The year is coming to a close and it's time we all stand back, put on our pretentious little spectacles and look at gaming as a whole over the past year. It certainly has been a year of ups and downs with sequels, remakes and... um... L.A. Noire I guess? But let's set aside the fact that the only original idea this year was in interactive movie (which reminds me, Catherine came out too) and instead talk about the big shots. This is a big effing rant so if you came for short blurbs, please find another forum.
Most of the superstar games came out at the end of the year, as is often the case. But what struck me as odd was the games were held in insanely high reverence. Games that not too long ago would've been slapped with a "yeah it's pretty good." Have swept up cult-like fandoms in mere months. Is this a change in gamers, or an increase in quality of games? I surmise that neither is the case. Instead what has happened is the standard of a great game has gone down, most likely due to the excess of bad games. So any stimulating game can easily become a smash hit in this environment. Let's take a look at some examples.
A good one from earlier on in the year is Portal 2. People understandably flipped cars over this game because the original Portal was fantastic and Valve has been known for their solid design. Unfortunately I, and many like me, found it couldn't live up to the name and the hype. It was a good game, but the puzzles were simple, the game held your hand, the story seemed to intentionally not want you to get in it's way. The whole thing was padded and fake, yet it was put on the same pedestal as it's predecessor. Why? Because Valve set it's own bar low. By not releasing anything after a series of amazing core games, any signs of movement in the desperate wide-eyed fanbase is cause for euphoria.
Next example: Modern Warfare 3. Despite scoffers it made more money than... well anything ever. Hell I think we bought Russia for less than what MW3 made, and for what? Modern Warfare 2 with more grit and sand? MW3 did gangbusters because it was known as a reliable FPS series with intense multiplayer and relatively engaging single player. Great? By no means, but this year was the year of the crap FPS. Every developer and their dog wanted in on the big piles of money so they pushed bad shooter after bad shooter into our face causing us to snuggle close to our reliable, if boringly predictable friend Modern Warfare.
Skyward Sword! My friends ran up to me and told me it was the most immersive and brilliant Zelda game since Ocarina of Time (which basically translates to "better than wind waker" since every other one was kind of bland). I love Zelda so I was insanely eager to try it. Turns out "immersive" means "the wii-mote goes the direction you actually point it at." I personally found a lot of flaws in the game like annoying controls, unintuitive world exploration, but what they were doesn't matter. The point is this was a mediocre Zelda game at best and a bad one at worst. Why were Zelda fans slobbering over it? Well brand loyalty mostly. But the argument about the new controls is the focus because finally getting the motion controls to have a point is enough reason to celebrate because the bar for the wii is already on the floor (so change your sensor settings.)
AND FINALLY... THE COUP DE GRACE... SKYRIM!!!!! Here's the thing about Skyrim. It was released at just the right time. Wrapping up a year with no good fantasy rpgs (yes Dragon Age II sucked get over it), delving into year of the brown shooter, and there are just soooooo many bad games out. Then comes a colorful and engaging rpg with dragons, wenches, and all the hacky slashy fun you've been starved of. Thus starts a phenomenon that will sweep the internet and the world into a love-smitten stupor for months on end. Every day since Skyrim came out I have come onto this website and there has never not been at least one skyrim thread on the "recently activity" bar.
Skyrim is a bit trickier because it is actually a good game. I call it "Oblivion done right." However, once you get all the new awesomeness out of your face, and hold it to the standards of games you've played in the past, it's not quite as good. I've played Diablo through at least 5 times. I can't even handle playing Skyrim through twice. The story is too loose, your actions have essentially no lasting consequences, and you become powerful enough to one shot every enemy by the time you're level 14. It's unbalanced, glitchy, and repetitive. But we didn't care about any of that, at least I certainly didn't because our standards from the whole year had taught us that at least if we're having fun, we can forgive a lot.
