The Decline of Gaming

[Xpelair]

Not sure if this should be in the debate section or not, but I'll post it here.

Alright so The Golden Age of Gaming is over, with the rise of the Internet and online gaming, games are becoming more expensive and we are receiving less content.

It is true that, with things like Xbox Live, games are shorter, and have less intricate stories. Online play starts out with good maps, but as these grow old, you have to buy more maps as they are released, when they could have easily been fit into the original release! But why do companies do this? They are profit driven. Games are more expensive than ever but we receive less content and more online play, that means less traditional game, and more having to play with 12 year olds on a laggy Internet server.

Sure some of you might like online play, but look at the original Xbox, those games now cannot be played online, and in the future, the hours you poured into these games will all be deleted at the push of a button, what will remain is a 5 hour campaign for you to play.

And PC gamers have posted all over saying nothing is wrong with their games, well, I got a game called Total War, and I had to install something called Steam just to play that game on my PC. It served no purpose but to bombard me with adds whenever I wanted to play my game, and it added literally nothing else.

Other examples such as Alan Wake can be seen, the game was awesome, but had no online, so they could fit more into the game, and they did, but you have to download it!

"The Passing", from Left 4 Dead 2, you have to pay 7 bucks for stuff they could have included elsewhere!

Battlefield Bad Company 2, short campaign, but the online is what selling the game, you take that away and you aren't left with much.

What is truly sad, all the "extra content" that these companies sell would have never taken off if it wasn't for YOU, the gamers that buy this cheap crap. If you would all stand up and say no, we might start getting what we deserve from these $60/£37 games.

Theres my rant on the issue, please post your thought.

 

[Alex]

No offence, but this is all very sensationalist isn't it? Saying that the 'Golden Age of Gaming' is over, when arguably gaming is going through it's peak phase right now by breaking into new demographics that wern't even interested in the medium before the current console generation, seems to be more than a bit false. Gaming isn't dead or dying, its only evolving along with the times and with gamers themselves. With the internet and the ever increasing variety of ways to get on it, there's no surprise that games like Minecraft or Farmville are seeing such a surge of popularity.

Also, complaining about the cost of downloadable expansion packs that continue the story in story driven games like Mass Effect or Alan Wake, is all very well and good. But when you remember that when you buy the game new, only about half of the money goes to the game developer and half to the retailer (100% to the retailer if you buy it used), is it really so shocking to see game developer's charging you a little bit more so that they can get 100% of the profit? I don't think its that unreasonable, and if the game is good enough then I'll gladly pay that little bit extra to continue the story.

When you remember that games can cost in the tens of millions of dollars/pounds to make, and how little developers can receive back from that for each unit sold, your accusation of the blame falling on US rings a bit insincere. The problem isn't on us for buying extra content, or on the games companies witholding it from us, but (IMO) at least - the very high set price of games by retailers. Top shelf games like Grand Theft Auto IV and Modern Warfare 2 were retailing for £50 in the UK on their release, thats a full £10 higher than most new releases, and retailers were charging this extraordinary high price just because they could.

You do touch on a lot of good points, and I do think there is slightly too much emphasis on the multiplayer/online aspects of modern games. But yeah, I think some of this rage is being targeted in the wrong place.

Also this is possibly one of the most potentially interesting topics on TLS right now, good job!

 

[Xpelair]

Saying that the 'Golden Age of Gaming' is over, when arguably gaming is going through it's peak phase right now by breaking into new demographics that wern't even interested in the medium before the current console generation, seems to be more than a bit false.

I do understand that gaming is still still strong and hitting it's peak, however I feel the 90's showed just how big gaming was. the 90's had a ton of awesome games and alot of them turned out to be classics that even to this day, stand the test of time.

The true golden age of gaming was getting a PS1/2 and N64/Gamecube or even an old Xbox, plugging multiple controllers in and getting all your friends to crowd around a way too small *v for splitscreen and shoot the heck out of each other.

