Hacker News Reader

Comment by Cushman | Hacker News Reader

I'm not much of a console gamer, but I do play more than my share of PC games, and I have to ask... is anyone else really unimpressed by this touchscreen-peripheral concept, in any of its incarnations?

When I'm playing a video game, I want to be immersed in it. It's a very clever illusion, though one I doubt anyone ever consciously invented, that since your field of view is always in the same place in retina-space[0], a static screen can trick you into thinking you're looking or moving around by displaying moving images.

I feel like having a second screen, especially one I have to hold in my hands, could only distract me from this effect and remind me that I'm actually sitting on a couch, staring at a big lighted box... which doesn't really sound like fun to me.

[0] Seriously, think about this. It blew my mind.

View on HN

I agree with it detracting from the immersion in many cases, but I think your forgetting about casual games. Where this is really interesting is that it enables hidden information in local multiplayer games.

For example, you can't play poker locally because you could see everyone's hand. With this, the hands can be displayed on the player's phones. This goes for a lot of board games.

Also - playing games like Madden - you can have a playbook on your tablet, and thus keep the other team from seeing the type of play you are picking. There are a ton of games that benefit from the 'second screen' without busting immersion.

I agree that Skyrim should skip the second screen, but imagine using the iPad as the map from CoD or BF3 - issuing commands to squads via the iPad while they control their characters with normal controllers.

> I agree that Skyrim should skip the second screen, but imagine using the iPad as the map from CoD or BF3 - issuing commands to squads via the iPad while they control their characters with normal controllers.

I'm remembering commander mode from BF2 and thinking that if I had a second screen for something like that, I'd be in heaven.

Even if the functions of the "start" screen (squad/team/comms/weapons management) were relegated to a second screen, I think it'd be a big improvement. It's a lot easier to switch context in the physical space than it is to flick between screens with input lag and the fact that it completely obscures your view. It's a modality issue. You can't effectively divide your attention.

Inventory management for Minecraft on 360? Easier to shift things around with your fingers than moving a pointer with the standard 360 controller.

Some of the very few GameCube games that took advantage of the GBA link-up cables made good use of player-specific screens. Final Fantasy: Crystal Chronicles used it for individual inventory management and Four Swords switched play to the GBA screens when players entered buildings/caves.

You're quite right, I did forget about those. I'm still not quite seeing it, though... I suppose since I'm not a console gamer I have a hard time imagining spending my time hanging out with other people while all starting at our hands.

I think I'd need to see an implementation that wasn't just a rehash of a board/card game I can play quite well already thank you very much to believe it.

Think of Scrabble for iPad, where the main board is displayed thereon and players can use iPhones for private game pieces.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com