What is Digg?161 Comments
- SystemLord, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Fully agree. As a previous employee of Electronic Arts I have to say I have noticed a serious lack in design and creativity of games. EA invests a lot of time in making their games look good and they get credit there. Some of the smartest people in the graphics business work for them. However, after working there for few months I realized that EA hasn't really produced anything intelligent in years. The games that do succeed from their studios are the games from studios they bought out (IE. Criterion Studios and Burnout 3). Everything else is a spin-of of games that are doing somewhat well... IE. Look at how many versions of NBA they have (NBA Live, NBA Street), who cares about that many NBA games. Same with Medal of Honor, seems like there was a Medal of Honor release every month and it sucked more then the last one. Even EA employees rarely played EA games. This comes from their over confidence in technology and their management. It was important for me to get an email every week how some manager is making more money then me and getting promoted to some Senior/VP/Manager of Marketing and Communication. The marketing hype behind the game was far more important then the game itself (IE. Need For Speed: Underground and featuring Snoop Dog, hmm I am sure that cost a few pennies). And last point is that EA paid peanuts for brights minds. People that get the top money are the managers and designers are stuck in a loop between studios and after a while they naturally get discouraged.
- Flyngwalrus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4I agree with it except:
What of the Revolution?
It's mentioned only once in the article. The industry won't fail; Sony and Microsoft will. - rileyjt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4*rollseyes*
All veterans long for the good'ol days.
This is what happens when an industry becomes highly commercialized and is dumbed down for the masses. The film industry is much the same way, but that doesn't mean that there are no longer any good movies being made, just don't look for a creative, fresh movie with a $200 million budget. Just because there are these mass market games and gaming systems does not mean that new ideas and new games will be brought into the industry. It simply means that the market is now bigger and you have to look off the beaten path to find those things. Rule of thumb - innovation is rarely found in mass market products - the risk is simply too high. - commongiga, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Wow. Eloquently written, and amazing points. I agree whole-heartedly with the opinions that the industry has turned into complete trash. There are still gems out there (I've been addicted to Shaddow of the Colossus and Guitar Hero for a month), but for the most part everything is stale and the same. Bravo submitter for finding this gem of an article.
- masterzora, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"The industry needs to be restarted, innovation needs to come back, and good games need to return."
I'm surprised nobody's mentioned the Revolution or DS yet. The whole point of the systems is to bring innovation and good games back. If you change the control scheme dramatically, you can't just rely on the same old thing; you have to innovate. It won't be so easy to get away with "just another Mario game" with that funky wand, will it? Developers say that they are getting great ideas for new things to do with this new control scheme, and I can't wait to see if they live up to what they say. - LeegleechN, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It seems that everyone commits the fallacy of forgetting all the crap games in the past and only thinking about the crap games in the present. I assure you we have just as many or more good games now than at any other point in the video game industry.
- mbwilliamson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Great article. Some of these games and their sequels are getting as exciting as a new version of AOL.
- cypher35, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2i think there is a lost art in 2d gaming... nobody makes 'em anymore because no one would buy a game without the flashy graphics, but 2d games were great back in the day and are still great now.
- betterth, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"Maybe the author of this article forgot some of the fantastic games that game out recently. It was only a year ago that Doom3, Half life 2, Halo2 all were released. More recent games such as Call of Duty2, Shadow of the Colossus continue to show innovation."
Doom3 was a pretty game that played terribly. The monsters and levels were horribly, insanly overused, and all those pretty graphics with a very drab, drawn out story line made for a really medicore game.
And Halo2 was a huge, huge disappointment. The only good thing about that game was xbox live. 5 hours of gameplay and some normal mapping does not make a sequel. ***** that, they've released bigger /patches/ on half the MMO's I've played.
CoD2 was wow, yet another WW2 game with shiny graphics. Played well with a good story, but hardly revolutionary or even original.
As far as Shadow, I don't actually know anyone who's played it, and that's saying something because every room on my hall (in my dorm) has at least a ps2 or xbox. - DevilsRejection, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Even if the revolution only has 1 AAA title, you people are forgetting, the entire back catalog will be offered!
