Where are we with video games ? and where are we going !!!!!!

Video games are a perfect example of how far technically we have come, from stunning visuals of the ps3/360 to the innovative controls of the wii.

But now we are at a cross roads of where do we go next ?

while we are at this cross roads, we are now stuck playing a multitude of poor games which do not fail because of the concept or in the majority the execution, but in the technical detail.

The introduction of Multi Platform is the 1st killer when you are developing for 4 or 5 different platforms or of which work on different architecture, how can you even contemplate creating something as "Good as it could be, AS Good as it should be & and @ £40 it damn well wants to be"

Take my Favourite gaming serious.. Pro Evo they release it on PC, PS2, PS3, Wii, Xbox 360 & last but not least PSP .. Now im sure they have different gaming divisions, but Konami aint the kinda company who have a pool size big enough to develop it for all those platforms and make it good, so was it no surprise when it came out and with in a week.. 1000's of posts, grunts, complaints.. of poor frame rate, poor online play.. sub par graphics, glitches, technical problems.
But do Konami care ??? You already have the game .. there pockets are already lined.

But now come onto the next part of my argument with what is currently wrong... "Online Access" online play the way of the future .. cant beat is.. playing and chattin with some guy 300 miles away.. & I would also agree with the fact online access brings a great way of adding content.. freshening the game up... continuing its life span.

But what does it do for the "finished article" Back when there was no online access.. console games had to be 100% perfect or as close as.. before they got released, These days any old unfinished rubbish can be released, knowing they can line there pockets with silver and fix the problems later.. well if they can be bothered.

Now onto the current "common sense issues" for which im going to give a few examples and im sure most of you have a million more.. my question at the end of this would be, who do they get to play test the game.. trained monkeys ?? dont they get objective gamers, who actually know what they are talking about.

Beijing : god i love and miss track and field by konami and I heard this was coming out, i was like with online play could be fun. The graphics are okay, alot of events.. online play.. you would think.. a pretty good overall experience.. UNTIL, you actually have to play the game.
Button Bashing at high speed on my 360 controller, and then expecting me some how to press the right trigger to jump, throw.. is like asking George Bush to actually say something intellectual. "HOW DID U MISS THIS WHAT WAS YOU THINKING OFF"

Alone in the Dark : Technical ideas, awesome.. story seems compelling.. graphics on the face look dark and eerie.. but then they release it with a control system stevie wonder would have a better job of actually working.. trying to get through a door is harder then killing the final boss.. "HOW DID THE GAME GET RELEASED AND SANCTIONED"

Battlefield Bad Company : There is so much to like about the game, there are alot of good ideas, and ideas brought over from BF2 and 1942. But there is also so much about the final release which frustrates you. The graphics are grainy and poor, which in this day and age in HD is unacceptable, when playing online you never feel in control, you run up and stand behind someone .. put a full clip in their back... then they turn round and have the audacity to kill you with 1 bullet. "where is conquest mode" ?? BF was built on conquest mode.. not linear-ed gameplay like it is with the new attack & defend scenario. "oh its okay they say" we are going to release a free patch.. " I DO NOT WANT A FREE PATCH, I WANT THE FULL GAME I PAYED £40 FOR"


All three examples show what multi platform, online access and the stink of cashing in quick as done for gaming... and something needs to be done to stop it.. NEAR technical perfection like Call of Duty 4 or Grand Theft Auto is coming to few and far Between and we need to start realising that "LESS IS MORE" i.e Less games More Quality.

P.S on a final note i just want to add we are now into the back half of 08 so.. please step up EA &............................

Fifa 09
NBA 09
NHL 09
Madden 09
Tiger Woods 09

Amazing what changing the front cover and a new date stamp.. can do for profit projection figures.

*P*

Well that was a nice spaz out. You went in about 50 different directions with your topic lol. I AGREE multiple console makers is BAD. Both in terms of the amount of software and especially in terms of quality. I just got Civilization revolution which got multiplatformed and the DS version has HORRABLE user interface. It doesnt look like a single person gave them feedback on how the game is presented and stuff. The incredible Hulk and Ironman are yet more examples of how quality is sacrificed. TIH got released with game freezing crashes and Ironman just has crappy menu screens.

You praise console's ability to go online(i think) because you get fresh content but I feel the opposite, I think it totally takes away from a game when they try to add online content. Why do hardly any FPS games let you fight offline? Broadband and routers are just an additional hurdle to jump to play a game. Im not ANTI-online but game devs shouldnt focus so much energy into it.

