Another Golden Age of Gaming?

An anonymous reader writes "Julian Murdoch over at Gamers With Jobs thinks that this is the best time ever to be a gamer. In his conversation with a (one suspects hypothetical) kid in a library, he engages in a bit of a rant on the topic: 'He's me when I was 16. Everything sucked. But I'm glad I talked to him, because it turns out I needed to hear myself say it all. For all of my daily kvetching, this is the best time ever to be a gamer, because the games are good. We can bitch all we want about console wars, prices, fanboyitis, and those games which do, in fact, suck. But at the end of the day, there are more different games out there than ever before, from the oh-so-pretty Oblivion to Guitar Hero to Dwarf Fortress. From Magic: the Gathering to Pokemon (laugh all you want, it's a good game). From Heroscape to Warhammer 40k.' So what do you think? In the midst of all the negative campaigning in the console wars, is this another golden age of gaming?"

Comments

Steam

[Pharmboy]

Although there are plenty of people who hate Steam, I think what Valve has done ever since Half Life originally came out has contributed. By making a good game that is easy to mod, they have opened the door for thousands of future game makers. Not only do mods create a platform to create lots of games, some good, some not, but their method of distribution allows the good mods to be further developed into viable commercial products. And I can just download them and they run in a few minutes.

Not everything I have bought I really liked (Sin Episodes, for example...) but for less money, hassle and installation concerns than traditional games, they have made trying new games out much easier, and increased the total number of good games on the market.

Re:Steam

[edremy]

I have to agree here. I bought The Ship the other day. This is a game that would *never* make it into stores, yet is one of the most innovative FP(S/B/S/P)*es I've seen. Hopefully others out there will have fun innovating- although i don't own a console stuff like XBox live gives great little games a chance to actually make it in the marketplace.

*Shooter/Bludgeoner/Stabber/Poisoner

Re:Steam

[Pharmboy]

I am salivating after seeing the trailers for TF2 and Portal, which will be bundled with HL2/Episode 2. I didn't even care about Portal until I saw the trailer. Looks very different than other games, and appears to be a total mind screw, forcing you to forget what you know about physics and learning to think extra dimensionally. They said pricing for Ep2 will be between normal Episode prices and full game prices ($20 and $60) but I don't think even full price will slow down the purchases, just for Team Fortress 2.

Re:Steam

[LMN8R]

The Ship and soon-to-be DEFCON are perfect examples. Best $15 I ever spent on a game for The Ship, and $10 for an innovative game like DEFCON seems like a steal.

People who bitch about Steam suck. It's by far one of the best things to happen to the gaming industry. Just read hear for more:
Interview with Troika Games

"Why Steam... the reason Steam is so fantastic, is because the game can be developed and distributed without any publisher involvement. Laidback will get to keep the IP, which means that the idea and world the game takes place in will still be ours. Laidback can make a great title, put it up there and people can download it for less than they'd pay in the stores. On top of that, Laid Back will only need to sell a very small number of copies to recoup its cost and keep the company going.

To help everyone better understand, I will explain Publisher funding vs. Developer return process. I'm going to simplify it a lot, but this is more or less how it works.... and it's really quite amazing...

After they agree to fund your game for 6 million, you begin production. They give you 500k a month upon receiving, reviewing, and approving your milestone. They are basically checking every month to make sure the game is actually being made and going in a good direction Fair enough. To keep things easy, let's say the game ships on time and they've given you a clean 6 million bucks.

Ready?.... You get 10% of the royalties of the game! So like if the game sells 1 million units at Electronics Boutique for 50 bucks a piece, you get 5 million dollars coming back at you right?!??!

WRONG

EB bought the game for 40 dollars and sells it for 50. Now the publisher takes away their expenses of producing the full color manual and the pretty box and such which we'll say is 10 bucks (usually more like 7, but let's keep the math easy). So now we are down to 30 bucks, and you get 10% of that... 3 bucks.... but WAIT!!! Your 3 dollars doesn't go into your pocket, your 3 bucks goes to pay back the publisher what you borrowed to make the game. They did give you 6 million dollars. So before the developer see's a check in the mail, you would have to sell 2 million units!!!!! So the developer before the developer gets a check, the publisher gets 30 million dollars coming in.

