is the failure of innovative games a bad sign of how bad the industry is?

[Tish-the-Scorpion]

with innovative games like,ico,beyond good & evil,psychonauts,and eternal darkness failling do you think that these games failures symbolizes what is wrong with the state of video games today?,

or is it a reflection of the tastes (or lack there of) of video game players/consumers?

[The Fury]

I think this is the same as any entertainment industry really. Take the movie industry, a big blockbuster about some guy with a gun saving the world, is always going to make more money then many academy award winning films.

While Invovative games like Ico etc are made, get great reviews and are awarded. Games like GTA sell. And game companies will prefer to make games that sell to those innovative games that do not.

[cactusmaac]

To be fair, big sellers like Metal Gear Solid, GTA, Resident Evil etc. are fairly innovative in their own right.

[Dizzy D]

To be fair, big sellers like Metal Gear Solid, GTA, Resident Evil etc. are fairly innovative in their own right.

I agree: some innovators don't sell, but the huge successes usually are innovative. Of course most popular games are the next installation of a sports game, racing game or another WWII shooter, but most popular music, TV and movies are also slight variations on popular themes.

Ico didn't sell, Shadows of the Colossus did (OK, haven't seen any figures, but I believe it sold reasonably well).

[Gargus]

Its a safe bet to go with what sells in terms of games now. All game companies on the whole care about are profit margins, stocks, sales numbers, product shipped and so on and they wont take a chance as often at loosing on of those values when they can make "generic product X" and bank on it.

EA unless drastic changes are made will always crank out the same sports titles almost twice a year with slightly better graphics and updated stats and nothing much else cause they sell them well.

Personally I think part of the problem is games cost to much to make. MOst people associate good games means its a good game and thats totally wrong. So companies spend more and more on making games and since they invest more they have to appeal to the widest audience to make any money back so in turn limits the games they make as well as the originality.

I hope the indutry crashes and burns and then has to start over and maybe we will see some changes and improvements.

Not that there arent good games anymore but they are few and far between to be sure.

[Metaphysician]

Frankly, I'd be entirely happy if EA managed to just crash and burn the entire sports game segment; maybe that money could get spent on games that aren't, well, see above. . .

[Xero Kaiser]

You know, it might be worth mentioning that innovative is NOT synonymous with quality. Just because something is "new and different" doesn't make it worth your money. It's entirely possible for an innovative game to just flat-out suck, just like a more mainstream game can still kick ass. And really, what was so innovative about ICO? It was a damn good game, but it was really just a puzzle game with a cool hook (having to protect the girl the whole way). Then again, prince of persia did really well, so obviously the interest is there

And, "the state of video games today?" What, you think there weren't 100000 platformers and fighting games falling out of the industry's ass when Mario and Street Fighter hit it big? You think Capcom didn't milk Street Fighter for all it was worth back in the day? You always have and always will have people going for a safe bet, it's nothing new despite what the "gloom and doom" game-prophets try to tell you.

As for Beyond Good & Evil, I blame that on the stupidity of the publisher. Releasing a game during the holiday season is bad enough. Doing it with a game that nobody's heard of and with little advertising is just asking to get your ass kicked sales-wise.

You gotta remember, there's a lot of games out there. And unfortunately, some things get passed up. It sucks, but it's not new. I think the industry would be better served by trying to spread out their releases better. The simple fact of the matter is, people only have so much money. When every company waits until October/November then floods the market with more games than any sane person can handle, only the biggest games are gonna come out on top.

And seriously, I could think of more than a few companies/games out there that could benefit from a little advertising. Nobody's gonna buy your games if they don't know they're even out there guys -_-

While Invovative games like Ico etc are made, get great reviews and are awarded. Games like GTA sell.

Are you saying that Ico was innovative and GTA3 wasn't? 'Cuz GTA3 brought a lot more to the table than most games and even kick-started a new style of gameplay.

Credit where credit's due, people

[Anthony]

with innovative games like,ico,beyond good & evil,psychonauts,and eternal darkness failling do you think that these games failures symbolizes what is wrong with the state of video games today?,

or is it a reflection of the tastes (or lack there of) of video game players/consumers?
Not really.

The Gaming industry still remains pretty innovative especially when compared to other entertainment industries (Movies and Music, especially movies).

Sure you get your blockbuster clones (True Crime cloning GTA), but that's always been the case (Sonic cloning a lot of Mario brothers elements).

