Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

The Videogame Industry is Broken 232

GameDaily is running an interesting opinion piece running down the ways in which the gaming industry is just broken. The author cites soaring costs, huge risks, a reduction in creativity, and a stagnation in market growth as just some of the signs of this crisis. From the article: "The next-gen systems require publishers to place very large bets with each title. This will mean decreased risk taking and just regurgitated sequels of big brand franchises. How many publishers will take risks with multiplatform original IP? This is clearly not good news for the consumer as innovation has driven our industry from the beginning. The irony is that the amazing tools, capabilities and quality of the new systems may very well doom what is most important, which is the game itself. Reconciling what a creative team wants and what the executive suite needs in terms of profits will be a growing challenge for many companies."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

The Videogame Industry is Broken

Comments Filter:
  • by mccalli ( 323026 ) on Sunday July 16, 2006 @05:35PM (#15729382) Homepage
    Whether it 'wins' is one thing, but it does look as if the Wii is going to get Nintendo a lot more attention this time. And Nintendo game platforms have always been places where new ideas get tried it. From the doomed Virtual Boy through bongos-as-controllers to dual-screen touch-sensitive handhelds, a Nintendo machine has always given things a bit of a go.

    Maybe the new creativity might start showing through that?

    Cheers,
    Ian

  • What are the odds (Score:2, Interesting)

    by 9x320 ( 987156 ) on Sunday July 16, 2006 @05:38PM (#15729391)
    that another video game will ever be produced for a console with graphics on the same level as that experienced by NES games, and that people will buy it?

    Also, I find it odd how many video games based on movies are coming out at the sacrifice of both gameplay and plot in order to cash in on the franchise. You'd think they'd have learned from the E.T. video game, but apparently the better graphics have changed that? Why must a book usually be made into a movie before a video game is based on it?
  • by gasmonso ( 929871 ) on Sunday July 16, 2006 @05:43PM (#15729416) Homepage

    What I find facinating is how companies change the way they do things when they get popular. They forget what made them popular in the first place. My company is a prime example. We we extremely successful and thus bought by a huge company. The first thing they did is change the way we did things... not realizing that the reason they bought us in the first place is that we were already doing things right. Very strange indeed.

    As for the video game industry, I see a trend of going back to the basics with respects to gameplay. All this push to make super realistic movie like games is just not working yet.

    http://religiousfreaks.com/ [religiousfreaks.com]
  • The specs (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 16, 2006 @05:52PM (#15729465)
    The specs are what really are going to kill the gaming industry. A one and half year old computer is no longer good if you want to play some of the newer games. And the major nuissance is when the package says Windows XP only. I might have become a senile old fart, but what exactly is it that you can do on Windows XP and can't do on Windows 2000 when it comes to gaming (well, obviously play Windows XP only games, but that's not the answer I'm looking for)?
  • by Gnostic Ronin ( 980129 ) on Sunday July 16, 2006 @05:52PM (#15729467)
    Well, depends on what the developers can do. It allows different types of inputs, true enough. But so did eyetoy and the DS.

    Most games making extensive use of either one looked more like tech demos to me (mostly I looked at eyetoy). The rest of the time, they used the technology very sparingly, relying on more traditional control scemes. In fact, most of the "eyetoy" functionality in games is reserved for scanning your face into the game you're playing, not some innovative gameplay feature. The only "true" game that makes use of eyetoy is Antigrav, the rest are either collections of minigames or minigames in traditional games. I expect similar from Wii -- sure Wii's Wario Ware will be fun, but I'm not expecting much more than Tech demos for the first year or two.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 16, 2006 @05:59PM (#15729488)
    ...the more they remain the same.

    http://pointlesswasteoftime.com/games/crash.html [pointlesswasteoftime.com]
    http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/games/manifest o.html [pointlesswasteoftime.com]

    food for thought...and nutritious food at that.
  • by MindPrison ( 864299 ) on Sunday July 16, 2006 @06:05PM (#15729507) Journal
    ...much closer!

    Graphics cards are faster, stronger and more powerful than ever. Some years ago when Virtual Reality
    where introduced - it lagged BIG time, it was however revolutionary - all the rage...and only
    the worlds hottest shopping-malls got it back then, but it quickly died because the games where simple
    and very boring except for the virtual reality immersion.

    The technology for virtual reality just wasn't there yet, but behold...we're THERE NOW!

    Just take a look at your own pc's gfx cards with their 1680 x 1050 resolution for your widescreen that
    you can't see the pixels on more (from a meters distance) anyway... imagine two of these cards
    and two seriously high-res mini OLED displays in your glasses and we're in business.

    Virtual reality online gaming also needed the bandwith - and it's only recently we've
    gotten this.

    The technology is dirt cheap too! Mobile cell phones already come with high-res Oled displays
    and you could create higher-res oled displays fit for "VR-Glasses" already...heck...they even
    exist today in 800 x 600...even higher if I'm not entirely mistaken. And they're NOT expensive.