Crazy huh?

So why choose Steam? I have chosen Steam because if you buy Valves engine to make your game with, you get to keep 100% of what you sell on Steam. That's right 100%. So using our math from above, if I can sell the game on Steam for 30 bucks and cost 6 million to make, I'll be seeing a check after the game sells 200k units instead of 2 million. AND the check I get for the units I sell will be 10 times more than it would be from a publisher AND after all this wonderfulness, you guys all get the game for 30 bucks instead of 50....

It's an all around winner.

If Troika was able to sell the games they made through Steam and sold only a 1/4 of the units they did, they'd be thriving today and everyone would have really cool RPG's to play. The more people who download, install, and actively use Steam the better. It's really small developers only hope to get their games out to people.

As far as the game being in a boxed version, it's possible... but I would wait until the game is close to completion before I entertained the idea of a publisher putting it on the shelf. If the game is done and there is a lot of buzz around it, then the developer holds all the cards could get a better deal out of it. Valve would also have their concerns as well and I would want to make sure the wonderful world of Steam would take TOP priority. "

Kids are Growing Up To Fast

[neonprimetime]

"Halo 2 was cool. You like First Person Shooters?"

"I guess. It's getting boring though. I used to play on Xbox live, but there are all these 8-year-olds in Kansas and sh*t that spend all day practicing and they just kick everyone's ass."

How is it that we allow these damn 8 years olds to whoop up on us? We need to quite our jobs now and take back our titles!

Golden Age? Hah

[DarkFencer]

What Golden age? The huge amount of sequals of previous games, and games based on crappy movie, cartoon, book, etc. licenses? Having 25 different '2007' editions of various sports games with very little additions to them does not mean quality.

The problem is now the cost of making mass market games is so prohibitively expensive that few companies are willing to take a risk and do something different.

Don't get me wrong. There are some good games out now but calling it a Golden Age is a bit much in my opinion.

I'll take what he's smoking

[AKAImBatman]

From Wikipedia:

The term Golden age stems from Greek mythology and Roman poets. It refers to a time in the beginnings of Humanity which was perceived as an ideal state, or utopia, when mankind was pure and immortal.

By definition, we can't have a Golden Age of Gaming again, any more than we can have a Golden Age of movies. The early days of when gaming hit its stride are long gone. Yes, we fondly remember when the Wizards and Gurus sat down at their keyboards and worked their black magic to do the impossible. It seemed like the sky was the limit, and new concepts for games were coming out every other day. There were pushes into story-driven games, first person perspective games, simulation games, action games, puzzle games, etc. Each magazine or software catalog that came in the mail delivered new surprises and wonders. It was all very new and VERY exciting!

Where we're at today is not a Golden Age. All the basic, conceptual groundwork has been laid. So we instead focus on providing the most immersive experience possible. Many of these games can be fun in their own right, but they simply don't compare to the excitement of seeing Duke Nukem' for the first time, or coaxing Wing Commander to run on your PC. It's nothing like the awe at playing Tetris on a portable system for the first time, or making Mario fly through the clouds on a cape. Those were totally, completely, and unabashingly wonderous things for a wonderous time.

I think Nintendo manages to capture some of that with the Nintendo DS. However, gaming will never be virgin territory again. That's just the way it is. :)

Re:I'll take what he's smoking

[mustafap]

>All the basic, conceptual groundwork has been laid.

That was said in the 70's about computer science,
and in the 60's about artifical intelligence,
and in the 19th century about physics.

In other words, I doubt it.

Re:I'll take what he's smoking

[AKAImBatman]

You obviously don't know much about AI.

Oh yes, very snappy comeback. (*rolls eyes*)

Artificial Intelligence was one of the defining goals of Computer Science. It's been on the table since computers were first developed. Yes, most of the concepts developed alongside CompSci in the 60's and 70's. But to call the 60's the "Golden Age of AI" shows a distinct lack of understanding to what "Golden Age" means in a modern context.

