People have always made formulaic crap.

I thought this was a pretty interesting article regarding the death of video games


http://www.cracked.com/blog/the-6-most-ominous-trends-in-video-games/

>>3614
Well that was a depressing read.

And who cares if new games are shit? There's a bunch of good older games that I'm sure you haven't played yet. And once in a while you find a few gems in the current generation, so it's not so bad.

>>3615
Exactly. I'm revisiting the last generation. There are so many good games that I didn't get to play when they first came out.

... I can't tell who's serious about this and who's just playing along for the heck of it. If it's the former this thread backfired big time.

I'm tempted to start one in /mu/ right now, or in /ot/ (about movies/books).

>>3614

The funny thing is that there is a very, very simple solution to ALL of those problems: don't buy those games. That's it, you're done. Thanks for saving the industry.

It's not the developers that got worse. The gamers themselves did. They don't appreciate good games and would rather gobble up another rehashed turd than play something worthwhile. You can blame the devs all you want but they are running a business and want to make profit. If the gamers would rather reward them for mediocrity than a creative effort why should they even bother? If they see studios like Clover and Cing bite the dust after developing spectacular games and EA/Nintendo making millions thanks to new Madden/Battlefield/Pokemon then can you really blame them for doing what they do?

I really regret not saving that /v/ comic where the guy pirates a game, plays it for a straight week then looks at the sales charts and complains about the state of industry - 'FUCKING CASUALS!'. Well, at least soccer moms actually buy the games.

>>3619
Pokemon isn't a bad game.

>>3621

Maybe it's not but I don't see a reason to re-release it every year. You could replay one of the older version and the difference would be almost unnoticeable. On top of that people complain that the new designs are getting worse and worse with each gen (I don't have an opinion as I plain don't give a shit).

>>3615
>>3616

The fact that there's lots of good older games isn't really the point. The point is the industry right now is in a severe state of stagnation and every game now is being made for retarded people. Like in the new Deus Ex game people literally had to petition the devs to make an option to get rid of the constant glowing of every object that could possibly be important, as if it never occurred to them that maybe some people would rather figure things out themselves.

>>3622
The male designs have always sucked, so they can't get much worse. The females are getting better. I mean seriously, look at the three on the bottom-left.

This isn't in chronological order for some reason, but it's the best I can find.

>>3621
maybe at first it wasin't, but I'd certinly say it is now.
The games havin't changed one bit since they started, Pokemon is no better then those sports games EA puts out, or all the call of duty clones.
The only thing that makes 'new' Pokemon games any different from the old ones, is the equivalent to an expansion pack, you're paying for the same game, with the addition of 100 more ass ugly Pokemon that only get more and more ugly as they games go on.
Pokemon is most definitely one of the problems with the industry, they put out never ending sequels each only slightly different from the last, and people like you eat them up and ask for more.
I think the most hilarious part is how they release multiple versions of the same game at the same time, it's insult to injury.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pok%C3%A9mon_%28video_game_series%29#Handheld_games
Just look at how many versions of the same game they've already put out, this is sickening.
How many more do they have to put out before you realize it's all the same shit?

>>3625
Pretty sure he was talking about the Pokemon designs, who cares about the characters?

>>3627
Oh, I got mixed up because the next post had a picture of a girl.

Yeah, the Pokemon designs suck now, that's undeniable. You can't expect there to be a whole lot of original ideas when there are 650 different characters.

>>3626
This happens with any kind of successful Japanese game. You only need to remember series such as Dragon Quest, Final Fantasy or more recently Monster Hunter. It's just a formula that works and people keep on buying the games because they're never really bad and always good to have an updated version of that "game you like".

>>3629
I didn't say those other games aren't also bad, although, at least final fantasy tries to have different stories for it's games.
Pokemon in itself might not have been a bad game, but it is now, now that there's 20+ versions of the same game, if a rehash of a rehash of a rehash of a rehash of a rehash of a rehash isn't a bad game, I don't know what is.
And another thing, everything they do actually change or add when they put out another rehash of pokemon, is always stuff that can easily be added to the games with mods.

