«

[Charmed]

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1784975,00.asp

Well I can certainly agree with this article. I have not bought as many games for a few years now, compared to what I used to buy about 5+ years ago. In fact, quite a few years ago, I bought more games in half a year, than I have now, in the last 3-4 years about.

It may not be the same for everyone else, but for me, someone who used to play games almost every free minute of his life, I can hardly find something that keeps me interested enough any longer and with increased prices, its hardly worth wasting your money for something you are just going to stash away after a day or two of playing.

Modern gaming just doesn't do much for me anymore, I'm sad to say. They can add better physics, better graphics, better sound - but it's still the same thing, just a lot prettier.

I mean what is the point now anyway, I need to buy a new machine every two years in order to play a game at a reasonable framerate? I need to buy a new machine EVERY 2 YEARS in order just to play a rehashed game - just with a touch more makeup on? Add on the expense of a game that you are most probably going to get bored with - there are exceptions, but there are very few of them. I used to, I am ashamed to admit, argue that the PC was the ultimate gaming platform. Nowdays I am arguing the exact opposite.

Consoles seem to be the only logical way to support gaming as a hobby. Unless you are Bill Gates son (or something along those lines), upgrading/buying a new machine every few months/2 years is just not a resonable option. Console games while being more expensive (on average - why are they more expensive that PC games I like to ask myself ... they should be cheaper seeing as everything is constant - the hardware, the system etc.) at least give you a level experience. At least buying a console game, you know you are getting the same experience as everyone else. Unlike a PC game where you hear how great it is, only to find out you have to use your countries military computers to be able to run the things ...

What do you guys think?

I personally couldn't care less for Doom 4,5,6 ... Half-Life 3,4,5 ... Halo 3,4,5... Red Alert 3,4,5 ... Tomb Raider 7,8,9 ... Mario 101,102,103 .... you guys get the point :P

I don' t know what it is with this industry and sequels and rehashed ideas. Enough with the sequels, enough with the BFG's, enough with the hype.

It's all because of sequels and hardware driven games - that the actually good games, ADVENTURES (not your adventure/rpg/action/puzzle type games) are forced out of the industry. Ironic isn't it, that ADVENTURES, once the FPS of the game industry, are so rare nowdays. Maybe its the reviewers that keep telling us how its not as much fun as Counter-Strike or whatever other FPS seems to be popular at the moment, that is leading to the extinction of commercial adventures. Maybe it is because they keep telling us the graphics arn't as good as Half-Life X or Doom X.

The industry really is a funny thing nowdays.

I seem to be playing Highway Pursuit http://www.adamdawes.com/windows/win_hpursuit.html

a lot more than your super-out-of-this-world-graphics games currently available.

Long live the oldies!

[Zarkumo]

If you want to see exactly how inane this is, go out and rent the brain-dead Paul Verhoeven film, Starship Troopers. The movie stank so bad that nothing came of it after its release. It's essentially a video game turned into a movie—all the elements are there, including an idiotic "boss" that is just some huge flabby bug—and it shows you just how lame these games actually are.

This judgement on Starship Troopers immediately disqualified this guy's article in my opinion. The only thing brain-dead I can see here is a whining, immature, passive consumer who is not ready to apply some intellect to what he sees or plays.

I can understand his frustration with the gaming industry, though, as can probably quite a few people here on Abandonia, too. But I was wondering why he gets into an argument with his kids about it. What do they care if their father already played a similar game like ten years ago? If the first FPS they played is Far Cry, they are gonna love it, no matter if DOOM already had all the basic elements (well, maybe not in this particular comparison, but you get my point). And of course the industry lives off these kids and not off their fathers.

I think a critique of the gaming industry has to be a bit more differntiated. I mean, WTF, you can trace every thought back to Plato, so what, are we gonna kill ourselves now? The fact that all basic ideas have already been there doesn't mean we can't work with them, does it? A game does not have to be entirely new in all of its basic elements to be good. To be good, a game must be fun to play. Period. It's the same with music, with literature, with art. Everything has already been there. But if you make new combinations out of old elements, it's still creative and the result can be great.

I think you can criticise the gaming industry for going for better graphics only, mostly, but you can hardly criticise them for using the basic genres.

[MdaG]

Originally posted by Charmed@Apr 30 2005, 08:03 AM
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1784975,00.asp
It may not be the same for everyone else, but for me, someone who used to play games almost every free minute of his life, I can hardly find something that keeps me interested enough any longer and with increased prices, its hardly worth wasting your money for something you are just going to stash away after a day or two of playing.

I agree, but I think it's more a case of "been there, done that". In other words, maybe you've outgrown games as a full time hobby?

[Charmed]

I agree, but I think it's more a case of "been there, done that". In other words, maybe you've outgrown games as a full time hobby?

