Do games lack substance this gen?

It's something that starts to bother me lately, and it's not only in games. Yesterday I saw star trek beyond and it suddenly hit me, the graphics and presentation are great, but they can't even find an orignal crew, they have to copy the one from 50 years ago.

Even worse, last movie they copied the story pretty much from an older trek movie as well.

Games have just the same disease, we get remasters, rehashes. twists on the same formula over and over and over.

It's not being original is so hard nowadays, on the top of my head I already have dozen ideas for new games but for some reason they don't happen, we get the same crap over and over over.

Apparently it must be selling, otherwise they wouldn't make it, but who buys this crap. Am I suddenly surrounded by idiots, that must be it. The world must be swarmed with idiots all of sudden.

Now I wonder , how this did happen , did they put something in the water? did my lsd-friends have children?

Either way, I am stunned, maybe 'for honor' will shed some light, that seems to be original , and it's from ubisoft, the irony...

@commander: Apparently it must be selling, otherwise they wouldn't make it, but who buys this crap. "

Evidently, you. You just said you saw the latest star trek and described the previous one so how did you see them?

I have had enough fun with gaming this gen to keep doing it. When I don't, I'll do something else with my time. I expect life to change, it's the only constant in the universe.

They do lack substance, but each generation of consoles brings millions of new gamers to the hobby, and they don't realize it. Everything is new to them, so developers can get away with selling it. There's not really any problem with that, but it does mean that with each successive generation I grow less interested in the big budget scene. Pretty much everyone with a passion for bringing out new ideas isn't working on the blockbuster scale. That's the nature of any business really. Lucky for us, we live in a world where it's possible for tens of thousands of devs to release games at little-to-no cost outside of their time to make the games, so there really isn't a lack of games to play.

It would be nice to get a big-budget game every once in a while that is original though.

well I can't see a movie that's still in theatres without paying a ticket. That's not the same case for games though. I just used the movie to make a point.

I hope you're right when you say life will change, otherwise I will get very bored.

Yes thank god for mad max fury road and witcher 3

great movie and a great game

can't stand most of the other crap now a days

No games have always lacked substance. You're just getting old enough to finally realize it.

you have a point there, but it's not like with movies that are 50 years apart, if everything is pretty much done before, why don't they get the older games, they are much cheaper.

AAA market lost its originality last gen. It's nothing new. In fact this gen is showing return of old franchises, so future is looking better. The reason why most games are made for dumb people is because they sell very well unfortunately.

Death of publishers like Sierra Entertainment has also affected game industry very negatively and has left us with EA, Acti and Ubisoft. SEGA is releasing some high budget complicated games but other than that the fun is mostly in mid tier market now. The next AAA game that is really pushing game industry is Star Citizen/Squadron 42.

JJ produced Star Trek. JJ is all about copy paste old ideas and drown them in SFX.

is mad max actually a good game? I have never given it much thought, not a real fan of the movies either, allthough the last one had something, but I don't really know what it is.

Witcher 3 is idd good, bought that recently but I'm more into multiplayer games

As long as games are fun, who cares? Indies usually fill the gap with originality.

No i meant the movie was pretty good for a modern movie I didn't play the mad max game yet.

Because games still function as toys, and people want the newest.

It doesn't help that the console makers themselves tend to dump old platforms for the new ones. Additionally, the fact that there are even three distinct consoles, two distinct handhelds, the mobile market, and the PC market all with different exclusives is absolutely horrible. If you buy a bluray player, it doesn't matter if it's from Samsung, LG, Sony, or whoever, it'll play not only any bluray movie you put into it, but also any DVD from the last 20 years.

However, if you buy a PS4, not only do you not get to play any of my PS1, PS2, or PS3 games on it, you also can't play a single game from any system of the last 40 years. None of this type of practice is conducive to getting gamers to explore games from all generations/systems, and expand their mindset.

Meanwhile, you can simply discover old movies, shows, music, and books just by having access to the internet. It doesn't even matter what device you have to access the internet with.

Hopefully a day will come when there is one single platform that any electronics maker can produce, and that can play every game in existence.

Tbh, i don't expect creativity and risk-taking from AAA devs, they need to appeal the mass so they can get their money's worth out of the investment.

As for creativity and originality, we have indie games.