The "Golden Age" is the period of discovery proceding the invention. It's usually offset by a period of time while the concept of the invention is assessed. Using the example of the Telegraph, the invention was the Optical Telegraph in the 18th century, but the "Golden Age" (sometimes referred to as the "Victorian Internet") didn't occur until the electric telegraph caught on in the 19th century. The "Golden Age" ended when the telegraph system became highly automated, thus disbanding the large network of operators. (The telegraph operators were a lot like the BBS users of the 80's and 90's.)

Similarly, videogames as we know them were invented in the early 1970's, but didn't experience their "Golden Age" until the 80's when the concept truly took off.

Re:I'll take what he's smoking

[EMeta]

I've been waiting for my entire gaming existance for there to be good controls on which I can swing something and a sword swings on a screen somewhere. I certainly think immersion is a wonderful goal that we are on the verge of achieving. That games haven't had accelerometers in their controllers already puzzles me, but I think a new age of gaming can now begin.

bit generations

[gEvil (beta)]

At the suggestion of a friend, I decided to check out some of Nintendo's "bit Generation" series of games for the GBA (Japanese only at the moment, but there's no text in the games anyways). The games are designed to be pseudo-retro in terms of graphics and gameplay (read: simplistic), but man are they fun! I highly recommend everyone try out Orbital. For a game that only uses two buttons (more gravity, less gravity), it certainly is engaging (and frustrating). As long as there are companies out there that are willing to keep things simple for those of us who like games they can just pick up, then the golden age will continue for a long time.

The Golden Age or the Revolution?

[eldavojohn]

When it comes to media, I'll take a revolution over a golden age any day.

What I mean by that is there are no new genre defining games coming out anymore. Maybe it's because we've reached hardware & software limitations or maybe it's because no one is willing to risk it with so many popularized genres out there to make a buck off of.

But at the end of the day, there are more different games out there than ever before, from the oh-so-pretty Oblivion to Guitar Hero to Dwarf Fortress.

This is true and I applaud games like Guitar Hero or even Um Jammer Lammy ... although I've never played Dwarf Fortress or Oblivion, Oblivion seems like a new twist on a way too common engine. Unfortunately, the makers of Guitar Hero are already making a Guitar Hero 2. How many before they channel their resources and creativity on another concept? I think franchises stifle creativity -- yes, even our beloved franchises like Final Fantasy & Legend of Zelda.

One would think (or hope) that with internet connections for consoles and the MMORPG world conquered by World of Warcraft that we would be seeing a lot of innovation. Unfortunately, I'm beginning to see less and less innovation and a whole lot more 'safety' games. Indeed, this is a golden age ... but if I visit IGN and search for Madden, it returns 115 results. Yes, I know it's been on every console and PC since the dawn of games ... but, for Christ's sake, when will it die? There is a proper time to lay a game to rest. I'm very much convinced that EA relies mainly on disposable games and sequels for 95% of their profits. Golden age indeed!

Re:The Golden Age or the Revolution?

[Swift(void)]

MMOs all follow the same pattern - grind, grind, grind. FPS' all follow the same pattern - shoot, upgrade, shoot.

Uhh, honestly, what do you expect? It might be a bit anal here, but:

1) For MMOs, when it comes down to it, subscribers will consume content far far far quicker than you can make, test and deploy it, so MMOs need something repeatable that offers rewards after x repeats to keep people playing. No matter how much innovation you do, youll eventually hit this wall. If you cant keep your players playing, it doesnt matter how many awesome advancements you have made, your players will leave. The real trick is making the grind enjoyable. WoW has dismally failed in some cases (Cenarion Circle) and succeeded in others (IMO Argent Dawn rep succeeds, since there are 2 zones to earn it off normal mobs while levelling, 2 5 mans and a 40 man instance that gives rep)

2) Well...duh. Pure FPS games have always been shoot shoot shoot upgrade and shoot some more. Its what a pure FPS is. Its when you start mixing genres that the formula changes, but then, your not talking straight FPS games anymore.