And truthfully there's only so much innovation you can get with processing power being what it is. Though if Nintendo plays their cards right, the next big innovation could very well be their new system (as far as the interface goes). If that thing plays well, you'll get a slew of new innovative and captivating games.

Still innovation could be a little too quirky for the general consumer (esp. American). But it's still there. Look at the Katamari games.

[cactusmaac]

I rented ICO and didn't stick with it long enough to finish it.

Mostly because I'm just not a fan of puzzles as opposed to shooters, adventure games and RPGs.

I think another problem is that the nature and complexity of modern consoles and PCs means it's difficult to pull innovative games off as reliable commercial successes. I'm thinking of games like Messiah, Republic, Galleon, Fable, Daikatana etc. which were supposed to reinvent how we game but got bogged down in a morass of technical problems and were released much-delayed and with a lot fewer of the features they promised.

To be honest I'm perfectly happy with games which don't reinvent the wheel but are well-crafted, fun to play and have enough new features to keep things interested.

I'm a lot more interested in how well game designers can use a particular title to tell a story and make me feel emotionally connected to what's going on.

For instance, see how many people still talk about KOTOR, MGS and FF7, long after they were released. For all Halo's graphical sophistication, I wish the plot and the characters were as ambitiously designed as the play mechanics.

[Xero Kaiser]

I'm thinking of games like Messiah, Republic, Galleon, Fable, Daikatana etc. which were supposed to reinvent how we game but got bogged down in a morass of technical problems

The only technical problem Galleon had was being butt-ugly

Shame about Fable though, they tried to do too much, too fast and reality just kicked them in the teeth (though the game still kicked ass). But, now they've got something to build off of, and with better technology they should be able to get closer to their original vision next time around

[Taltos]

with innovative games like,ico,beyond good & evil,psychonauts,and eternal darkness failling do you think that these games failures symbolizes what is wrong with the state of video games today?,

or is it a reflection of the tastes (or lack there of) of video game players/consumers?
No, i think this is a good sign. It means that crappy games, however innovative, will still fail. While good innovative games flourish, e.g. Guitar hero, Nintendo DS line up, Halo, etc. The industry is continuing to evolve even if people refuse to see it. Evolutioun takes time people!

[Urusai Wrangler]

For all Halo's graphical sophistication, I wish the plot and the characters were as ambitiously designed as the play mechanics.

I'm actually very impressed with Halo's storytelling thus far. The plot is a fair sight better than 99% of the FPS out there today.

[Tish-the-Scorpion]

most of the games i named are just examples.and the question isn't really my personal opinion.its just a question i made after hearing industry people,and reading there comments on the net.

http://www.gamespot.com/xbox/action/psychonauts/news.html?sid=6141519


MY personal opinion is that games are becoming more and more subjective.unlike in the begining where they was either good or bad.now as games get more complex games get more and more mixed reveiws now,unlike before.like the aformentioned DS games has it critics while others praise the games.so i guess its open to your interpetation.

[Xero Kaiser]

MY personal opinion is that games are becoming more and more subjective.unlike in the begining where they was either good or bad.now as games get more complex games get more and more mixed reveiws now,unlike before.like the aformentioned DS games has it critics while others praise the games.so i guess its open to your interpetation.

I think it just seems like that because of the 'net. With 8/16-bit games, most people just had to rely on their friends and a few mags for reviews. Now when a game comes out you can get like 100 different opinions without really going out of your way

[blackdragon6]

i find my self becoming more,and more bored with next gen games.(i might be growing out of games) but i still find myself playing old 16 bit games.

[P-Man]

No, i think this is a good sign. It means that crappy games, however innovative, will still fail. While good innovative games flourish, e.g. Guitar hero, Nintendo DS line up, Halo, etc. The industry is continuing to evolve even if people refuse to see it. Evolutioun takes time people!



Halo? Innovative? It's an FPS, much like a hundred other FPS's that came before it. One can take the position that it's the greatest FPS ever, and that it perfected the genre. I disagree, but still, that's a perfectly valid opinion to have. . . but to call it innovative? I don't see it.

[cactusmaac]

I'm actually very impressed with Halo's storytelling thus far. The plot is a fair sight better than 99% of the FPS out there today.

I find the characters and story to be pretty cardboard and cliched to be honest, like your typical by-the-numbers action B-movie.

