Innovation, Innovation, Innovation.
It’s the buzzword of this gaming generation, but are things really changing for the better?
This year marks the 37th anniversary of commercial videogames, and gaming has undeniably evolved faster than any other artistic medium. But is this down to intellectual or just technological innovations?
For example, the Wii remote is an excellent technical innovation, but removed from its control method, Wii Sports in an uninspired game. Just picture Wii Sports on the GameCube…
Of course, gaming is an interactive medium, so the input method is key to the experience. Unfortunately, few developers have used the Wii’s unique player/software interaction to create an experience that would not be conceivable on another platform. Whilst Mario, Zelda and Metroid are fantastic games, they could have worked with few compromises on the GameCube. Thus while Nintendo continue to innovate in the hardware stakes, their software is lacking the fresh originality of previous generations.
Being a much more open-ended, variable and interactive medium than cinema, means that gaming has the potential to offer a much greater range of experiences to the player and so can allow us to view the world in many new ways.
Sadly, most gaming experiences are still shackled by cinematic tradition, instead of embracing those things that are unique to gaming.
Cut-scenes and textual exposition still seem to be the preferred ways for game creators to tell a story, instead of trying to integrate storytelling and gameplay (which can be a vastly more powerful narrative tool.)
Less than 15 years ago, developers were still regularly creating new genres and revolutionising the existing gameplay experiences, which isn’t something we often see nowadays. Looking at the gaming line-ups of the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3, we mostly see ‘next-gen’ versions of the same old games that we’ve played before.
Has gaming then reached a plateau of sorts? Will all future games simply be refinements rather than revolutions?
Much of the problem lies with publishers, as apparently only three-in-ten games are making a profit, this has forced publishers to be more conservative and to stick to tried-and-tested formulae. Sadly, it’s been the case that original concepts tend to lack commercial success, and whilst gaming is more of a business than an art-form, then money is king.
The hope for innovation may lie with the smaller enterprise, the indie studios more concerned with realising a creative vision than ensuring profit margins. Here we look towards Xbox Live Arcade, Wiiware, XNA and Playstation Network as bastions of un-stifled talent.
Unrestricted by the hardware limitations of yesteryear, the sky is potentially the limit for these determined visionaries. Sure texture-mapping, dynamic lighting, Hi-Def visuals, anti-aliasing and stupendous polygon counts are nice, but lack of these elements needn’t be a barrier to creating an excellent game.
These opinions may seem a tad pessimistic, but of course there are always exceptions to any rule. Boom Blox shows how a game can be built around motion-control. Braid shows how a mature and thought-provoking narrative can be integrated with the game-world, and forthcoming titles like Mirror’s Edge continue to create new sub-genres.
Ben
August 30th, 2008
One would expect originality to be harder to come by when an industry such as this is reaching maturity. And if I were to put myself in the position of today’s publishers it is not an easy position, given increasing commercial pressures and complexity.
That being said, so many games are dumbed down to inexcusable levels. Comparisons to film are often drawn but almost no game has produced the kind of intellectual engagement present in the best films. I would say that in both gameplay and technological terms videogames continue to advance, the Halo series for example. But intellectually there has been no progress since the days of the Point & Click Adventure, a genre that is disappointedly uncommon now.
XBLA, PSN and WiiWare represent a ray of hope for smaller developers to produce a game that won’t just fall into PC obscurity, but I too am quite pessimistic about the likelihood of modern games meeting our intellectual expectations.
There will be those who say games are all about gameplay, but there should be deeper adventure experiences that offer more than the paper thin conversations in Zelda.
Now gaming is mainstream it is possible more people will demand more intellectually stimulating games in a few years.
Seth
August 30th, 2008
To be honest though, if you look at the film industry you see that 95% of movies are the same recycled hollywood trash.
My mother was shocked when she found out that I seriously thought games could be an artform. But I realised that as artistic games are so few-and-far-between, that most people will never have played one.
We need more publishers that are willing to take risks. As far as I’m aware, although they weren’t blockbuster sellers, artistic and original games such as Braid, Ico, Rez, Okami etc. haven’t made a loss.
Just like the movie industry, I do believe that we’ll have to keep looking towards the indies for the most original work.
Manuel (the laughing man)
August 30th, 2008
Seth i agree with your post, but i think is our fault as a gamers to not try to impulse the innovative games, see for example games like ico, beyond good an evil, okami, boom blox, pro evo 08 on wii, the new tiger woods on wii etc, those games had innovation to boot, especially those on wii, but they had terrible commercial success, so i think in the end is our fault, the companys see this trend, therfore they keep making the same games again and again, only with updated graphics, because they known they would sell a lot not matter what.. assasins creed …cough…, thats why you see 2, 3 4 and 5 iterations for those games, example ( marioparty, silent hill, resident evil, etc), and other thing if the big companys keep the trend of buying the good but less smaller comapnys the thing will be worst, because they only bet on the sure thing, not in risky ( innovative games).
Seth
August 30th, 2008
You’re right Manuel. At the end of the day if we don’t buy the original games, then they won’t keep making them.
It’s a shame that us intelligent gamers are in the minority, eh?
Steve
September 28th, 2008
Same arguement as films really. Theres always a group of people like us for whom any peice of entertainment wont do. People who refuse to watch those crappy spoof movies like Epic Movie on the sheer principle.
Luckily, people like us are a lucrative audience, which is why every so often a brilliant idea comes our way. For us to applaud and spend our money.
For the 360 and the PS3, I personally see a big high concept, big budget game come along every few months which pushes the bar and also sells. It’s the Wii thats full of shovelware, even from Nintendo.
Nintendo’s hardcore following by and large are very happy to see another Zelda, unlike on another platform where the hardcore are harder to please. (just see how few Nintendo fans comment on forums for fresh ideas, over another Mario game.
At the end of the day, great innovations need to be rare though. Or the bar would never be set.
I don’t have much faith in indie developers, they make nice little XLA games I don’t bother with. But you need money to change the world, just ask those behind Bioshock or Mirrors edge (is that really EA???) see, the corperations still need to innovate, to get the smarter gamers hard earned money.
Manuel (the laughing man)
September 29th, 2008
i loved games like pro evo 2008, the blob, zack and wikki, bloom box, no more heroes, umbrella chronicles on the wii, they are fresh ideas very well excuted, and the upcoming games, like madworld and disaster day of crisis, little king etc. I will give them a sure try ( and they are not from nintendo only crisis).
P.D the ps2 has by large (in quantity and quality), the most shovelware titles of all time, but hey, that one required another blog dont you think.