    So get cracking! Take a chance - make the VR games right now!
  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 16, 2006 @06:32PM (#15729584)
    ...by putting out more interesting, fun games than the big shops. Currently my favorite game is Mount&Blade [taleworlds.com], which was begun by a husband and wife team.
  • by eebra82 ( 907996 ) on Sunday July 16, 2006 @06:59PM (#15729679) Homepage
    There's obviously going to be good games and not so good games, but the biggest problem is the increasing demand of super graphics. My impressions tell me that previous reviews focused a lot more on the story, playability and addictiveness of a game. Now it seems like reviewers take on the graphics more and more, as if it was a necessity. I find it sad that it's - as far as I can tell - impossible to get a top score with mediocre graphics. I'm not saying that graphics aren't important, but I do think that the importance of graphics has been ramped up recently.

    My take on the situation is rather obvious. Video cards are getting seriously powerful and realism in games is only a decade away or so. Yes, it's obviously a stunning experience to play the most visually appealing games but that's only a couple of hours of excitement and it goes away, quickly. I still play StarCraft, despite the fact that it looks like crap and only supports 256 colors. Fact is, it has the playability. It has the story and it does have the addictive features. If such game was released today but with perhaps a higher resolution and more colors, without improving much beyond that, it would require far less resources and obviously less personell. It could still be a hit and I doubt anyone in here can prove me wrong on that point. Point is, to create a super pixelated game with the latest and best stuff, you need more developers but that will only add little to the last hours, days, weeks and (hopefully) months you're spending.

    There is a solution, however. Games have become more complex and it is almost impossible to create a game that would generate some interest with the work of only a handful of people. Nowadays that number is more likely 30-50, sometimes even twice, three times or even four times as much. Therefore, the only way of making a game more profitable and less risky would be to slash the amount of developers who are working on a game title. This could be done if developers started exchanging technology and graphics. A lot of code and graphics can be reused in many other games and altered only a little without risking repetitiveness. Think about it: great-looking grass is always grass and a wooden crate is always a wooden crate. Just change the colors of it, add different shapes. We don't need artists to redo all that stuff over and over again. Instead, recycle what's still good and create games that last (read: story, playability and addictiveness).
  • And the funny thing (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Sycraft-fu ( 314770 ) on Sunday July 16, 2006 @07:13PM (#15729716)
    Is smaller companies CAN compete. Nobody said it was easy, but then nobody said it was supposed to be. On the PC market we see a small but thriving indy games scene. As the most successful receant example see Galactic Civilizations 2. It is the game Master of Orion 3 should have been, and because of that it's sold quite well (if you don't have it, get a copy, it's well worht it). You also discover, when you persue these Stardock people, that they've got a little system set up where you can buy a bunch of other indy games easily, you just pay and downlaod through their little tool. More research will show they aren't the only place doing this. Ok so you don't tend to see them on Walmart shelves (other than Gciv2) but that doesn't mean they aren't out there making money.

    Consoles are harder, but even then, it happens. See Marble Blast Ultra for the X-box 360. Marble Blast is just a little "roll the ball through mazes" 3D game for the PC/Mac from Garage Games (another site you can get multiple indy games off of). However it is enough fun that MS decided it would make a good game for X-box Arcade and thus we now have Marble Blast Ultra.

    Are people becomming mega-millionaires off of this? No, but then I don't think that's the only measure of success. I think if you can make a game that people like to play, and make money doing it, you've succeded. Apparantly that can be done indy, despite the current game market.
  • by kbonin ( 58917 ) on Sunday July 16, 2006 @07:34PM (#15729772)
    Some of us are... :)
  • by dinther ( 738910 ) on Sunday July 16, 2006 @09:48PM (#15730175) Homepage
    I looked to much forward to the XBox 360 but it simply failed to impress me. Same old same old. Just better graphics apperently but that is lost on me. What is not lost on me are the increased game proces and even worse the huge game load times making me long for the good old Nintendo game cartidges.

    As long as companies insist to create artificial business plans they will suffer the consequences. Game consoles are sold below cost just so they can start making money on the games. Therefore you need to be authorised to develop for the particular console and of course only those with deep pockets get the chance to do so.

    At the same time console makers build in restrictions to stop small third party developers from creating content since it won't benefit the console maker. Effectively killing the number of titles that can be made available.

    At this very point in time, the console maker who is price conscious and sensible about their console will be able to sell it at or above cost is going to be the winner. Simply because they can afford to leave the platform open to third party developers and thus create a very lively user community around it.

    Typically this means simpler technology, lower development cost and easier access for new developers. Yeah I know, it sounds like Nintendo Wii doesn't it! Can't wait to start lauging.
  • by Wry Cooter ( 899317 ) on Sunday July 16, 2006 @10:49PM (#15730369)
    One way to kill the Hollywood mindset of regurgitating sequels for a safe bet because of compromise of innovation to hedge bets against huge development costs, is to open console games up to user modification. This is going to HAVE to happen for consoles; it has been propping up the PC game market a considerable more than some developers might be willing to admit.

    Mods and Cheats need to be built in to console games.

    The difficult thing, is to convince financiers wanting to 'own' a franchise, that this is the healthiest way to continue.

    One way they might be convinced, is in merely rereleasing previous game in a new souped up, more flexible and editable engine. A bit less investment on their part. Unfortunately, this is too much like just pumping out sequels, and remakes, could be considered worse.

    My typical game purchasing pattern: Buy new console; read of a few interesting games that never are released, suffer the lack in variety as the same safe blockbuster titles are regurgitated.

There are two ways to write error-free programs; only the third one works.

Working...