|
Written by Administrator
|
|
Thursday, 15 December 2005 |
Video gaming seems stuck in a rut lately. The sports games we love so much are struggling while developers learn new hardware (such as the XBOX 360). It’s unlikely that these “first run” software problems will be ironed-out till the second releases of whatever basketball, football, & hockey engines are tweaked and perfected. To make matters worse, that same “next gen hardware” is on-hold for most gamers due to manufacturing slowdowns, demand, etc.
So, like many of you, I’m going back and playing non sports games that previously I haven’t had much time for on both PC and consoles.
Outside of the sports realm, I see many issues with some of the new games. Particularly annoying is what seems to be a total lack of depth and a reliance on sequels and rehashes. My feelings about sequels are that some games do deserve sequels, and we want them. However you might notice how many really lame games get sequels nowadays. We are getting sequels for games that practically nobody bought- which totally baffles me. (How many of you personally bought “Full Metal Alchemist” and felt you just had to have Full Metal Alchemist 2?)
(Yes, I just took a cheap shot at the ultra-Japanese anime game genre. You’ll have to forgive me if I don’t apologize.)
Of course, there’s many more than just that example. What’s even more disturbing is that if a game isn’t a sequel, it tends to fall into the “make a quick buck on a license” category. Sadly, these are the types of licensed, short, shallow-yet-with-good-graphic games that companies like EA churn out. (A prime example would be “From Russia With Love”)
But where is the depth? Many developers fall into the “graphic” trap where the “virtual playground” created for us in a given game is shrunken in favor of a “quick-fix” with good graphics. Replay value is all but non-existent on most of today’s games once you beat them. Sure, there are exceptions- such as the Grand Theft Auto games. Those are usually sprawling, giant, open playgrounds for us to explore. There’s also a steady improvement in the quality of Star Wars games on the part of Lucasarts and their affiliates. However, these are often exceptions in a gaming economy filled with “quick-fix games.”
Perhaps this type of gaming environment is what has created the huge popularity of MMORPGS like World Of Warcraft. Each quest, each character, and each item you craft is given ownership to you- the player, as well as al the skill trees and abilities you seek to invest in. Of course, Blizzard is one of those companies that crafts exceptional games to the point of artistry. While many developers have an 8 month dev cycle, Blizzard will take three years to release one highly anticipated game and load it with depth, story, and all the things we love. The bad news is that over the past several years, many people left Blizzard to join/found new game developers. The good news is that they seem to be spreading the Blizzard philosophy elsewhere. Look at Guild Wars- a game that was created by many Blizzard castoffs who worked on the fine “Diablo” series and came over to NC Soft. The proof is in the quality- and its REALLY evident in such a finely crafted game. Then we have more former Blizzard team members making the upcoming game “Hellgate London” for Flagship Studios. Most industry insiders who have seen the game so far are claiming that this one is going to be huge.
It’s the mavericks like Blizzard (and their former designers) that are shaming their competition into slowly improving. A good example is how Sony’s “Star Wars Galaxies” MMORPG for PC recently revamped just about everything about their game to make it more fun, player-friendly, intuitive, and – in their words- “Star Warsy”. To be fair, Galaxies has a long way to go yet, and the change alienated some hard-core role-player subscribers who didn’t want the game to be so action-oriented, but I’ll give Sony credit for trying to improve a very not-so-user-friendly game. We can thank World of Warcraft for that. Its become the MMORPG by which all others are judged, and also the game by which the quality of games from many other genres are judged.
That’s a good thing, especially in this industry of “licensed quick-fix games with little replay value”. Perhaps its what scared The Lord Of the Rings: Shadows of Angmar into releasing much later than they wanted to get things right. Perhaps World of Warcraft is also pushing the Dungeons & Dragons Online game to push harder towards quality, depth, and playability before it launches.
One thing is for sure: by their very nature, MMORPGS are the one haven of depth and replayability gamers seem to be flocking towards. I think we are in good hands with a company like Blizzard blazing the early paths of quality. My only hope is that the now-famous “Blizzard-type-quality” would be adopted by other genres, particularly those making console games.
We shall see.
Quietcool72
Editor/Co Founder
Consolesports.net
|
