize that pretty thing is actually boring and boring thing is actually really fun, but that doesn't change the fact that the very first thing that your brain registered when presented with the two choices is that one was pretty and the other not.

Whatever. i'd rather say that people are already fed so much pictures on a daily basis they don't care for anything that does not remotely look original, rather than pretty.

Anyway, the real point is, who cares if it's pretty, you don't translate immediate attraction to purchase. If that were that simple, all packaging in the stores would be featuring naked girls and that's it.

 

[WizardStan]

i'd rather say that people are already fed so much pictures on a daily basis they don't care for anything that does not remotely look original, rather than pretty.

You're free to say that. Saying it doesn't make it true but you can still say it if it'll make you feel better.

Anyway, the real point is, who cares if it's pretty, you don't translate immediate attraction to purchase

And I never said it would. Stop intentionally confusing the issue. I addressed a very very specific point that was raised: why fancy 3D graphics? Because fancy 3D graphics will grab immediate attention. Period. End of arguments. That is the whole extent of what I said, I went no further. I said nothing about sales, nothing about packaging, nothing about what happens after that first attraction, I said one thing and one thing only: fancy graphics will make people look.