For boardgaming, maybe

[Bohnanza]

This IS as close to a "Golden Age" of boardgaming as there has ever been. Check out Boardgamegeek to see why. For electronic gaming, I believe that time will come when the focus shifts back from "AWESUM GRAFIX!!!" to making fun games.

Re:For boardgaming, maybe

[cowscows]

A couple things will happen in the near future to help video game development out of its general rut.

First is digital distribution will become the prominent way of getting games out. Everyone will get used to it, it'll cut out a lot of the middlemen producers, it's a win/win.

Second, as graphics begin to plateau, the selection of available toolsets and engines will start to catch up and mature, they'll become easier to use, the cost of those tools will drop.

Things have always functioned like this on a small scale in the PC world with shareware and the like, but as the size and complexity of games increased so quickly, it was hard for smaller developers to keep up, not to mention that bandwidth restrictions made it hard for gamers to download large games. But the bandwidth issue is less of a problem now, and the modding scene has provided people with low cost tools for making games for the PC. Console manufacturers are starting to take notice of this, and Microsoft has already begun to work the community of smaller developers into Xbox Live. Nintendo has mentioned similar things for the Wii. I'd expect it to become a bigger part of console gaming with the next next-gen.

Doubt it

[drsquare]

When most people are playing rehashed sequels or sitting playing cookie-cutter MMORPGs 12 hours a day, drooling at the screen grinding on monsters over and over again like zombies, I don't think this is can be considered a golden age.

The wii and ds may provide a mini-renaissance, but that's about it.

Pointless

[BenjyD]

I think trying to classify something as large as the games industry into "sucks" and "doesn't suck", or to trying to define a "golden age" just isn't possible.

Looking back, things always seem better because you tend to remember the good bits more than the mediocre. There are some really great games out there. Sure, there are lots of sequels and generic FPSs, but you don't have to play them.

Civ

[steveo777]

It's okay, he was just playing Civ IV. We're in a golden age right now, but don't worry about that because it's going to end in 20 years or so. So, if you think building all these cultural advancements is going to help, you've got another thing coming. I just know that everyone thinks they're safe. But you just wait, because Genghis Khan is gonna come rollin' in here a couple turns later with his Keshiks and roll right over our modern armor. I know this, because it ALWAYS happens to me.

Unparalled Ridiculous Power=Golden.

[Locution Commando]

(Off-topic fer just two shakes of a Parots' Tail....Sept 19 -ITLAPD!!
Arrr! I must get me plug in fer the day o' days before me comments. I hope no scallawag keel-hauls (-1 Mod) me fer me ferver -Yar Har!)

Ye' must be three sheets to the wind, if ye' were to tell me 'twer not an age ye' call "GOLDEN" (Yarrr! GOLD!)

Aye, I can recall back to day I was but a gamin' lubber - Me Atari and me spent many a countless watch ravenging the .00001-bit seas! Sailin on, who can ferget (yarrr! who can remember?) the death dealin Captain... errr... Commander Keeeeeeeeen?

Let me take ye' forward a stormy watch or two, and remind ye' of where the ship lies -
Weee've got us photorealism, Multiiii-thread Cooores,
Swashbucklin and Adventurin
An' Lo' Killin. Aye, Killin Galoooore!
An' Now in 5.1 audio, needn't bother with letter's yer Eyes

Have ye seen ye Oblivion?
Have ye seen ye F.E.A.R. - W.O.W. - Ye Console P-Cube-X?
Even now yer belov'd Dungeon-o-Dragons?
Ye scurvey dog, could ye live now without PCI-Express?

Yarr - I fear thar be some dissen't among the ranks,
the ol' buccaneers tend much t' thar ways
Those dogs who worship thar good ol' days, aye, they should walk the plank!

Aye! 'ts ne'r been be'er
te see games as a treasure
Ye'd have te be plum-gone rum insane,
              te think the past be'er 'an than a world with
Massive Multiplayer Online Raidin' Pirate Games! YARRR HARRR!!!

The golden age..

[Rob T Firefly]

..was when ye olde 8-bit and 16-bit games became easily emulatable on me desktop!

