I tried the demo of Mirror's Edge and it definitely could be frustrating. I liked the slightly fish eye view and the ability to see your hands and feet out of the corner of your eye, it really made the game feel immersive.

However, I don't think a parkour simulator really works on the existing 16:9 screen. Maybe with a wrap around screen from the future? The ME camera would be better suited to a slower paced adventure game.

I really enjoyed the concept of Mirrors Edge! Its not the best but I am confident it will improve in a sequel!


Actually PC's do exist that play Crysis! Mine does at an avg. 64 fps!

PC Specs
Intel i7 920 @ 4ghz / 6gb OCZ DDR3 Ram / Asus Rampage II Extreme / 2 XFX Nvidia 9800 GX2 in SLI / 2 Intel 32gb SSD RAID 0 (for OS only)/ 4 300gb WD Velociraptor's RAID 0/ 1Tb Seagate Barracuda /Blu-Ray Drive / 24'' Monitor / Vista Ultimate 64-bit / Windows 7 Ultimate Beta 64-bit

I don't have a problem with the camera in Mirror's Edge.  I think almost all of the game's problems can be traced to the controls and especially the "hit detection" of when Faith grabs onto things.

I completly understand Jonny's complaints, but I still enjoyed it.
The sheer joy when I actually made it through a part of a level flawlessly outweighed the times when I restarted the same damn stretch over and over again.

I think Mirror's Edge was, without a doubt, the most frustrating game I played last year.

Oh no, I didn't have any problem with the camera either. What I meant was the camera deserved to be in a better game.

By the way, I finished ME today.  It has tons of great level design and a lot of memorable moments.  There were also times when I came very close to throwing a controller, not to mention many curses under my breath.

I'm listening to it right now. Still in the "Whatcha been playin" section.

Just as a suplement to the N64 Expansion Pak discussion.

Here is the reference link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expansion_Pak

I'm sorry but I found it hilarious when Lindy started freaking out about FPS game criticism. Hit a little close to home ehhe, Mr. Lindy Luthor? ;)

Anyway great show.

Just finished listening to this episode. Great one. I totally agree that Luigi's Mansion holds up and still looks good today. I re-played the game last year and still enjoyed it. I think it's a no-brainer to be part of the New Play Control! series.

FPSes are the hip thing to bash, like Nintendo is the hip thing to bash.  It's all the same to me...close-minded.

I think a sequel or a remake would better suit the game than a NPC! port. You would need to change the POV and camera for the IR to be an effective tool I would think.
A sequel would be preferable. I like that some of these games are getting a second chance at exposure but I don't want to end up watching Nintendo resources get sucked up by porting half of the Gamecube library to Wii when they could be better served making new sequels.

I wonder if it could be attributed to the fact that it is one of the most abused and stagnant genres going now. It needs another half-life (or Goldeneye) to jump start another evolution, Resistance, Conduit, FEAR 2, along with others are not helping matters, and it seems closed minded to not accept the fact that it needs to evolve. The same thing can be said about the RTS genre, which is FINALLY starting to change and is becoming exciting again (as a fan of the genre I really appreciate this evolution). Now that genre has less wiggle room in evolution then even the FPS but it is being done. If developers stuck with the mindset that "We can't innovate this anymore" we would probably be getting prettier versions of Doom.

The FPS genre has so far to go yet, but it is being held back by consoles from what I've seen . I'm waiting for the genre to take the next step and implement not only the free roaming, non-linear structure found in games that are still pretty unique, like Far Cry 2 or Crysis, but with extremely interactive environments that affect how the game is played (I'm not talking about terrain deforming but that can be an aspect). The linear, been there done that, FPS needs to go, it is archaic (though admittedly it can still be fun but far from exciting anymore) still sucking off Half-Life's innovations. If you want to call that criticism closed minded, go ahead but I actually want to see innovation. I will NOT accept that lazy notion that it can't go any farther. THAT IS CLOSED MINDED. The genre, like any genre out there is still open for fresh new ideas, whether it is something we have never seen before or meshing other genres into it (which is NOT new for the genre, like I said compare the complexity of Doom to what we see now).

Historically anytime a genre starts getting attacked is because it was starting to get stale. Whether it is the JRPG, Platformers, RTS, or Point & CLick adventures. It is a signal that something is wrong with a particular genre, that the market has been inundated with it and excitement starts waning. This has NOTHING to do with being closed minded but is a sign of a breaking point. As a fan of the genre, someone who has played FPS games since Wolfenstein 3D I do not want to see this happen. I'm not going to stick my head in the sand and pretend the genre is doing just fine that it isn't starting to lose its excitement. I DO NOT want to see it go the way of the platformer, a genre I loved to death but even I admitted it was being abused and needed to change.