>they're never really bad and always good to have an updated version of that "game you like".

I'd call it far from good to see your favorite games dragged though the mud, watered down, and bled to death only to be paraded around like a zombie long after it should have died.
Some of my favorite games from back in the day are still going, and it pains me to see how shitty they've become, it's not nostalgia, it's developers continuing games that don't need to be continued, developers not doing anything new with the series, and developers dumbing down and simplifying the games for the iphone generation.
Nothing lasts forever man, you need to learn how to let go and move on.

>>3633

>developers dumbing down and simplifying the games for the iphone generation

Endless rehashes are forgivable but this, THIS is what makes me wanna punch my monitor. When I play some sequels nowadays I literally have to hold back my bitter rage tears. Just don't tell me when they'll be done with new Civ game, let's pretend Deus Ex never had any sequels and Elder Scrolls ended with Morrowind, when mentioning new PoP make sure to use words 'interactive movie' and let me forget about Anno series.

Post edited on 20th Jun 2011, 4:22am

>>3634
To be fair the new Deus Ex is actually pretty good I hear, and that's from people who originally made fun of how shitty they thought it would be. As for elder scrolls and similar games, I only get them because of mods. Save the world as a loli~

Speaking of how shitty video games are becoming, look at the new Hitman game. They gave him goddamn xray vision and other stupid superpowers that can only be "recharged" by performing stealth kills. Also there's checkpoints and forced action sequences. And they fired the voice of Hitman (well not so much "fired", more "didnt tell him theyre making a new game and ignore his calls").

>>3640

I blame Assassin's Creed.

>When was the last time someone made a game with anywhere near the depth of creativity and effort that Planescape: Torment had?

I love Torment but I wouldn't call it a good game. I love the story, I love the characters, I love the setting but I loathe the gameplay, face it, Torment has the worst gameplay of any INFINITY engine game, Torment should have been an adventure game. The DnD combat in Torment just sucks and I'm saying that as an Infinity games fanatic, playing Icewind Dale 2 with with NPC mod for the billionth time now.

OP, you are a part of the problem. Good games are still being made but because of ignorants who live in the past like you they don't get the deserved recognition.

>>3644

see

>>/an/4376 and >>3618

>>3644
Did you even bother to read the article linked to here? >>3614
This isn't about living in the past or nostalgia clouding our judgements.

It doesn't matter when you started playing videogames, anyone can see current games are a sea of sequels and rehashes, accompanied by dumbed down interactive movies.
Yes, good original games are still being made, they're just becoming more and more uncommon, that's why we say gaming is 'dying', not 'dead', yet.

>>3648
Yeah, because sequels and rehashes are something new. Again, it's your ignorance. 2010 gave us: Enslaved: Odyssey to the West, Bayonetta, Alan Wake, Alpha Protocol, Batman: Arkham Asylum, Blur, Dante's Inferno, Risen, Darksiders, Deadly Premonition, Majin and the Forsaken Kingdom, Metro 2033, Resonance of Fate, nail'd, Nier, R.U.S.E., MAG, Red Dead Redemption, Singularity, The Ball, Sniper: Ghost Warrior, Split/Second, Shank, Vanquish, Amnesia: The Dark Descent, VVVVVV, Super Meat Boy, NyxQuest.

Just one year, no sequels/rehashes, no little known PC games, no Wii/DS games. More than 2 completely new games/month. Video games are not dying, but you need to, you know, actually play them to realize that.

>>3649

RDR is a sequel, just Saiyan

>>3640
The whole situation with 47's VA is really depressing because apparently they made him audition (even though he's been playing the character for a decade), told him he got it, and then never spoke to him again. He didn't even know he was out until emails from fans started pouring in asking what the hell is happening

>>3650
I think Red Dead Redemption would count more as a rehash then a sequel, just on the base alone that that it tries, (and does very well) at making people think it's original.