@commander: How can life do anything else? My point is, I read so much negativity in regards to current games, and it was the same last gen and the gen before. Life is a subjective experience and if something no longer pleases, then cast it aside.

To be fair about game development these days especially with in the AAA market. The time and cost to make something original is like playing the high risk vs high reward theory. I mean yeah you could make a game about a superhero who has to take various drugs to get his superpowers, but at the cost of becoming a drug addict, but then you have to ask yourself how many people would buy that game if you gave it the AAA development treatment. Hence like the movie industry you have the Indie scene vs the blockbuster scene. That's problem these days most of the time for original ideas getting made without going into insane cost was back around the early 3d days and 8bit era of gaming. But thank god for Kickstarter and other crowd funding websites they allow for the impossible to be possible.

@beardmad: Because games still function as toys, and people want the newest"

I disagree there. Games aren't relegated to "just toys" anymore. It is no secret that gaming is an entertainment industry that encompasses a broad range of ages and people these days. Phones aren't "toys" but people want the newest.

Enthusiasts in anything eventually have to cope with an influx of consumer money that isn't concerned with more than being entertained, be it film, music, literature, gaming or anything really.

It makes me laugh. Gamers want cutting edge. Tech but that costs and without the mass consumer money it isn't possible for a business to survive. There is always a Yang to the Yin in life.

If this hobby doesn't do it for a person anymore, leave it. Crying does nothing.

maybe so, but look at no man's sky for instance, if they had triple the manpower and resources they would actually have been able to make what people expected, the manufacturing cost would still be only a fraction of any aaa game and it would have sold like hotcakes at full price.

That's not always the case, people can be fed up with more of the same, the videogame crash of the early eighties is a nice example of this. I actually thought we already got there with the last battlefield and call of duty but apparently we are not there yet.

the new consoles are a smart tactic but that won't keep on flying, people know the difference very well between the quality of this gen consoles and last gen consoles. Not to mention a lot people still play on the pc and older consoles too, it's not like the x360 and ps3 are completely dumped, those servers are still going and when they get shut down, there will still be server maintained by users, if there's people willing to play on them.

One device 4 all is a nice idea, but not very realistic, it could be bad for competition too. Look at the current gen, there is basically a duopoly by sony and microsoft, and we got nerfed consoles.

While a lot of developers are playing it safe this generation and not taking many risks, there are some fresh IPs and ideas here and there, like PlayStation VR, Splatoon, Sunset Overdrive, No Man's Sky, the upcoming Zelda Breath of the Wild (which looks unique for a Zelda game), Super Mario Maker, and indie games.

100% man! Don't let the apologists on this thread keep you down. I assume lots of gaming companies have their shills on various forums to derail genuine arguments.

There are as many remasters this gen as original AAA titles. Not only that, a number of these so called remasters are essentially re-releases of games we saw a couple years back on the PS3/XB360. Thats a remaster of a 2 year old game. Fuk me thats scraping the friggin barrel.

In all honesty, since I got bored of Fallout 4 my PS4 lay barren till my recent PES/FIFA experience but that only lasted a few days. We're almost 3 years into this console cycle and I can't think of a single killer or original exclusive for Sony or MS.

Console gaming may well be dead and when a console diehard like me is looking to but the witcher 3 and probably the next BF or COD on my PC, you know shit has hit the fan.

Your issue isn't substance (although yes Star Trek is fluff vs the hard science it used to be during the TNG days), it's more so this medium is stale. Reality is don't stick to just triple A games or big block buster films. Hollywood still has plenty of great lower tier productions built on the backs of great writing and acting. Gaming has an indie space and returning middle market which goes back to the fundamentals of what these medium is good at: Fucking being a game.

As much as I bitch, we've never had access to more games in our lives, so any inability to find a game that satisfies your taste is on you.

That's not an excuse for the higher end productions to be so creatively dull, they should get better, and any entertainment would benefit from its high end being much better, but there is no absence of quality out here.