Although yes, it is better than most FPS' whose plot could simply be reduced to: Strike Out against the evil Bydo Empire!

[G. Wayne]

Guitar Hero is innovative? That's the karaoke/DDR wannabe game with the playschool looking guitar peripheral thingy?

I think it's a sign of what's wrong with the video game industry, with the push for and vehement stance to stick with franchises. That, and cloning what's popular to the umpteenth degree.

The innovative games are being made, but they don't get the marketing push of Turbo Mario Kart Alpha Edition or GTA Clone #2517 or the bland FPS #56297. Or in the case of something like Shadow of the Colussus, a kid sees that lame ad with the giant, or they see Sonic or Mario or True Crime, and what do you think they'll want?

[Xero Kaiser]

True Crime sold like crap. Infact, Activision axed it's 3rd game in the series. Sonic ain't exactly lighting up the charts like he used to either

[G. Wayne]

They might not be selling, but it sure seems to me like they're advertising the bejeebus out of them.

[Jagatai_Khan]

I find the characters and story to be pretty cardboard and cliched to be honest, like your typical by-the-numbers action B-movie.

Although yes, it is better than most FPS' whose plot could simply be reduced to: Strike Out against the evil Bydo Empire!

Dude, Bydo was R-type. That wasn't even an FPS, that was a side-scrolling flight-shooter. One of the best ever, too.

[Black Atom]

I think the industry is healthier now than it has been in years, honestly. More innovative? Hell no. But definitely healthier. Will it stay that way? As long as people are selling their right nuts for X-Box 360s so they can play better-looking versions of games they've already got. What did Halo 2 give us? Dual Wielding? Sorry, Blood came up with that first, years ago. But people will still buy Halo 3. But yeah, carbon copying is nothing new really, it's just nowadays there's lots, lots more poop to wade through.

[Chiasm]

Too much time now is spent trying to make the game look pretty and seem innovative. In the process far too often the most important factor is lost - fun. I think that is the failure of many games. I still get more fun out of some old school games on the SNES than I do a lot of current games.

Furthermore, when it takes hours just to get the hang of the control scheme to play some first person shooter games nowadays I really miss the original Doom and its simplistic (relative to nowadays) approach. Doom 3 is a great example of what I'm talking about. It looks great compared to the original but plays horrible.

[Xero Kaiser]

Furthermore, when it takes hours just to get the hang of the control scheme to play some first person shooter games nowadays I really miss the original Doom and its simplistic (relative to nowadays) approach.

Hours? If it's taking you hours to get the hang of a control scheme that's barely changed (or any control scheme for that matter), then I don't know what to tell you

[Metaphysician]

Well, I would hope that game companies would tend to standardize controls for certain types of games. For instance, absent some compelling reason, I'd expect most X-Box FPS' to have mostly the same scheme as Halo.

[Dizzy D]

Well, I would hope that game companies would tend to standardize controls for certain types of games. For instance, absent some compelling reason, I'd expect most X-Box FPS' to have mostly the same scheme as Halo.

Most FPSers/3rd action adventures on the PC that I know about use the WASD+mouse system. Only difference usually is what key for using items/opening doors and what key for jumping.

[Citizen V]

Its all on how you see it,or personal views on the matter.Some say that the Video Game industry has been in decline for the past few years,others say that the Industry has never been stronger.Especially with the "Next Generation" consoles like the PlayStation3,X-Box 360 and Nintendo Revoultion.

Its all on how you look at it,and what your feelings are twards games these days.

[Jade_GL]

What people seem to forget is that there was a metric ton of crappy games back in the 8-16 bit days. If you ever take some time to think about it, you'll soon realize that the overall quality in the industry is better now than it was back then.

Just look at somethingawful and their ROM reviews. And that's just scratching the surface of all the dreck that was put out in the 80s and 90s.

Overall, I think the gaming industry is just fine. Sure there are some crappy knockoffs of innovative games (for every GTA3 there's a million halfassed clones) but there are a lot of great games. Sure they aren't necessarily innovative like something like SMB 3 was, but they do what they do well. Look at games like Kingdom Hearts, Soul Caliber, etc. They both have predecessors, they're not reinventing the wheel, but they do their genre well and are great games. SO not everything has to hit the market like games used too.

What is making me mad is that games like Madden aren't improving much, but EA made sure that no one else could make an NFL game with NFL players and teams. That stinks, because we could have more innovation if there was actual competition. I mean, you either have Madden or you replay your 2005 versions of games. That's just lame.