Do you see any potential from certain companies or upcoming games to bring about these changes?
I would imagine Half-Life 3, when it comes (not episode 3 of HL2), could be a bearer of innovation.
I also remember hearing about a PS3 game that was going to have up to 256 players on a map. Making maps that huge could pave the way for a lot of things including more open-ended (almost MMO-esque) worlds and interactivity.
In fact SW Battlefront 3 had a lot of possibility with it's huge seamless world from fighting on a planet to taking a ship and flying it into space and landing on a Star Destroyer and continuing the fight inside. All that without load times or transition points.

The 256 player game could be a stepping stone if utilized right. Increasing the amount of players on a map will not innovate alone but if you make use of that larger community to create unique situations that could not be done otherwise would be important. I think the Battlefield series is a good example of utilizing lots of players for a unique experience. Even Battlefield origins, while stripped down in many places for consoles showed promise with a more interactive environment.

I think the biggest problem is that, despite a few games like Far Cry 2, Crysis etc companies are afraid to evolve the genre much because they fear that the user base will revolt and not buy their game. Which is really a double edged sword because sooner or later it will collapse under the Halos, Resistances, Conduits (yes I am throwing it in there, while it is a great step for Wii, it still is yet another weight put onto the back of the linear FPS with a pretty basic multiplayer mode), and the FEARS etc like the RTS genre did. I also think Bioshock was a step in the right direction when it came to a compromise between linear and non-linear gameplay.

It would not surprise me if someone is thinking "Well Nintendo doesn't innovate their key franchises much". Guess what? I agree to an extent, but the difference is that the core Nintendo franchises like AC, Mario, Zelda, and Metroid are few and far between that the market isn't flooded with them which in turn would make them lose their magic much faster. I still find it kind of funny that as long as Zelda has been out, besides Okami, few games have even matched it in 3D.

Didn't Deus Ex attempt non-linear play? I remember playing the first one vaguely and I know the devs wanted to achieve non-linearity in how you could play and complete levels, though I think they ultimately failed.

I remember there was an MMO-FPS a few years ago, but did not that also fail? Was that due to too much non-linearity to hold peoples attention? It seems if you give a game too much non-linearity players loose focus as the story waters down to account for user free-will.

Where is the balance, or is non-linearity be the best way for the genre to go?

Deus-Ex was a good first step, though sadly it didn't make much of an impact. I'd say Crysis is a good balance between linear and non-linear, you technically are going on a linear mission but there are so many ways to achieve your goal the game feels wide open. It directs you through the action while still making it feel like you have freedom.

The FPS MMORPG would be hard to pull off as shown in the past, because you have to balance it so new players aren't overwhelmed. Not to say it should be abandoned, because it has a ton of potential but I would hate to be the person that has to design a GOOD FPS MMORPG.

PlanetSide was what I was thinking about. A friend of mine was really into that game back in its hey day.
I found an MMO-FPS list on Wikipedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massively_multiplayer_online_first-person_shooter

A good MMO-FPS should be more about missions and objectives and less about leveling up and getting stronger. Maybe better weapons but not too much so as to allow the possibility of alienating players.
Give players a gamer tag of sorts with promotions, ranks and achievements Promotions would open up more advanced missions and weapons as you become more important to your organization, allowing newer players to play the easier ones as they adapt to the game.

Nice to hear that not everyone is excited about The Conduit.  I"m not a FPS fan either, so I'll probably be skipping this one, nothing new to see here.

I am still looking forward to it, can't say I'm thrilled because like I said it does little distinguish itself or move the genre forward. I'd rank it ahead of, let's say, FEAR 2 (which I did buy, it still is a fun series) because of things like the all seeing eye, along with nostalgia that it will be like playing PD or Goldeneye, not to mention playing with people here online. The only FPS games I can say I've been excited for are Bioshock and Crysis, because they brought some fresher things to the genre (I'd include Mirror's Edge but it isn't really a shooter).

Wow, better that Fear 2, bold statement.  I actually played through that demo and I was VERY impressed with the spooky vibe and over the top action.  If I'm going to pick up any FPS it'll probably be Killzone 2 as that demo impressed me as well.  Like the Conduit, it doesn't seem to bring anything "new" per say, but personally, I prefer the art stye in Killzone to that of The Conduit.

Well with Killzone 2 as I've said before dual analog aiming is a major turn off for me. So I probably will not pick it up.

Woohoo it appeared!

WTF... where did it go?  I'm on the case.  We have to find that thread so we can read more comments on the next show!

Crytek bought Free Radical specifically for console development it seems.

http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/a147098/crytek-using-free-radical-for-consoles.html

I guess I should have framed my comment on Luigi's Mansion a little differently.  I read up a lot on Luigi's Mansion.  I wasn't expecting a Mario-type, exactly;  I was just hoping that the game would have a little more depth or variance in gameplay. 

To be honest, I'd just like a Mario Game where I'd have an option to play as Luigi from the start.  I was always one of the weird kids who play SMB 3 and SMW with controller 2 just so I could play as Luigi.

I still do that. :)

After I beat Galaxy with 120 stars, I really wanted to go back through the game and play as Luigi, but I've never been able to work up the motivation to do it.

Its the Luigi factor