Gaming isn't dead or dying, its only evolving along with the times and with gamers themselves.

Your right it isn't dead or dying however because gaming industries are becoming more profit driven. In fact I read that Activision may begin to charge for online play. So, instead of paying for just Live or PSN+, you will have an additional monthly payment.

If it sells, expect every single gaming company to follow.

Also, complaining about the cost of downloadable expansion packs that continue the story in story driven games like Mass Effect or Alan Wake, is all very well and good. But when you remember that when you buy the game new, only about half of the money goes to the game developer and half to the retailer (100% to the retailer if you buy it used), is it really so shocking to see game developer's charging you a little bit more so that they can get 100% of the profit? I don't think its that unreasonable, and if the game is good enough then I'll gladly pay that little bit extra to continue the story.

I agree gaming industries have to make money some how. Continuing games with small side story's and expansion are all great. (For example Modern Warfare or Call of Duty.) They come with map expansion and sure enough some of them are a hell of a lot of fun however when the servers get shut down you really aren't left with much, which kind of makes downloadable content just a scam.

Just one extra thing that I'll add and that is that most games I've played for years are becoming more online focused, and what really matters, the game and story, is getting pushed out the door. That doesn't anger you to spend money and not get your money's worth? Games are for entertainment, but dammit if it isn't long enough to entertain you, you have a right to be angry and demand more.

Also this is possibly one of the most potentially interesting topics on TLS right now, good job!

Thanks!

 

[Xpelair]

Sorry for the double post however I feel this has to be said.

Gaming has been on a steady downhill decline since the rise of casual gaming. Casual gaming has even had an impact on hardcore games. With more streamlining and focusing much more on the multiplayer than the singleplayer.

I play alot of retro games and modern games, and some older games (mostly from beyond the 90's) have an insane difficulty which would put off most gamers today. But of course they are not true gamers if they are afraid of difficulty. For example how many gamers today would give Contra a go and not give up at the difficulty.

Something is wrong with the games industry when there are more testers than programmers. Games need to be made by people who play games not people who think they know how to make a good game but just end up producing a franchise which is wearing.

I miss the days when games were made specifically for gamers and not streamlined by being made easy and casual. I'm sick of online being such a big part of games today often overshadowing the single player campaign.

 

[Sheva Alomar]

You keep harping on gaming going downhill when that's not the case. As Alex (Zaeed) said, it's just that gaming is evolving. Your mention of difficulty in games still exists, but is out-measured by the spectrum of other difficulty settings now placed in most video games. For example: Gears of War has Casual, Normal, Hardcore and Insane. They're allowing a larger portion of people to ease themselves into the game - and potentially - the realm of gaming itself. You can't maintain the idea of gaming as an elitist sport or what-have-you. Games aren't JUST made easy, although there are some that are geared towards a group that aren't necessarily familiar with what we like to call "hardcore gaming". The whole idea is to have video games more accessible to ALL demographics and not just a small circle of people. Fun for all, not fun for few.

You are certainly on the right track when discussing the trend of games lacking single-player campaigns. I only say "the right track" because again, the few outweigh the many. Games like Halo and CoD build themselves up around the multiplayer aspect, not bothering too much on an actual story for for the single-player. And it disgusts me. This is, of course, the wrong angle to come from when developing a game. At the same time, there are games out there that can blend the two together well - many aren't released just yet, but we have games like Demons' Souls and Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood that demonstrate games that are MADE for the single-player, but keep the multiplayer aspect in mind. Games like Brink that is due out in Spring of 2011 will hopefully expand on this idea.

If you're a true gamer, you can't just whine about everything just because it is changing the face of what you have come to know and love. You have to try and understand all sides of the arguments and changes being made in the industry. There are some things that, yes, have been quite bad as far as developments go, but it's all part of the process.

 

[Mitch Connor]

Too much nostalgia can be a bad thing.

