Trends for the Worse

[sealboy6]

I just wanted to know what everybody thought was the thing of this generation or the next generation that will be the worst thing for video games.

Personally, I believe GTA:SA switching to AO will be an awful thing for video games. Now that this has happened, I think that the ESRB will rate games on a much harder scale, which will affect sales and the games that come out in the new generations.

My second big issue with modern gaming that will be bad for video gaming in the future is that of games bringing more and more sequels out. I think that most of these games are good games, but if companies start to become more complacent, people will lost interest, and the companies will receive a nice surprise.

Just a thought.

[SkiDragon]

I know video games are doing better now than ever, but most of my friends are largely dissatisfied with modern games.

[Haoie]

A lack of originality, instead for firms to fall back on prequals/sequals/remakes just to be "safe". Fresh gaming ideas are very rare now. A lot of people don't seem to be bothered by this, interestingly, instead calling for more sequal and remakes, etc.

[PDorr3]

The trend of todays young gamers who are being brought up on nothing older than the n64. Sadly to them the only thing that matters these days to them is graphics.

Retro games might seem like they are being brought into mainstream with the recent boom of retro gaming tees and tv plug ins, but lets just ask ourselves this, that 14 year old kid you saw with the atari tee on, does he even own the system or play the games?

Retro gaming lives on only becasue we have people like us around to keep it alive

[DeputyMoniker]

Well I, for one, dont have a poblem with the ESRB. When I become a parent it will make my job a little easier when it comes time to buy a game. "AO? M? You already know the answer...put it back." Perhaps strict rating will hurt our chances to get good AO or M games, I mean look how rare it is to see a blockbuster R rated film. On the other hand I dont know how well R rated films are doing on DVD & rental. Maybe parents cant get time away from the kids so theyre waiting for it to come out on video. If thats the case then there shouldnt be any problems in the gaming market. AS LONG as the game is not ONLY rated AO but its actually a good game. Many of you may think GTA is a good game but I, personaly, dont game with ANY adults who like it. I do know a few adults who like it...but they arent actually adults...theyre just kinda childish grown-ups. Thats not to imply I think a GTA fan must be childish. Thats just my experience with people I know.

I dont really think gamers of tomorrow are doomed to shallow gameplay. As long as we have puzzles & fighters then there will be kids out there who choose to play a game that requires you to learn, practice, trial and solve. I guess the one thing I think will be missing from tomorrows games will be the need to practice. I dont mean Halo practice...I mean Galaga practice. Defender practice. KoF practice. Pacman practice. Do you understand where Im going with that?

[njiska]

The GTA:SA controversy is going to be devestating to the industry. The witch hunt has begun.

However i still don't think that's as bad as the blight brought on the industry by EA. EA is responisible for a huge decline in the quality of games and as long as they continue throwing money around thing will get worse.

EA is to the gaming industry what Microsoft was to the computer market in the late 90s.

EA buys good companies and then destroys their products (Westwood Studios for example). EA has started buying exclusive rights to sporting leagues and that means that they have no competition. It's bad enough they're sports titles were basically the same from year to year, but with competition they have no need to try and make better games.

EA also buys movie licences and releases sub-standard movie games. Batman begins was un-impressive and hell it took them 3 games to get a decent Bond game.

EA is a virus and it's hurting us all.

[Raedon]

Not really a trend. Same stuff has been going down sense the Genesis/Snes and MK. Politicians and religious groups complained. There were tons of sequels out and people were asking where the new thing was which came with 3D. Doom came out and I still see clips in news clips over a decade later.

If you don't turn on the Cable TV then these are not problems at all - they never enter or effect your reality.

[Sylentwulf]

Sequels are NOT a problem. They've been out since Pong, and it's never hurt anything. How many pong sequels have there been? Or pacman, donkey kong, mario, sonic, basically ANY Popular franchise. Sequels that start failing, like tomb raider, usually don't keep getting new sequels. For example, unless this next TR game is a gift from the gods, you'll probly never see another one, ever.

If Square/Enix ever announced the end of the Dragon Warrior series, Japan would probably fall off the map, and gamers everywhere would riot over the end of final fantasy, with an equal amount of people being glad, and those who would be mad screaming at each other like rabid fanboys.

As for the rating system. I don't see how it will affect anything. Only people over 18 will be able to purchase GTA? Oh friggin no..... That's how it was SUPPOSED to be to begin with. Game stores are gonna have to start carding a LOT more, and that's only a GOOD thing.

