Poll: Gaming Society

[Programmed_For_Damage]

Nah. Been gaming since the early 80s and this gen is my favorite.

Portal 2, Bulletstorm, LA Noire and I'm sure many others all had lots of innovation this year.

The only bits I'm not a fan of are multiplayer being squashed into everything, annual franchise releases, motion controls and certain DLC and DRM policies.

I wholeheartedly concur. As much as I get all nostalgic over the old halcyon days of the Commodore 64 and Atari 2600, I have to say that I've spend more time "gaming" and being consistently impressed with this current generation. My wife isn't so enamored by that fact though.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

I was having a discussion with my friend about new releases, and i began to notice all the sequels and that fresh innovation in games was getting harder and harder to come by. Do you think as a gaming society we've peaked?

No, we've not peaked, you and your friends are typical normal regular mainstream humans thus you don't know of all the unique and creative games out there or you don't like them enough to count them as that.


Play corpse party on PSP and then come and tell me that an anime-like horror game mixed with a twisted dating-sim-like thing is not innovative.

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

Well I for one have certainly never played a game where running across a certain substance speeds up my movement

So you have never played an ice level? I envy you

I agree with what you said though this gen really doesn't know how lucky they are with fresh ideas and the sheer amount of different game-play mechanics and even art-styles there are.

I picked up a little game called Toki Tori in the steam sale and it was really fun to play and felt fresh. I can't help but think that if they had chosen a less cutesy presentation it would have been more hailed amongst gamers.

Even the more creative indies are available on console now.

We really don't have any reason to complain.

 

[MaxwellEdison]

Portal 2, Skyrim, Deus Ex:HR, Minecraft, all in one year.
I think we're a bit far from losing our innovation.

 

[lacktheknack]

How did Portal 2 innovate?

It took the gameplay of Portal 1 and essentially added a sprint and jump power up, a few more obstacles like lasers and nothing more.

Portal itself was an innovation; Portal 2 innovated by taking that same dynamic and crafting a uniquely fun and rewarding cooperative puzzle-solving experience. No, they didn't re-invent the wheel, but innovation is not necessarily defined as "brand new."

Portal itself wasn't an innovation, it just expanded the concept of Narbacular Drop with a Valve plot.

HE JUST SAID "innovation is not necessarily defined as 'brand new'".

Did you PLAY Narbacular Drop? It was rough around the edges and crappy, relying on arbitrary restrictions (you can't jump, for instance) to make the "meh" puzzles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innovation

Valve took it and made it better in every way for the global market. Thus, it's a perfect picture of innovation. If you want a unique and new idea, that's "invention".

 

[MaxwellEdison]

How did Portal 2 innovate?

It took the gameplay of Portal 1 and essentially added -snip-.

That's how. It took previous ideas, and added on to them to make them more fleshed out.

 

[Harkonnen64]

With a lot of franchises having hit their third installments last year, I'm looking forward to seeing new franchises this year. Could introduce a lot of new stories and game mechanics.

 

[Jadak]

No, we'll have peaked when Spore comes out. By that, I mean a game fitting the concept of what spore should have been, a true "everything sim", not the lame kiddie game that reality has so far provided us.

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

No, we'll have peaked when Spore comes out. By that, I mean a game fitting the concept of what spore should have been, a true "everything sim", not the lame kiddie game that reality has so far provided us.

You know my biggest disappointment in that game? I watched what apparently was an early build presentation that had in it a sea level where you didn't just go from being a microorganism into having legs at land but actually played as a fish for a part of the game as well and it looked AMAZING. It gave me echo the dolphin flashback chills.


Sadly, something happened to it and it wasn't included in the finished product...which basically killed my fun right away.

 

[iNsaneMilesy]

Gaming is weird. Thesedays there is less chance of companies taking risks on new ideas and innoations to instead go fo r the easy sequel and make some money. There have been many games I have played over the years that while werent successfuor had massive budgets or advertising campaigns, had unique designs, gamplay and mechanics that if remade now would be nothing short of amazing. One example I perally would like to see taken inspiration from is Hidden and Dangerous 2. A small WW2 PC game that hado much customisation and forthought from the company, had it had the cash and time, could easily competed with battlefield othe multiplayer front and more than excelled with single player. But that is just one game from my personal list of many. Also, there have been many series I love that had great potential for the sequel years that were totally ruin due to the quick cash grab mentally of now, one of my favourites in particular was Brothers in Arms... the 4th one to be released looks rediculous.

