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."
Yeah, like the Drama club geeks are going to work with the CS geeks.
"Best step off, this be technical theater territory."
"Eat it, lighting nerd! The Computer Club rules!"
Come now, EA has been on this path for over a decade. They used to publish tons of games, from the great to the crappy, all of which were at least great fun for someone. Now they just publish the super mainstream "Safe" games like Madden and Sim* while taking VERY VERY few risks.
Um, Tony Hawk is a real preson. Where are the editors?
* The FPS and RTS genre's games are MUCH easier to play with mice. The dreamcast could accept a mouse -- can any others, and do the games work with it?
* 640x480 just isn't good enough anymore (and your TV set can't even do that well.) Consoles will have to be able to display to SVGA monitors just like the computers do. HDTV is another option, but how many people have HDTV now? Not very many.
* And last, but not least, you can't justify an Xbox to do your taxes. People are going to buy PCs for `productive' things, and when that's done, they'll want to play a game.
(Now, if a console can run Turbo Tax, that might be what's needed to drive the final nail into the PC game coffin. Of course, if that happens, then that console you're using ... is basically just a PC!)
Like it or not, but certain genres of games are still dominated by PC games -- in particular, I'm thinking of FPS and RTS games. Maybe this will change in the future ... we shall see.
Why are Slashdot reprinting it? (Oh right, it's supposedly a games story, so up to
Thought provoking? Hardly. Perhaps a mention of the growing number of classic developers EA have bought and sucked dry (Bullfrog, Origin, Maxis, next stop Westwood) that have paid for these fancy offices would be in order?
Preferences > Homepage > Customize stories on homepage > Authors > Zonk > Uncheck
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
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
Game Industry goes from Geek to Chic
Most of our ex-girlfriends pretty much made a similar transition in tastes.
Table-ized A.I.
yes, it is that realy big blue room. The resolution is superb, but I still say the physics are a little off.
It was me, I did it, I moved your cheese
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