The 6 Most Ominous Trends in Video Games

@JazGalaxy: I can agree with that. Well said. Entertainment does move in trends and with culture. I still believe people are too impatient and want the next big thing quicker than they got the last big thing though. There is no problem with the industry in that regard, rather the problem is with our culture. Which sort of brings me full circle into stating we need to just need to enjoy what we have and quit complaining so much because it's not as bad as we make it out to be.

@Sincillian: you just have to look deeper, beyond what the big publishers are pimping. there are plenty of original, well-crafted games coming out. more than ever actually.

Truly, the end is nigh.

That was a horrible article.

@Grumbel:   Something about your logic confuses me. What exactly do you consider a clone? Joe & Mac, which is pretty much "Super Mario World in caveman times" doesn't count, but Battlefield 3 does? What exactly wouldn't count as a Modern Warfare clone, then? Halo? Goldeneye?  How are they better than generic military dudes? They're generic cartoon dudes; they're one word removed.  I'll give you the weapons part. Reality does limit that, even if I'm pretty sure that Mar...again, WHY ARE WE LIMITED TO MARIO!? Why can't I point to some random Dragon Quest clone to prove my point? Or some Sonic clone, or Street Fighter clone, or Doom clone, or Diablo clone, or Grand Theft Auto clone, or any other clone out there?  How does that prove your point? "Oh, I can choose between this Mario knock-off, this Street Fighter clone, this blatant rip-off of Modern Warfare, this poor man's Final Fantasy Tactics, or, hell, a Final Fight palette swap. Which should I get?" There's less variety than you're making it out to be. Besides, all of these genres have existed for a long time, and still exist today, disproving your point, by this weird logic.  So? Go out of the mainstream; why should I limit myself to games I know about? You can't say "those games don't count" if I'm giving you some clear examples disproving your point. Just because they're not popular doesn't mean that they're not there. Also, why am I limited to the 360 and PS3? If I remember correctly, the Wii sold pretty damn well, so it's pretty relevant to this discussion.

Creative bankruptcy does not exist on a macro level. Someone, somewhere, will always be doing some unique.

Creative bankruptcy does not exist on a macro level. Someone, somewhere, will always be doing some unique.

  What exactly do you consider a clone? Joe & Mac, which is pretty much "Super Mario World in caveman times" doesn't count,

What exactly wouldn't count as a Modern Warfare clone, then? Halo? Goldeneye?

Why can't I point to some random Dragon Quest clone to prove my point? 

Besides, all of these genres have existed for a long time, and still exist today, disproving your point, by this weird logic. 

Just because they're not popular doesn't mean that they're not there.

I'm equally confused about your logic when you talk about clones. How in the world is Joe and Mac "mario in caveman times"? (Isn't Super Mario Wold Mario in Caveman times?)  Again, nobody is arguing that old games were completely dissimilar. But to say that Joe and Mac (of all games) and Super Mario Brothers are the same is strange.

6. claiming that the technology is moving backwards is oversimplifying things. Just because motion controls turned out to not work as well as he may have hoped doesn't mean that the entire industry is regressing technologically, also he's ignoring all of the things that actually work about the Kinect and the Move.  And besides that, the tech moves forward in game design, more processing power can lead to more creative A.I. routines and smarter ways of handling random actions by the player. 
 
5. DRM is annoying, but for the most part it's hardly destroying the industry. Look at steam for example, it's hardly obtrusive. 
 
4. there's always been the possibility to abuse DLC, and gamers have accused and complained about devs holding things back since the beginning, but most of that stems from a lack of understanding about how game development works for the most part. Development on additional DLC (especially single player centric) almost always starts being worked on after the main game has finished. And if there isn't enough content in the core release to satisfy you, then don't buy it. 
 
3. as other people have already stated, there are new creative things out there if you just bother to look for them. also saying that every game in which you look down the sights of a gun is identical is overly simplistic. it's like saying all hip-hop or metal or country music sounds the same. even between the two obvious choices, MW3 and BF3 there are fairly significant differences, and assuming that Far Cry 3 is going to be the same game as MW3 is just plain moronic. 
 
2. it seems like for every claim that a game on Xbox 360 doesn't need to look any better there are just as many who talk about how much better games look on a high end PC, there's always room for improvement. But really, has there ever been a "vision" for the future? all that's needed is for people to continue making compelling experiences. 
 
1. this is just a semantic argument, it's pointless. it doesn't matter what you call them, they are what they are.

@Akrid said:

Creative bankruptcy does not exist on a macro level. Someone, somewhere, will always be doing some unique.

Again, not really. Someone, somewhere, will always have done it before you.

But really, has there ever been a "vision" for the future?.

Lets give this thread a positive spin:
 
What exactly was the most creative thing you saw at E3? That made you happy and hopeful for the future of video games?

@Grumbel: hmm, I'm sure a set could be home made using some of the wii/kinect hacks and a set of those TV headset things.

