HULK SMASH?!
By sweep 6 Comments
I don't really like futuristic space games
I found Metroid to be almost unplayable, and Mass Effect was just about saved by its conversation trees and character relationship networks. However the future in general is something that fascinates me (in a geeky kind of Back To The Future sort of way). I cant decide if I prefer the post-apocalyptic shabbiness of Star Wars and Blade Runner - or if I would prefer the geometric perfection of the clean Mass Effect universe.There's something about blowing shit up that's really appealing. Maybe its just a way of channelling human aggression on a basic subconscious level, but I think its more than that. There is a strong sense of satisfaction at being able to reduce something magnificent to a pile of rubble. Maybe its just a power-trip for geeky kids that get bullied at school. Maybe its searching for a sense of realism in computer games to add meaning to what would otherwise be a waste of time. Who knows? I don't...
But one thing for certain is that dudes who play games like destroying stuff. "Fully destructible environments" tags are presented with such pride by developers, as though they have tapped into the holy grail of great videogame mechanics. And to a lot of people, the ability to smash stuff up is great. But does it really add the level of depth which games so thoroughly believe it does?
This was all brought about by the recent Bombcast (9th September)
Tacky voice acting in Infinite Undiscovery is dismissed by Brad as a "convention of the genre". For some reason, this pissed me off quite a lot. I love video games, to the extent that I am actually proud to be part of this culture when a great game is spawned. But it has dawned on me that gaming needs to move to the next step. Instead of hundreds of shooters revolutionising the genre with "fully destructible environments" I would prefer to see something groundbreaking.I find myself in a situation where I am actually going to stick up for the Wii. I'm sure you are all sick of hearing about how great it is - but it deserves a lot of praise. Its a shame it receives such poor support from it's developers. I salute the Wii because of the initiative to look at a gaming genre, take a step back and say "how do we make this different?" That's what I want. It may not be better, but the nerve to take that chance was amazing. I remember playing Timesplitters 1 on my PS2 for the first time, and how strange it felt shooting with the R2 button. Before that I had only been using face buttons on my Sega Mega Drive. But now its no natural! And that happened... about 10 years ago. There is much to be said for the "If it aint broke dont fix it" method of design, but its slightly depressing that we cannot see further than simply remapping the controls of a game pad.
I'm feeling kind of weird right now, like I have a big gaming hole which needs to be filled by something which doesn't yet exist. Gaming culture needs to find the 'next step', as soon as possible. Simply upping the graphics for each new console feels so basic. I want someone to revolutionise my gaming experience. Gaming seems to be defined by the chains of design that we have drawn around ourselves by consistently demanding unimaginative content - apparent in the releases of so many sequels of existing franchises. Gaming is being held back in a way that alternative forms of entertainment are not. Music has branched out in infinite directions to accommodate every desirable enjoyable wavelength. Gaming remains stuck in such a narrow channel. The first step is simply realising there is a problem...
That's my blog for today. Its a bit intense and a bit depressing I suppose, but I really feel like something needs to happen to give gaming the wake-up-call it so desperately needs.
You don't need to tell me I'm crazy. I already know.
Thanks for reading
Sweep