12 Steps To Regain Industry Confidence

ews? by tomhudson · 2006-03-09 05:26 · Score: 3, Insightful

Its not like "Hot Coffee" actually hurt the industry. It created the sort of buzz you can't buy. (the only thing worse than bad publicity is no publicity). The people who claimed to be "offended" weren't the target market anyway.

Re:ews? by Thad+Boyd · 2006-03-09 05:54 · Score: 3, Interesting

Tell that to Take-Two's shareholders.
Re:ews? by voice_of_all_reason · 2006-03-09 05:56 · Score: 4, Funny

Serves them right for putting their money in a pyramid scheme.

1 Step by mabba18 · 2006-03-09 05:27 · Score: 5, Insightful

1. Stop making crappy, overpriced, sequels and even crappier movie based games.

--
The third most important thing I have learned in life: Squeeze anything hard enough and it eventually makes a noise.

Re:1 Step by TheAngryMob · 2006-03-09 05:53 · Score: 5, Insightful

Actually, that just shows they have too much confidence. If they weren't so cocky, they'd be wary of publishing the same crap over and over again.

The problem with crap sequels is that people buy them! Next time junior wants Madden 200X, smack him and then get him a real game!

--

Don't just game, Dungeoneer
Re:1 Step by KingBraden · 2006-03-09 06:05 · Score: 1

Every time this discussion comes up someone has to insult Madden. But the truth is Madden sells. People want a new Madden every year. They know Madden is fun, and they can see the upgrades from the previous year. What people don't want is generic RPG number 476, with the exact same story as every other RPG, exact same battle system and exact same graphics. People are more than willing to buy sequels of good games. They just don't like rip offs (see Grand Theft Auto v. True Crime, Final Fantasy v. Shadowhearts, etc.)
Re:1 Step by Zantetsuken · 2006-03-09 06:23 · Score: 1

so if you dont wanna insult Madden or other sports games, look at the Pokemon series - yes, it was popular at one time, but then they just started making crap sequels to get little kids who are just now hearing about pokemon into buying the games

also, look at the Halo series - the first one sold great and I wont deny it had a decent story or multiplayer gameplay (except when you got bastards sitting on one side of the map camp/sniping from the same place every time, and the only way to take em out is doing the same) - but IMO one of the biggest reasons people bought Halo 2 was they knew the first was so great they expected the 2nd to be great also, and this is fine - but now there is supposedly a Halo 3 in the works, and you cant deny that one of the major reasons its being made (if at all, not sure if its a rumor - I'm not an Xbox/+Halo player/fan so I dont follow it) is that they expect Halo 3 to sell well because # 2 did...
Re:1 Step by geminidomino · 2006-03-09 06:26 · Score: 1

Every time this discussion comes up someone has to insult Madden. But the truth is Madden sells.

I think that was the point of GP's post...
Re:1 Step by aichpvee · 2006-03-09 06:51 · Score: 1

Oh dude, gtfo! Shadow Hearts: Covenant is a better game than any modern era Final Fantasy, and FF6 is the only one of any generation in the same league. The first one was kind of weak in most areas, but again that makes the sequels not just rehashed bullshit.

I haven't played the new one yet, so maybe it's complete crap. But Covenant is one of the best RPGs this generation and I'd go as far as to say ground breaking in a way that Final Fantasy hasn't been since SNES, being that it is both new AND good (Final Fantasy has been both, just not at the same time in any remarkable way). It's got solid voice acting with an incredible script that is HILARIOUS, one of the greatest RPG gimmicks ever (Judgement Ring) tied into one of the best RPG combo systems this side of Grandia, and a healthy dose of bizarre.

I could see the ripoff comment if you've only played the first one, but as a series it's fucking brilliant. More than anything else Covenant justifies playing a pretty lackluster original, which is something I can't say for any other sequel.

--
The Farewell Tour II
Re:1 Step by mabba18 · 2006-03-09 07:01 · Score: 1

It's a deadly circle. Madden-like game gets made, sells well. Its sequel have a bigger budget, more promotion, and sells better and so on, and so on. Eventually all the mainstream media knows of are Madden-like games.

There needs to be more celebration of creative and original games.