If you acknowledge that this has always been a problem,

So? Those games are still out there, even if you do have to search for them.

This exact same argument could have been made at the end of the previous generation, but we got that Fragile Dreams.

@Icemael: I love how you just swooped in at the beginning and fucking won the thread, dude.

@Video_Game_King said:

@Akrid said:

Creative bankruptcy does not exist on a macro level. Someone, somewhere, will always be doing some unique.

Again, not really. Someone, somewhere, will always have done it before you.

It is also possible that humanity exists elsewhere than because if the universe if infinite, there is only so many variables that can happen until they repeat. Did I blow your mind about a possible scientific fact?  Again, people who agree with that dumbass Wong shouldn't be online, writing anymore, espically considering the man has made the exact same article three fucking times in a row. (Not joking in the slightest.) All the man does is whine whine whine. and I am afraid for anyone that agrees with him. Video games are a far more creative medium than movies ever will be, anyone who has ever played a single videogame should know this. DRM services are dying out due to steam and GOG, kinda a fact really. In terms of creativity, the video game industry is BEYOND creative, with indie devs and mainstream devs all doing amazing things with their craft I would say that they are far more creative than the movie industry ever has. (probably repeated myself there, but it's fucking true.)  In terms of vision for the future, just look at the PC market, since PC power doubles every year there is literally no way you can tell where videogames are going, this is not a bad thing like the dumbass Wong says, but really, is a strength that other mediums don't have, due to the power of change and evolution in videogames, there is so much creativity each gen and it keeps on growing.  Also, the definition of what a game is, is honestly, one of the DUMBEST things I have ever read in all my years of life. here is the most simple fucking explaination in the world that the dumbass Wong would never think about due to his extreme cynicism and pessimism, IF IT IS INTERACTIVE IT IF A VIDEO GAME! This includes heavy rain style games and fucking "True" games as he like to put it also in the same boat. it is obvious to anyone with a brain that isn't filled with extreme pessimism and dumbassery that this is how it works. sorry for insulting anyone but damn. David Wong is a dumbass and doesn't deserve a job

@Jay444111 said:

here is the most simple fucking explaination in the world that the dumbass Wong would never think about due to his extreme cynicism and pessimism, IF IT IS INTERACTIVE IT IF A VIDEO GAME! This includes heavy rain style games and fucking "True" games as he like to put it also in the same boat. it is obvious to anyone with a brain that isn't filled with extreme pessimism and dumbassery that this is how it works. sorry for insulting anyone but damn. David Wong is a dumbass and doesn't deserve a job.

Books are interactive, board games are interactive, TV Shows can be interactive, Radio Programs can be interactive...

Yes, it was. Did you click the damn link I provided? And things didn't suddenly become original the moment another dimension was added; you still got a shitload of Super Mario 64 rip-offs and Final Fantasy VII clones and blatant copies of Tekken and Resident Evil plagiarism and what-not. Hell, I could make the same argument that David Wong made of 2011 for 1995:

Wait, Nintendo gave up motion controls? Then what about the 3DS gyro thingies? Or the Wii U's motion controls?  

Again, why can't the same be said 20 years ago?

Besides, smaller titles may not even have reviews, so again, take the damn risk.

Wow and I thought I was pessimistic. I don't think creativity is gone at all, ya just have to look in the right places. Look at BioShock, Valkyria Chronicles, Bayonetta, Vanquish, Portal. They're all fantastic games that are very unique and original. And trust me, I dislike the milking of franchises as much as the next guy but when did sequels all of a sudden become the most horrendous thing ever? Sequels have been around since the NES days and continue to be like that. Apparently no one had a problem with 3 Mario games being on the NES. We're not at all on the verge of creative bankruptcy, games like Call of Duty and other big FPSs tend to overshadow the real gems out there. Look at upcoming games like Shadows of the Damned, Catherine, The Last Guardian, Bastion. The creativity is out there folks.

Just got done reading it and I pretty much agree. The online all the time stuff sounds really fucking annoying. SINGLE PLAYER SHOULDN'T NEED TO BE ONLINE. I get the piracy deal and all, but jeez come on.

I have to wonder if some people complaining about this article actually read the article themselves. There was more to that guy's complains than just "there's alot of sequels!" (Which wasn't even the biggest complaint until the second page of the article.) His complaints about motion controls, the lack of a real vision for the future of gaming, and the endless payment model were completely legit and have gone totally ignored in this thread by people just dismissing the entire thing. Also, why can't we have some nuance on the issue of sequels? Yes, sequels have existed, no, not all sequels are bad, but yeah, a hell of a lot of them are, and yeah, over time it only gets more ridiculous. Seems fair to me.

• It's the one point that pisses me off the most when gamers talk about it.
• I have a bad habit of derailing the shit out of threads.
  

What the hell are you talking about with motion controls now?

