Yossarian wrote:But yes, popular game that people love tends to be relevant in threads about popular or important games. Finding it annoying is likely to be aggravating.
b0r1s wrote:My original point, which I've reiterated is that I was interested in people's views on whether the next gen hardware has afforded any kind of revolutionary/different/unexpected (apologies for lack of correct word usage) whatever gameplay that has emerged before.
People constantly banging on in the thread about why it's a pointless discussion is, in itself, utterly pointless. If you don't want to discuss then don't. Don't keep saying you don't want to discuss it.
If this is the case it would suggest 'revolutionary' gameplay ideas are often things you can identify some years after they actually happen. You wouldn't then expect to see any after 2 years of a new generation.monkey wrote:If revolution can be defined I think it's more to do with impact than originality. Nothing is original, you just get new mixtures of things. Games are iterative so things like gears can have a big impact because of how well they executed cover mechanics but it wasn't anything new as such. It was just well done, and that's probably another important component. Something with an industry shaping impact that is a new, different combination of what has come before.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!