The 6 Most Ominous Trends in Gaming

Mark Hamill

Article on Cracked.com. There are a number of other threads talking about various aspects of the game industry being in decline, but I think this deserves a thread of its own. I agree with a lot of what the author says, which can be summed up as "developers milking gimmicks for all their worth (and far beyond), coupled with knee-jerk ignorant paranoia of piracy is going to run the industry into the ground". It probably wont kill it, but it most likely kill a lot of the innovation out there. I didn't watch E3 vids, (I read some of the thread on this forum) but I didn't realise it was quite as bad as described in the article:

Microsoft led off with the aforementioned Modern Warfare 3, which is really Call of Duty 8 (game makers like to switch up the sequel titles so the digits don't get ridiculous). Next was Tomb Raider 10 (rebooted as Tomb Raider). Then we had Mass Effect 3, and Ghost Recon 11 (titled Ghost Recon: Future Soldier). This was followed by Gears of War 3, Forza 4 and Fable 4 (called Fable: The Journey).

"Seriously, we have no goddamned idea what number we're on now. Just start over."

Next were two new games, both based on existing brands and both for toddlers (Disneyland Adventure -- a Kinect enabled game that will let your toddler tour Disneyland without you having to spring for a ticket -- and a Sesame Street game starring Elmo).

Then, finally, we reached the big announcement at the end (they always save cliffhanger "megaton" announcements for last, Steve Jobs-style) and they came out to announce that they were introducing "the beginning of a new trilogy." Yes! Something ****ing new!

Then this came up on the screen:

Confused? So was the audience. By "new trilogy" they actually meant that there would be three more Halo games. Did I mention that Halo 4 is actually Halo 7? Which means they intend to put out at least nine Halo games before they're done? Oh, wait, they also announced they were doing a gritty reboot of the decade-old Halo to make it an even 10.

Sony came up next and announced a sequel, another sequel and then a reboot. After that it went sequel, sequel, special edition of a sequel, new FPS, sequel, new FPS, sequel, special edition of a sequel, new game based on an existing property (Star Trek), sequel, sequel and sequel. Then they introduced a new system (the PS Vita) and showed it off with four sequels.

Nintendo's list went: sequel, sequel, sequel, sequel, sequel, sequel, sequel, sequel, sequel and (hold on, let me double check here) a sequel. And you already know what those were, even if you haven't played a video game in 15 years: Mario Kart, Mario World, Luigi, Zelda, Kirby, etc. Then they showed off their new system (the Wii U) with a demo reel promising that some day it would allow us to play sequels like Arkham Asylum 2, Darksiders II and Ninja Gaiden 3.

ShadowHearth

good bits out. will need to read on full article.

nothing wrong with sequals if theyr are good and bring something new on the table, but in nintendo case - milking machine at its best!

i know nintendo fans will come now with pitchforks at me, but seriuoslly lads. how many time you get same game just rehashed and added new graphics with a few extra bits?!

i dont even say about that new zelda game, which ir rereleased 5th time!!!!

even if its a good game, why the feck to beat the dead horse again again and again!!!

Healium

"If you want a vision of the future, imagine SecuROM slapping your face with its dick -- forever." -George Orwell

Gold.

Zero-Cool

HAHA thats a great read!

I'd nearly put it down to this gen being tricky to develop for (i'm looking at you ps3 :mad:) and it takes so long for devs to make a game that if its anyway successful, it's very tempting to just make a sequel as they have the groundwork done and won't take as long to make a new IP.

But don't worry, the sequel will have an overpriced preorder pack full of useless shiit and half of the game will be held back and sold to us as DLC for when we finish the 5 hour campaign.

Overheal

Hang on.....


They're finally making a Prey sequel?

richymcdermott

I was pretty much called a fool for talking **** bout developers with their cash in sequels ,pre order dlc ****e

Even battlefield 3 as the game will be great might aswell be ****ed entirely on ea part handling the game , pc will be great consoles we will try screw up the customers

http://www.qj.net/pc-gaming/news/battlefield-3-boycott-brewing.html

Icyseanfitz

splitting the gaming market into three different sectors seems like a very good idea tbh

Overheal

richymcdermott wrote: »

I was pretty much called a fool for talking **** bout developers with their cash in sequels ,pre order dlc ****e

No it was more because you felt a sense of entitlement about it and made some argument about a character's appearance, which was rather comical.

We're all perfectly aware of "DLC Bull****" the difference is there are people who sucker into it and those who don't. I don't worry about the former does with themselves.

richymcdermott

Overheal wrote: »

No it was more because you felt a sense of entitlement about it and made some argument about a character's appearance, which was rather comical.

We're all perfectly aware of "DLC Bull****" the difference is there are people who sucker into it and those who don't. I don't worry about the former does with themselves.

When i talked bout the dante thing was just about dmc fans pissed with capcom over it , i dont play dmc , but this not the time to get into topic again thats the past

Magill

I don't see the problem(Besides the DLC ****e)... the gaming industry has always been like this.