 

[MiracleOfSound]

I wholeheartedly concur. As much as I get all nostalgic over the old halcyon days of the Commodore 64 and Atari 2600, I have to say that I've spend more time "gaming" and being consistently impressed with this current generation. My wife isn't so enamored by that fact though.

Glad someone agrees. And yes, my poor girlfriend has the felt the sting of games like Skyrim this gen too hah!

 

[ElPatron]

Mainstream appeal =/= innovative

Yes, innovation is robbed from a sequel. Doom was innovative with it's weaponry, large and open levels etc. Doom 2 had those same innovations, is it innovative? No it isn't, a neither is Portal for using the same innovations from NDrop.

You are missing the point. NDrop and Portal are the same game. One was a commercial release and one was an assignment.

No he is not. NDrop was innovative. Portal is said to be innovative because it was the first commercial release of it's kind.

Your argument is like saying that you have a band with a lot of talent that plays good songs, and then a year later record songs that the public already heard and call them "innovative".

I think my problem with you (and others like you) is that you refuse to admit when a small innovation is still innovation. Small innovations is how you get polish. Call of Duty 4 became a pop culture icon this generation because of small innovations to the FPS genre.

Call of Duty 4 plays exactly like Call of Duty 2 would be played in a modern setting.

I mean, I could make a Dead Space... underwater. It wouldn't be innovative, the mechanics are already there before I even start making that game.

 

[GonzoGamer]

It depends on the perspective. Games now are more popular than ever and are making more money, but that also means taking less risks and if people are willing to buy the same repackaged shit why would you change it?

The past isn't better either. Sure they are a lot more creative games but some old graphics are hard to look at unless you grew up with them. Not to mention we spend the last 10-20 years ironing out kinks in game play to make it smoother, but also decided to iron out too much and some things are missed such as health bars in certain games.

Gaming seems to be more of a waves. There isn't a set peak but some eras of games are better than others. I would say we are on the downslope where we put technology in front of the gaming and fun aspects but that just means the next peak will be even better.

I?ve been thinking the same thing. Hopefully, it hasn?t peaked for it?s last time but we definitely hit A peak with the PS2 generation and seem to be on a down slope now.
But it might not go back up. Sure, some games make more money now than others of the past but it doesn?t change the fact that there is a smaller base of consumers for AAA games at this point than there was at this point of last generation... They?re just paying more and some franchises have gained more momentum. If you look at the sales records, when the ps2 was as old as the 360 is now, it had sold a hell of a lot more units than the 360 & PS3 combined. It?s not too surprising, the consoles this generation aren?t as rewarding purchases as the ps2 was. And the games themselves are mostly overhyped eye candy rather than compelling gaming experiences.
I don?t blame most of my friends for not getting a console this generation: it?s pretty hard to choose to spend hundreds of dollars on a toy, a machine that has a 50/50 chance of turning into a brick with a fee, and a machine that loses more features than it gains & gets the sloppiest ports ever made.
Sure, there may still be big selling franchises that gain more and more followers every year but overall the base market for gaming has become stagnant when it should be growing a hell of a lot faster (considering the industry?s age) as old non-gamers die off and new potential gamers are born.

 

[wooty]

In a stance on technology and ideas, no we've not peaked, we are climbing, but at a slower pace of recent.

In a stance in terms of community and "socially", I find gaming sometimes brings out the worst in people, trolling, platform wars (seriously, this shit needs to be taken out back and have its head staved in), rage, "I hate x so your all fags for liking it". That, could do with some serious tweaking.

 

[Aurora Firestorm]

No, we won't ever peak. It's like how every generation thinks the one below it is listening to Evil Satan Music. Every generation thinks that their childhood games were the best ever, or if they don't, they pick another generation and whine and moan about how the others are all terrible.

Gaming won't peak; your interest or preferences, however, likely will. I don't think mine has yet.

Also, games are pumping out at a faster rate, and as 90% of every medium is crap, we see more crap now than ever. We also have more awesome now than ever, but nobody notices.