- masterzora, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@ninjagamer:
You don't have to listen to a random commenter you don't know, but I suggest /not/ majoring in game programming. It's too narrow a field, as far as I am concerned. If something goes wrong with it, the degree isn't that great. I mean, sure, it still is a degree to show that you have one, and you still take core competency classes, but that's it. I suggest taking a broader major (computer science or software engineering or something). If possible, you can minor in game programming. Much better to fall back on, and looks better to non-game companies if need be. Of course, I am not qualified to make an official statement on this.
Sorry to veer offtopic, but that is something close to my heart. Same situation I was in recently, and I finally ended up deciding on Computer science (though I still have time to switch if need be). - TheNik, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2If you don't like the games offered today, play the old games. There are several new, fresh, and innovative games offered today. People are just too picky.
- shiftless, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2How crappy games make any money: Wow. Uh, thanks for the game you found in the bargain bin grandma!
- Beanis, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This end-of-gaming crap is spewed in constant waves. It becomes really common during generation changes, but it always exists. It reminds me of all the end-of-the-world types, you might be right, but you still look like a dumb ass.
Innovation doesn't mean fun, plenty of games are fun to play without being innovative. That word is used so damn much (in regards to gaming) it has lost its meaning. Also looking to sports games for innovation... what a dumb ass...
There are plenty of good games coming out all the time, and the future looks bright for all consoles. New franchises are started all the time, most unsuccessful, and there is nothing wrong with sequels. - Groovester, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Sorry, heard these complaints before. I see more and more analysts foreseeing a "doomsday" but when in all reality, gaming is seeing an increase in interest (look at the sales numbers NOT slowing down). While it may happen a few years down the road for some odd reason, I see good times and good games for the next few generations.
- cypher35, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1kubedawg said - "I could care less if it used 2-d graphics, as long as it's a great playing game."
Word. - jesusphreak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Anyone bashing the 360 obviously hasn't used it. It literally is the best-designed console ever, from the controller, to the interface, to the console itself.
Yeah, the console games aren't super-duper revolutionary, but what launch titles are? They are essentially last-gen games with prettier graphics.
But the console itself shows so much promise. Don't bash it if you haven't used it. - calero, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1legend of zelda anyone?
- DevilsRejection, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Thanks, I have been reading the inquirer for a while now and even met Charlie Demerjian in January at the CES convention. He is a nice down to earth guy with an amazing grasp on not only the gaming industry but the hardware scene.
After reading this, I knew that there had to be others out there who shared the same thoughts as me, glad you enjoyed it commongiga. - ninjagamer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Wait a minute here, now I may be a bit biased due to the fact that I plan to major in game programming in college but I disagree with this article.
Maybe the author of this article forgot some of the fantastic games that game out recently. It was only a year ago that Doom3, Half life 2, Halo2 all were released. More recent games such as Call of Duty2, Shadow of the Colossus continue to show innovation.
AAA game titles are few and far between, there has always have been periods of stale games being released. When crash bandicoot came out for the PS1, numerous bad games came after it such as Gex enter the gecko, Donald ducks treasure hunt etc.
Developers are still getting their feet wet with the next gen hardware, give them some time. Good games will be coming. - dragonmortal, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1speaking of innovation when will Grand Theft Auto 4 be out?
- stealthboy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2One word: Revolution.
Sorry to be the Nintendo fanboy, but they always manage to make fun, exciting games when the others are busy making NFL 2006 (now with new stats!) and Final Fantasy XXVIII. - Scorch6969, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1And this surprises you all how? Self-destruction is the gaming industries middle name now. Everyone asks for graphics, and your going to get it. No one asks for better gameplay, and the gaming industry gets stale. You all should've realized this before you all went heywire at the graphics, and didn't pay attention to gameplay. It's all about entertaining, when there is barely any entertainment in it anymore. The days of N64 Dreamcast and PS1 were the best bar-none. Last time I checked, graphics was not what was amazing people at the time then, it was the gameplay and variety of games and gamestyles which form the premises for the games redone today.