--
The third most important thing I have learned in life: Squeeze anything hard enough and it eventually makes a noise.
Re:1 Step by iocat · 2006-03-09 07:27 · Score: 1

Is the problem with crap sequels that "people buy them," or that "you don't like them?" Realistically, if "crap sequels" and movie tie-in games didn't sell, publishers wouldn't make them. And honestly, over the past 15 years, if people never enjoyed any sequels or movie tie-in games, they wouldn't still be buying them. So, for a large segment of the game buying population, sequels and movie tie-ins are good, positive, things.
That doesn't at all mean that publishers are not trying to build new franchises, or that there aren't scrappy independents (a la the Darwinia guys), or famous rich dudes (a la Will Wright) making neat ideas.
The videogame industry is not a zero-sum game. The existence of sequels and licensed games does not preclude the existance innovative, experimental games. And in fact, the ratio of innovative titles (Katamari, Ico, Darwinina, Bridge Builder, Puzzle Pirates, etc) per year versus sequels and licensed games probably outpaces the ratio of quality new TV shows versus typical TV crap. Bottom line: you could only buy so-called "innovative" games and pick up at least a 12 - 15 console titles a year, never mind how many PC games you could buy. (Yeah, some of them may be failed experiments (Robot Alchemy Destruction, anyone?) but that's the chance you take when you buy experimental games.)
Frankly, that's a pretty good rate. If you buy 15 games a year you are well entrenched into the "hardcore" demographic.

--
Dude, I think I can see my house from here.
Re:1 Step by XenoRyet · 2006-03-09 08:03 · Score: 1

It's also posible that they expect Halo 3 will sell well because Bungie is a great developer that makes good, fun to play, games. You are self-admitedly not a xbox/halo fan, so I'm not so sure your analasys of Halo and the reasons Halo 2 sold are exactly spot on, but we don't need to go into how easy it is to kill sniper campers once you get into the game just now.
The point is Halo had several well done innovative aspects to it. Halo 2 had several more, though probably not quite as innovative as the first. I would expect the 3rd iteration will have a few more innovations, and will round out the story, which wasn't finished in Halo 2. It seems pretty clear that Bungie always intended the series to be a trillogy, and that's fine. A trillogy is a far cry from Madden 2kX or Pokemon 328 Purple flower version.
The Halo series does some new things and tells a story, the other examples are iteration just for iteration's sake, changing only stats and minor graphical upgrades. I would think the former is what we would hope for from games, the latter should be avoided.

--
If forums teach us anything, it is that logic and critical thinking should be required courses in the public schools.
Re:1 Step by bigman2003 · 2006-03-09 09:29 · Score: 1

Halo was a really good game. It had a good campaign, and a great multiplayer that unfortunately was not net enabled.

Halo 2 was an even better game. The single player stuff wasn't as good, but the multiplayer was REALLY good. That thing has legs- people are still playing the heck out of it now. I don't think that a better on-line console game has been created yet. On each game I probably spent 30 hours on the single player. But I have spent MANY hundreds of hours on the Halo 2 multiplayer.

Bungie/Microsoft are willing to put the money/time into Halo 3 to make sure that it is even better than Halo 2. Because if it sucks, then the marquee Xbox game sucks- and they can't afford to let that happen.

I bought Halo 2 because I really liked Halo. I'll buy Halo 3 because I really liked Halo 2.

I don't see a problem with that.

--
No reason to lie.
Re:1 Step by Anonymous Coward · 2006-03-09 10:21 · Score: 0

That thing has legs- people are still playing the heck out of it now.

Right, so it's been going for what, 18 whole months? That's nothing, kid. Come back when Halo 2's shown it has stamina like Counter-Strike, which is coming up to its 7th anniversary and still the most popular multiplayer game ever.
Re:1 Step by bigman2003 · 2006-03-09 11:15 · Score: 1

I don't have any problem with Counterstrike being popular for 7 years.

But I think I would kill myself before I played the SAME DAMN GAME for 7 years.

Variety is the spice of life.

Counterstrike is not the most popular multiplayer game because it is the BEST multiplayer game. It is the most popular for other reasons- like the low hardware requirements...the number of servers available...the large base that knows how to play...etc. etc.

Halo 2 on the other hand is popular because it is the BEST console multiplayer experience.

(Yes, I specified consoles...and I said 'experience' which unfortunately takes Call of Duty 2 out of the running.)

--
No reason to lie.

Most Important Step. by TripMaster+Monkey · 2006-03-09 05:34 · Score: 4, Insightful

It's a real shame this one came in seventh:

7. Embrace the Constitution.
We have a right in this industry to make and market our product in an unregulated manner. We should be talking about what our rights are. Videogames are part art and part commerce; both parts are protected.

This is just one more facet of our not-so-slowly eroding civil rights.