You may be right. I do still play the odd game here and there though, but yes I think it is once you have seen and played the original type of genre, playing sequels with pretty graphics just doesn't do it for you anymore. I am sure there are tons of teenagers and such that absolutely love the current games - but we can't really blame them, seeing that this is all new to them. Of course many will just give you a cold shoulder if you try tell them about older games and such.

The last fairly new game that I played and really enjoyed was The Legend of Zelda - The Wind Waker. I thought that game was so cute good for kiddies and adults.

This judgement on Starship Troopers immediately disqualified this guy's article in my opinion. The only thing brain-dead I can see here is a whining, immature, passive consumer who is not ready to apply some intellect to what he sees or plays.

Zarkumo, seriously :bleh: , are you going to try tell me that Starship Troopers was a great movie? Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed that movie, but the word cheesy comes to mind... It was one of those movies you had to see, but once you have seen it, you never want it mentioned around you again.

Zarkumo to dismiss his opinion just because he didn't agree with a movie you liked is a little silly.

You may disagree with him, but you cannot deny anything he has said with regards to the industry. You just need to look at stats and trends to see for yourself.

On average below:

1 - Which games get the highest reviews .... FPS = FACT
2 - Which sequels get the highest reviews ... FPS = FACT
3 - Which games drive the industry ... FPS = FACT
4 - Which games make you have to upgrade or buy a new machine ... FPS = FACT

Now I am being biased towards FPS here (no secret they are on average not near the top of my list of favourite genres), but facts are facts.

Something similar can be said with RTS games. Warcraft 1,2,3 .... Age of Empires 1,2,3... and so on. He is right with what he said, with regards to only a few genres.

He wasn't arguing that there is nothing good left to play, merely that there is only so much people can take with regards to the same stuff being churned out.

Look at all the sequels ... same old most of the time just prettier
Look at the the gameplay ... same old thing

I don't think he was saying there needs to be a completely new genre - merely that it needs to be refreshed.

Look at RTS games - they were all pretty much the same thing (I am generalizing now, which is a wrong thing to do, but on average) until they decided to bring hero type characters in games. Now its the norm to have hero type characters. After a while this will get stale and it won't seem like a big deal. The same thing applies for all genres.

Granted there is only so much you can do to bring originality in a game - but you can at least stop with the trashy torrent of sequels. How many more Dooms/Quakes/The Sims expansion packs do you need.

One very simply solution is to stop with all the sequels. That way you would be bring originality back into the industry, not wholescale, but a start.

Besides its a fact that many developers have said this before, that they would love to try new ideas, but it's too much of a risk. Simple as that. They themselves admitted they wanted to do something else, but making a sequel is the safest thing in their eyes.

Gaming is a business now - not much of an art any more - pretty much everything in the world is now a business.

If it means food on your plate and a roof over your head, we can't really blame them for taking the easy way out can we. We would most probably do the same thing anyway.

[Charmed]

Just to clarify my point - I am busy reading on Gamespot.

Another Tomb Raider is in the works, another Hitman and another Commandos Game.
Commandos won't be the in the same style of the originals, so we will have to wait and see what happens.

Can you really make the argument for modern games being original? It's ridiculous. Just look how much of the same thing is being done all these years later ...

When did the first Tomb Raider come out 1997?

Oh and read this - this just shows exactly what the industry is all about at this stage - BUSINESS.

Kinda like EA games - BUY EVERYTHING.

http://www.ferrago.com/story/5606

"It's a great shame that yet another developer has to go to the wall because of the outdated business model that the games industry still clings to. The astronomical costs of development for the next-gen consoles coupled with developers having to fight for investment and take risk on content creation in a manner that other media industries would sneer at, the days of smaller, innovative developers could well be drawing to a most unfortunate close."

That says it all.

There are the facts - the gaming industry is an old hag. Stale and rotten.

Another good read
http://www.gamespy.com/articles/596/596734p1.html

So its not just us bitching and maoning - the developers are doing it as well.
So I guess we should point fat fingers at the publishers.

[Quintopotere]

I agree totally that Starship troopers is "the brain-dead Paul Verhoeven film"!

But talking about the game industry i think that the problem is only the marketing, like my guru, Ron Gilbert :angel: , said here

Nowadays the game industry is in the hands of the marketing managers, who don't mind about quality or innovation of the games: the important thing is that they have to sell, sell and sell!

[efthimios]

I do not think even the first Tomb Raider was original. There are very very very very very few original games.
TR was just another version of Rick Dangerous or even further back Dr. Livingstone (forget the spelling right now), or even Pitfall.

Being original does not mean the game is good. Being more of the same does not mean the game is not good.