- 4ZN-1NV4ZN, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1dude has a point, xbox360's new games are well, meh, nothin special to look at. i mean the madden games ITS THE SAME GAME EVERY YEAR, and youre still gettin the ball to the other side.
- headphonist, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1What we need is an indie/open source gaming movement. Free open source games are already available for computers. Today's games can be compared to big Hollywood movies, as said before "dumbed down" for the masses. Now with the increase knowledge and experience from gamers, coders and artists we could start creating games just like indie film makers have been.
- DevilsRejection, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"I personally really like some of the games. They couldn't have been done on last-gen consoles. I think they are fun. So that's why I got the console. If you don't like the games, don't get it right now.
But that doesn't take away the fact that the 360 is probably the most well-thought out console ever.
There really isn't anything like playing Perfect Dark Zero while talking to a friend that is playing Call of Duty 2, while at the same time listening to a custom soundtrack. It is just done smart."
Because a game is so much more fun when I am talking to my friend and listening to the same CD i've been keeping on loop in my car for days. - miligo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I completely agree with this article. We have been playing the same clone of castle wolfenstein for 13 years except with better graphics. The last innovation in FPS games was the addition of networked deathmatch.
I too believe the only company that can infuse innovation into the money grubbing industry is Nintendo, they are the Apple of the gaming world. - Cyberdactyl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Whaaa whaa whaa, games are as bad AND as good as they've always been.
One extremely good point was made tho, that I couldn't agree with more. Now, if you blow it, you've blown tens of millions and careers, instead of 4 months worth of Mountain Dew and pizzas.
Games are still VERY innovative, look at 'Shadow of the Colossus' as one example of new approaches to gaming. - eng69, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The industry is to big to fail now. similar to the movie industry. I refuse to go to the theaters because of crying babies, fat guys next to me, overpriced refreshments and the movies are *****. But people still still go... enough to sustain the industry. same will happen with gaming.
- kubedawg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I hate people like this sayin "OH NO THE APOCOLYPSE IS COMING FOR GAMERS!!!"
Atari may have fallen after their empire of gaming, but games have been around for years, and it has only grown. Gaming never halted.
Never.
There were a few protesters when doom came out, but we told them to go ***** themselves, because video games are here to stay, and there's nothing they can ***** do about it. the only thing that will hurt gaming is drm technology as the government and the like can control what we play.... ***** that. creative commons is a much better idea. The government, as you probably know, wants to control everything and everyone, so they can feel powerful.
now, what i do see is more video games being made from movies. either that, or interactive movies. 3-d movies were cool, but what if you could control what happened in a movie, add your little quote at the beginning of movie credits and ***** like that? thatd be kickass.
this world is filled with if's and else's and at the start of each day, everyone gets up out of bed and says "Hello world."
graphics in gaming will always improve. They will always become faster. The quality of gameplay is what really matters though. I could care less if it used 2-d graphics, as long as it's a great playing game.
pong was the best game ever invented, and look what kind of grapgics it used.
And look of the complexity of games today. If we can multiply pong's quality of gameplay by a million, right now, imagine what's to come in the future. I think Nintendo will become the market's leader once all 3 next gen gaming systems come out, as the innovation of the company is no longer in it's infancy, and is going to have a wealth of growth. but PC gaming will always beat any console system just as long as you have the right equipement to support the games. - timon00, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1games are boring now , i dint get an xbox360 because all the games suck , i havent bought a single game since splinter cell chaos theroy that i didnt even finished ,no more original games pice of ***** sony and microsoft im getting a a ds and a revolution , and i used to be an xbot fanboy
- hadees, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1They need longer games. Older games took longer to beat.
- Ribald_Jester, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1the gaming industry needs to melt down. Maybe something can grow from the ashes, but the mess that it is in now. I'd like to see more creativity, better, more fun games and less crap. Games (computer games at least) used to cater to intelligent, creative people, now it's just gunz and explosions. When a mouth breathing cretin like 50 cent has his own video game you know we've hit a *major* low.
- rylz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I personally believe that the internet and open source will be the causes of the "rise from the ashes" that he describes. Think about it. These are the same pressures that are already pushing many to open source software. MS has systemized mediocrity and covered it up with a lot of eye candy, releasing new versions every now and then that have new, improved ways of wasting ever-increasing system resources.