--
____

~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey

Re:Most Important Step. by KDR_11k · 2006-03-09 08:52 · Score: 1

We have a right in this industry to make and market our product in an unregulated manner.

No. The law will not limit your creativity but it will certainly regulate e.g. how you can treat your employees and that you cannot market your product by spraying graffiti on public property.

--
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.

TV ratings are bullshit... by xxxJonBoyxxx · 2006-03-09 05:43 · Score: 2, Insightful

"1. Promote the ratings system. It worked for movies, the recording industry and TV."

The TV ratings are bullshit. During G-rated shows I've watched with my kids I've seen:
1) life on earth wiped out by fires caused by meteors (Disney Channel - "Dinosaur")
2) promotions for other shows that featured naked people screwing in bed (Fox - don't remember the show) 3) graphic decapitations of live animals (Animal Planet - Animals Behaving Badly)

"Evangelize the benefits of videogames. Book: Everything Bad is Good for You, by Stephen Johnson. Videogames not only help children to compete more effectively, they make kids more intelligent."

This may be true for older kids, but all the children I know who started playing before the age of five are borderline retarded. Also, the "compete more effectively" thing seems to overdone - the hardcore online adult gamers I know are complete pansies in real life.

Re:TV ratings are bullshit... by chrismcdirty · 2006-03-09 06:09 · Score: 2, Insightful

This may be true for older kids, but all the children I know who started playing before the age of five are borderline retarded.

While I don't disagree with you, you can't blame it entirely on video games. I was playing video games since I was probably 3. I played my dad's Atari 2600, then an NES a few years later. I seem to be functioning fine. Key points, I didn't play them constantly, and I also had other extra-curricular activities, such as reading, baseball, and playing with neighborhood friends. OTOH, I know a 4.5 year old who has never played a video game, but I still can't understand a word he says. Point being, the children you know are probably borderline retarded because of their parenting.

--
It's like sex, except I'm having it!
Re:TV ratings are bullshit... by voice_of_all_reason · 2006-03-09 06:13 · Score: 1

Nature's cruel, Staros.
Re:TV ratings are bullshit... by AuMatar · 2006-03-09 06:20 · Score: 1

I started gaming at age 3. I'm now a software engineer and member of Mensa, and still a hardcore gamer. I suggest you meet more gamers.

--
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
Re:TV ratings are bullshit... by Surt · 2006-03-09 07:05 · Score: 1

The point was not that the ratings system worked for parents and families, but that they worked for the tv and movie industries to help keep censors off their backs. Obviously kids will still get exposed to the same stuff, by sneaking into movies, poor ratings, etc. The games industry needs to emphasize their ratings system to the public, and convince walmart not to sell AO titles to kids, and their problem with censors should be solved.

--
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking

Learning from history by Volante3192 · 2006-03-09 05:51 · Score: 5, Insightful

4. Publicize that history shows we never embrace new media.

History also shows that the older generation never learns. Change only comes around when they die out and the rebellious young generation becomes the status quo, only to villify the next new thing.

Wonder what the video game generation will lobby against?

Re:Learning from history by Anonymous Coward · 2006-03-09 06:02 · Score: 0

Well, we can still hate the gays, that seems to be popular... maybe xenophobia could work too...

Really we just need to invent a new form of entertainment to corrupt the new youth. Perhaps virtual reality could make a comeback.
Re:Learning from history by Surt · 2006-03-09 06:04 · Score: 2, Funny

Buuuuuutttt Daaaaaad, everyone is getting rna brain parasites!

--
"Who is the Journal of Quantum Physics going to believe?" --Stephen Hawking
Re:Learning from history by Prophet+of+Nixon · 2006-03-09 06:08 · Score: 4, Interesting

Well, to some extent I think the original twitch based videogame generation is lobbying a bit against the new 'MMO' skill-less videogame-as-timesink generation. At least it seems that way to me. I don't even consider those crapfests games. And I know I'm not the only one. I see MMOs going the way of persistent virtual reality worlds if technology allows, which lead to complete reality withdrawl of their users. I would lobby against that. Its not so much that its morally wrong (its not at all so far as I can tell) as it is completely unnatural and unhuman. We'll be reaching a point soon where the old moral standards aren't going to be able to completely explain why some of us feel strongly for or against some things... where the issues that are divisive will not be along lines of morality or law, but rather humanity and reality.

I dunno.

I'm probably nuts.
Re:Learning from history by Feanturi · 2006-03-09 06:25 · Score: 1

Wonder what the video game generation will lobby against?