And surely 'twas made all the sweeter when it became easy to find ye massive torrents with all of each system's entire calalogue o' ROMs in a single RARrrr, matey!

MMORPG's definitely not

[SQLServerBen]

The new console wars are encouraging, and I'm looking forward to seeing what comes out of it. But MMORPG's are entering a dark age, not a golden age. WoW's success means few companies are willing to gamble, because they don't think they can beat it. (And they're right -- without spending $50 million on content, they can't.) There's not a decent PvP game on the market, and the selection for future pvp games is very slim. Compare this to five years ago when we had Daoc, Shadowbane, and the promise of WoW on the horizon.

In other news...

[petrus4]

Julian Murdoch over at Gamers With Jobs thinks that this is the best time ever to be a gamer.

In other news, dairy farmers throughout the world wish to remind the public of the miraculous health properties of milk and cheese, and potato farmers, noting the potato's abundance of Vitamin C, have also made an announcement that a diet rich in potatoes is a great way to avoid any possibility of scurvy.

My Definitnion

[uberjoe]

The Golden Age of Gaming is whenever you are old enough to understand the game and can be really good at it, but still young enough to have the loads of free time to actually play the damn thing. In my case (I'm 25) that was anywhere between five and fifteen years ago.

The Golden Age can't be now (not for me anyway) because I have a job, a spouse, kids and a house to attend to. Oh there are plenty of great games I would love to play and really immerse my self in, but I can't really get the time.

Now my son OTOH is five. He plays SMS and Zelda on Game Cube, and various Mario and Wario titles on his Game Boy. He doesn't quite get some of them yet, but he'll get better. His Golden Age is rapidly approaching. More games than ever to play, and a whole childhood to play them in.

Sadly my time is over, until I retire that is.

Re:Golden Age? Hah

[AcidLacedPenguiN]

Sure sequels have been around for awhile but now the game industry is DRIVEN by these, not by new ideas.

Re:Golden Age? Hah

[rabbot]

Mod parent up.

This is exactly the problem with games today. Everyone is playing it safe now...it's Hollywood. Nobody wants to take risks or just make fun and challenging games anymore. There are FAR fewer good games these days. Don't let pretty graphics and sound fool you.

I can't honestly believe that anyone that has been gaming since the 80s can say that this is another golden age and keep a straight face...

Re:You're emphasizing on the etymology of the word

[AKAImBatman]

In the case of the article, I believe golden age is right. With the current state of the market, every type of gamer can find their fair share of games. young, teen, adult, seniors, they can all play and from various source like consoles, cell phones, PCs, portable console and each source offers a pletora of styles and each styles has a truckload of titles.

Your interpretation of "Golden Age" leaves something to be desired. Again from Wikipedia:

A golden age is often ascribed to the years immediately following some technological innovation. It is during this time that writers and artists ply their skills to this new medium. Therefore, there are Golden Ages of both radio and television. During this nascent phase the technology allows new ideas to be expressed, as new art forms flower quickly into new areas.

It goes on to give several examples that are consistent with this definition, including a Golden Age of Videogames.

This is backed by Princeton's WordNet:

golden age (a time period when some activity or skill was at its peak) "it was the golden age of cinema"

The problem with your definition is that any period with an abundance of a technology or art would be the "Golden Age" of that subject. Which would mean that the "Golden Age" of Science Fiction was the 80's and 90's, with a new "Golden Age" appearing today. This is blatently incorrect. The Golden Age of Science Fiction was a period between the 40's and 50's when the concepts regularly used in today's SciFi were developed.

The term you're looking for is probably "Renaissance". As in, we are experiencing a rebirth of fun Videogames in abundance. Thus, a "Videogame Renaissance".

How insightful..

[4D6963]

Julian Murdoch thinks that this is the best time ever to be a gamer

Well of course it is, as time goes by, more and more games are created, more and more consoles are created, more and more emulators are developped, and nothing disappears.

Being a gamer in 2020 > being a gamer in 2010 > being a gamer in 2005 > being a gamer in 2000 > being a gamer in 1995 > being a gamer in 1985 > being a gamer in 1975 > being a gamer in 1930.