[Griking]

The GTA:SA controversy is going to be devestating to the industry. The witch hunt has begun.

Oh please

How about the fact that most of the gaming industry seems to think that in order for a game to be successful a game has to have extreme violence and/or sex in it? The industry's attitude that they constantly have to push the envelope is a huge negative trend.

[YoshiM]

The GTA:SA controversy is going to be devestating to the industry. The witch hunt has begun.

How so? If the sex stuff wasn't in the game, it wouldn't have made headlines and it would still be rated "M". All the gore, profanity and stuff people love is going to remain untouched. Sex or sexual themes, however, are probably either going to be gone over with a fine tooth comb to ensure it's "tastefully done" (I think the upcoming Darkwatch has a non interactive scene that is actually integral to the story) and be made non-interactive. If that's devestating, the industry has been a charred post-apocolyptic wreck since Beat 'Em & Eat 'Em.

However i still don't think that's as bad as the blight brought on the industry by EA. EA is responisible for a huge decline in the quality of games and as long as they continue throwing money around thing will get worse.

EA is to the gaming industry what Microsoft was to the computer market in the late 90s.

Okay, this is just totally opinion. I don't agree with EA's marketing strategies (like locking up the NFL, NCAA, Arena Football, Foosball or whatever sport licenses they snagged up) but they do publish some pretty solid games. Burnout 3 is a great example, the Battlefield series (even though it's probably milked for all its worth, they are still fun), SSX...the list goes on.

Mergers happen. Buyouts happen. Sometimes if they don't the smaller companies just die and the hope of more really cool titles from these companies usually fizzles away.

EA buys good companies and then destroys their products (Westwood Studios for example). EA has started buying exclusive rights to sporting leagues and that means that they have no competition. It's bad enough they're sports titles were basically the same from year to year, but with competition they have no need to try and make better games.

Set the wayback machine to the 80's. Activision, probably the first third party games company, buys out adventure game company Infocom (as in makers of the Zork series, Wishbringer, Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, etc.). Essentially, they destroy the company. Get the pitchforks. Move forward to the early 90's: Sierra starts a line of sports games labeled "Front Page Sports" for computers. They get rave reviews and are praised for having the ability to update rosters without buying new titles. Pretty much every year afterward they start cranking out new versions of their sports titles. Get the rope.

For the sports issue, like it or not it makes money and thus makes good marketing sense to do annual releases at $50 a pop (which is what the market will bear). If there is anyone to blame these days it's the droves of people who keep BUYING Madden or NCAA. If no one bought the games, EA wouldn't put them out as often. And I don't think it's subliminal messages, media pressure or what have you that makes people open their wallets. I think it's more like tradition, kinda like the Star Wars fan that said Episode X stank and then swivled around to the ticket counter and purchased their tickets to see Star Wars. On the side of megers and acquistions (murders & executions?), projects getting axed, ideas of a possible hit being twisted and tainted so they could target a larger demographic, etc. and so on are common in the business world. Don't necessarily blame the company as a whole, blame the bean counters who only cares about the bottom line and won't authorize a risk if that risk would hurt the shareholders' earnings.

EA also buys movie licences and releases sub-standard movie games. Batman begins was un-impressive and hell it took them 3 games to get a decent Bond game.

So does Atari get some blame for the craptastic Matrix game? LJN for Jaws, Friday the 13th and Nightmare on Elm Street games? Sony for Brom Stoker's Dracula? Bebe's Kids? Crash Test Dummies? Cool World? The Indiana Jones games? Willow? The Terminator games? Dukes of Hazzard (then and now)? Should I go on?

Movie/TV licensed games have been around forever, possibly before EA probably came onto the scene. It is completely and totally unfair to point to EA to say they are to blame for every movie licensed game out there. They are not. Licensed games are historically average to bad no matter who put them out.

EA is a virus and it's hurting us all.

If EA is a virus then the people who buy their products willingly get themselves infected, usually with a smile on their face and a "hoo-hah" two-for-Tuesday on their lips. Okay, maybe not so much the second but you know what I mean.

[Mr.Faxanadu]

A lack of originality, instead for firms to fall back on prequals/sequals/remakes just to be "safe". Fresh gaming ideas are very rare now. A lot of people don't seem to be bothered by this, interestingly, instead calling for more sequal and remakes, etc.

