Adult Games, Child's Play?

Thanks to TotalGames.net for their gamesTM-reprinted piece discussing whether games are actually dumbing down in the industry's rush to produce mature titles. The editorial is concerned that "adding a spot of claret and some unguarded language to your game doesn't require any special artistic skill on the part of a developer." The writer then worries that "...those developers whose bread and butter has traditionally been more abstract titles where the gameplay is the hook and the graphical stylings are aimed at younger gamers, or at least at a general audience, are starting to find their games harder to sell." But original Grand Theft Auto creator Dave Jones thinks that "it's not violence that's selling but simplicity", even for his own series, arguing: "GTA has a very simplistic game mechanic - it is Pac-Man. The people are the dots you eat (run over) and the police the ghosts who chase you", although admitting: "What was different was the level of interaction within the city."

Comments

video games -are- growing up. if we'd let them.

[*weasel]

GTA itself -was- pacman. it also sucked. it wasn't until Vice City that they really explored the full range of gameplay. With the depth they added, with the polish and the honest attempt to tell a story that just happened to fit with their existing gameplay, -that- is when rockstar struck gold.

When you abstract Vice City out to the level of 'pac man', then everything is pacman. Get the power up, win the game.

right now, gaming only has (predominantly) kids and young adults - and they (predominantly) are more into slickly produced action, sex and sports than, say, a good noir detective story. so clearly that's where publishers are going to pit their efforts. do you see movie studios backing anything truly new?

if we try to impose some sort of artificial limit on what is good content and what is 'pandering' - then we marginalize the entire industry.

the mainstream American Comics scene managed to marginalize itself entirely with the Comic Code of the 60s - 90s. Contrast the current american view of comics (no matter what the story, a guy holding a comic book is an immature dork) versus the japanese view of anime (where it is the content of the anime itself that matters).

Porn and Predator do not diminish all 'mature' film - so why should bmx xxx, or quake 3 diminish gaming's legitimacy?

Right now, gaming is dominated by big publishers, like film is dominated by big studios. We don't have an underground scene yet, and quite frankly we are only recently able to attract actual actors and writers to work in our media.

Innovation will happen, and 'mature' content will find its niche and push the media. In the meantime, yeah, predominantly it's going to be the 'formula', and slight variations that get pumped out.

And quite frankly, that's probably the way it will always be. The only difference we can hope for, is that after enough true gems come out these articles will stop claiming that when a publisher produces DOAX that it is proof that all video games are only shooting for that audience, and only fit for that audience.

People thought early cinema was a bastardized media, incapable of telling a story like a good novel or a play. and partially they were right. The thing is, by being able to explore they eventually found stories they could tell that no traditional medium could.

All this is, once again, is the old guard trying to convince everyone that this new fangled stuff is all rubbish and incapable of telling a 'proper' story. Time will be on our side so long as we don't fall for it.

Actually I think of GTA3 as

[M3wThr33]

I tend to look at GTA3 as a game similar to Zelda. You have a complex world, free roaming, and some dungeon/quests to complete in order to get new items.

Your basic math lesson...

[tibike77]

It is said the average IQ of the human race is 100 (at least that was the ideea when they came up with). Under 80 and you're "too dumb for school" and anything above 120 and you're a intelligence beast... anyway, it's distributed as a "gaussian bell curve"... in case you don't know what that is, google it.
No really, this was necessary.

The world's population is almost 7 billion.
The population having access to computers is (let's go out on a limb with assumptions) about half, let's say 4 billion.
People that USUALLY buy games (or have games bought for them) are somewhere between 15 and 30 years old. The closer you get to the 18-22 zone, the more games they "consume".
So we can safely say, that out of all people using computers, only about 10% purchase games once a year, even less.
So, that leaves us with about 400 million people in the "I'll buy one game this year" pool (yeah, some buy more, but really only Japan and USA persons buy more than 2 games a year on an average).

The number of titles showing up that are worth buying are about 200 each year. So that leaves us with about 2 million possible buyers for a certain game.