As retro things come back into style more and more, it'll probably be banging rocks and sticks together rhythmically around a fire in a cave. We'll decry this dangerous activity as inherently violent because it involves blunt objects that could potentially be used as weapons, and because someone might get carried away by the demonic beats and fall into the firepit. Additionally, such activities can have ceremonial trappings, which threatens the religious Right, and can also lead to substance abuse. We need to move to ban this before it's too late!
Re:Learning from history by Jeff+DeMaagd · 2006-03-09 10:32 · Score: 1

I never really cared a whole lot for the FPS or the MMO type games but that doesn't mean that I think they are evil or wrong, nor would I lobby against them. I've played a few FPS games, but never an MMO. I do think that there are too many FPS type games, or at least, too little innovation or variance between games. MMOs seem to demand a certain amount of use to justify paying for them.
Re:Learning from history by Bullet-Dodger · 2006-03-09 13:35 · Score: 1

People interacting in virtual MMO worlds is completely unnatural and unhuman... he says using electrons speeding down a wire. Man, is your irony-meter broken? This may be the wrong place to decry virtual communication.
Re:Learning from history by *BBC*PipTigger · 2006-03-09 15:37 · Score: 1

David Sirlin is a good friend of mine.

He recently wrote a Soapbox opinion piece on Gamasutra which prompted this /. story. The story summary highlighted the main point of the piece well and it drew a lot of comments, but of course, only a tiny fraction of even the highly-rated posts demonstrated understanding of the real arguments.

This problem was largely remedied over the past couple weeks in the discussion on Sirlin's blog where myself and other comment authors helped clarify the points that the casual reader habitually missed. Many interesting topics came up and I think your recognization of the "original twitch based videogame generation" being against the "new 'MMO' skill-less videogame-as-timesink generation" is wholly in line with the article and discussion.

The idea of lobbying for legal restrictions on games or their players is a distasteful one to me though. I would like to think marketers can make their proposed progress towards solving the political problems and intolerance the game industry faces... but I also feel the emphasis on marketing anything (over creating quality and superiority that speaks for itself) is the deeper issue. Salespeople are paid to convince and deceive others into becoming customers. In this interconnected information age we live in, the resentment towards advertisers telling us what to buy is on the rise. We'll see where it goes.

Anyway, you don't sound too nuts to me. Then again, a lot of people call me crazy so I'm maybe not the best judge. =)

-Pip

The devil is in the details. by Anonymous Coward · 2006-03-09 05:59 · Score: 1, Interesting

"Videogames are not the devil incarnate, and not capable of half the deviltry our critics claim for them."

Who's saying they are? Being concerned about side effects isn't the same as saying games are the "devil incarnate".

---
"Slashdot requires you to wait between each successful posting of a comment to allow everyone a fair chance at posting a comment.

It's been 20 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment"

Oh yes Taco. It takes 20 minutes to be fair. Do the registered posters have to wait? And if not, isn't that unfair to everyone else? Who are you fooling?

Re:The devil is in the details. by voice_of_all_reason · 2006-03-09 06:15 · Score: 1

I think if you keep trying to comment before the wait period is up, the counter resets (but keeps track of your last comment time)
Re:The devil is in the details. by darkhitman · 2006-03-09 07:03 · Score: 1

"Videogames are not the devil incarnate, and not capable of half the deviltry our critics claim for them."

Note that this applies only to most video games. Some video games, suprisingly, actually are the devil incarnate. It's been proven. Studies have been performed. It's all scientific.

--
Tell me something...it's still "We, the people"... right?
Re:The devil is in the details. by DeathFromSomewhere · 2006-03-09 09:07 · Score: 1

Do the registered posters have to wait?

I dunno, let's find out.

--
-1 overrated isn't the same thing as "I disagree".
Re:The devil is in the details. by DeathFromSomewhere · 2006-03-09 09:10 · Score: 1

Yes.

--
-1 overrated isn't the same thing as "I disagree".
Re:The devil is in the details. by KDR_11k · 2006-03-09 09:44 · Score: 1

Nope, at least not when you're logged in.

--
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.

Logical Fallacy by under_score · 2006-03-09 06:00 · Score: 1

The quoted argument:

4. Publicize that history shows we never embrace new media. This is true for silent movies, radio, pulp magazines, comic books and every new music wave including Mozart. Videogames are not the devil incarnate, and not capable of half the deviltry our critics claim for them.

doesn't hold any water. In fact, it's not really evidence at all. The statement could be read like this:

History shows that we never embrace new foozles.
This is true for blue foozles, red foozles and green foozles.
Yellow foozles are not the devil incarnate, and not capable of half the deviltry our critics claim for them.