Let me ask you this.....how pissed off would people be if they didnt make sequels ?????????

No Uncharted 2/3... no Zelda or Half life 2.... no diablo 2 or fallout 2/3.. no Mario sequels.. no CoD4 or Battlefield 2... No FFVII or Super Metroid ? What if valve came out tomorrow and said they were never making half life 3 ? I'd be pissed !

Most of the best games ever made are sequels, clearly not bad thing for the industry. Innovation slows down when the developers catch up on the tech, you always get a lack of new IP's coming near the end of a generation. We've had our motion control crap this generation, we've had our heavy rain's and uncharted's.

People need to stop whinging and just enjoy the bloody games !

Antar Bolaeisk

Overheal wrote: »

Hang on.....


They're finally making a Prey sequel?

Yeah but it's a different game from the first, not quite FarCry 2 different but still different.

Linky

richymcdermott

Magill wrote: »

I don't see the problem(Besides the DLC ****e)... the gaming industry has always been like this.

Let me ask you this.....how pissed off would people be if they didnt make sequels ?????????

No Uncharted 2/3... no Zelda or Half life 2.... no diablo 2 or fallout 2/3.. no Mario sequels.. no CoD4 or Battlefield 2... No FFVII or Super Metroid ? What if valve came out tomorrow and said they were never making half life 3 ? I'd be pissed !

Most of the best games ever made are sequels, clearly not bad thing for the industry. Innovation slows down when the developers catch up on the tech, you always get a lack of new IP's coming near the end of a generation. We've had our motion control crap this generation, we've had our heavy rain's and uncharted's.

People need to stop whinging and just enjoy the bloody games !

I agree completely

Antar Bolaeisk

Thankfully we have indie developers who produce gems such as Minecraft. Project Zomboid is looking very interesting as well.

Zero-Cool

Antar Bolaeisk wrote: »

Thankfully we have indie developers who produce gems such as Minecraft. Project Zomboid is looking very interesting as well.

And Limerick lads Open Emotion Studios who made the gems Mad Blocker and Ninjamurai!

Mark Hamill

Magill wrote: »

Let me ask you this.....how pissed off would people be if they didnt make sequels ?????????

No Uncharted 2/3... no Zelda or Half life 2.... no diablo 2 or fallout 2/3.. no Mario sequels.. no CoD4 or Battlefield 2... No FFVII or Super Metroid ? What if valve came out tomorrow and said they were never making half life 3 ? I'd be pissed !

For most of them? No, I wouldn't be pissed, not unless, like Half Life, the story wasn't finished.
The sequels you mentioned are all sequels to what was, at one stage, a new game, a new IP. Imagine how pissed you would be if that first game didn't get made, because the studio decided on a sequel to some established IP?
Dont get me wrong, I'm not against sequels, if a game is good and allows for more story and proper gameplay refinement (I really enjoyed HL2, Diablo 2, Fallout 3/NV etc). But if I had to choose, I would rather many stand alone (full story, where applicable) games than relatively few multi-sequeled IPs.

Grumpypants

Sigh... these articles drive me nuts they look at the few big sellers as the future of gaming. Like everything else gaming goes through cycles. The 2D platformer was all the rage in the 90's with sequel after sequel Mario 1, Mario 2, Mario 3, Mario world, Mario allstars a reboot of the previous titles !!

Yea you get franchises building up and publishers will want to release sequels but they also release plenty of new games too, this has happened since the beginning of gaming and will continue.

The future has never been brighter for the gaming world.

Zero-Cool

Grumpypants wrote: »

The future has never been brighter for the gaming world.

Well if Kinect is the future, you better call up Doc Brown and send me back to the 80's!!!

EDIT: Jaysus what was I thinking, make it the 90's! Tomb Raider ONE, Resident Evil ONE, GTA ONE!!

Magill

sheehy83 wrote: »

Well if Kinect is the future, you better call up Doc Brown and send me back to the 80's!!!

EDIT: Jaysus what was I thinking, make it the 90's! Tomb Raider ONE, Resident Evil ONE, GTA ONE!!

All of which have better sequels

fasty

Hyperbole. It's almost like the article has been designed to say nothing while still garnering lots of comments on Reddit and forums.

There's plenty good about the industry, but an article about that wouldn't have people chipping in with some lulz about iron sights and DRM.

RobertFoster

Regular readers know I made a similar graphic based on last year's games.

Guy complains about sequels, writes one himself :pac:

Games, like other software, can be seen as iterative. Therefore, (some) sequels are an improvement on the original. Sure, it can get out of hand with Annual Shooter/Football/Racer/Zelda 20, but technology is constantly improving so we can go from GTA to GTA3 and see huge jumps.

I think the naming convention is just another way of saying "Hey! Remember that game you liked a couple of years ago? Well guess what!". Movies do something similar with their "From the director of ..."

richymcdermott

The only ever series i played that made little to no changes was pokemon ,its only recently with soulsilver i said ive hthink i need a break from the franchise, defiently one of the most addicting games :pac::pac:

jaykhunter

RobertFoster wrote: »

Guy complains about sequels, writes one himself :pac:

Games, like other software, can be seen as iterative. Therefore, (some) sequels are an improvement on the original. Sure, it can get out of hand with Annual Shooter/Football/Racer/Zelda 20, but technology is constantly improving so we can go from GTA to GTA3 and see huge jumps.

