Anyone else thinks that console games are a hindrance to game development?

[Sugetsu]

It dawned on me that video games are not evolving at the same pace they did in the early 90s and early two thousand. I wonder what type of games we would have had now if most game developers weren't focus on creating games for outdated technologies.

We have been using DX9 in most games for decade now, even though DX11 is out, but very few games are being developed for it.

Perhaps the only game that has pushed the envelope is Crisis. I think it is really sad that console games are not designed in way that allows for hardware upgrades as computers do, because all they are doing is bringing video game development to a halt.

I guess the money is too good to pass up...

[MeoTwister5]

Originally Posted by Sugetsu

It dawned on me that video games are not evolving at the same pace they did in the early 90s and early two thousand. I wonder what type of games we would have had now if most game developers weren't focus on creating games for outdated technologies.

We have been using DX9 in most games for decade now, even though DX11 is out, but very few games are being developed for it.

Perhaps the only game that has pushed the envelope is Crisis. I think it is really sad that console games are not designed in way that allows for hardware upgrades as computers do, because all they are doing is bringing video game development to a halt.

I guess the money is too good to pass up...

Consider the following:

1. It's a industry, therefore it's for profit. At some point innovations and improvements are warranted when the gaming masses want them, but if still makes you money then there's no point in throwing it away just yet.

2. It's comparatively more difficult and more resource intensive to develop software for new technology and new platforms. The average gamer can't tell the difference between Dx11 and Dx9.0c (I certainly as hell can't!), so unless your new technology breaks new ground to attract the masses, it may simply be not worth it.

3. Consoles were also designed primarily for people who can't afford the next Pentium processor or the next Radeon GPU. Consoles are there to last you a while to play games without having the need to bust out more caps to play the next big game. Plus consoles are more capable than what most people give them credit for. People are actually surprised at the things even even aged consoles can do if developers used the technology well.

[technomo12]

no actually games don't evolve is because of those DX9 or 10 or 11

it is due to the faq that because of limits of consumer usage that games dont evolve

[james0246]

Originally Posted by technomo12

it is due to the faq that because of limits of consumer usage that games dont evolve

Agreed. Games cost too much and require too much time (in order to play) to make large scale experimental titles (at least in America). Consequently, producers tend to create games that have a built in audience (the franchise titles, or games of a specific genre, etc), and only produce a few titles that attempt to go beyond the ordinary.

Anyway, this should really be in the Games thread...

[thevil1]

Don't forget that many systems can't handle many games. This computer can't take HL2 ep 2. And forget about FSX, and L4D. The technology to make extremely advanced games is out there, but is unrealistic to have commercially. (I think I understood this topic correctly. derr)

[synaesthetic]

Games like Crysis are exactly why they don't do what you want them to do, OP.

It's too demanding. It demanded more hardware than actually even existed at the time of its release.

But no, console focus isn't killing the gaming industry. In fact, it's actually making it bigger and better, especially with so many developers focused on concurrent development. Exclusives are going the way of the dodo.

What's been dying is PC gaming, but it appears that with the MMORPG fad starting to lose its luster, PC gaming seems to be bouncing back fairly well. The sooner World of Warcraft dies, the sooner MMORPGs go back to being a niche genre, the sooner we'll see a proliferation of quality single-player titles on the PC platform.

Now if only Square Enix will stop being a whore and fucking port Final Fantasy XIII to the PC...

[Sheba]

I'd rather have a game that makes the most of a platform like Shadow of the Colossus or Ico than a game that makes my hardware obsolete and pushes me to buy a better hardware, only to have it rendered obsolete by the next new shiny FPS.

[Cub-Sama]

The reason games aren't evolving is because as they become more part of the mainstream media, the harder it is to sell new ideas unless you are already built up a solid foundation as gaming company like Nintendo or Square Enix. Investors like to see what they know will work therefore games with similar elements come out and gaming comes to a halt, now all industries care about is making money.

Back then games were a relatively small market, therefore there was more room for new and creative ideas and innovation because there wasn't a guaranteed success plan. For example current shooters have a guarenteed success plan now:

Short, cliche or bad story + Great online = Cha-ching

Anyway as gaming grows its hard to make an innovative or original idea because more things will become common.

[NorthernFallout]

Originally Posted by Cub-Sama

The reason games aren't evolving is because as they become more part of the mainstream media, the harder it is to sell new ideas unless you are already built up a solid foundation as gaming company like Nintendo or Square Enix. Investors like to see what they know will work therefore games with similar elements come out and gaming comes to a halt, now all industries care about is making money.

This. Now I consider myself a PC elitist to a degree, but this is largely true to a big extent.

It's a universal problem, not limited to any platform, I'd say.

[synaesthetic]

Businesses only ever cared about making money, but when gaming was more of a niche market, the more serious gamers are a lot harder to please than the unwashed masses. Hence the proliferation of shovelware titles these days.

The industry knows it doesn't have to rely on the picky hardcore gamer niche anymore. It can just cash in with Halo clones and the next Madden title on the drunken-fratboy crowd.

[Sugetsu]

The company that got me into hardcore video gaming was a company called SNK and nintendo. SNK used to make really great tittles. Well in the end the company died due to bad marketing decisions. Their games are timeless classics and the technology they used to have was way ahead of its time.

Now every time I see a game coming out of no where I see nothing but recycled concepts and "shallow entertainment".

Here is an amazing video called:

Neo Geo - The Rise and Fall of SNK Neogeo

It is not just a documentary about the company but a tale of the game industry.