Why are games so expensive to develop? The companies have to create everything in-house, from scratch if they haven't done a similar project before (which is one of the reasons sequels are so loved). Imagine a world with shared, customizable game engines, libraries of customizable models, etc. The effort would all be focused on the original idea behind the game, not the tools and engine to make it so (but when someone needed a new feature not in an open source engine, they could just add it and submit a patch). When you make it easy to make something currently so complex and expensive, quality will no longer be gauged by eye candy, but by the idea, story, and gameplay.
This is happening in the broadcasting world as well, with cheap tools and free distribution through bittorrent threatening to bring down the industry's tried and true "put out crap and force advertising down their throats" system. I can see it happening with movies as well.
Take the complexity out of the execution of making a currently complex creative work, and you'll get higher quality products. It makes sense. With all effort focused on creativity and ideas, you'll get more creativity and better ideas. Technology is very near providing us with such a world. - DevilsRejection, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I've used it, and you're telling me because it's designed great I should get one even tho there aren't any good games currently out???
Are you listening to yourself.
You said it best: "They are essentially last-gen games with prettier graphics." - EricG, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I saw the industry crash in the eighties (I was in high school then) and I am seeing the same thing pretty much happen all over again.. I think the author captured the feelings I have had about the recent crop of consoles and how there is so few unique games being made these days.. they are all just rehashes of Doom clones or Madden variants.. how sad and depressing, I would have guessed this many years down the road there would be amazing games, but sadly it went just the other way.. its pretty much all eye candy and very little innovation.. I can only hope that just as it did back in the day, a new company (or several) will rise from the dung heap the game industry has rotted itself into.
- Cyborg771, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Unlike everyone else who has mentioned Nintendo, I am not worried abouts sounding like a fanboy. I agree with the key points of this article but with the direction they have been moving lately Nintendo hardly fits the form of the console we know. Perhaps the next teir of gaming will be more interactive software like what Nintendo will be doing. I mean, if they can change the market once, who's to say they can't do it again?
- manfesto, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@masterzoa
While I agree with your sentiments (if you can't tell from my "jaded old gamer" rants), I must disagree with your point that innovation matters to a large amount of gamers. The industry is booming despite a lack of innovation BECAUSE the newest generation of gamers, this new larger demographic, doesn't care for it. Gamers of yore that remember being in shock and awe at the first shots of the N64 controller and wondering what it'd be like to play a game with it are very much in a minority to people waiting in droves to play Halo 3 because that's what they want out of gaming - not innovation. A sad day for us (well, it would be if I were still as much a gamer as I was a few years ago), but we're pretty inconsequential. - DevilsRejection, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Don't even tell me that, I played PGR3 on my 1080p 67 inch hdtv.
Boring as hell, the prettiness wears off after the second lap. It brings no, zero, none, innovation to any other racing game I've played. - Nicholas, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This argument has the benefit of retrospecition to base upon (2600 etc.), but so does the opposite. Everyone and their dogs have been predicting the death of PCs for ages too, but it continues to thrive.
Even though most games may now be crap, the good ones that do stand out are good enough, and if you looked at the computer industry's history, that's good enough to make it survive too.
That, and betting against Microsoft makes for such a doomsday unlikely IMHO. - Draconiko, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I'll agree on the decline of quality games but I wish there was more dealing with PC games. Game mods add replay value. Counter-Strike and Desert Combat are a few.
- RayMetz100, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Someone get this poor guy an Xbox360 with PGR3. He will change his mind after about the 4th trophy.
- manfesto, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@jesusphreak
Nobody is accusing game makers of no longer producing fun games - they are fewer and far between, however. The good ones are drowning in a sea of mediocre games that people buy over and over again in every iteration (like sports games and sequels, which can be fun and new (as apparently PDZ is (thank god - I really want to play that game)) but more often than not are disappointing). Like I said in my last post, what's frustrating is that we'll get more of the same because it is what the "larger demographic" of gamers (the xBox generation now greatly outnumber the NES and Atari generations) expect and want - and innovative, critically acclaimed games will fall to the wayside (Beyond Good and Evil, Rez, Katamari, etc. - critically acclaimed games players love and everybody else has never heard of). - HugeDigger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Why did this article get pulled from the front page? Is this site hosted in China?