One of your original questions is why i wanted to respond though. "Where are we going". They already have the tech to allow technology to scan your brain and respond. I think man and machine interaction is where we are headed. Imagine working your cellphone or car by touch, being able to write messages without typing or talking, putting on a pair of glasses that reads your eye movements and pupil dialations. Hopefully eventually we will plug our consoles into our body and become one.

Imagine if the human body had audio/visual jacks lol. You plug two cords into your spine and hit a switch and the game console overrides your eyesight and hearing. Images and sounds would be sent directly into your brain which means you wouldnt need a tv or speakers. Imagine playing a video game on a 50 FOOT monitor lol, you could change the size and shape of the viewing area to anything you wanted.

I totally agree. Also, something else to look at; Game's like GTO4 & MGS4 are most definitly great, but their just the same game with the "proper" updates it should have. Once Developers get those heavy hitters out of the way, all they have to worry about is money and piece of crap games. But its fine. Let them.

Sooner or later some developer wll get off their lazy *** and make a new and fun gaming series for "this gen". I guess alot of people loved Drakes "uncharted". It was a cute attempt from naughty dog, i beat it my self. Although if you ever played their Jak an daxter series you would probably wonder why the PS3 hasent even matched the PS2 "quality" of a gaming library.

I guess times are changing, im 20 years old now and games like chrono trigger and zelda: ocarina of time just dont cut it for me. Twilight princess was a drag to go through and it hurts.

I have to rephrase the chrono trigger remark. If developers could even match an RPG on the lines of those classics we wouldent need such over priced systems.

Times are changing......

I dunno about plugging games consoles into your body. It's a bit New World Order. Why would you so readily embrace that idea?

In response to the OP, I think you are being very pessimistic. Yes there are some crap games being released, but I think that gamers have ever increasing expectations. If you try and play classic old games today they quickly become tiresome:

Goldeneye 007 - clunky controls

Zelda: Ocirana of Time - dungeon sections with their run of the mill puzzles drag on

Tomb Raider - simlar problems to Zelda and Goldeneye

(Zelda 3 on the SNES is still brilliant though, and have playedit through a few times since it was released, so I'm contradicting myself a bit)

I think a lot of developers are doing their best with the money, man power and time available to them during production. Why would you go into an industry like video games with the intention of being lazy and creating crap games just to rip people off? I'm talking about developers rather than publishers but I think that's a wider discussion which covers other entertainment.

Also the games you cite as being bad are ones which you should have expected to be bad! Film licenses are usually BAD, so rent or play the demo first. Licensed olympic games are usually bad! Why are you suprised by this? It has only been convention for the last 20 or so years. Why haven't you learnt?

As for Pro Evo, you can't blame Konami for the way the industry is set up. There are lots of platforms. Their game competes directly with EA. EA release, and have done so for years, on all the platforms. Konami have to do the same. It's business. I know they had a different team working on the Wii version because it was very different but am not sure about the others. And anyway, it's a better game than FIFA. And I got PES6 for £2.99. So I'm not complaining.

Sorry OP, wasn't you who mentioned Hulk and Ironman (long posts, confused)

You did mention Alone in the Dark, which has been a bit up/down; some hate it, some love it. It'sa tough on with persoanl preference. A bit of a different but related point, gamers do rely on reviews and 80% or 90% plus marks more than any other media consumer. You go watch a crap film and it doesn't really matter as it costs £7 and takes 2 hours. Games cost £40 and take 20 hours (average). But if you watch 10 crap films that's 20 hours and £70. But people don't really care. Maybe episodic game distribuion will really lower our standards.

Beijing is not that bad, it would be actually okay if they had gone "now lets spend an 1hr working out the controls" instead of just randomly putting buttons anywhere.

This is why i called it common sense issues, something of which i would expect my 5 year old cousin to work out... plus its not hard to whip out konami's track and field of yester year and see what works and what doesnt, theres also that saturn one i cant remember the name of, and that was awesome.

Alone in the Dark is good example of people with great ideas and innovation, but its like they spent 90% of the time creating the ideas and only 10% of the time developing and executing them.

As for the guy who said i was being pessimistic.. maybe a little, but i go down plays release list for the back half of the year, Yes there sequels which will be Good but more of the same, but nothing which jumps out at me and says "Im going to be awesome"

Actually scrap that there is 1 .. Tom Clancys End War.. innovative idea, which im looking for to see the execution.

but apart from that.. my god there is some trash in there, trash they charge @ £40, which for me is shocking.