That's basically what this all comes down to. Last year is a little bit to blame too but this was the year where so much trash came out that we took what we could get and worshiped them as gods even though what we were getting at best was a fat pope who occasionally told a funny joke. The standard used to be "most games are ok, some are good, a few are great." Now the standard seems to be "most games are bad, but the second coming of christ may pop up every now and then." K I'm finished. Sorry I wasted your Christmas here.
Most of the superstar games came out at the end of the year, as is often the case. But what struck me as odd was the games were held in insanely high reverence. Games that not too long ago would've been slapped with a "yeah it's pretty good." Have swept up cult-like fandoms in mere months. Is this a change in gamers, or an increase in quality of games? I surmise that neither is the case. Instead what has happened is the standard of a great game has gone down, most likely due to the excess of bad games. So any stimulating game can easily become a smash hit in this environment. Let's take a look at some examples.
A good one from earlier on in the year is Portal 2. People understandably flipped cars over this game because the original Portal was fantastic and Valve has been known for their solid design. Unfortunately I, and many like me, found it couldn't live up to the name and the hype. It was a good game, but the puzzles were simple, the game held your hand, the story seemed to intentionally not want you to get in it's way. The whole thing was padded and fake, yet it was put on the same pedestal as it's predecessor. Why? Because Valve set it's own bar low. By not releasing anything after a series of amazing core games, any signs of movement in the desperate wide-eyed fanbase is cause for euphoria.
Next example: Modern Warfare 3. Despite scoffers it made more money than... well anything ever. Hell I think we bought Russia for less than what MW3 made, and for what? Modern Warfare 2 with more grit and sand? MW3 did gangbusters because it was known as a reliable FPS series with intense multiplayer and relatively engaging single player. Great? By no means, but this year was the year of the crap FPS. Every developer and their dog wanted in on the big piles of money so they pushed bad shooter after bad shooter into our face causing us to snuggle close to our reliable, if boringly predictable friend Modern Warfare.
Skyward Sword! My friends ran up to me and told me it was the most immersive and brilliant Zelda game since Ocarina of Time (which basically translates to "better than wind waker" since every other one was kind of bland). I love Zelda so I was insanely eager to try it. Turns out "immersive" means "the wii-mote goes the direction you actually point it at." I personally found a lot of flaws in the game like annoying controls, unintuitive world exploration, but what they were doesn't matter. The point is this was a mediocre Zelda game at best and a bad one at worst. Why were Zelda fans slobbering over it? Well brand loyalty mostly. But the argument about the new controls is the focus because finally getting the motion controls to have a point is enough reason to celebrate because the bar for the wii is already on the floor (so change your sensor settings.)
AND FINALLY... THE COUP DE GRACE... SKYRIM!!!!! Here's the thing about Skyrim. It was released at just the right time. Wrapping up a year with no good fantasy rpgs (yes Dragon Age II sucked get over it), delving into year of the brown shooter, and there are just soooooo many bad games out. Then comes a colorful and engaging rpg with dragons, wenches, and all the hacky slashy fun you've been starved of. Thus starts a phenomenon that will sweep the internet and the world into a love-smitten stupor for months on end. Every day since Skyrim came out I have come onto this website and there has never not been at least one skyrim thread on the "recently activity" bar.
Skyrim is a bit trickier because it is actually a good game. I call it "Oblivion done right." However, once you get all the new awesomeness out of your face, and hold it to the standards of games you've played in the past, it's not quite as good. I've played Diablo through at least 5 times. I can't even handle playing Skyrim through twice. The story is too loose, your actions have essentially no lasting consequences, and you become powerful enough to one shot every enemy by the time you're level 14. It's unbalanced, glitchy, and repetitive. But we didn't care about any of that, at least I certainly didn't because our standards from the whole year had taught us that at least if we're having fun, we can forgive a lot.
That's basically what this all comes down to. Last year is a little bit to blame too but this was the year where so much trash came out that we took what we could get and worshiped them as gods even though what we were getting at best was a fat pope who occasionally told a funny joke. The standard used to be "most games are ok, some are good, a few are great." Now the standard seems to be "most games are bad, but the second coming of christ may pop up every now and then." K I'm finished. Sorry I wasted your Christmas here.