And that's assuming that the game even got a review; there were more games back then that simply didn't have reviews.

@Jay444111 said:

here is the most simple fucking explaination in the world that the dumbass Wong would never think about due to his extreme cynicism and pessimism, IF IT IS INTERACTIVE IT IF A VIDEO GAME! This includes heavy rain style games and fucking "True" games as he like to put it also in the same boat. it is obvious to anyone with a brain that isn't filled with extreme pessimism and dumbassery that this is how it works. sorry for insulting anyone but damn. David Wong is a dumbass and doesn't deserve a job.

Books are interactive, board games are interactive, TV Shows can be interactive, Radio Programs can be interactive...

Sequels have always been an industry cornerstone. And this "everything is a military first-person shooter" bullshit is just that: bullshit. First off, we've seen the exact same thing in the past, with first-person shooters (albeit not military-themed) and other genres (sometimes I wonder if everyone but me has forgotten about all the 3D platformers two generations ago, or the 2D platformers before that). Second, there are tons upon tons of great games coming out every year that are neither military-themed nor first-person shooters. Do you know how many military first-person shooters I've played for more than a couple of hours this generation? One. And yet, I buy and enjoy plenty of games every year. If you can't find anything but Call of Duty clones, you aren't looking very well.

Mark my words, in ten years we'll see the kids of today complain just like the kids of yesterday are doing now.  

"Everything's a sequel!"

"Everything's an [insert genre that's popular ten years from now]!"

"I remember a decade ago when there was real variety and originality!""Where is the industry even going?"

Sequels have always been an industry cornerstone. And this "everything is a military first-person shooter" bullshit is just that: bullshit. First off, we've seen the exact same thing in the past, with first-person shooters (albeit not military-themed) and other genres (sometimes I wonder if everyone but me has forgotten about all the 3D platformers two generations ago, or the 2D platformers before that). Second, there are tons upon tons of great games coming out every year that are neither military-themed nor first-person shooters. Do you know how many military first-person shooters I've played for more than a couple of hours this generation? One. And yet, I buy and enjoy plenty of games every year. If you can't find anything but Call of Duty clones, you aren't looking very well.

Mark my words, in ten years we'll see the kids of today complain just like the kids of yesterday are doing now.  

"Everything's a sequel!"

"Everything's an [insert genre that's popular ten years from now]!"

"I remember a decade ago when there was real variety and originality!""Where is the industry even going?"

Wow, this article is ignorant and full of bullshit.

@Icemael: That attitude is exactly the kind that lets the industry go into slumps like this. "No worries man, it's just the way of the world."

You are right, there are plenty of other games. But that doesn't change the fact that there are wayyyyy too many FPSs on the market, and E3 made it clear it wasn't changing any time soon. I mean, I enjoy shooters quite a lot, but they aren't getting any better, and many are getting worse, or at least old.

Just because this "always" happens doesn't mean it's wrong to push against that pattern. Even if you don't have an effect on it, you still shouldn't sit idly by and act like everything is fine. Progress come from criticism and opposition and competition, and those things should be encouraged.

Once again I really don't see what is so wrong with his points on payment system models, technology "evolving backwards" and the limitations of motion controls, and the apparent lack of a vision for a future of video games. People seem to be obsessively focusing on "HE'S COMPLAINING ABOUT SHOOTERS AND SEQUELS, HE'S SO DUMB."

Uh, has anybody seen the Flashback tab on Cracked today?

So I guess we should drop that one point?

 Yea, let's leave it at "Giana Sisters was a popular game?"  

Just another bitchy article. If I were to truly believe the crap in that article I would have to throw away my "I have Brains" mug.

Cracked is complete bullshit. he needs a history lesson in video games.

@Icemael: I completely agree with your points on creative gaming and the complaints of today. As a matter of fact, we're seeing more of a focus now on indie games and creativity than ever before. I think it's actually kind of a neat era in gaming history.

@Video_Game_King said:

@Sparky_Buzzsaw:

Wait, what about Flash games? Or Plok? Or all the crappy PC games for 80s British PCs? Hell, even Enix got in on the indie thing in the 80s (read: they were a publisher, not a developer).

Sorry, but I'm completely missing your point here. My opinion is that complaints about creativity in games seems to be cyclical while conveniently ignoring the clever games of the moment, and that I think the current run of independent games and outlets for smaller developers are better than they ever have been. I'm not arguing against Flash games, since they still exist and are going strong. As for your other examples, I'm just not sure what point you're trying to make.

@Video_Game_King: No. My quote was that we're seeing more of a focus on indie games. Not that it's a new idea, or whatever bizarre spin you want to put on my words. We have more outlets for independent minded publishers and developers nowadays. Digital distribution, online gaming, and yes, Flash games and the like have made it possible for these developers to get their games out there to a wider market with more of a chance to succeed than ever before. That was my point.