 

[Ryushikaze]

What we are in today is a major BRANCH event of gaming, but it is not the decline of gaming at all. There may be major repercussions, but it is unlikely the crash of '83 will happen again.
Gaming has been changing and twisting ever since the days of Missile Command.
The current swing to casual and motion gaming represents a particular branch of the market, but not the indication of where the whole of the market must be going.

On the other hand, there is a major movement to revitalize gaming for gamers, including Japan's recent 'Wait, we're being stupid' realization re: the direction they've been going.

There never was a golden age of gaming. Just ages. We're moving through them all the time.

 

[Max Payne]

Alright so The Golden Age of Gaming is over, with the rise of the Internet and online gaming, games are becoming more expensive and we are receiving less content.

Do you write for Fox News or something? As my good friend with the fucked up eye says, this is quite sensationalist sir. Quite sensationalist indeed.

It is true that, with things like Xbox Live, games are shorter, and have less intricate stories. Online play starts out with good maps, but as these grow old, you have to buy more maps as they are released, when they could have easily been fit into the original release! But why do companies do this? They are profit driven. Games are more expensive than ever but we receive less content and more online play, that means less traditional game, and more having to play with 12 year olds on a laggy Internet server.

No, what's true is there are still many games with very story driven gameplay prominently these days. Many of them have no MP at all, but a wealth of content. Such as Dead Space, The Uncharted Series, Mass Effect series, Bioshock, The Fallout Series, The Fable games, The God of War games, The Elder Scrolls games, Red Dead Redemption, The GTA series, Rocksteady's new Batman games, hell even the Halo series has a good focus on story, even if it doesn't make much sense at times. Sure some of these series have evolved to include MP, but the single player has been no worse the wear for it.

Sounds like you're playing the wrong games to me.

Sure some of you might like online play, but look at the original Xbox, those games now cannot be played online, and in the future, the hours you poured into these games will all be deleted at the push of a button, what will remain is a 5 hour campaign for you to play.

Are you saying that those hours of play with friends and family have no value? Does the time we spent in highschool playing games with our friends
have no value?

And PC gamers have posted all over saying nothing is wrong with their games, well, I got a game called Total War, and I had to install something called Steam just to play that game on my PC. It served no purpose but to bombard me with adds whenever I wanted to play my game, and it added literally nothing else.

Oh my derpy doo. Did you not pay attention to ANY of the features steam affords you? Hell the deals the service offers you are worth it, not to mention the great online features and community.

Other examples such as Alan Wake can be seen, the game was awesome, but had no online, so they could fit more into the game, and they did, but you have to download it!

"The Passing", from Left 4 Dead 2, you have to pay 7 bucks for stuff they could have included elsewhere!

You realise this bloody content was created a good while AFTER the games came out? It didn't exist beforehand. There is some BS going on with certain methods of selling DLC, but not all of them are underhanded.

Such as the amazing value you get for ten bucks with Red Dead Redemption Undead Nightmare. Also, Left 4 Dead 2's dlc is all free on PC. MS makes Valve charge for it on their console.

Battlefield Bad Company 2, short campaign, but the online is what selling the game, you take that away and you aren't left with much.

The Battlefield series has ALWAYS been about great multiplayer long before it ever came to consoles. With that series the campaign is the bonus. Hell, some entries have no MP and are still worth the price.

What is truly sad, all the "extra content" that these companies sell would have never taken off if it wasn't for YOU, the gamers that buy this cheap crap. If you would all stand up and say no, we might start getting what we deserve from these $60/£37 games.

I am sorry, but I am all for extended the value and playtime of a game with DLC as long as it's worth it. The DLC for ME2 and RDR are well worth it.

Games like Halo and CoD build themselves up around the multiplayer aspect, not bothering too much on an actual story for for the single-player

This is bullshit as far as Halo is concerned. The games have always had a big focus on lengthy(for shooters anyway) story driven campaigns that find ways to incorporate all of the gameplay's features into them. Whether or not those stories are good is another matter, but you've ALWAYS gotten good quality out of a Halo campaign.

