Should gaming go further?

johnny_ultimate

Something thats on my mind lately...

As much as I love video games, I can't help but feel they are very insular. For the most part, games don't really try to be much more than mere 'entertainment'. With the exception of rarities like Bioshock and Braid (two games that make you think about what you're doing) there are few games that aim to be anything else. As great as the likes of Gears of War, Call of Duty, Oblivion, Assassins Creed, Final Fantasy, *insert most other games here* are, do they ever do anymore than entertain? Even with a good release schedule coming up, few of the games seem to suggest they'll do anymore than provide some relatively mindless entertainment.

And there is nothing wrong with this, as there is nothing wrong with Hollywood blockbusters (if they are good, of course). But do you ever wish games did something else: more original stories, visuals (Okami for example: a relatively traditional game with fantastic art design and presentation), something more than simply entertain? Is there a place for "arthouse" games? Even something like Spore feels like a step in the right direction: while people have had their issues with the gameplay, in terms of getting the player involved with creation of their avatar (and meaningful decisions that impact upon the world) the emotional impact the game can create is surely a positive advancement?

Sorry if all this sounds 'pretentious', but I'm just curious if people are happy with games the way they are? I for one love RPGs, shooters etc.. but always wish there was something else. The whole casual game thing is weird too: while games can be sometimes too complex (stats, for example, are something very bizarre and could only exist in video games), many casual games are way too simple (Wii Sports, for example). Should *some* games aim to try more, and stop trying to be specifically the largely generic 'video games' that people are now well familiar with? Should they aim for more interactivity (like Half Life. never removing the player's control even as the story plays out)?

Retr0gamer

It's basically the same problem with movies. Games have become so expensive to make that studios will no longer take risks and pump out games that clone other successful games. They won't take a chance on something new or original that is not gauranteed to succeed. Hopefully the advent of digital downloads will mean we see a lot more originality coming to the fore.

I do get your frustration though about games not really advancing artisticallt. We get the odd one like Ico but again it's rare that they are successful. There's also nothing wrong with developers taking existing genres and doing something creavtive with them. Look at Okami and Panzer Dragoon Saga. Okami is basically a zelda clone but spices it up with some very inventive visual while Panzer Dragoon Saga is a an RPG with a story that couldn't have been told in any other medium. Again it's frustrating that generic space marines still sell better.

Of course there are the odd successes like Bioshock. It was highly ambitious and didn't always succeed but it somehow managed to be a commercial success. But you can also say that it's a dumbed down retelling of System Shock 2 and that game was a disaster in sales terms.

I think we're going to see a lot more play it safe games from here on out punctuated with the odd videogaming masterpiece that pushes the medium further artistically and a few sleeper indy hits. It's not unlike the movie industry at the moment. At least we get dumb no brainer games that are fun unlike the horrid blockbusters that are spewing out of hollywood.

tba

I think games are becoming more like films alright, in some good ways as well as bad.

I enjoy the more immersive nature of alot of games plus I think the mechanics they employ (gravity, cover etc...) make it easier to portray more complex scenarios which only help the immersion. Also they tend to be getting shorter, which is good cause i have a short attention span.

johnny_ultimate

Retr0gamer wrote: »

It's basically the same problem with movies. Games have become so expensive to make that studios will no longer take risks and pump out games that clone other successful games. They won't take a chance on something new or original that is not gauranteed to succeed. Hopefully the advent of digital downloads will mean we see a lot more originality coming to the fore.

The money issue is a concern alright, and probably part of the problem. Many of the 'indie' games are no budget affairs, the really interesting likes of Passage very cheap, technically limited games that rely on ideas more than technology. It would be interesting to see a designer like that get a budget, but probably won't happen as this kind of gaming is a ridiculously niche market. While people like David Lynch will always get films in budget even though their work is pretty 'out there', they still have a huge market compared to games. Film studios often have indie wings, or at least film fans willing to fund less commercially viable work. Can't see that happening in games any time soon, alas.

I do get your frustration though about games not really advancing artisticallt. We get the odd one like Ico but again it's rare that they are successful.