I think XboX thinks putting out ever popular first person shooters is safe! But have you noticed that many of the first person shooters are just “halo engines” with a new skin placed over it. Man! I’m getting sick of them - Conker’s, Destroy All Humans….

[njiska]

The GTA:SA controversy is going to be devestating to the industry. The witch hunt has begun.

How so? If the sex stuff wasn't in the game, it wouldn't have made headlines and it would still be rated "M". All the gore, profanity and stuff people love is going to remain untouched. Sex or sexual themes, however, are probably either going to be gone over with a fine tooth comb to ensure it's "tastefully done" (I think the upcoming Darkwatch has a non interactive scene that is actually integral to the story) and be made non-interactive. If that's devestating, the industry has been a charred post-apocolyptic wreck since Beat 'Em & Eat 'Em.

I think you need to take a look at what a Mr. Jack Thompson has to say before you ciritize me saying the witch hunt has begun. This has nothing to do with content of the game. This has to do with the ESRB setting a precident. The ruling allows for people to make arguements over what things a game could be modified to do. In the case of Jack Thompson, Pedophilea in the Sims. It has nothing to do with sex or violence in the game but rather how liable companies are for mods to there game. One could argue that by providing tools companies are supporting the creation of obscene content. i realize that's a stretch but it wouldn't suprise me in the least if someone makes that claim.

However i still don't think that's as bad as the blight brought on the industry by EA. EA is responisible for a huge decline in the quality of games and as long as they continue throwing money around thing will get worse.

EA is to the gaming industry what Microsoft was to the computer market in the late 90s.

Okay, this is just totally opinion. I don't agree with EA's marketing strategies (like locking up the NFL, NCAA, Arena Football, Foosball or whatever sport licenses they snagged up) but they do publish some pretty solid games. Burnout 3 is a great example, the Battlefield series (even though it's probably milked for all its worth, they are still fun), SSX...the list goes on.

Mergers happen. Buyouts happen. Sometimes if they don't the smaller companies just die and the hope of more really cool titles from these companies usually fizzles away.

You're right mergers and buyouts do happen. But because EA has an anti-competition adgenda those buyouts cand become dangerous. They do publish solid games, like Burnout 3 and James Bond: Everything or nothing, however i find the ratio of quality to crap is rather light on the quality side and heavy on the crap.

EA buys good companies and then destroys their products (Westwood Studios for example). EA has started buying exclusive rights to sporting leagues and that means that they have no competition. It's bad enough they're sports titles were basically the same from year to year, but with competition they have no need to try and make better games.

Set the wayback machine to the 80's. Activision, probably the first third party games company, buys out adventure game company Infocom (as in makers of the Zork series, Wishbringer, Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, etc.). Essentially, they destroy the company. Get the pitchforks.

True but we're talking about this generation and the next and right now EA is continuing that trend. It's always been a bad thing for gaming.

Move forward to the early 90's: Sierra starts a line of sports games labeled "Front Page Sports" for computers. They get rave reviews and are praised for having the ability to update rosters without buying new titles. Pretty much every year afterward they start cranking out new versions of their sports titles. Get the rope.

For the sports issue, like it or not it makes money and thus makes good marketing sense to do annual releases at $50 a pop (which is what the market will bear). If there is anyone to blame these days it's the droves of people who keep BUYING Madden or NCAA. If no one bought the games, EA wouldn't put them out as often. And I don't think it's subliminal messages, media pressure or what have you that makes people open their wallets. I think it's more like tradition, kinda like the Star Wars fan that said Episode X stank and then swivled around to the ticket counter and purchased their tickets to see Star Wars. On the side of megers and acquistions (murders & executions?), projects getting axed, ideas of a possible hit being twisted and tainted so they could target a larger demographic, etc. and so on are common in the business world. Don't necessarily blame the company as a whole, blame the bean counters who only cares about the bottom line and won't authorize a risk if that risk would hurt the shareholders' earnings.

I wouldn't blame the company as a whole if it weren't for the fact that the company seems to share the mindset of quanity over quality. Yes i realize that sports games are a yearly thing, however EA's innovation in each year is below that of most other publishers. EA is supposed to be the best at sports games but instead of raising the bar they're lowering it. These opinions are not just held by me. Read almost any review of and EA sports game released in the last year and you'll always hear the same thing. Sega's ESPN line did wonders at invation and enhancement but sadly due to the EA/NFL deal Sega decided to drop them. By the way nice American Psycho reference.

