Slashdot Mirror
Game Industry goes from Geek to Chic
Raiford writes "A Reuters feature story describes how the computer gaming industry is shedding its geek persona in an attempt to attract Hollywood's best visual effects, sound, lighting and animation experts into the gaming fold. The story quotes the executive vice president of Electronic Arts on how rapidly advancing processor technology is demanding an expanded skill set and that Hollywood provides the ready source to meet the demand."
produce better games were they to attract some top-notch game designers? Like some of those crazy designers from japan. It's nice to have realistic lighting and animation, but in the long run, playability is key. If gamers wanted reality, they would step outside
While there are still some great games, many of them with "cinematic" effects, the Hollywood-ization of the game industries are causing us to see lots of crappy games that are flashy, but also lack gameplay depth and especially challenge.
The Sega CD bombed back in the 90s, not because of the lack of system capabilities, but because Sega focused on crappy FMV-based games and hyped them as "interactive movies" rather than good games.
"You spoony bard!" -Tellah
I loved this paragraph: The studios have sacrificed office space for a vast reception area with a cozy coffee corner and couches. Cubicles for programmers are squeezed high into the corners of the building, almost as an afterthought.
Meaning, the programmers are just unimportant people that they can "squeeze" away into cubicles, while tons of space is wasted in the fucking lobby. What a shitty company.
If I worked there, I'd organize all of the programmers to go work downstairs in the posh lobby and tell the management to fuck themselves.
That's really all I can equate this too.
For the last 5 years game makers have been sacrificing game play to graphics in an attempt to bring in more customers.
EA is a great example of doing this. I can remember a time when Maxis produced or distributed interesting, technical games. Titles like sim ant, sim city, or a-train.
Those days are gone. The sim city franchise (once considered their 'flag ship' title) actually lost many of its technical features in the last release, and the next release has been delayed not by programming, but because EA's marketing people have decided to hold off on the next release due to yet another version of the sims.
Don't get me wrong, 'The Sims' is a neat game, but the novelty (for me) wears off quickly after the AI becomes so woefully predictable. But Maxis (EA) beats the quick fad like a dead horse. 'Look, now your sim can have a puppy! That'll be $35' Meanwhile more technical and thought provoking games get better graphics and less gameplay. "We want to make the game more accessable to childern and novices" was a justification in the last Sim City game. Read: We want to dumb it down and have pretty colors.
So, if chic means computer games are reaching a new more sophisticated level where art and game play are merged together, they are wrong. If Chic means the game industry is going more Holywood insofar as artistic quality and new or unique innovation is sacrificed to the gods of safe, rehashed ideas to maximise profits... then ok, yeah.
The Internet is generally stupid
Yeah, EA is risk-adverse. It's cubeland office environment inspires much loathing from anyone who's worked elsewhere in the industry, too. EA used to have an interesting philosophy, back when games were either completely done by a single individual or a handful of people. But the bar has been raised very high now, with dozens of people working on any title (I'm amazed at the number of Japanese titles have 100+ team members), which means that more sales are required to break even.
That said, EA did try to axe The Sims multiple times during it's development process. So to say that The Sims was a non-risk is obviously untrue - some execs were very scared of it. Now that it's an established "brand", much to those execs chagrin, it's obviously turned into a non-risk...
Moof!
Flash and dazzle is nice, but not lasting. The biggest boost that the gaming industry is getting from Hollywood is from the writers.
Games are now being scripted like movies. No more "ok so you run this guy around and shoot the red guys and save the blue guys", game storylines are becoming more and more intricate, the characters more interesting.
Alot of script-writers are pitching games, as they would pitch a movie. I'm also seeing alot more talent being enlisted for voiceovers, etc. Personally, I see this as a good trend. Others mileage may vary.
Though, with the gaming industry pulling in more coin than the movie industry, it's a no-brainer that they'd be recruiting a good chunk of their talent, both technical and non-technical.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Several years ago, we heard this same "party line" from such software developers as Origin. They promised us a merger between PC gaming and Hollywood. We got such things as Wing Commander III. (Most people I know loved the original Wing Commander, but by its 3rd. incarnation, just got boring to play. It felt like you were just running through repetitious missions so you could view a few more minutes of the movie afterwards.)
Now, EA is telling us that "more Hollywood" is just the thing for their sports simulations?