Edit:
"Investors like to see what they know will work" this is very true indeed. I believe this is the very reason why video game development has been halted during this decade.
Back in the 90s when I used to live in south america, I used to come across really innovative tittles. Some of those type of games would never made a reappearance. Their style gone for good.
Take for example Captain Tsubasa 2; the game was really great. I remember playing that game in Japanese and I still managed to beat it. The game was just that good XD

Name one game that has come out in the last decade that has a similar play style.

[synaesthetic]

SNK made... fighting games.

I don't see how that's even in the same league as something like Shadow of the Colossus or even Portal.

[Kusa-San]

Originally Posted by Sugetsu

Perhaps the only game that has pushed the envelope is Crisis. I think it is really sad that console games are not designed in way that allows for hardware upgrades as computers do, because all they are doing is bringing video game development to a halt.

Uh lol ? I don't know how old you are but video game is not about graphics it's about pleasure. You don't need great graphics to make a great games. There are many other parameters such as the scenario, the charcater, the music etc...And sorry but I don't want to change my console every three month because she's outdated. Not everyone want to spend all thier money into video games....

Futhermore, It's a matter of how you use these graphics. You can have beautiful games with the use of 2D and horrible game with the use of 3D. What's the most important is what the graphics make you feel.

And it's the console game industry which make video game so appealing for everyone not the PC industry. With a console, you don't need to buy the next supra powerful omega level S++ 3D card at 45000 euro for just a game. No you just need to buy the game and enjoy it.

Who cares about the technology in video games serioulsy ? The only thing that you should care if you enjoy or not the game, that's all.

And again : Great game != Great graphics/technology. For me, if you think that for havaing a great game you need to have the new technology then, it means that you don't undertand video games.

[Kusa-San]

Originally Posted by synaesthetic

SNK made... fighting games.

I don't see how that's even in the same league as something like Shadow of the Colossus or even Portal.

What do you mean by that ? That SNK is better than SoC (which make no sense at all btw because SNK is not a game)

[justsomeguy]

I disagree with the idea that consoles hinder game development. The real hindrance is the ridiculous race toward better and better graphics, rather than spending development budget and time on making enjoyable and complete games that run out of the box without bugs. I enjoyed games like the Ar Tonelico and Persona series, even though those had pretty basic graphics compared to the FPSs or the Final Fantasies from the same generation.

The rush toward better and better graphics turned me off of PC gaming, since I do not enjoy having to buy a new graphics card (or a new computer, since I use a laptop these days) whenever something new comes out. I am surprised that somebody who is against profits would support industry practices that are all about profit and no innovation.

[synaesthetic]

I'm just saying that titles by a company that made a name for itself ripping off Street Fighter could even really be compared to things like SoC.

2D fighting games, not much originality or imagination there.

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by synaesthetic

SNK made... fighting games.

I don't see how that's even in the same league as something like Shadow of the Colossus or even Portal.

SNK made fighting games, sure. But they did classics that are still played and appreciated today, King of Fighters 98, Samurai Shodown 2, The Last Blade 2 or Fatal Fury 4: Mark of the Wolves.

[Sugetsu]

Originally Posted by justsomeguy

The rush toward better and better graphics turned me off of PC gaming, since I do not enjoy having to buy a new graphics card (or a new computer, since I use a laptop these days) whenever something new comes out. I am surprised that somebody who is against profits would support industry practices that are all about profit and no innovation.

There are people who enjoy making video games. Profit gets in the way though.

[justsomeguy]

Originally Posted by Sugetsu

There are people who enjoy making video games. Profit gets in the way though.

Yes, and constantly having new hardware is both a cause and effect of this. Forcing developers to develop for old, limited hardware increases creativity, since they don't have to worry about bumping up the graphics (which is what new consoles or graphics cards are all about). Compare modern games to those on the SNES, and you'll see that developers use good stories and gameplay as well as clever and efficient programming to squeeze masterpieces onto a cartridge that holds less than 5mb. With modern games, you get bugfests, abandoned routes, patch after patch after patch, multi-gigabyte installations, DRM, DLC that should have been in the game in the first place, etc, while the core game outside of graphics is no better than older games.

[Sugetsu]

Originally Posted by justsomeguy

Yes, and constantly having new hardware is both a cause and effect of this. Forcing developers to develop for old, limited hardware increases creativity, since they don't have to worry about bumping up the graphics (which is what new consoles or graphics cards are all about). Compare modern games to those on the SNES, and you'll see that developers use good stories and gameplay as well as clever and efficient programming to squeeze masterpieces onto a cartridge that holds less than 5mb. With modern games, you get bugfests, abandoned routes, patch after patch after patch, multi-gigabyte installations, DRM, DLC that should have been in the game in the first place, etc, while the core game outside of graphics is no better than older games.

"Investors like to see what they know will work."

These are words of wisdom

They sum up what I think is the problem with the current console market. Game developers are being "forced" to create specific game styles that are widely accepted by the masses. Anything that might be a risky investment is automatically ignored. Take for the example the Captian Tsubasa game I linked a few post above. It is the same with creating more powerful hardware; this is the reason why SNK neogeo went down the drain and why all other game companies like to play it safe.

Remember when blizzard was stomping the game industry with ground breaking games with innovative play styles? Now blizzard made a partnership with activision in order to maximize profits. They are not creating new games, all they are doing now is playing it safe and milking their past glories to the last penny by creating continuations.