EA also buys movie licences and releases sub-standard movie games. Batman begins was un-impressive and hell it took them 3 games to get a decent Bond game.

So does Atari get some blame for the craptastic Matrix game? LJN for Jaws, Friday the 13th and Nightmare on Elm Street games? Sony for Brom Stoker's Dracula? Bebe's Kids? Crash Test Dummies? Cool World? The Indiana Jones games? Willow? The Terminator games? Dukes of Hazzard (then and now)? Should I go on?

Movie/TV licensed games have been around forever, possibly before EA probably came onto the scene. It is completely and totally unfair to point to EA to say they are to blame for every movie licensed game out there. They are not. Licensed games are historically average to bad no matter who put them out.

Again you're proving my point. Bad lisenced movie games are a trend. It may have started long ago but EA is continuing to carry the torch.

EA is a virus and it's hurting us all.

If EA is a virus then the people who buy their products willingly get themselves infected, usually with a smile on their face and a "hoo-hah" two-for-Tuesday on their lips. Okay, maybe not so much the second but you know what I mean.

Look the point i'm trying to make is that EA embodies a lot of the negatife trends of the past and their current business practices aren't helping the industry. Just because people buy EA's games doesn't mean they aren't bad, it just means they know how to market. EA is a horribly anti-competive company and that's never good for business. Just be glad they can't buy Ubisoft, even if they do own 20% of it.

EA is a ruthless company, just look at how they treat there programmers.

[MegaDrive20XX]

Consumers buying the most pointless games and ignoring the really good treasures on the current generation consoles.

People who buy systems just for sports and racing games..to me, that's like buying a car just for storage purposes, by filling it up with crap.

The RPG craze is still insane, but I'm trying so hard to point out the original RPG's that have been missed by many during the years, like Legend of Mana, BOF3/4, Dragon Warrior series, etc.

Final Fantasy fans, I'm sorry to offend anyone in this forum, I like FF too, but I see these kids all the time, they don't wanna play anything else, they have a stack of PS2/PS1 games with nothing but FINAL FANTASY written on it. Anything else they'll play, they'll bitch it's not like Final Fantasy...well duh....it's called "Originality, not copyright infringement" and again this is just like the car analogy, buy a car for only storage purposes..

How everyone goes crazy over the PSP, but nobody can still afford it. Yet they blindly discuss the PSP without actually knowing how it plays and the many purposes it has.

On top of the PSP, I just don't like how everyone these days has the need for some portable device. How badly are we in a hurry to get on with our lives? Has the thought of having a large TV just died out? Is sitting down and relaxing with your favorite game just a myth now?

I agree about the younger generation, brought up on nothing but GBA and GameCube. (Some have never even seen an N64 now...it's getting scary). When a 6 year old brags about graphics, I just smirk. I look and say "How do you know what graphics are, when you can't even color within the lines in your Kindergarten class? I still remember when you were a twinkle in your mama's ass, hell I could be yo daddy! I used to hunt buffalo!"

The floods of children's cartoons being made into video games is getting on my nerves...I say make a 3D Ren and Stimpy game and I'll be fine heh.

Gamers who bitch about 2D Fighting games, but adore Tekken and Soul Calibur.

and I still hate to this day this quote "Dreamcast? I remember that old school shit"

[Slimedog]

The only trend in modern gaming that will affect me personally is the trend toward digital distribution. I wouldn't be surprised if 10 years from now all games are download only and when that happens, I won't have anything to collect. Then maybe I can get caught up.

[Xexyz]

I see a few bad trends developing.

One is the fact that almost every game made these days needs a big budget. The companies spend so much money developing high detailed 3D engines, voice actors, etc. that it chokes out the small developers (and even worse, the arcade style developers).

I really detest how every game needs an involving storyline. leave it to the RPG's and Adventure games. I don't want to read a novel when I play a new Mega Man title anymore. Imagine if shmups started getting detailed storylines...

I hate how every game needs to be 20+ hours long to sell and satisfy the casual gamers. Go to the NGG board on GFaq's. The simple minded fools always complain about short games. Again, Adventure and RPG games can be long (although 50+ hours is seriously stretching it, not many people want to devote that much time to one game).

I hate the idea that 98%+ of the console games must be in 3D and in a 3D perspective. 2D games are not obsolete. They deliver a satisfying style of gameplay that cannot be duplicated in 3D games. The restrictions of free roaming do not hinder 2D games, they enhance them. I'm not complaining about 2.5D games. I don't mind 3D graphics if I can still get a 2D gameplay style.

