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

[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.

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!

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!

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.

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.