I wish all the people who post about video games being awful and this gen being so bad would just quit the hobby already. The masochism is outrageous. I do agree that games aren't as experimental as they used to be. Probably is a byproduct of the current toxic gaming culture that talks trash about indies and big budget rehashes alike in the same sentence. When more joy is had using the word "flop" than talking about enjoying the hobby, you know we are experiencing problems. They are just giving us what they think we want and apparently we don't want new things. I like it better when a developer takes the attitude that we don't know what we want and need to be shown. I would like developers to make the kind of game they want to play. Taking a risk these days is a thankless job in video game fanboy land and just isn't seen as profitable. Apparently.

having access to all these games is not what really matters, that's the same as having a movie collection and having seen every movie several times. That's no excuse for making bad movies or making bad games. It's the decease of this decade, there's no intellectual pride anymore.

thanks lol but it's even worse with the remasters than you think, they have the nerve calling 10 year old games remasters and having worse graphics than the pc version (bioshock)

And if I excused them your argument would have merit, but I didn't. There are plenty of good games and nuanced games to boot. We didn't have turn based strategy games that played like Invisible Inc, and it's a pretty bitchin game. One that is replayable to boot, and flexible to be friendly to chumps at strategy games and tough as nails. We didn't have games like what Superhot is. Or what Infinifactory does. Even The Witness is myst in a very superficial way, the way its puzzle designs work aren't anywhere close to being the same thing. And even in the 60 dollar space for all the beat-em up games that have worked off the formula of Devil May Cry, none of them really play like The Wonderful 101, and I don't know too many third person shooters that play like Splatoon. Divinity Original Sin uses a battle system that really wasn't a thing at the height of when crpgs were the poster child of what a wrpg is.

Overwatch may have its lineage owed to Team Fortress, but anyone dismissing it as just as Team Fortress, is judging the game on a superficial level and willfully choosing to ignore where the game does different things and fresher things in terms of mp shooters. We didn't have games that tackled the narrative subjects that games like Life is Strange, a Gone Home, or a Firewatch touches even in the hey day of point and click adventure games. We certainly didn't have top down action games that played like Hotline Miami.

So yeah we get plenty of creative games if you know where to look for it. Games with mechanical depth? Yeah Bayonetta 2 is a thing, Street Fighter is a thing, Starcraft is still going strong. Overwatch and Rainbow Six Siege put the skill back around team synergy and coordination over "my aim is better than yours" and even then Unreal Tournament is back, and it's fucking free. Dota 2 is an exceptional multiplayer experience, also happens to be free.

One side of gaming being lame as shit, doesn't invalidate all the other games that are pretty fucking good.

You want to argue that there aren't enough truly great or excellent games? Sure, I'm there with you. That the triple A space is creatively boring? Haven't disagreed with that. But we're missing games with substance and creativity in general? Nah, you're just not looking for it, that's on you sport.

The reshash always sells, because there is a market for it. It's new to them. They don't offer much for the more sophisticated gamer. Like ETQW; that was a great game, but too sophisticated for the average gamer it seemed.

I enjoyed ST Beyond, some nice comedic elements in there I found, and some things I didn't like but overall it was a decent Star Trek movie to me. I was very sceptical at first of the JJ reboots, but over time I've grown to enjoy them more.

I don't want to talk too much about that though, and just remember how they brought in the Seven of 9 actress in the middle of the Voyager run to boost ratings, and there were rumors she and Kate Mulgrew didn't get along on set. It's a fascinating tale that I won't talk too much about here, but suffice to say these products...especially Games, they are mostly marketed as forms of entertainment.

For a lot of people, this 'substance' you speak of might be boring. It's there, but perhaps not as much in the mainstream these days, I would agree a little bit with that. But it doesn't bother me because it's still there if I want it. I just have to look more carefully. When you are a showrunner or a game designer, TC, your opinions might change. They only feed the market, the consumers decide in the end what products should get the bigger spotlight.

Mainstream games these days lack substance, but there are plenty of lesser known (not necessarily indie) games out there with real meat to them.

All the games you mention linger in the realm of low budget, niche market and mediocrity. The arcade/low budget scene has gotten a voice last gen and it's a good thing but you have to draw a line somewhere. Quality and niche are two different things and last but not least, twisting a known formula without really creating something new isn't really what I was talking about either.

It's not that it's harder to make a masterpiece than last gen, there are new tools at hand, and the creative minds can make the level of quality that we had in previous generations. The problem is not that they cannot do it, the problem is that they choose not to do it.