I would rather have a well done and well made game that isn't innovative (such as really well done platformer or RPG) than a crappy, buggy, or boring innovative game.

[Xero Kaiser]

What people seem to forget is that there was a metric ton of crappy games back in the 8-16 bit days. If you ever take some time to think about it, you'll soon realize that the overall quality in the industry is better now than it was back then.

I've said this a million times. Glad I'm not the only one

What is making me mad is that games like Madden aren't improving much, but EA made sure that no one else could make an NFL game with NFL players and teams. That stinks, because we could have more innovation if there was actual competition.


Sucks, but the NFL's the one who put the offer on the table. You can't blame EA for jumping on it.

[Jade_GL]

Sucks, but the NFL's the one who put the offer on the table. You can't blame EA for jumping on it.

True, but it still makes for no competition and therefore EA can pretty much put out the same game, slap a 2006 sticker on it, and call it good.

EA's sports games, on the whole, have been getting worse. I know that there is only so much you can do with a sports game, but it's definitely reached the point of stagnation.

I remember when Madden was blowing minds every year. Now it's like the same thing with a slight graphics modification and new rosters. Blah.

[Tish-the-Scorpion]

i find my self becoming more,and more bored with next gen games.(i might be growing out of games) but i still find myself playing old 16 bit games.


Too much time now is spent trying to make the game look pretty and seem innovative. In the process far too often the most important factor is lost - fun. I think that is the failure of many games. I still get more fun out of some old school games on the SNES than I do a lot of current games.


i deffenitly share both of your sentiment.but then again i will be 30 years old late this year.so i might be shoing my age.

[Kid Kamikaze10]

No offense, but some of you are really showing your age in this thread. I think some of you need to retire.

The video game industry has not been any stronger. Nowdays, video games are being featured just as much as actually music videos on MTV (yeah, I am bashing MTV for it's lack of music).

Not everything has to be Killer 7, Katamari, and ICO.

People think that EA doesn't make innovative games or something. What about NBA/NFL Street, the Burnout series, Fight Night, and the Def Jam series? Those were all innovative in their own right, and they are all popular games.

In most cases, the non-innovative games (besides Madden, Live, etc.) are the ones that don't sell. Sure, their are some innovative games that don't sell as much, like Full Spectrum Warriors, ICO, and Katamari. But, other innovative games are selling in the process, like Viewtiful Joe, Resident Evil 4, and the Splinter Cell games.

The video game industry isn't the one dying, your love for video games in general (or at least keeping up) is dying. Sometimes you need to accept that.

[Metaphysician]

Wait, Katamari *didn't* sell?? Then why the sequel??

[Black Atom]

What's innovative about NBA/NFL Street or Def Jam? Both games had been made before as far back as the 16-bit era.

Anyway, I agree that the industry's healthier than its ever been. There's a much better market for gamers now, however, there's also 50 times more poop to wade through to get to the innovative or quality games. A few generations ago, only the best RPGs would really get ported and they were few and far between. Now, there's so many, you don't really know which ones are worth picking up. Same with FPSs, hack-n-slash dungeon crawlers, shitty franchise-based games (God, it seems like they drop another Star Wars, Harry Potter or LOTR game every week) and other genres. So, yeah, there's a lot of cloning going on, especially now that homes consoles don't have to compete with arcades in terms of versatility or innovation anymore, but there's still some excellent games out there buried under all the muck.

[Metaphysician]

OTOH, we also now have the internet, giving us a better tool for sorting through the muck to find the good stuff.

And sort of OT, but I think this is actually why the Halo series is good: it *didn't* try and reinvent the wheel, it just is a well-made FPS thats fun to play.

[Anthony]

i deffenitly share both of your sentiment.but then again i will be 30 years old late this year.so i might be shoing my age.
I don't think so. It looks like we're the same age (I turn 30 late this year as well), and I think innovation in games are just fine. At least at the same level as it was in the 8 and 16 bit era. I get nostalgic as well. I absolutely love Capcom's Versus series and probably always will. But honestly, I get more games now than I did then. Of course that could have something to do with going outside of consoles for games as well.

