Have video games become 'boring'?

[Still Life]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/click_online/9538690.stm

There are some vintage video games that will live long in the collective memory. Space Invaders, Tetris and Doom were original, inventive and didn't have a number after their name. Nowadays, the market is saturated with sequels and franchises. But does that mean innovation has dried-up?

In the video games industry at the moment, things are coming in threes.

Gears of War 3, Far Cry 3, Uncharted 3, Mass Effect 3 and Battlefield 3 - along with countless other sequels - are being released this year. Many will be played on the PlayStation 3, itself the latest offspring of a hardware dynasty.

In fact, half of the global top 10 best-selling list is made up of sequels. In the European list, it is six out of 10.

Critics have bemoaned the relentless rise of sequels, some going as far to say they will "harm the marketplace irrevocably".

But follow-up games have been around since the days of Ms Pacman, and players appear to be endorsing them with their wallets. In the US, over $2bn (£1.3bn) was spent on video games in the first quarter of 2011.

You guys saw it.

Most of the big games at E3 were sequels, or part of an established franchise. Is it correct to say that all the sequel baiting and franchise building antics of the industry are killing off innovation and creativity?

COD is getting a titles annually and very little has changed since the release of COD 4. You could possibly argue that the franchise hasn't really seen a major change since COD2.

Personally, I'm not sure. I don't really know how I feel about the industry and I like a well-crafted sequel which expands upon a story and/or formula in a satisfying way. Hell, my most anticipated title is Mass Effect 3.

Still innovating?

Others see a technical virtue in having two, three or more follow-ups to a successful game.

"Personally I don't think sequels hurt the industry at all," said Mat Sneap, co-owner of software company Eurocom.

"It lets us improve products, incorporate feedback from reviewers and people that play the games. If we have to constantly build games from the ground up, unless we have years of development like LA Noire, it's very difficult to be competitive straight away.
Milla Jovovich poses during a photocall for Resident Evil Afterlife
Big games become brands that extend to films and merchandise

"I think it does give the developers a chance to innovate, as once the core gameplay is locked down from the original game you can look to push in other areas."

And sequels regularly appear on lists of best and most creative games.

And there are some great looking new IPs in the works (Dishonored?), so maybe it's not all doom and gloom for the industry. But then I look at the increasing monetizing of in-game content and basic services and I wonder:

Is my hobby becoming a golden Cash Cow for those who know how to manipulate the consumer market?

What says the forum?

 

[Savber]

Lets see from my list of favorite games.

Half-Life 2

Left 4 Dead 2

Mass Effect 2

Just Cause 2

Baldur's Gate 2

Battlefield: Bad Company 2

Portal 2

Team Fortress 2

Witcher 2

Huh...

So yeah we can ***** that there has been few original games but I can't say that the sequels are really the "doom and gloom" of the industry either.

 

[octafish]

Minecraft, Frozen Synapse, Avadon, Capsized, and Terraria. Nope not boring at all. You might be out of luck on a console, because all the FPSs are getting very samey.

 

[Stall]

Everyone's hobby is a golden cash cow, bud. Moreover, gaming has always existed to be a golden cash cow. The Reds lost 20 years ago, and thus the Western world is basking in Capitalism. No matter what you want to do, "the man" is going to make a buck off of you. Be in in video games, movies, music, camping, hunting, climbing, exercising... everything is monetized.

It's a fact of life, and only something you can deny out of naivety.

 

[ZeroMachine]

How in the flying fuck does "it's a sequel" mean "boring"?

How does it being a cash cow make it bad?

I fucking hate that logic.

 

[Still Life]

How in the flying fuck does "it's a sequel" mean "boring"?

How does it being a cash cow make it bad?

I fucking hate that logic.

Well, I have balanced the post with two sides of the argument. As I said, I'm not sure about the direction of the industry, myself. I can see the merits of sequels, yet it sometimes comes at the expense of having a game that has weight to it.

One example would be the original Crysis. The ending was terrible (not that the overall story was great) and was a hollow attempt to give premise for a sequel. Another example would be the annualisation of the COD franchise. I like COD, but I can't justify so much money for what is essentially the same game with a few tweaks here and there.

I do recognise that the industry has to make $$$. However, in some ways, it feels like it's coming at the cost of creative risk and diversity; for a industry based around creativity, this could potentially be a bad thing.

It's a fact of life, and only something you can deny out of naivety.

It's not naive to question the potential direction of the industry and it gets to the point where the want for money goes too far.

 

[Treblaine]

*Snip*

Good games are out there, they just aren't the top sellers.

Bioshock is a really interesting game with a less common type of gamestyle and a very distinct look and feel. Others to consider:
-Orange Box
-Left 4 Dead
-Batman: arkham Asylum

You get more interesting stuff the further you go off the well beaten path, into Indy Territory like 'Jamestown', 'Amnesia: Dark Ascent' and 'Magicka'. But dare you further into the badlands in search of riches to dabble in the dark arts of mods, you will be richly rewarded.

Though I wouldn't say gaming is in a dire state if held relative to the other great captivating electronics industry of the movies. I looked at my local cinema listings for this week: overpriced Crap sequels EVERYWHERE... in 3D.

To get the good stuff you need to look beyond the blockbuster smashes, some of the best films i've seen in recent years only ever had a DVD release in the UK.

 

[Stall]

It's not naive to question the potential direction of the industry and it gets to the point where the want for money goes too far.

The want for money is the only thing that keeps this industry alive.

 

[Still Life]

Snip*

You're right. Most of the innovative talent is coming from the indie scene. I wish some of the ridiculous sums of money spent on marketing second-rate games like MoH went to Frictional so that they could make a great game even better.

And as I said, I'm not adverse to sequels. I am adverse to sequels that don't have anything ultimately compelling, but are instead simply content to ride a lucrative trend.

It's not naive to question the potential direction of the industry and it gets to the point where the want for money goes too far.

The want for money is the only thing that keeps this industry alive.

That statement in itself is debatable. It could well be that philosophy which proves to be the downfall of the industry. The mod and indie community don't need huge sums of money to put out qaulity products.