Heck some games have not even gone past there expiration date yet, bring a game like borderlands with destiny graphics and you have already a winner, but no one seem to care. It doesn't have to be completely original in the sense that it has to be a different game mechanic, or something completely out of the ordinary. I'm just talking about the level of quality in mission design, story, gameplay , character development with current gen standards.

Don't you think it is odd that a game like destiny is played like crazy while it has the soul of a sloth on benzos. Don't you think it is odd that ea didn't figure out that wrestling doesn't translate very well to a controller and doesn't make a boxing game for 6 years. Don't you think it is odd that people whine about 1080p and 60 fps but some games can barely escape nauseating framerates at release.

You mention a game like overwatch and it's indeed one of the few games that has acceptable quality this gen, but it looks like it's made for 8 year olds and may even trigger a whim of nostalgia for the first pixar artists. However it may be a breath of fresh air for the 20 year old mp fps but it is far from what you could call a current gen multiplayer fps. The gameplay may have gone in the right direction, but the graphics and artwork scream last gen all over the place. Doom does it the other way around, they crawl back to old shool shooter mechanics with current gen graphics. Apparently no one seems to get it right.

I could go on all day, how rehashed, copied and pasted or even remasterd every game is we get this gen. Nobody dares to actually make a proper game besides the obvious exceptions. By the time the xbox 360 was ending its third year, it already had a dozen masterpieces. Now all I can find are a handfull of promising titles, which are mostly sequels and where the yawn is always just around the corner.

Idk some people consider things like immersion/atmosphere and story to be substantial in games. By that measure this gen is doing just fine. But yeah if were talking gameplay/mechanics then I think it's more that things are getting stale and less that games have less substance than previous gens. That's unavoidable when you've been gaming for a few gens; there are only so many ways to do things intuitively in a game...well, without some truly innovative ideas that is but those are and far between.

Not all of them but the large majority do, ya. That's why im excited for Nioh, that game has the substance.

I came in here to talk about games but you trashed star trek beyond. That's an amazing movie. I watched it for the second time the other day and had to hold back tears on three separate occasions.

And you're done talking. You'd rather be close minded and play shiny wank, and I'd rather actually play a video game that actually plays well. You don't want substance, you're pretty shallow mate.

yeah sure, what did you expect, no need to mention the overflow of low budget/niche games this gen. We're all well aware of that. I would be nice if some of those devs started working together and made a game with a bit more body. I have lived through the eighties , while I'm quite nostalgic when I hear or see anything about it, I don't have to live through it again, even if it has some better graphics and sound.

Yeah, for films there is a lot of flash no substance.

I think it was even the CEO of Warner Bros that said: "People don't go to the cinemas to see amazing stories, they can watch those at home, they go to cinemas for the special effects"

As for games I doubt the situation is really that bad. I play games primarily to have fun, I watch movies primarily to be entertained, and have a good-decent story.

Even Ryse, which at first thought was a all flash no substance, I really enjoyed at the end :)

Well I just used the movie as an example, I actually enjoyed the movie as well but I'm a star trek fan, I'm not going to collect any merchandise but I have always liked the lore/universe. It just feels meh to see zachary quinto as spock and that other dude as kirk. Not to mention the doctor. It's simply embarrassing when they try to capture the magic between the characters of the first show and movies. Thank god it's a movie and not a series, where these interactions happen a lot more.

The previous two treks weren't bad either and the first one didn't suffer as much because it felt like a hommage to the original crew. Now it feels like a shameless copy, especially the second one, where they pretty much stole the plot from the second orginal movie as well.

But enough about the movie, with games this lack of originality is a lot worse, since the medium is a lot younger. We have so many crap game sequels that another police academy movie wouldn't even seem like a bad thing. I thought this gen would pick them apart but since there's nothing else, people keep on buying it. That's a difference with feeding the market, it are just a bunch of monopolies and the production values are so big that a lot of devs are scared to start/ or can't find the resources to build a premium priced game.

That why I gladly gave my money to no man's sky, I know, the game is buggy , it only has half of what was originally intended but still I hope it's a signal to the current devs that a lot more money is to be made with new stuff, instead of rehashing older stuff. Still, it's kinda shitty that I have to state the obvious.