Great... So what'll it get us this time? Games that feel just like watching the real thing on TV, complete with commercial breaks featuring real actors and actresses?
The fact is, many industries find themselves getting closer together via computer technology advances. Still, it doesn't mean the relationship equally benefits both parties. (EG. Engineering folks are rapidly becoming forced to work more and more with computers, to the point where they're learning programming languages and becoming software developers in things directly related to their field. Does this mean traditional computer developers and/or I.T. staff are becoming more of engineers than they used to be? Nope....)
I think computer programmers and I.T. have provided a number of new tools to Hollywood, and certainly, Hollywood f/x teams have been forced to become much more computer-savvy than they used to be. Does it mean game developers need to bring "Hollywood" to their table, to improve their products? I think not.
The *core* problem,as I see it, is this. Hollywood specializes in creating passive entertainment. (Sit down and watch us act for 2 hours and you'll love it.) Gaming is all about sucking people in, actively.
If it helps, think of that trend as the result of computers becoming popular with the Masses. Electronic Arts and the rest already know that they can get "us" to buy games. Hardcore gamers are a given. So like any smart company, they wont spend much effort to keep us attracted to their games. At this point, they want to get Jocks, Women, Artsy types, Beurocrats, Lawyers, and the rest to buy games also. In short, they are going after the AOL demographic.
Most people from that group are just not likely to spend much time playing the sort of games that geeks typically play. However, even they can appreciate a cool looking explosion or light show.
It is easier to sell a pretty looking game because any idiot can look at a picture and say "Ooh, thats pretty.". The same cannot be said for the gameplay.
END COMMUNICATION
PC games are dying
He might be right, here's why:
About 2 years ago I played Diablo for the first time on the PS(play-station 1). I was addicted immediately, and played 4 or 5 hours at a sitting. For whatever reason I decided to buy the PC version(it was like 10$ in the bargain bin or something) and I tried it on the old PC. What I noticed was that for the most part, it was the same game. The controls were equally playable, the graphics were just about the same quality, etc. The strage thing was, after a day or so...I decided to stop developing my character on the PC, and went back to the Playstation.
So to recap, I tried the PS version and liked it...then I tried the PC version and liked it the same...then I decided to stop playing the PC version and went back to the PS version. Why?
Furniture.
I have a very warm and cozy living room, and I sit in a nice comfy lazy-boy adjustable chair while I play on the Playstation. After a long work/school day of sitting in a straight-back chair...you most likely just want to lay back and relax. Playing 4 hours on the lazy-boy is much more appealing than 4 more hours of sitting in front of a PC.
The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
When patches or additions become available for a game simply download and install them. With a console, these features are a long way off. Perhaps we'll see a merger of the 2 in the future but until that happens, I think the life of gaming PCs is alive and well.
In case anyone didn't notice, the whole article was just BS promotion for EA (I'm surprised there wasn't a paid advertisement notice at the end of it.) This, incidentally, reminds me of another gaming company *cough*Ionstormdallas*cough* that had nice posh offices and lots of BS press coverage, and not too long afterwards closed (thank god Eidos kept Ion Storm Austin, though), which is what I am hoping EA will do not too long after this (you can only release boring games for so long before everyone realises they are boring.)
Everyone remembers John Romero, right? The guy had to sell off his Hummer after Daikatana flopped, remember? You want the same thing to happen to those horrible people that decide to publish 100 identical, yet somehow subtly different (can it be the box art?) Sims expansions, don't you?
In the great CONS chain of life, you can either be the CAR or be in the CDR.
Same here it semes to be more of a comptetion like who can win In Madden NFL or who can get the farthest in game x.
What do games need?
1: Innovation, Konami has managed to breathe life into the Arcade Game world with the BEMANI games. Dance Dance Revolution has new, innovative gameplay that attracts all types of gamers.
2:A community that devotedly supports the game. Americas Army, Counter-Suck, NWN, EQ, Dance Dance Revolution, all have wonderful communities supporting the games. These people are out to support the game in whatever methods they can.
3: Mods and Patches. Whether they are Created by the community (Counter-Suck) or the game is constantly supported (America's Army is set to release new content for the next 5 years for the game and the DEV team listens to the players) a game needs constant support. Even DDR has mods (hardware and pad modifications but mods nonetheless)
Games don't need to be Hollywood. They don't need to have 3 story offices with the coders set off forgotten in a corner somewhere.