There's nothing wrong with having games with a big focus on MP either. If we're gonna have games with a huge focus on single player, what's wrong with having the other spectrum?

 

[Vossler]

Just throwing my two cents in. But I have a feeling that yeah it maybe so that console gaming maybe on the decline, I tend to look at the positives of what's currently happening.
I like the fact that gaming is becoming more interactive instead of sitting on your ass exercising your thumbs. You have the Wii that allows you to have the motion sensor, playstation has since come out with something similar and now you have the X-box Kinect (sp?) in where your whole body is the controller. I like that plan where you can jump around controlling the character or reactions without sitting down. It get's the player more involved with the game instead of laying on your ass with a controller in your hand.
Yeah console gaming is on the declince but interactive gaming is on the rise. The more people can be more involved with a game the more likely it will inflate to epic proportions.
It would be nice in 5 or 10 years we actually have something like the holodeck in Star Trek. Now that would be fucking awesome and the way things are going, it's going to happen.

 

[Dana Scully]

I had to install something called Steam just to play that game on my PC. It served no purpose but to bombard me with adds whenever I wanted to play my game, and it added literally nothing else.

"The Passing", from Left 4 Dead 2, you have to pay 7 bucks for stuff they could have included elsewhere!

I just have to say I found this kind of ironic - if you had bought L4D2 for PC (aka, through Steam) then you would've been able to download The Passing and all future DLC for free. xD

Anyways, I have to agree with the people before me who said gaming isn't declining, it's just changing. And while everyone knows that change is scary (

Spoiler

) it's not by any means a bad thing. If anything the recent shift towards more casual gaming has introduced more people to video games in general, including the hardcore ones.

I agree that the new fad these days is MULTIPLAYER MULTIPLAYER MULTIPLAYER and that single player is suffering because of it, but there are still a lot of games with excellent single player - Enslaved, Halo (yes, Halo, I really enjoyed playing through the coop campaigns and the story and universe was actually pretty well done), Assassins Creed, Mass Effect, Starcraft, to name just a few.

And tbh, I think that the biggest culprit behind less content nowadays are the graphics. Game companies spend so much time and effort polishing rocks because, sadly, that's what fans expect nowadays, and it leaves less time for all those little things like, say, story/character dev/gameplay.

As for difficulty, while I love ridiculously hard games (ie Ninja Gaiden) sometimes I don't want to experience the difficulty equivalent of having my face smashed repeatedly into a wall. Sometimes I just want to shoot or stab things and not worry about exploding shurikens that take off half my health bar.

 

[Bex]

Yeah console gaming is on the declince

No, it isn't :/

 

[Cat Rage Room]

I'm lazy and I have to fill out a bunch of these recruitment papers so I'll keep it short for now; gaming, more than ever, has the potential to be bigger than its ever been, ever. With the massive advances of gaming technology and tools of the present, the higher demographics of gaming than before, and the hindsight and knowledge of what worked and what didn't work in the past, and the high production values of professional games, and the ease of regular old people like you and I making indie games, all of these factors combined can turn video games into everything we've ever wanted it to be.

But like I said, the keyword is potential. Are all video game companies using this potential? No, and a company like Square Enix is a good example.

For example of what I mean; a lot of people, me included, have a special place in their hearts for the 2D games and RPGs of old. Understandably, making 2D massive games on next gen consoles with a big production budget isn't really feasible. However, we have consoles such as the DS/PSP that are more than capable of doing that. Don't like being restricted to handhelds? The Arcade of Xbox 360 and the PSN have been great at providing a good home for fun games 'not quite big enough' to warrant a main title, but totally playable on a console regardless.