Hmm... the first two points don't mention anything about yellow foozles that in any way shows that they are not the devil incarnate.

--
Helping with organizational effectiveness is our job.

Re:Logical Fallacy by chrismcdirty · 2006-03-09 06:14 · Score: 1

I assumed that since it was a discussion about video games, they were implied as being a new type of media.

--
It's like sex, except I'm having it!
Re:Logical Fallacy by under_score · 2006-03-09 06:34 · Score: 1

Indeed, but just because two things share a type doesn't mean they have the same attributes. It is only if you can show that the attributes of each thing are caused by being part of the type that this works. Not only that, but the first part about history doesn't prove that those previous forms of media weren't evil. This is not a trivial point: there are plenty of people still worried about (for example) television. Just because something has become pervasive and culturally accepted doesn't mean it's "good". The connection between video games and other types of media, in the context of this discussion seems intuitive, but it is not logically supported, at least not how the connection was presented.

--
Helping with organizational effectiveness is our job.
Re:Logical Fallacy by Anonymous Coward · 2006-03-09 08:04 · Score: 0

And you interpreted this paragraph as a syllogism why, exactly?

You're right that it's a bad logical argument. But the reason for that is because... it's not.
Re:Logical Fallacy by KDR_11k · 2006-03-09 10:01 · Score: 1

Pour holy water over it, if it doesn't evaporate it's not the devil incarnate.

--
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
Re:Logical Fallacy by nasch · 2006-03-10 05:44 · Score: 1

I read it as a claim (not proof) that the outcry against video games is not because they're bad, but because they're new. He offered evidence that other new things have suffered the same fate, which is evidence that such a cause-effect relationship is possible. Does it prove that cause? No. Does he think it proves it? I hope not.

Creative games? by Winterblink · 2006-03-09 06:32 · Score: 1

10. Demonstrate our most creative games. Halo and GTA represent us in the marketplace, and we need to show people it's not all about guns and boobs. Katamari Damacy, DDR, Parappa, Donkey Konga and Guitar Hero are games the whole family can enjoy and play.

Mmm hmm. How about Shadow of the Colossus, or Psychonauts? Both games were amazing, creative, critically a success, but sold nowhere near the number of copies as the fifth Grand Theft Auto game. I don't think the industry has a problem demonstrating creativity, I think the industry is now so commercially oriented that they stifle it in favor of the sure money.

--
"I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
-Hoban Washburn

Re:Creative games? by CashCarSTAR · 2006-03-09 08:12 · Score: 2, Insightful

The problem isn't the industry.

The problem is the people buying the games. The video game industry doesn't stifle creativity , in fact, the gaming industry tries to forcefeed creativity in a lot of ways. But the mainstream buying public doesn't want any of that.
Re:Creative games? by Winterblink · 2006-03-10 10:12 · Score: 1

It's not like either of the two games I spoke of as examples got any really decent amount of advertising either.

--
"I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
-Hoban Washburn

Attack of the Cycle by Puhase · 2006-03-09 06:36 · Score: 1

Ever notice how every 4 years there seem to be a lot more political commercials on TV?
Or the fact there are more action movies in the summer and more serious Oscar contender's and fantasy epics in the winter?
Now, have you noticed about how this "Industry" referenced above (the software industry), always goes into a psychological/monetary depression ever 3-4 years in the beginning of a new hardware cycle? We have already seen a ton of articles that sum up to, "Consumer's unwilling to spend great % of their income on gaming and will therefore buy less software to afford hardware". The software industry hasn't changed how they handle the cycle, like starting to release ALL new titles at reduced cost, so why do they expect any different? If they did have this 8-12 months of reduced game costs I bet they would still see the same numbers of units sold as before. Demand does decrease to a certain degree, but its not that much as long as they are making halfway decent games(insert flame about bad sequels etc.). Its just that people can't suddenly dip into the couch and find more disposable income. This kind of year has always been followed by a year of record breaking sales, as people want the new and interesting games for their new systems and developers hit their stride with coding on the new machines. If the stuffed suits over on Wallstreet can figure this out, why can't the software people?

--
I am and always will be a stereotype, because who in their right mind prefers mono?

Re:Side effects by vertinox · 2006-03-09 07:17 · Score: 1

Being concerned about side effects isn't the same as saying games are the "devil incarnate".

