God this sucks! I've never gone through such a long period of time with absolutely not a single game coming out that I'm interested in. In a very small way this has been good in that I've revisited some games I enjoyed in the past and also played some that I probably would not have tried otherwise. (This had both good and bad results.)
So I was reading the GameSpot State of the Union (found here) and sort of agreed with two of answers given by some of the big wigs surrounding the question of what's wrong with the video game industry.
Phil Spencer of Microsoft Game Studios says: "There are too many games, I see, that don't really strive to stretch the envelope creatively. We seem to have hit this glut, to some extent, of people following tried-and-true, existing formulas and not trying to challenge themselves with every release--to really change consumer expectations and to wow people and really delight them."
Yeah, so there's some fluff at the end of that answer, but he's right. Assassin's Creed is the only game I can think of in recent memory that actually did something different, and it was really good! I mean, it's ok to do stuff that's proven to work, provided that you actually make it interesting. Just use the tried and true mechanics, but put it together with an engaging story or ...something! It's just amazing to me that we've gone for so long now with the same ol' same ol'. Combine that with the good franchises taking forever to put out their games and you end up with misery.
Nick Earl of EA Games says: "With all that is going right about the expanded availability of games to new audiences, we still make the core experiences way, way too remote and challenging. We produce enormous amounts of content that never gets seen even by core gamers. It's expensive, it's futile, and it hurts the business of making games, which in turn could slow or even reverse the good that's coming with the proliferation of casual games."
Ok, before I agree with him, I am not a fan of "casual" games. If they make money so the studios can put out the good stuff, then great, but "casual" games usually means "crappy" games (IMHO). Anyways....
This guy is right on in that the good games are so incredibly immersive that there are areas of the map devs spent months creating content for that 98% of us will never see. I'm all for the freedom to experience a game in your own way, but do we have to spend so much time in development adding 3 pixel berries to every tree in a forest when you could be releasing the game so I could be playing it? Get the core in, make it look good, and RELEASE IT!! Weather and stuff is a nice touch, but if it means I have to wait another three months to play the game, I'm ok without a snow storm in some remote place of the map where I'll spend a total of 15 minutes.
I had to add this because I thought it was so dumb. In response to the same question about what's wrong with the industry, Cammie Dunaway of Nintendo says: ""Right" and "wrong" are subjective terms and usually differ, depending on whom you're asking. Ultimately, consumers decide whether the choices a company makes are interesting and worthwhile to them."
Very good Cammie, except they were asking your opinion of the subjective term "wrong." Don't be a politician, just answer the question. Jesus! I don't really like the Wii anyway (exception: Mario Kart Wii).
Yeah, so not much hope for the near future. Hopefully I'll enjoy Fallout 3, which I just started playing. If not, my backup plan is to play Final Fantasy XII ....yeah, I'm *that* bored.
Log in to comment