We might not have seen great games such as Scott Pilgrim the World: The Game if it wasn't for the Arcade/PSN. If Square Enix was smart they could totally put cheaper 2D games on such a medium. Even indie gamers are filling in that slack with really, really fun, often free games (the link on my site has some of the most promising games I've seen in a while) available online or on the PSN/Arcade. Was this technology available a few years ago? I don't think so!

Potential unrealized, I think.

 

[Interslicery]

Im sorry but the fact you're bashing steam makes you loose all credit with me. Steam is by far the best thing for gaming right now. Aside from the pop up telling you about new releases and deals, I fail to see where the "bombardment of ads" is.

Hell, like dacon said, the deals alone are insane. This summer they had a sale where everything was between 50-75% off, and they have sales constantly. You can put off buying a game for months, and ignore many sales it has cause it will ALWAYS get lower. IIRC you could buy l4d2 for like 20 bucks 1-2 months after it came out.
Check the steam store at the end of december for their annual holyshitwtf sale.

This isnt even going into how valve operates, which is a whole 'nother conversation.

 

[null]

Games aren't more expensive than ever. I bought Super Mario Bros. 3 for $65. That was in 1990. I don't think it's reasonable to say that today's games have a lower overhead cost, less content or lower quality for the price than those for the NES.

Contra is a bad game for illustrating the point about difficulty. Everyone used the 30 life code back then. Use Battletoads. I still can't beat that fucker even with an emulator and save state.

Also, it might help the discussion if we had specific examples from the past to compare to today's games. Which shooters from the past had better stories or content than Halo or Modern Warfare? Doom? Duke Nukem? GoldenEye? Is Zelda: OoT more intricate than Twilight Princess? Did Diablo I surpass WoW? Can you name an old game with more story than Mass Effect? Obviously SE games were more inspired in the old days, but is that the rule?

Something is wrong with the games industry when there are more testers than programmers. Games need to be made by people who play games not people who think they know how to make a good game but just end up producing a franchise which is wearing.

Well, there's several reasons game programmers are in short supply.

1) The gaming industry is brutal. Long hours, shitty pay, high turnover.
2) Elite programmers don't grow on trees.
3) There's a law of diminishing returns on the number of developers you throw at a project.
4) There should always be more testers than developers on a major software project. There's nothing wrong with that, it's how things are supposed to work. You don't want your expensive programmers wasting time shooting walls looking for bugs.

Despite all that, gameplay and graphics are more amazing than ever. I don't think any of the problems facing current games are due to a lack of technical proficiency. Programmers aren't usually responsible for the game design, writing, art or music. If your creative team comes up with uninspired crap then no amount of engineering can solve that. Developers also can't help it if management or marketing keep adding requirements or demanding changes without pushing the deadline.

 

[Alex]

Games like Brink that is due out in Spring of 2011

Shameless plug is shameless!

 

[Alessa Gillespie]

If this was in fact, titled the Decline of Japanese Gaming, I'd have to agree. Haven't seen anything even remotely worth playing since Odin Sphere. But, as far as gaming as a whole, I'd have to disagree. There are tons of good American games that people have come up with innovative new stories and systems, like Heavy Rain. I completely disagree with gaming being on a decline. (tho imo japan needs to get its ass in gear plz)

 

[Splintered]

There are parts that I agree with and parts I disagree with.

I kind of feel that game campaigns are shorter, and a good portion of the newer companies are focusing on fps's, and that single player campaigns are getting shafted (this is my biggest complaint because I don't do multiplayer. Or if I do, it's on a rare occasion, and I only play with friends and family). But I feel this has to feel less because of quality and more because the massive budgets and huge graphical demand make it too expensive or risky to do it otherwise.

But the upside is that there is innovation in the gaming industry. I hate motion controls, but it still is a viable way that gaming is evolving and trying to create new ways of immersion. Games like Heavy Rain also try to push the envelope on story telling.

Also, some people really are looking at the past with rose colored glasses. I liked the PS1/2/N64 era. But not all classic games had great stories. You can't seriously tell me with a straight face that Mario 64 and Golden Eye have a better story that Bioshock or Mass Effect.