@commander: I understand where you're coming from as someone who also often likes to support the "underdog". It's a rough business for sure, and it's often unfair. The great, original and passionate work doesn't always see the success it deserves.

I too also go out of my way to support some of the games I believe in, but I can't change market trends. A lot of times you have a great game that doesn't do well because of other reasons, such as lack of proper marketing, unfavorable release date, etc. I do my part, I try to be vocal with devs and give them feedback...I enjoy Twitter because of that, because the internet is filled with negativity so I like to message devs with constructive criticism as much as possible. I try to focus on the things I can control, the society we live in today it appears many companies are doing their best to listen, so what we can do is vote with our wallets and give constructive criticism and hope for the best.

It would be nice to establish what substance is and show examples of games that have them. I would think most games have substance. But, it's substance we've seen before. I'm fine with that. I don't care much for originality or innovation so long as the games are fun.

Perhaps originality is what the TS is looking for. But then, most gamers tend to ignore games with originality because they're outside the mold the gamers are used to.

substance

(ˈsʌbstəns)

n

1. the tangible matter of which a thing consists

2. a specific type of matter, esp a homogeneous material with a definite composition

3. the essence, meaning, etc, of a written or spoken thought

4. solid or meaningful quality

5. (General Physics) material density: a vacuum has no substance.

6. material possessions or wealth: a man of substance.

7. a euphemistic term for any illegal drug

I think it's quite obvious I'm talking about number 4 here.

Substance is a thing confirmed

The problem with substance is it's a relative term. So now, it's time to cite examples of games and why they have substance. What is it about that game that makes it have substance?

For example, a game I loved, Combat Flight Simulator 2: Pacific Theater looked fairly good at the time of its release. It simulated well the differences in maneuverability between Allied and Japanese fighters with the Japanese fighters being able to out-turn and out-climb contemporary US fighters. But, US fighters in the game were faster, allowing the recreation of zoom and boom tactics when flying US planes. CFS2 did good at recreating the air war between the Japanese and Allies in WW2. In real life, US pilots were told to avoid dogfights altogether and rely instead on zoom and boom tactics which take advantage of superior speed and allow them to initiate/break off combat at will.

No. Despite the fact current gen kids think hate everything new is cool, gaming was never as good as it is now.

well of course it's a relative or even a subjective term, since we're talking about an artform here.

But still there are some criteria that can be used to measure the quality, like I'm not really into dogfight games but if you are and you think that game is good, it's probably going to have substance because you know a lot about these type of games.

As long as its fun I dont care. I've been having a blast this gen for the most part with such as Bloodborne, The Witcher 3, MGS V and most recently I just beat Batman: Arkham Knight (wich was absolutely FANTASTIC! I dont understand the flack it gets on forums and the 7 VanOrd gave to it was just... wrong imo).

The only thing I really REALLY hate this gen are the remasters. If you havent played them last gen, ok, I can understand, but if one of those that already played them and is double dipping constantly instead of supporting new games then I hate you with a passion

Well that might have been the case in the end nineties and early 2000's on the pc, because of piracy and lack of marketing.

But in this day and age the great, original and passionate is not going to go unnoticed, the problem is that it isn't there, or at least only to a very small extent.

Of course I am talking about bigger budget games here, it doesn't have to to be the most expensive production but a game that has decent build quality with current gen tech would suffice. Sadly most of the games have major flaws or are just last gen games at higher resolution in a new jacket.

But the hate for remasters doesn't make sense ether!

There are almost 800 games reviewed on PS4 at this point (500+ with positive scores). How many of those are remasters? I would say 30 at most. Same for people who bash indies, sequels, etc... It all adds to a big and diverse library.

@commander: welcome to the era of the soft reboot. Everything is a rehash of a rehash.

Substance? Solid and meaningful quality. Yeah I've got plenty of games I find solid and meaningful in quality. Games that are worth my time.

TC didn't mention any examples of games with 'tehh substance'.

yeah but wasn't the 3rd entry released like 2 years ago? Maybe slightly longer and they supposedly "remastered" it lol

And don't even get me started on the Uncharted remasters. The second 2 games, which had mp modes, aren't as good on the PS4 because you have to pay extra to pay online. How the hell is that an improvement?

This has gone too far.

There are more than enough games this gen it's just that people limit themselves.