I'll admit there is a bit of oversaturation of some game genres, but then I never was a big fan of FPS to begin with so I ignore them. Same with the GTA series clones. I pretty much stick with GTA. I'm a sports game nut, so as long as the games get more and more realistic in that field I'll be fine. I love fighting games, though admittedly this genre has stagnated in the past few years. I also have my quirky contingent, Intelligent Qube when it first came out got regular run (Yeah it's a tangent of Tetris but it's a fun one) as did the Katamari series.

Though to people arguing the numbers as far as the health of the industry, I don't think that's Tish's argument. I mean, yeah it's doing well financially, but creatively there are less instances of innovative brilliance that could help expand it more. They exist, but they are getting further and further apart. Kind of like how I see music in general and hip-hop specifically.

[Anthony]

OTOH, we also now have the internet, giving us a better tool for sorting through the muck to find the good stuff.

And sort of OT, but I think this is actually why the Halo series is good: it *didn't* try and reinvent the wheel, it just is a well-made FPS thats fun to play.
Agreed reinventing the wheel isn't necessary for good games. Games should be about one thing, fun.

Of course, I'd somewhat disagree with how much fun Halo actually is, but that's just my own personal FPS bias showing. I'd even agree to the fact that it was a well made game.

[Black Atom]

It depends on what you like. Most developers are obsessed with making games more and more realistic, which isn't a huge concern for me. I happen to find jumping on animals or flying through rings or rolling around giant eggs really fun. Not to say I don't enjoy more realistic games like Halo, but for me there's simply no need for a Halo 3, or GTA 5, or Tony Hawk 8, or Need for Speed 10 etc etc that improves on realism but doesn't add any dramatically different play mechanics. Making stuff that's not real look real isn't enough reason to pat yourself on the back anymore (something Geroge Lucas realized to late to win an effects Oscar for Episode I) especially when I can see "real" stuff anytime I glance out my bedroom window.

[Jabuka]

It depends on what you like. Most developers are obsessed with making games more and more realistic, which isn't a huge concern for me. I happen to find jumping on animals or flying through rings or rolling around giant eggs really fun. Not to say I don't enjoy more realistic games like Halo, but for me there's simply no need for a Halo 3, or GTA 5, or Tony Hawk 8, or Need for Speed 10 etc etc that improves on realism but doesn't add any dramatically different play mechanics. Making stuff that's not real look real isn't enough reason to pat yourself on the back anymore (something Geroge Lucas realized to late to win an effects Oscar for Episode I) especially when I can see "real" stuff anytime I glance out my bedroom window. you proved a really good point there sometimes I look at my video game collection and look at something like burnout and then I see billy hatcher and I choose billy hatcher in most terms its just more "fun"or "innovative" to me

[Xero Kaiser]

Billy Hatcher was innovative? :confused:

[Convoy]

Billy Hatcher was innovative? :confused:

I think he meant that it was more "fun" b/c it is unrealistic.

I think.....

[Xero Kaiser]

I think he meant that it was more "fun" b/c it is unrealistic.

I think.....

As opposed to Burnout? 0_o

[Convoy]

As opposed to Burnout? 0_o

I know, I read that at first and thought, "Burnout? Realistic? Naaaaahhhh!!" :D

[Kid Kamikaze10]

As opposed to Burnout? 0_o

I was thinking the same thing. Billy Hatcher more fun than Burnout?

He must be playing Burnout 1 or 2 because Burnout Revenge is way more fun than Biller Hatcher.

[cactusmaac]

OTOH, we also now have the internet, giving us a better tool for sorting through the muck to find the good stuff.

And sort of OT, but I think this is actually why the Halo series is good: it *didn't* try and reinvent the wheel, it just is a well-made FPS thats fun to play.

To speak up for Halo, it was the first FPS to seamlessly integrate vehicular combat during regular missions.

And its' policy of only being able to carry two weapons at a time (and have all of them be useful for different tasks during different points of the game) was a nice change from the progressive upgrading of weapons that every other FPS employed.

[Black Atom]

Again, it depends on what you like. No one can definitively say "[game] is more fun than [game]". It's really what you're into. Billy Hatcher is something like a Mario/Sonic hybrid, but different enough that I don't feel like I should be playing either Mario or Sonic.

Now take Halo, for example. I really dig Halo. Really, with Halo around, you don't really need to play another FPS. Ever. For example, I was playing Perfect Dark Zero yesterday. Now, it has some interesting new mechanics, like the ability to duck/cover, but for head-to-head combat, do you really need this game around when Halo does just about everything better?