It is mostly because video games have as much side effects as breathing air, drinking water, and eating food.

Actually... I take that back. Breathing bad air can give you lung cancer. Drinking bad water can give you dysentary. Eating too much food can give you heart disease and possible choking hazard.

So yeah... Video games are safer than most activies in life.

--
"I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
-Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)

Evangelizing the benefits of videogames. by GlenRaphael · 2006-03-09 07:26 · Score: 1

2. Evangelize the benefits of videogames.

Such as that videogames can help you get fit? So far that project is going okay, as far as the New York Times is concerned...

(That was a mirror; the original is behind their firewall here)

--
I play Nerd-Folk!

Whoa whoa WHOA. Shadow Hearts, a rip-off?! by Swimmin'+Pants · 2006-03-09 07:58 · Score: 1

They just don't like rip offs (see Grand Theft Auto v. True Crime, Final Fantasy v. Shadowhearts, etc.)

I don't know if you've actually played Shadow Hearts, but it's NOTHING like any Final Fantasy game I've played. It's actually got a fresh setting for a JRPG (The first two take place during World War I. That's right, in the real world), and a great battle system that requires some reflexes, so you can't just depend on the menu selections.

Sure, there are some RPG cliches in there, plotwise, but it's honestly one of the few RPGs that manage to make you care about the characters while STILL having a sense of humor (and none of that anime-cutesy-crap humor that pollutes so many Japanese RPGs). If you never played Shadow Hearts 2 and wrote the series off as a Final Fantasy rip-off, I urge you to reconsider and try it. I guarantee that you won't be disappointed.

Hell, I'd even go as far to say it's better than any Final Fantasy game I played (save for maybe 6; but the newer FF games pale in comparison to the Shadow Hearts games).

They're just kidding themselves... by Dev59 · 2006-03-09 08:21 · Score: 1

"4. Publicize that history shows we never embrace new media. This is true for silent movies, radio, pulp magazines, comic books and every new music wave including Mozart. Videogames are not the devil incarnate, and not capable of half the deviltry our critics claim for them."

Do they actually think that will help them at all? Television, Music and Movies are still being constantly bashed by the same people who are ragging on video games right now, and largely for the same reasons.

The only reason that video games are taking it a bit harder (at least in ways that are publicized) right now is because they're even bigger with children right now than the preceeding examples. Rock albums and rap albums are still being persecuted, networks still recieve hundreds if not thousands of complaints every time a new episode of CSI is aired, and the movie industry is constantly criticized by the same people every time something other than "The Passion of the Christ" or "The Chronicles of Narnia" is released.

Massive denial by Anonymous Coward · 2006-03-09 10:54 · Score: 0

Yeah, I agree with you. Over time, it will become more clear why MMO games are a bad thing. I doubt that they will eclipse all other types of game, but I think that they will eclipse everything else for a significant number of people. Those people won't do anything other than play MMO games. I think that this has already happened to a few people that I know, and I don't know how to help them.

The current generation of MMO players appear to be in massive denial about what it is they are doing. They've found something that is easy to do, but similar enough to real life that it can act as a replacement. These games are not just entertainment, or just an amusing way to spend an evening with your friends. They are a way of life.

Of course, that's only bad because you don't achieve anything by playing an MMO game. You managed to get an extra row added to a database table? Fantastic! Ooh, you incremented an integer! Well done! Now carry on playing: all your "achievements" will vanish like faerie gold unless you give me some more money.

To be honest, I'm just glad there are other people out there who are able to see this.

Re:Whoa whoa WHOA. Shadow Hearts, a rip-off?! by Anonymous Coward · 2006-03-10 17:37 · Score: 0

You've got to admit that if someone had only played the original Shadow Hearts and not had the patience to stick out the slower parts (and sleep-inducing battle music) that they could easily come away with that impression. I love Shadow Hearts, but if it had ended after one game it would have been another instance of a game with great potential that was never even close to realized.

Luckily we got Covenent which, in my opinion, is the genre-defining game of the generation and easily one of the greatest console RPGs ever created. It's also the most stellar turn arounds between a game and its sequel that I've ever seen. Fix every issue I had with the original, extended the characters, story, and gameplay, and they even replaced the bizarrely placed, pretty horrid voice acting with some of the best in the industry.

Now I've just got to get through some of these games I've been sitting on so I can play From The New World.

Slashdot Mirror

12 Steps To Regain Industry Confidence

55 comments