 

[Fishyash]

Not really... it's just the fact that gaming has now become a high profile business now. Only AAA games really sell well, so the high profile games play it safe.

Obviously there are other titles that are trying new/different things. However they are in the background, rather than on a level similar to everyone else.

HOWEVER it doesn't mean they are harder to come by, this is mainly because of digital distribution.

 

[lord.jeff]

All mediums have periods where one school of thought takes the spot light look at painting it's had it's share of stagnation but it eventually moves past them, even gaming itself has stagnated before remember the SNES era over half the games out were based around one very simple idea run from left to right, jump over that and kill that, the main difference between each being if you had gun, sword, or deadly soles.

 

[Savagezion]

Mainstream appeal =/= innovative

Yes, innovation is robbed from a sequel. Doom was innovative with it's weaponry, large and open levels etc. Doom 2 had those same innovations, is it innovative? No it isn't, a neither is Portal for using the same innovations from NDrop.

You are missing the point. NDrop and Portal are the same game. One was a commercial release and one was an assignment.

No he is not. NDrop was innovative. Portal is said to be innovative because it was the first commercial release of it's kind.

Your argument is like saying that you have a band with a lot of talent that plays good songs, and then a year later record songs that the public already heard and call them "innovative".

I can't make out the context of your example, but either way it goes, it is a bad example. One way further cements MY point, the other makes your example not similar at all.

I think my problem with you (and others like you) is that you refuse to admit when a small innovation is still innovation. Small innovations is how you get polish. Call of Duty 4 became a pop culture icon this generation because of small innovations to the FPS genre.

Call of Duty 4 plays exactly like Call of Duty 2 would be played in a modern setting.

I mean, I could make a Dead Space... underwater. It wouldn't be innovative, the mechanics are already there before I even start making that game.

Really? Like Dead Space plays just like RE in space? So Call of Duty 2 had perks? an interchangeable dossier? levels? prestige? a completely fictional but great campaign? If you think that is comparable I guess talking about map layout is a bit too in depth for you.

I can't tell if you are trolling or just actually think I am a moron who will believe such unsupported claims. Saying something is similar does not mean it offers no innovation. Final Fantasy titles are all very similar yet any FF fan would be pissed if you said that each one weren't leaps apart and that each sequel doesn't bring in some innovation. Once again, for people crying about innovation, people sure like to speak up about when a Final Fantasy game tried to innovate and failed, like FFXIII. People praise innovation until they don't like the changes it made, then it is "BOYCOTT! rabble, rabble!"

 

[ElPatron]

I can't make out the context of your example, but either way it goes, it is a bad example. One way further cements MY point, the other makes your example not similar at all.

You made good songs, and you developed them into an album and call that album "innovative" even if the innovation was done prior.

On the other hand, you are trying to prove that something is still innovative because there was no commercial release.

Really? Like Dead Space plays just like RE in space?

LOL PUTTING EXTRA WORDS IN MY POSTS, I NEVER SAID ANYTHING ABOUT RE

So Call of Duty 2 had perks? an interchangeable dossier? levels? prestige? a completely fictional but great campaign?

Oh, you're talking about MP.

Levels? Prestige? Ranking is a "feature" (not an "improvement" because it's highly subjective) that were implemented in games before, and prestige is not a game mechanic. Just an "achievement".

Great campaign? Call of Duty 2 had one, and although it is based on real events, the campaign is still fictional, and fictional campaigns in the "near future" setting were not unheard of before CoD4.

If you think that is comparable I guess talking about map layout is a bit too in depth for you.

LOL AD HOMINEM

I can't tell if you are trolling or just actually think I am a moron who will believe such unsupported claims.

LOL TROLL CLAIM
LOL IMPLYING I WAS INSULTING YOU TO MAKE ME LOOK BAD

FFXIII

Never cared that much for FF, but I get what you said.

However, FFXIII's "innovation" is not an excuse for it's quality.

 

[josemlopes]

No way, games are capable of delivering a bigger experience then any book, music, movie or play could ever give, but it still hasnt.

Most games are still just games (win or loose) instead of an interactive experience, only some are trying to push things forward in baby steps.