>>3649
Except for that part where most of those games weren't even good, but you got a point.

>>3648
The problem here is that these war FPS games are getting a lot of publicity over (usually) better games. The gaming market is now full of "casual" players, people that will buy solely what they see on TV. Gaming is a big business since a few years now, so obviously publishers want to cash in on the easy money with easily made games that keep the same winning formula overtime.

Really, it all comes down to this. >>3619 Vote with your money. The problem I see here is that the "hardcore" gamers have now turned massively to piracy, they buy much less games than before. As a result, the games appealing to the mass of casual gamers will have higher sales than that great game you liked.

At least, this is how I see it.

>>3640
Same thing happened with the new Splinter Cell, it was simply horrible.

At the same time, can you blame devs for making games easier and dumbed down? They just want money at the end of the day, so they try to appeal with cinematic scenes and streamlined gameplay. Or games that play for you.

Really, I think the good old days of gaming are over. It's not that niche entertainment market it was in the 90's. Good games will still come out of course and you can still go back and have a blast with your SNES, which on a side note has to have one of the best libraries of games for a console.

It's sad how I used to think gameplay in games will get tons better after graphic capability reaches the peak and devs would be forced to focus on things that actually matter, but now games will be little more than interactive movies by the time that happens.

I find it funny gamers complain about games being dumbed-down nowadays, and then they go back to playing old games that were simple in the first place.

>>3656
compare how many buttons the NES controller had, to the amount of buttons microsft's kinect has.

>>3656
>>3640

>>3656
I think they mean things like multiple "Press Triangle" action sequences instead of actual gameplay and all of those things. A lot of them are perpetual whiners though, but there are some that actually mean it.

>>3656

'Dumbed down' means they're piss-easy, too. Compare old PoP trilogy (or even original PoP game which was hard as nails) to the turd they released some three years ago. Be sure to have some tissues at hand.

You know pretty much every game since their inception is a clone of another one right? There were dozens and dozens of clones on the NES, Turbografix, Segas, Ataris, DOS, PC98 etc.

Games aren't dying, they're just stuck due to technological limitations. You can't really do much innovation in a game these days when to play it, the format is the same. That's why developers had - for the most part unsuccessfully - attempted at using motion gameplay lately. Give it 10 years and games won't resemble a thing they do today, assuming technology keeps up and remains cheap enough to implement.

I guess another reason is that publishers are now big corporations due to how accessible gaming has become due to the likes of Xbox 360 and PS3 and Wii. These are the first moderately powerful yet easy to use systems one can purchase for gaming. Not so much consoles even, but easy to use computers in a sense. Publishers are going to be interested in using this consumer product to make money, and so they put lots of demand on the developers. This leads to rehashed, unoriginal games that come out that are just there to fill a quota. Publishers don't want to pour money into a long term project these days due to risks (look at DN:F and 3D Realms) these days so we're stuck with sequels and prequels that come out twice a year ever year.

  >>3673
Games aren't stuck in a rut becuase of technological limitations, I can't fathom how you can honestly believe that, it's like saying movies have and always will suck just because they've always been nothing more then moving images on a flat surface.
3D glasses wont make a crappy movie like resident evil 4 any less crappy.

There is no reason what so ever devs cant put out a masterpiece with traditional controllers.
crap like Motion Control isn't the game industry trying to revolutionise gaming and give us better more complex and in depth gaming experiences.
It's nothing more then the industry trotting out a new shiny toy to wow easily impressed morons and milk them for cash.

Have you seen this video here? this is the way 'gaming' is heading.
can you honestly say you'd be happy waving your arms around like an idiot as your videogame practically plays itself?

I tend to think a lot of what is perceived as a loss in quality has a lot to do with the way the individual adjusts to media.