Regarding the rapid advancement of PCs, what is so strange or new about it? Even in the age of the Home Computers (Amstrad, Spectrum, CMD, Atari, Amiga...) there were new models every couple of years, and there were games that were not playable AT ALL or with reduced speed, details, content! etc. It is a strength of the PCs the constant upgrade of hardware. Sure, you and me may not be able to afford it, but that doesn't mean it is bad. I bought my current PC/laptop in the summer of 2002 and is obsolete now. Most of the new 3D games are not possible to run on my laptop since many of them require either faster CPU or better graphics card that supports say Pixel Shaders etc. There is no way for me to buy a new one for at least another year, may be more. But, that doesn't mean that that is a bad thing.
Just vote with your money. Buy games that are not top of the edge in terms of graphics etc, let the companies know and support those that make less games (in those terms).

[The Niles]

I disagree with the article. I too was disappointed by many of the scenes hottest releases over the past year or two (Doom3 actually being a marked exception) but to say everything has already been done before and therefore it will inevitably all come crashing down sooner rather then later is to misunderstand the nature of the development in the computer industry.
A computer twenty years ago is in essence exactly the same as a computer today. A machine capable of making rapid calculations. This is universally true and will remain so. The difference comes in the amount of calculations these two computers can make in a given timeframe. Computers have not become different, they have become better. This is also true of the applications those computers run. The first computers could process text just like today’s computers can but today the programs you use for it are infinitely better then, even, the older versions of the same program.
What I will say next will be controversial but I mean it. The same thing holds true for games as well. Having played Civilization (1) extensively again recently (on my pocket PC) I realized two things. Civilization was a great game for its time and also, given the choice I would rather play Civilization 3. Why? Well, Civilization has expanded greatly over its different incarnations. In Civ3 I have more options better features and nicer graphics (let’s face it Civ1 graphics where abominable). This is not because during Civ1 development there was a conscious decision to leave out features for no good reason. No, it was that it was not possible to add things because of hardware restriction and development cost considerations (and a learning process that had only just begun). Neither Civ3 nor Civ1 are flawless games but there can be no argument that Civ3 is the better game (which is something different from having a personal favourite).
Games over the years have become better and have evolved into separate genres but the former more then the latter (which doesn’t mean ALL new games are better then ALL old ones. There are plenty of bad games then and now). People complaining that there is nothing new or even good coming out today forget two things. One, there are millions upon millions of people (many more then ever before) who enjoy and love the games that are coming out TODAY. Secondly, if you don't like the newest games this is not so much a problem of the market not suited to the demand but you no longer being interesting for the market. In the not to distant past the only people who had computers where those who could afford one. This meant that computer game where written for those people likely to own a computer. Reasonable well of people of all ages are likely to be the better educated, more intelligent people. Computer games where written with their tastes in mind. Right now computers (either in PC or console form) are no longer out of reach for anyone and the market has changed accordingly. No longer are the tastes and interests of the well educated the guide stone for the gaming industry. The largest group of gamers today are the lower middle classes. This group demands different things from games. Adventures are gone for a reason. They are no longer interesting for the gaming public at large. Today things need to be fast paced and easily accessible.
Other corners of the market are still being served but not by the large companies. Small publishers are feeding this niche market with a few great games every year. You just need to keep in touch with that part of the gaming industry and not be blinded by the glare of the big publishing houses such as EA and Activision.
Lastly, on the coming crises in the gaming industry. This is true but not for the reasons stated in the article. Development costs are ever rising. An average game now costs $15-$20 million to make, the large names cost even more (Doom3 was in development for 5 years). The pressure for these projects to be successful is enormous and the price of failure for a small company is bankruptcy. There is also overproduction in the largest market (FPS #13548282 please step forward) I foresee a purge of smaller companies (those that make the niche games will not be affected by this as much) in the near future and maybe one big name will disappear as well (like Interplay not that long ago). Gaming is now the largest entertainment industry on the planet but the industry is not yet fully formed. A crisis can help it become that.

[KingTizz]

In my eyes the main problem with the games industry is the developers and publishers, so many are being bought out by the big companies (EA in particular) and big companies don't like risks.

In the old days small development studios would try new things, new types of games and if they made a duff one or two, they would carry on. Now it seems most the old development studios have been bought up and the teams disbanded and spread out through many different projects. If some small studio does make a decent game, they are bought up and 20 sequals that do exactly the same thing as the origional, just prettier, are planned and the origional team loose the control they had.

Publishers don't want to take the risk of releasing something totally new anymore, Black and White is an exception, it did stuff thats totally unique, it might not have been as good as promised but it was certainly something new.

What was the last game that genuinly changed a genre or gaming as a whole?


Then games that do actually do add new stuff really well (like deus ex) are made more 'accessible' to other markets by taking away that which made it different.

BOOOOO HISSSSSS at Publishers, especially EA who ruined one the best games of all time.



P.S. Starship troopers was a good film, it did exactly what it said on the tin. Lots of Aliens, lots of humans, lots of fighting, lots of gruesome deaths. Not every film has to be an oscar winning epic about emotional stuff or whatever.

[The Niles]

Back and White was nothing more then the continuation of Populas by newer means.