Alot of ranting but I'm serious. The games I enjoyed this gen weren't Jade Empire, the KOTOR games, Halo, MGS3, FFX, GTA 3, or the many other Sports/FPS/Adventure games. The games I enjoyed were Gradius V, the Nippon Ichi SRPG's, Ikaruga, Capcom vs. SNK 2, Guilty Gear XX, Metal Slug 3, etc. I did enjoy some mainstream titles like Devil May Cry, but alot of my favorites were small time and more interesting.

[Falcon]

I hate the idea that 98%+ of the console games must be in 3D and in a 3D perspective. 2D games are not obsolete. They deliver a satisfying style of gameplay that cannot be duplicated in 3D games. The restrictions of free roaming do not hinder 2D games, they enhance them. I'm not complaining about 2.5D games. I don't mind 3D graphics if I can still get a 2D gameplay style.

You have to remember, first of all companies are a business, not people who enjoy video games. If 2D games wont sell, they wont develop it. Capcom Fighting Evolution, Marvel Vs. Capcom 2, Capcom Vs. SNK 2, these are examples of games that came out that are 2D, and I can honestly say that I dont know many people that own these games.

[Amy Rose]

I hate how every game needs to be 20+ hours long to sell and satisfy the casual gamers. Go to the NGG board on GFaq's. The simple minded fools always complain about short games. Again, Adventure and RPG games can be long (although 50+ hours is seriously stretching it, not many people want to devote that much time to one game).

It's strange that you say that, I never would have thought that casual gamers would want their games to be long. The few casual gamers I know only play games for a few hours a week, and get bored with them really quickly.

Then again, since games cost so much nowadays (the prices of handheld games are just disgusting) I guess you'd want your money's worth out of it, and if that only comes in length, so be it?

[Mr.FoodMonster]

A lack of originality, instead for firms to fall back on prequals/sequals/remakes just to be "safe". Fresh gaming ideas are very rare now. A lot of people don't seem to be bothered by this, interestingly, instead calling for more sequal and remakes, etc.

I think XboX thinks putting out ever popular first person shooters is safe! But have you noticed that many of the first person shooters are just “halo engines” with a new skin placed over it. Man! I’m getting sick of them - Conker’s, Destroy All Humans….

No. Most FPS are better then Halo, and I'm insulted you think otherwise. Although, it is understandable that some people are getting sick of FPS, because 1-4 or so is actually amazing/original. Also, Conker's and Destroy All Humans... not FPS. Not even kind of.


I think the GTA:SA is bad for the industry, for various reasons posted above. And I really can't imagine why some of you are saying its not a big deal. And I totally aggree with the statement about EA putting out mass amounts of 'teh s uck'. If we end up with only a handful of game developers, and none of them are making the same type of game, then we will simply have eyecandy, but the gameplay will be brainrot. The industry is growing up, and I don't particularly like its 'new friends'.

[le geek]

Personally, I believe GTA:SA switching to AO will be an awful thing for video games. Now that this has happened, I think that the ESRB will rate games on a much harder scale, which will affect sales and the games that come out in the new generations.

It will be interesting to see how this pans out. One thing to keep in mind is that some games do get rated AO by the ESRB. It's just that the developers pull or alter content to get the M rating, before publishing. So it won't affect sales so much as games may not be as over the top with realistic violence.

Cheers,
Ben

[davepesc]

Personally, I believe GTA:SA switching to AO will be an awful thing for video games. Now that this has happened, I think that the ESRB will rate games on a much harder scale, which will affect sales and the games that come out in the new generations.

It will be interesting to see how this pans out. One thing to keep in mind is that some games do get rated AO by the ESRB. It's just that the developers pull or alter content to get the M rating, before publishing. So it won't affect sales so much as games may not be as over the top with realistic violence.

Cheers,
Ben

I'm hoping this opens the door to more AO games. If SA can sell millions as a mislabeled "M" game, then other games can do it too, right?

As a parent, I want to see some games unavailable to children and as an adult, I want to see games offer as much as possible. This is not necessarily just "OMG lookit teh b00biez," but violence and weighty themes too.

Also: can someone explain more about the EA/NFL partnership? I was told it was the NFL that wanted an exclusive contract with one game company. EA just ponied up the most cash. And I hear that another company got the rights to MLB, yet we don't hear about how that deal is destroying the industry.