Nidhogg IS great.

Spread the word.

I'm trying to think EDIT: conceive of a game that uses modern - high resolution displays, motion plus for control, used with some sort of trimmed down gameplay that works on a single screen and can be enjoyed by spectators. Needs to be 2 player versus.

It needs to be so that it can never be truly mastered. Think about snooker on TV - you can see everying on the TV at once - the skills required are kinetic  - each gen throws up better players despite its apparant simplicity - it's not far away from a video game really - yet gets viewing figures.

It needs to something unique but - not pretending to be something else - something that could only work in a digital realm. Tough.

Wouldn't have to be M+ but the input needs to be analogue or an approximation of it that M+ and Move are - it has to be such that it feels like requiring a physical skill to play well.

Davy have you seen Johan Sebastian Joust? Fits all your criteria except being on a.screen!

Office gaming league hasn't got off the ground this year - too much happening in work (for me at least). However this could give me the impetus to get it going again:

http://www.meetup.com/Tetris30/

2 player Tetris if played as a race (first to 25 or 40 lines) with garbage attacks on is a great game.

mistercrayon wrote:

Davy have you seen Johan Sebastian Joust? Fits all your criteria except being on a.screen!

Bringing physicality to gaming is an important way of expanding interest in it - good example.

Not convinced of that.You can't "see everything at once" with an FPS. For those who are into them I can see it working but if you want to get casuals or uninitiated people involved they aren't the best type of game to use.

It would take a bit of effort to set one up for watching. Depends on the match ups and how many you would involve at any one time. A 2 player match in a small tight level might work but there are too many opportunities for kills to be made that can't be followed the way scores in a same screen game can be.

One game I would try it with would be Outtrigger with it's small tight arenas and arcade sensibilities (it was a network arcade cabinet game with trakball and joystick control) but sadly the DC PAL version dropped network options and is split screen only. A two player split screen game might work but I aim to avoid any split screen game. The only one I have tried was Super Monkey Ball in 2 player competition mode which worked OK but I can't see me going further than that.

Something else I would toy with would be a racing game with linkup mode but again - a pain to set up because of the need for a second screen (in my case projector and screen). But racing games require knowledge of tracks and once someone gets a lead are boring to watch so its unlikely to be worth the effort.

I'm afraid there aren't that many games that are suitable and its why uninitiated people find many games have accessibility problems. Back to my original post.

In a game like American football you can't watch everything that's happening but the tv people make sure you're watching what is most important. It's the same in a 5v5 game of counter strike or 4v4 Halo.

Knight wrote:

In a game like American football you can't watch everything that's happening but the tv people make sure you're watching what is most important. It's the same in a 5v5 game of counter strike or 4v4 Halo.

Requiring a broadcast editor is a barrier to entry when dealing with people you are trying to engage with.

Windjammers ..... good choice. Ever tried Warlords? Have been toying with that one. Four player too.

Puzzle Bobble, S.puzzle fighter, mean bean and similar all tend to get a crowd ooo'ing and ahh'ing too. Again, fast turnarounds (essential at these things I find, no one wants to wait 15 mins for a FIFA or halo game to end), simple to grasp and very compelling to watch for all levels of gamesy people.

Warioware is a fucking riot of a game. May need some gaming intuition to understand what to do though.

Cool, I've got a 2600 and two paddles, I think... don't have the game though, which could be a setback

Good shout on wario ware Livvers, couple of the boys have had that going before.

nick_md wrote:

Cool, I've got a 2600 and two paddles, I think... don't have the game though, which could be a setback Good shout on wario ware Livvers, couple of the boys have had that going before.

Game can be got for next to nothing - a pound or two off eBay would sort that out. Really need 4 paddles/ 2 pairs for 4 player mode as the AI is moronic. There is a doubles game version on the cartridge that lets you control 2 castles at once which offers a decent option for a 2 player game though.

If you can get a projector and the 2600 going through that (or on the big TV) that would help. I got mine going by using a VCR to convert the signal to composite which would be good enough.

I might have a look at the XBL version - would be easier to get setup. It looks good - not sure how the control would hold up though..




There's a non Atari version too...