Yeah there definitely are the rare few (Prince of Persia: SoT, Beyond Good and Evil, Ico as you say) and yeah most are commercial disasters. Something like Bioshock really is an exception: flawed (ending in particular) yes, but a vastly more intelligent shooter than the norm. I think finding away of combining the commerical and artistic elements of the game is going to be the hard part. Bioshock may have a pretty deep plot, but at the same time it has accessiable, inventive combat and memorable enemies.

I think we're going to see a lot more play it safe games from here on out punctuated with the odd videogaming masterpiece that pushes the medium further artistically and a few sleeper indy hits. It's not unlike the movie industry at the moment. At least we get dumb no brainer games that are fun unlike the horrid blockbusters that are spewing out of hollywood.

We do have it good in terms of entertainment for sure, Every new genre game is more refined than the last. Gaming is definitely one of the most advanced forms of entertainment around, and that does certainly count for something!

tba wrote: »

I enjoy the more immersive nature of alot of games plus I think the mechanics they employ (gravity, cover etc...) make it easier to portray more complex scenarios which only help the immersion. Also they tend to be getting shorter, which is good cause i have a short attention span.

Immersion is where it is at, alright. Games like Portal and Braid are short, efficient affairs built on imaginative but very playable mechanics. Theres no messing around with anything else, and I think thats why they work: anyone can play through them, see everything and and get immersed in the game. Its things like endless menus that need to be dealt with. There will always be a place for the stat heavy RPG, but they are constantly reminding us we are in a game far removed from reality. Some of the better recent games have stripped away all the complex fluff with (ahem) huge success. But creating such games, while trying to keep them challenging for gamers, is probably easier said than done.

tba

that passage thing was interesting, took me a while to figure it out.

johnny_ultimate

tba wrote: »

that passage thing was interesting, took me a while to figure it out.

His other game Gravitation is great too. Very surreal, simple and involving games.

seraphimvc

I cant help to say this:I for one welcome kojima sama joining us boardsie!

seriously tho,jus like your friend,ya dun get good friends everywhere do u?

gaming = business,no money ,no game.there is no such thing as best selling game:people just have different tastes,different people like different games.making a great game is a tough sh!te to do,you need to satisfy as much people as possible,asian/caucasian gamer,old/young,boy/girl/man/woman/nerd/geek,just impossible.simpler way to say,game company can only choose light user or core user .*lets not go into the case of nintendo who aiming the market of non-user*

ICO/okami like OP named,they are good game indeed,in our eyes,but how about in reality?the selling of ICO/shadow collusus dint go that well tbh while okami is a failure.

nowadays the hype and advertisement is what makes people impulse purchase stuffs.money become an extremely huge factor in the gaming industry than ever.there is no way we can avoid it and it will become a bad cycle.unless one day no one will buy a game say,released by EA,then maybe EA can wake up and make a change.same goes to some company keep reheating its 7th installment of some game purely for money - it works,people pay for it.

enjoy the life,play good game,that's it dude.

*mobile boards is broken!there is no way i can type more than few lines in my phone.*

speedboatchase

EA have made a change though. Dead Space looks excellent and is getting great reviews and they've completely turned around the FIFA series when they didnt need to

Retr0gamer

Yep EA are definitely changing for the better. Dead Sapce as already mentioned and Mirrors Edge look great along with the already released Boom Blox.They are also no longer buying up development studies and destroying them like they did with Origin and Bullfrog. Dice and Criterion seem to be quite healthy and EA leaves them mostly to their own devices.

johnny_ultimate

speedboatchase wrote: »

EA have made a change though. Dead Space looks excellent and is getting great reviews and they've completely turned around the FIFA series when they didnt need to

Yeah EA really have been behind a lot of quality products recently. While I still don't agree with their practices in business terms (the attempted Battlefield paid DLC 'bonuses', Rock Band pricing) the EA symbol is no longer to be feared, with stuff like Spore, Rock Band, Stranger's Wrath and the aforementioned Dead Space/Mirror's Edge all innovative and unique. Good to see them going out of their way to distribute slightly more offbeat games, and they are one big gaming company who seem to devote a little of their resources to new IPs. Ubisoft are pretty good too: while they rake it in with Imagine Horses or whatever crap they throw out for the DS, they at least are willing to fund games that may not be as profitable (Beyond Good and Evil and PoP were commerical failures, but they are taking and risk and making probably quite costly sequels of each).