- jesusphreak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0>>> Well the author has some good points, and is why i'm sticking to my Xbox. Live 360 is awful, better graphics, but they removed a TON of features. Same with Madden 360, worse. They took out even more features than they took from Live. So dissapointing. >>>
Uh, what features did they remove? PGR3 has the TV mode which no LIVE game before it had. All games have a unified Friends List system so there is no more having an excellent Friends List in Halo 2 while having an awful one in Brothers in Arms.
LIVE Arcade is now available in every console...you can hold private chats with anyone on LIVE no matter what you are doing. They will soon be doing a unified clan system. Oh, and Perfect Dark Zero literally has no lag, even with 32 players due to much better netcode on more powerful hardware.
I don't understand how its awful. I'm assuming you are another one of the people who haven't even tried the 360 out. - JAppi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"The last one happened at the height of Atari's power, they were invincible, pumping out hit after hit. Pac-Man, ET, Asteroids, movie tie-ins, overflowing arcades and a rabid fan base."
ET was a hit??? - bonlebon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Revolution maybe the next big thing, well thought nintendo.
- jesusphreak, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0>>> However, the 360 gave us *basically* a newer version of their old controller. The hardware is basically that of a computer. There's no real grounds for innovation because of the console, only because of game developers. And, frankly, I haven't seen all that much innovation coming from X-box games. >>>
Odd. I thought you said that. Nintendo slowly improved the controller? Surely the difference between the NES and SNES controller was minimal? New shoulder buttons?
I'd venture to say that the "triggers" on the Xbox controller and the layout of the analog sticks was just as important. And now they have gone a step further and replaces those black and white buttons with some excellent shoulder buttons (NES to SNES anyone)?
You can say it isn't innovative all you want, but innovation isn't what matters. What matters is whether or not people have fun. And judging by the booming game industry, I'd say lots of people are having more fun. - masterzora, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@jesusphreak:
Okay, I usually agree with what you say, but you are contradicting yourself even when you talk about the 360.
You say that its essentially the same games as last gen but prettier, then you say that they couldn't have been done before. What about them couldn't have been done before, anyway? Because the 360 is just a higher spec Xbox 1. This isn't a direct insult or anything, I'm actually interested in what couldn't be done before beyond the shininess.
Oh, and no amount of cool features can make up for a lack of great games. Ever.
@dragonmortal: Umm... I thought San Andreas was already the 5th iteration... - pentomino, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I actually worry that Nintendo might be single-handedly keeping the console market alive longer than it needs to be. If they took a generation off, the entire industry would die, and they could re-invent the market two years later, the way the NES did in 1986.
Even though Nintendo still leans heavily on its franchises, its games still have more creativity, pound for pound, than the competition. It's managed to keep its creative talent across gaming epochs. Atari's entire workforce jumped ship by 1984, and Electronic Arts and Infogrames are buying up and liquidating the entire Western industry. By contrast, Nintendo's Shigeru Miyamoto has been working for Nintendo continuously since he designed Donkey Kong. And its Nintendo DS is bringing new life to old genres, from Pac-Pics to Nintendogs. The Revolution looks promising, and only time will tell whether it's the next NES or whether it's the next Virtual Boy.
There's one other key difference between today's situation and the 1984 crash: in 1984, the video game market was heavy on companies that only made video games. The console manufacturers had maybe one other division: Atari also made computers; Coleco also made Cabbage Patch dolls; Mattel also made Barbie. Today, the console manufacturers, apart from Nintendo, all make billions of dollars selling other things, and only recently decided to make a game console. Again, nobody can predict what that means: will they cut their losses, or will they keep those departments alive until they bleed to death from them? I think it's safe to say that they're not too keen on adapting to the market, and they'll probably try to use their clout to make the market adapt to them. -
Show 51 - 100 of 158 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is