When you first get into a medium or a genre, everything is new and shiny and the novelty of it all helps you enjoy many things despite their mediocrity.

I think this might be part of the reason that we see some things as not "aging well."

>>3674

Why are Stormtroopers and Darth Vader in the same era as AATs and Droid Starfighters?

>>3677
Because George Lucas.

>>3674

First, some random Star Wars game is hardly a good example of innovation. It's a cheap movie franchise with already dozens of games out, so it's a dumb example to use. Also, like I said, the current "new generation" of these motion input systems are extremely juvenile in terms of development and implementation. Remember Virtual Boy? Probably not. These will die, but something else will take its place. The key here is not only innovation, but immersion.

Second, yes I do think they are stuck in a rut from technology. If the "other" way to better innovation is more stories, cut scenes, and slightly altering menus or dynamics, how much further can you really expand that? What else can developers do with a M+keyboard or controller, that isn't done? It's like the advent of moving pictures and ultimately cinema that came after books, and became a new form of entertainment. This is what we need. A new way to immerse in games that allows developers to push ideas to new limits. I'm glad hardware developers are experimenting with new forms of technology for this. You'd have to be a fool to buy them yet, but give it time. Remember how bad touch screens were 10-15 years ago? Now they're in absolutely everything from phones to handheld games.

>>3706
if it's a such a dumb example to use, why not try giving a example of a good konect game?

>>3707

Maybe you missed the point where I said there are none and that the devices all still suck? Or maybe you don't know what the word innovate means in a long term context.

really, whats wrong with developers trying new hardware and publishers trying to use it? of course its all in its infancy. if you're old enough to remember all the bad systems from the 90s you'd know that very well.

would you rather have a stagnant gaming world where its down to CoD style bullshit, with all your favourite games turning into easy-profit franchises that come out twice a year, yet they're all the exact same?

i really don't. if it wasn't for all the bad experiments in gaming over the years, you wouldn't have half the shit you do now.

>>3706
motion control wouldn't make movies any better, and neither would it make games any better.

>It's like the advent of moving pictures and ultimately cinema that came after books, and became a new form of entertainment. This is what we need.
do you not know how long ago that was?
Films have not changed one bit how movies are viewed other then this recent 3D bs, which many are now abandoning.
It's headache inducing and distracts from the movie itself.
It's like they're trying to draw attention away from how shitty the movie is.

Having controllers, which allow us to control the stories and events as we see fit already gives video games the potential to far surpass static films.

seriously, get your head out your ass already, we don't need any of this stupid shit, we need good ideas in games, better writing, better and original stories, better portrayed and flushed out characters.
3D, motion control, touch screen ect, none of that shit can make up for a talented developer.
It doesn't make once difference if you make the character on screen jump by pressing A or waving your hand in the air, a shitty game is still going to be a shitty game.
Furthermore, you really need to understand that shit like kinect and wii's remote seriously limits your control over the game, it doesn't as they would have you believe give you more control, it takes it away.
Why do you think the wii is flooded with rail shooters?
Why do you think so many multi console games don't make it to wii?
kinect is far worst then wii in this regard, it has no buttons at all to it, there's a extremely limited amount of control over the games when all you can do is jump up and down and wave your arms around.

You and people like you are the reason why video games, and most other forms of media are completely going to shit.
you like what the media tells you to like, you cream yourself when they put out Xstupid product, and worst of all, defend it to the death, as long as they convince you it's popular and push it hard enough.

50 years from now someone will be wearing a blue suit covered in balls jumping up and down with a stick up his butt as he watches a 100% quick time event video play on his headset of a monkey tossing it's shit at him, he'll be playing the most popular and best selling game of the year, and we'll have people like you to thank.