Re:Golden Age? Hah

[bigman2003]

I've been gaming since the 70's- and I think this is the golden age.

I can go out and buy a game that has better mini-games than anything that was made in the 80's. An easy, if over-used example would be Geometry Wars, which was just a small part of Project Gotham Racing 2.

The on-line gaming space is absolutely fantastic now. Not only are there millions of opportunities for you to get a game going, but the games actually WORK. Just last night I was playing Call of Duty 2 on my Xbox 360. Rooms would fill up with 8 people in just about 1 minute. The lag was imperceptible, the automatic matchmaking meant that the competition was good- AND we could all chat while playing!

In the 1980's I couldn't even dream that I would be able to TALK to a player who was thousands of miles away, as we planned our attack on 4 opposing human players in a fairly realistic 3d world. And while I was crouched, protecting our radio (headquarters) I could tell where the enemy was using my surround sound system. And when the enemy finally made it to the door, my team-mate sniper could tell me "move to the left, I have a clear shot".

Maybe this isn't for you. Maybe you would rather play a game by yourself, pushing colored blocks around while sub-midi quality music played repetitively through your speakers.

I do remember multi-player in the 80's it was a lot of fun. My friends and I would sit around a computer and take turns playing a game. (Whoever lost the last city in Missle Command would get pummeled by the rest of us.) It was great fun. Now I have the option of Internet gaming, OR we can still gather around one box and play. (I do both)

As someone who has been gaming consistently for 30 years (sadly...yes, for 30 years consistently and nearly constantly) it is my opinion that games have never been better.

Re:Golden Age? Hah

[teflaime]

The huge amount of sequals of previous games, and games based on crappy movie, cartoon, book, etc. licenses? Having 25 different '2007' editions of various sports games with very little additions to them does not mean quality.

The game publishing industry is driven mostly by the same people who drive the rest of the entertainment industry (after all, most game publishers are owned by mega-media corporations). This means that the game publishing industry will be stodgily uncomfortable with risk. Risk to these people is anything that hasn't made money before; ergo, you will see lots of sequels (most crappy, the rare one occasionally good), lots of games based on other properties that have made money. That's just the way media corporations function.

I think it matters a lot on where you are standing

[El_Smack]

For us (25+ y.o. gamers, I'm 36), the "Golden Age" is over, because we grew out of it. Things can't ever be "new and exciting" again, because we have been looking at it for the last 10 or 25+ years. Maybe when we can plug in to a neural net or something.

For my kids, though, holy cow! For $50 I got a flash cart that can play almost 30 years worth of console games on my son's GBA. He has a library of over a hundred games, and they are all fun for him, no "Yo' Noid" crap. In less than 2 months, my daughter will be waving a contol around like a tennis raquett, or turning like a steering wheel, just like I did with my Atari 2600 joysticks and paddles. But hers will actually control the game! Would you just kill for that back in our "Golden Age" of the 70's and 80's and early 90's?

And yesterday, my youngest asked my daughter a question about ninja's. Her response: "Let's ask the computer." In 2 or 3 minutes, he had color pictures printed and hanging on his door and his question was answered. I remember when Scotty asked the computer questions, now my kids do it

So I think that todays kid's "Golden Age" kicks ass, just like ours did.

Re:Golden Age? Hah

[rabbot]

You made some very good points. I agree that online gaming has opened up a lot of doors and introduced things we never dreamed of as kids. You can really immerse yourself in some of today's games.

I play just as many new games as I did 20 years ago. I appreciate the advances that have been made over the years. You have to realize that even though I obviously don't consider this the best time in gaming, it's certainly not the worst either. From your response it seems that you think I have to love one or the other, but not both.

I just don't feel that the games of today live up to the peak that was hit in the early to mid 90's. Maybe it's nostalgia, but maybe it's because I think games back then had more character.

I'd hardly classify the 80s and 90s and "pushing colored blocks around while sub-midi quality music played repetitively through your speakers".
Maybe I have a greater appreciation for art style than I do for 3D modeling and texturing.

Anyways, I completely respect your views and I'm glad you responded.