Yes, games like L4D don't have huge stories, but they aren't suppose to. They are not meant to be compared to the likes of Enslaved or Arkham Asylum. Plus, these are the same guys that made Half Life 2, I'm sure they can craft a great story when they need to.

So, uh.

I don't really have a point.

I guess it's that I do feel like that there are some things getting sacrificed because of the huge risk and expense that games cost, but at the same time I see there are tons of great games that are innovative in plot, story telling, and in gameplay. I feel like this leap is still a bit of an awkward stage, and that games will eventually find a medium between cost restrictions and innovation.

Games aren't like movies, tv, or like comic books. It's a new genre that is still growing into itself, and will never stop because it requires not just "better tools" but constant redefinition.

 

[Sheva Alomar]

Shameless plug is shameless!

I AM CONVINCED THAT THIS GAME WILL BE VERY GOOD, OKAY?

 

[ForceStealer]

If this was in fact, titled the Decline of Japanese Gaming, I'd have to agree. Haven't seen anything even remotely worth playing since Odin Sphere.

Japan may need to step it up, but I dunno about this statement. Odin Sphere was awhile ago. Nothing since 2007?

Demon's Souls and Valkyria Chronicles come to mind right off the bat for me. I haven't played Persona 4 but I heard good things. Lost Odyssey, Resonance of Fate. Even Crisis Core and Birth By Sleep would qualify as "worth playing," I think.

I don't necessarily disagree with your point, but that seemed a bit unfair And Heavy Rain is a French game, but I know what you meant.

 

[Sheva Alomar]

I can't embed this video, but it is very relevant to points of our discussion.

Link: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/extra-credits/2454-Easy-Games

Please watch, it's really informative.

 

[Ryushikaze]

If this was in fact, titled the Decline of Japanese Gaming, I'd have to agree. Haven't seen anything even remotely worth playing since Odin Sphere. But, as far as gaming as a whole, I'd have to disagree. There are tons of good American games that people have come up with innovative new stories and systems, like Heavy Rain. I completely disagree with gaming being on a decline. (tho imo japan needs to get its ass in gear plz)

Oboro Muramasa?
The new CV with Patrick Stewart?
Dead Rising 2?
I mean, yeah, Japan's been releasing a lot of stinkers, but it's not a complete dearth of content.

 

[Alessa Gillespie]

Oboro Muramasa?
The new CV with Patrick Stewart?
Dead Rising 2?
I mean, yeah, Japan's been releasing a lot of stinkers, but it's not a complete dearth of content.

it's dying, it's just taking its good, sweet time

 

[Max Payne]

Oboro Muramasa?
The new CV with Patrick Stewart?
Dead Rising 2?
I mean, yeah, Japan's been releasing a lot of stinkers, but it's not a complete dearth of content.

Dead Rising 2 was not made by a japanese studio.

It was outsourced to Blue Castle games.

The new CV is the in the same situation.

They are not japanese developed games.

 

[Madame Mayor]

Dead Rising 2 was not made by a japanese studio.

It was outsourced to Blue Castle games.

Woo Canada!

 

[Rumpelstiltskin]

I have a mixed view when it comes to this topic, on the one hand I can agree that gaming is seeing a remarkably abismal time when it comes to sequels in the past.
Fable 3, TFU2, COD: Black Op's etc however your stunned every now and then by a few choice games where the companies have actually listened to what the gamers wanted.

Mass effect 2 was a prime example of a game that alot of people had hype over, the game was changed in aspects that the developers had noted were areas the fans did not like and as a result the game was a massive success.

Whereas you have companies like Treyarch which have made their past few tites based on the work of others (coughinfinityward) they have brought out two games in the past few years using the game engine designed by a different company and instead of trying to improve on it they have massacred the franchise. The simple inability to listen to what fans actually want and focusing on the revenue they can make out of fans is what is truly causing the decline in gaming.