First Force Unleashed reviews cause wincing
SOCOM beta demand batters PSN, says Sony
Bungie Halo game news "sooner rather than later"
May 15th, 2008 @ 12:29
Banjo Kazooie: Nuts & Bolts dev lead Gregg Mayles reckons platform adventuring of old is over - and the new Rare game is the true evolution.
“It’s true that anyone wanting a carbon copy of the previous two games will be disappointed, so I’m not even going to make out that it is,” he said in a live chat with Rare fansites.
“What I believe it to be is an evolution of the platform adventure genre. The genre is too stale: it needed shaking up, so we’re trying something different, but within the framework of a ‘traditional’ Banjo game.
“It has a familiar structure, things to collect, characters to talk to and all the humour you would expect. I said on one forum that all we have done is to make the travelling fun. So that pretty much sums it up, we have taken the boring bit (travelling) and made it fun.”
Mayles went on to give an abolute ton of information on the upcoming game, which was announced earlier this week at the Microsoft Gamer’s Day in California. Fill your lunchtime with Rare bear.
Del.icio.us | Digg | Share on Facebook
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
May 15th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
I don’t think Mario Galaxy was very stale.
May 15th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
Well it wasn’t exactly ground-breaking.
May 15th, 2008 at 12:40 pm
“characters to talk to”
Oh bugger, I was looking vaguely forward to this until I read this bit.
NO TALK, JUST ACTION DOCTOR JONES
May 15th, 2008 at 12:41 pm
SMG was a revelation.
May 15th, 2008 at 12:41 pm
By adding cars! And weapons! Yes! INNOVATION!
May 15th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
Jack and Daxter was fairly groundbreaking, and nobody gave a shit about that. Again though, somebody PLEASE explain why it’s so important for games to be innovative and groundbreaking? I’m sick of hearing about it.
May 15th, 2008 at 12:49 pm
Because some people get bored of playing the same old thing? Because if it games didn’t attempt this the genres would become stale?
I dunno, makes sense to me.
May 15th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
“Again though, somebody PLEASE explain why it’s so important for games to be innovative and groundbreaking? I’m sick of hearing about it.”
It’s important for publishers and developers so that their game becomes the genre defining experience that can’t be found anywhere else.
I don’t think that it’s all that important for all gamers though. I’m sure many people would still rather play a 2D platformer over the latest stuff anyway.
May 15th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
Wrong on both counts. Just because a game doesn’t have some new features, doesn’t mean it’s the same old thing. The best games never innovated anyway. Ocarina of Time wasn’t innovative, Halo wasn’t, FFVII wasn’t, GTAIII wasn’t, none of the best games are ever innovative. It’s the refinement of ideas that makes the best games. Almost all of the games that you might think were innovative, nearly always had an unknown game that preceded it. That a game should be innovative is one of the popular myths of gaming, up there with “gameplay is the only thing that matters”.
May 15th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
Little Big Banjo using coloured lines to attack things to other things and drop them into the game world.
INNOVATION.
May 15th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
Can’t argue with that, ecu. Fair play.
May 15th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
“Ocarina of Time wasn’t innovative, Halo wasn’t, FFVII wasn’t, GTAIII wasn’t, none of the best games are ever innovative.”
You sure about that?
Ocarina of Time was the first 3D Zelda and it created the Z tageting scheme. Halo created the silly re-charging shield nonsense. FF7 was the first big RPG to take advantage of the extra storage space of a CD, it was a huge epic sweeping tale, especially in comparison to the SNES games that came before. GTA3 created an entire genre.
May 15th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
I think those kinds of games do have some originality, but never on a massive scale. As mentioned with Halo, the little things made all the difference - (AFAIK) the best vehicle implementation in an FPS, the recharge shields, the melee system and having grenades on a button rather than a seperate weapon were all new ideas.
May 15th, 2008 at 1:03 pm
Depends what you class as innovative, then, absolutezero. Z-targetting and shield recharging are new features, but the games are really just ultimate refinements of existing ideas imo.
May 15th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
I do agree that refinement is far far more important than innovation for innovations sake. Adding in lots of little new ideas though serve to shake things up alot.
GTA3 was’nt really a refinement of anything though.
May 15th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
Here’s a nice figure for you:
Banjo 3 gaming balance - 20% platforming, 80% vehicles
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=189036
I sense a fanboy storm a brewin’!
May 15th, 2008 at 2:13 pm
@ Blerk
FYI: the comment you quote from C&VG is taken from the very same source Pat links to in this article. I urge you to read the source before either linking out or jumping to conclusions on what we think makes the game innovative.
May 15th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
/waves at George K
Ignore Blerk. He hates everything.
May 15th, 2008 at 2:24 pm
Ooh, get her!
May 15th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
better get some vaseline in here and quick.
May 15th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
/misses UncleClive
http://lolrare.ytmnd.com/
May 15th, 2008 at 2:38 pm
\o/