Now, look for some tool/graph anywhere that can integrate (as in the mathematical function) the bell curve distribution surface right-side of a certain number. Play with it for a while.
You will see something startling come up...

IQ=100 required to play and enjoy a game = 1 million copies sold
IQ=105 required to play and enjoy = 800 thousand copies sold
IQ=110 required to play and enjoy = 500 thousand copies sold
(and that goes exactly the same the other way around)

Except for extremely aggresive marketing campaigns and/or "heavy brand name recognition" and/or an "exclusive niche" in a genre... the above rule pretty much holds true.

Do you still wonder WHY games are intentionally "dumbed down"???
It's just the allmighty dollar at work here.

Move along, nothing to see...
DISCLAIMER:
1. The numbers, the logic and pretty much anything except the basic ideea followed in this post... were intentionally exagerated (to prove a point).
2. No mathematician was seriously hurt while making these calculations
3. If you use these numbers to compare best-sellers with their gameplay-IQ, I should not be liable for anything that the lawyers throw at you later :P

Re:This is nothing new

[brkello]

Good graphics != good gameplay

True.

Games with bad graphics, when they had to make the gameplay good, because thats all they had, are still played today.

I have to disagree with this. There is some stupid misconception that games back in the day were better because there was less emphasis on graphics. But guess what, the "bad graphics" you are talking about were cutting edge based on the system and the sophistication of the industry. Bad graphics != good games. Good games == Good games. Graphics and gameplay have nothing to do with each other, so get that out of your head. I bet you in 10 years when all of these games we have now have "bad graphics" people will still be playing them too.

I also think there is some sort of nostalgia effect for older titles. When Final Fantasy first came out and I played it, it was absolutely incredible to me as a kid. I can play that game over today and sitll enjoy it. I would never force a kid to play that game though, because even if he could see past the graphics, the game really pales in comparison to games that are out today. So just try to hold back a little and think when you say today's games aren't as focused on gameplay and games back in the day were more fun...are you looking through your childhood eyes that got more excited about everything (e.g. Christmas, new toys, new games) or are you being objective? Personally, I think there are many modern games out there that if I played as a kid would blow away my old Nintendo favorites.

Re:you sound like Katz

[*weasel]

Where is this underground scene? without any sarcasm whatsoever - i honestly would like to know where i can find it. Maybe i missed it, maybe i'm too cynical. maybe we mean two different things by 'underground'. i dont know.

Where are the independent games that are turning out nontraditional or innovative gameplay or storytelling? an rpg told from the point of view of the captured princess? where's the fps that doesn't feature powerups, a health meter, or a shotgun? where's the action game that is about -preserving- life and property? where's the strategy game that covers conflict between nontraditional opponents (eg. rebels, terrorists, seperatists, etc)?

the IGF thus far has been mostly independents seeking to emulate the established genre games, to try to break into the industry. were it not for underfunded overseas companies competing in America for lack of a native market, there wouldn't even be a decent number of 'independent' games made in a year.

the Mod scene is the closest thing we have in the end, because it gives the best chance for good production quality to a small team that's trying to innovate the gameplay or story.

but most of that is 'me-too', and lacks any sort of recognized legitimacy. aside from counterstrike's undeniable success, does any press even honestly -review- mods? let alone maps, gametypes, etc.

is there an independent gaming rag i can refer to, that covers games and developers that i haven't heard of yet? that reviews the independent games and offers a soapbox for independent game makers?

if by 'underground' you mean that half the pc gaming content is under-marketed, i'd agree. but that's hardly the same thing. part of what makes independent film so inaccessible to the mainstream is that it is not only underfunded and thus lacks the glitz and the attention - but that it covers topics, stories, and storytelling methods that the mainstream hasn't tried yet.

Where are these underground pc games that do this? I honestly hope i'm wrong. I'd love to find an underground culture for people who are getting a little tired of yet-another-fps, yet another rts, yet another rpg.

I just haven't found it by myself.