I think it's time for a change... I love Gears. I love Halo. I love Doom. I love Ratchet & Clank. These are great games, maybe considered among the best ever for their respective genres. I've been playing games for twenty years. To me there's always been a common theme for most games. There's been a common theme in place since the birth of the home console era. This theme has been heavily relied upon by developers and publishers for years because it sells well, regardless of the platform the game is on. This theme has to do with the game experience for the individual player. Here's the theme: The player is given a character to control (or in some cases, the player is allowed to create a character). Then the player is given a weapon, a set of weapons, or, in some cases, a set of powers. The character is placed in a level (with the idea being to clear a set of objectives to reach the next level) or the character is placed in some kind of open environment (a la GTA or WOW). Then the player has to accomplish goals, clear levels, or even reach a certain score to beat the game. However, the one thing that most games have in common is this: Kill the enemies. The player is given weapons and/or powers usually for just one purpose: killing bad guys in order to clear goals and levels and eventually the game. Now don't get me wrong. I thoroughly enjoy chain sawing bad guys in Gears as much as you do. I enjoy sniping enemies from across the map in Halo. I enjoy laying the final blow on a boss in one of the Legend of Zelda Games. To me, when I finish a game, I feel a sense of déjà vu. It feels like I've been essentially doing the same thing for twenty years: killing bad guys in some form or another. The thing that excites me most about games is not looking towards the future, but actually looking at the progressions of gaming's past since the 8-bit era. Thanks to Nintendo and, more specifically, Miyamoto, the introduction of story, themes, and feeling attached to a character started to permeate gaming. Thanks to the introduction of CD-based gaming, more specifically the original Playstation, characters now had a voice. Now environments had some depth to them. Games didn't have to look like colorful cartoons anymore. More importantly, the original Playstation, the Sega Saturn, and Nintendo 64 featured, almost entirely, 3D based games. We can now look, explore, and play completely in 360°. At that time, more than ever, gamers could experience just about any imaginable environment. As gaming hardware has progressed over the years, up to this point in time, we've seen major leaps and bounds in graphics, sound, gameplay, and online connectivity. You can easily draw side-by-side comparisons to Final Fantasy III, Final Fantasy VII, Final Fantasy XII, and the to-be released Final Fantasy XIII. The game, at its core has pretty much remained the same. Thanks to improved hardware, these games have seen increased graphics, sound, and gameplay features...but the game has essentially remained the same. You can look at Doom when it was originally released then look at the recent release of Doom 3. The game, in the technical fashion, is completely different...but you still play as one guy from the same perspective, with a plethora of weapons, with a group of levels you have to clear, and with a bunch of bad guys you have to kill. Again, I thoroughly enjoyed the Final Fantasy series and Doom games, but I think we're due for a change of the guard. I can sum up my opinion with this: I believe games have been following in the footsteps of the Madden development path. Every year, EA releases a new Madden game. Essentially the graphics remain the same per platform (maybe with a few animation tweaks here and there), there may be a few gameplay tweaks, there may be a few tweaks to the user interface, there may be a few tweaks to the game modes, and then they usually throw in a new feature or two with every release (like the Hit Stick or using the right analog stick for juke moves). Every year I buy Madden, and after a few months of playing it, usually the only update I find useful is the up-to-date rosters. Yet every year I buy it, and every year EA gets richer around the month of August. It seems like games, and not just sequels, are just updates of previously released games. It seems like some developers say, "Hey, Medal of Honor is a cash crop for EA, let's make a similar game." Then a couple of years later, we get Call of Duty. "Hey, Super Mario is a cash crop for Nintendo." Then we get Sonic the Hedgehog (soon followed by Crash, Jak and Daxter, etc.). "Hey Final Fantasy is a cash crop for Square." Then we get .hack. Now I understand this is a business, and developers and publishers are going to do what they think will make them the most money, even if that means taking a known game, making some tweaks, then calling it a new game. Sometimes this works (GTA leads to Crackdown and Saints Row); sometimes this doesn't work (GTA leads to True Crime). It's as if developers and publishers just take what's known and juice it of all it's worth. Every now and again, someone takes a risk. Every now and again, someone leaps off of the deep end to try and bring a new experience to the masses. Games like Guitar Hero, Rez, and Katamari Damacy. Some of these risks pay off (like GH and KD), and some do not (like Rez, despite being hailed by critics like Gamespot). Although I fear that those risks, like GH and KD, are starting to follow the path of Madden; all to make a profit. I'd like to see something new. I'd like to see something that will make other developers and publishers start to think about ways of copying this new thing. I'd like to see new genres. I'd like to see games that obliterate the line between gameplay and storytelling. When I think of games like Halo and Zelda, I think of the gameplay experience. I don't think about the characters and the story. The one time, in my mind, that characters and story rose up above gameplay was when I played Star Wars: KotOR. That game was completely driven by the story, the characters, and the actions your character took while completing various missions. What you did affected the story, how other characters responded to you, and even the game's conclusion. Rarely have games done this. Typically, games force you onto one path. If you don't follow it step-by-step, you don't advance. I can't stand that. Sometimes that path works; other times it could be annoying. When I play what everyone usually considers a great game, like, say Half-Life, I sometimes get annoyed with locked doors that remain locked and areas the game won't allow me to explore for the sake of exploring. I want to see everything. If there's a door, I want to walk through it (or break it down if it's locked). I think that's why GTA is appealing to a lot of people. Gamers will say it's cool to steal cars, shoot at pedestrians, and get chased by the cops. I think gamers like GTA because, unconsciously, gamers like the freedom to go wherever (although there are buildings with doors that remain locked). So...after all of this ranting...here's my point: When will we get to play a game that has great story-driven elements, where we're free to explore the environment, where other NPC's are impacted by the player's actions and decisions, and where we don't have to completely obliterate everything in sight in order to advance the game. To the death with linearity and repetitiveness! When do we get to put down the guns, knives, and keys to the tank in order to solve problems using feeling, intelligence, and decision-making? Are games like this a risk for developers? Probably. Just ask the developers of Ico (which is a great game, despite using a blunt object to defeat enemies just to open a door. Do yourself a favor and play it). I think these kinds of games are possible now more than ever before. With the technology where it is now, this is absolutely possible. Games like Roboblitz, for the Xbox Live Arcade, that have excellent graphics, that are somewhat produced quickly compared to retail games like Gears of War, and that are cheap for consumers ($5.00 to $10.00), should be looked at by developers as a means to test out possible risks. I'm sure there are game developers out there, and even independent studios, which have off-the-wall ideas for games but could be tempted to shelve them due to the financial risk involved. Now with Xbox Live Arcade, Playstation Store, and the Wii Virtual Console, some of these ideas should be realized. Developers could make episodic games (if need be), that will help maximize profits. Gamers, I would imagine, would be more likely to plop down $10 for a digital download every three months, than they would be for plopping down $60 in one shot for the whole experience. For developers, imagine selling ten 3-5 hour $10 episodes, or selling the entire thing for $60. I would rather buy the $10 installments, because it seems like an impulse buy, and it's more convenient because I know exactly how long I'd be playing each episode. I don't have to ask myself if I'd be able to finish a game like Oblivion 120 hours into it. Now's the time for the risks to be taken. Now's the time for something new. Now's the time for a completely original experience. Now's the time for a new era.