Ha, very clever My opinion on sequels is this : If it's a new story and the game is different enough then it's just fine. Unlike a lot of movies, videogame sequels are better and better than the last.

Like with videogames costing as much as a blockbuster film, it's understandable that gaming companies make sequels; i.e. something the fans are already familiar with and are already somewhat emotionally invested in. And we want more of a great thing; so it's win-win. Assassin's Creed 2, Uncharted 2 blah blah sequels are awesome; some of the names are the same but the rest can be very different. Like i'm sure nobody's complaining about Bioshock 3! Same world but different world and guaranteed quality!

abelard

A lot of good points made in the article.

Regarding sequels, they can certainly be good, if they expand the scope of the original, or refine the mechanics etc. For example, Civilization sequels have generally been worthwhile, even more recently we have things like Uncharted. Sequels can innovate and improve on the original, but the developers have to actually care and take some risks.

On the other hand, there are two current problems. Firstly the cost of production of video games has spiralled. Second, the hardcore is now a niche. Developers aren't taking risks any more as failure is so costly, and they need to appeal to as wide an audience as possible. Thus we get essentially the same Modern Warfare/Battlefield/whatever game every year because its a formula that they know sells games, despite each version being pretty much a graphical overhaul.

Or successful hardcore games are being dumbed down for wider appeal. Look at Mass Efffect 2 (which admittedly was still great) and the plans to pretty much eradicate the RPG elements for Mass Effect 3. Look at Dragon Age compared to Baldur's Gate, and then look at the disgraceful Dragon Age 2 (again, diluted complexity, not to mention the repetition of assets and environment in order to save money and shove the sequel out the door).

Kiith

You can't just rule a game out cause its a sequel. Some of my all time favourite games are sequels...System Shock 2, Freespace 2, Baldur's Gate 2, Deus Ex 2 :pac:

abelard wrote: »

Look at Mass Efffect 2 (which admittedly was still great) and the plans to pretty much eradicate the RPG elements for Mass Effect 3.

Where did you hear this? From the interviews i've seen so far, they've talked about it being deeper then the 2nd. More combat, but also more choice with powers and how to approach the combat.

Mark Hamill

I think that some people are latching on to the point about sequels and ignoring the rest of the article. The point about sequels was more about how everything big in the industry (everything at E3) not that no new IPs are being made. However, any new IP will be threat from the other things mentioned in the article - draconian drm, everyone copying each others gimmicks, lack of vision, idiots adding pointless elements to gameplay (fetch quests etc) - and any game will be under pressure to try to integrate subscription services (COD is doing with the next game, aren't they?) or make use of some copied gimmicky technology (Fable on the kinect :eek:?).

CramCycle

Magill wrote: »

What if valve came out tomorrow and said they were never making half life 3 ? I'd be pissed !!

I'd be happy if they just finished 2

krudler

no sequels= missing some of the best games ever made.

Street Fighter 2
Mario World
Super Mario 3
Resi 2+4
God of War 2
Uncharted 2
COD4


I'm all for originality in games, but I do love good sequels as well, games are luckily one area where the sequels are usually better than the originals, not always, Bioshock 2 is a perfect example, but its rare the original isnt improved on in the sequel.

richymcdermott

I thought bioshock 2 was great though the ending on both games i didnt find enjoyable , there should be a thread on games that are brilliant have the most unsatisfied endings ever

abelard

Kiith wrote: »

Where did you hear this? From the interviews i've seen so far, they've talked about it being deeper then the 2nd. More combat, but also more choice with powers and how to approach the combat.

Preview like Eurogamer's suggest it's going to be more like a standard 3rd person shooter and less an RPG.

I'm not using this as a stick to bash ME3. It's pretty much a day one buy for me. But it is further evidence in my opinion of developers making decisions about gameplay solely to appeal to a wider audience. While I trust BioWare enough to still think ME3 will be epic, there are a lot of developers who don't get this right and we end up with disappointing watered down games.

Overheal

krudler wrote: »

no sequels= missing some of the best games ever made.

Street Fighter 2
Mario World
Super Mario 3
Resi 2+4
God of War 2
Uncharted 2
COD4


I'm all for originality in games, but I do love good sequels as well, games are luckily one area where the sequels are usually better than the originals, not always, Bioshock 2 is a perfect example, but its rare the original isnt improved on in the sequel.

Agreed but there are also times when they just seem to only be there to cash in. Like many of the Sonic the Hedgehog titles that have come out since the Dreamcast. Adventure 1 and 2 were actually alright if not totally different, but then you get Sonic Heroes, and it was alllll downhill from there. Kinda like successive Megaman X games, where you can kinda tell they were barely even bothered anymore.