>>3709
be it the power glove, the vr23 or any of the other countless stupid shit they've tried out, it's always going to be stupid shit.
No one's saying we should have endless CoD.
that's just another problem with the industry.
It's a 2 sided coin with shit on both sides, endless rehash on one side, and stupid crap like wii fit boards on the other.
what we need if for someone to toss the coin away, and work at making better original games in place of working on dumb gimmicks bound to fail, which would kill two birds with one stone.

>>3712

Ok kid, keep enjoying your W+M1 FPS and AB D+Pad games, while you continue to cry and cry about how the "industry is drying" and "real games are dead". Sorry, but you're just a spoiled and young. God help you if you lived through the 80s and had to put up with the repetitive shit that came out every other week. Suck it up, really, or find a new hobby you've obviously fallen into the deep end now.

>>3720
Again, bad/repetitive games are not the fault of the technology.
You don't try to reinvent the wheel, when it's the car itself that's the problem.

>>3720
saying that old games were shit doesn't excuse new games being shit, or motion control and 3D being gimmicky

>>3706

> Remember Virtual Boy? Probably not. These will die, but something else will take its place.

Are you serious about this? If you brought Virtual Boy up I'd assume you actually know what you're talking about but it sure doesn't look like it. VB was the biggest catastrophe in N's history. Pretty much all other companies would bite the dust immediately after churning out such a failed product (currently we've got M$ and Sony, too, but back then I doubt even Sony could afford to do something like that). On the other hand you've got Wii which one could argue might become (if it isn't already) the biggest commercial success in Nintendo's long history.

How can you even compare them and say they will 'die out like VB'? After N's huge success M$ and Sony both realized how much money they could make by appealing to casual crowd. Look at M$'s E3 conference this year. KINECT, KINECT EVERYWHERE. The same could be said for last year and year before that. As for Sony, they didn't showcase it as much this year (as they had Vita to announce and such) but there are tenths of different PS3 bundles with their shining dildo. They are pouring lots of money into advertising them, too.

>>3712

>better writing, better and original stories, better portrayed and flushed out characters

Just like you said 'a shitty game will remain shitty'. I don't see how adding interesting stories is supposed to help.

>>3729
What would you say makes for a good videogame then?

>>3733

If a contest for 'most useless word' will ever be held I bet 'good' and 'bad' will both place in top 10.

What makes a game 'good'? 'Good' gameplay. And what is that 'good gameplay'? That's for you to decide. In short if you have fun playing it it's 'good' which of course means there is no such thing as 'objectively good' as everybody likes something else.

When people say 'games are shit nowadays' they actually mean 'devs don't carter to me anymore'. And of course they don't if you've got niche tastes. Sure, there will always be people who are estatic to hear that the new game of Company X will feature 2049372 tables and 2940 stats which influence one of the 1404 you can take but they will remain a vocal minority at best.

One thing only an idiot would argue against is the fact that games nowadays are watered down to no end (politically correct version: they are simplified). 'If the dumbest of us will understand everybody will get it'. That's how it works or rather, that's how it's been working for literally hundreds of years.

As for the 'better writing, better and original stories, better portrayed and flushed out characters' part... The question here is whether a game could still be labeled a game when it's more akin to an interactive movie. I don't PS3 so I wouldn't know if it's true but saw Heavy Rain get labeled as 'QTE: The Videogame' countless times.

Megaman games do have some kind of story. Not that I would know as I enjoyed the sidescrolling instead of wondering what Dr Willy's motives are.

A good, compelling story is a nice addition but a game can do without it. On the other hand a shitty game with amazing story will remain shitty.

Has anyone played with the augmented reality cards?

Sure, its rudimentary.
but think about the future maaaan

>>3739
I've tried them on the 3DS and they're pretty fun, despite being short.

I've heard that the Vita will also use Augmented Reality as well, but I haven't been following it since it hasn't interested me as much.

>>3739

Stupid gimmick that only fags buy and its killing the industry blah blah blah

>>3739
That reminds me that I haven't even tried most of them on 3DS, although I wasn't too impressed with the target shooting one.