Separator
The Demise Of A Genre
59208264_l
Thursday, April 22, 2010
"Yes, I Miss Fester's Quest Too"
 
 
In a recent rant about the hype surrounding the newest Gears of War game, I received some interesting responses from the gaming community.  Though the majority of gamers who support their genre-of-choice are very accepting of sequels, remakes, and the occasional clone. History has shown a saturation point exists for all genres. Fighting games were in a creative rut since the late 90's. Rhythm action games are now seeing that even their quality titles are missing with an audience that fervently supported them during the genre's initial boom. I'd like to say that a multitude of sequels and creatively bankrupt concepts within a franchise will inevitably turn off any group of fanboys, then again -- the reason I started writing this article was a result of me misreading hype surrounding one of the most popular space-marine shooter sequels.
 
What makes the shooter genre impervious to the woes that affected the side-scrolling beat'em up or the FPS's oft confused cousin -- the shmup [side-scrolling shooters]? Obviously these genre's didn't die. As a credit to the growth of the gaming industry its improbable to think any game genre will completely die-off. Heck, people are still making new text adventure games. But first-person and third-person shooters are arguably the least creative gaming genre. Space marine, rogue bad ass and of course war hero are the staple devices used in the vat of uninspired thin plot lines currently being churned out to the public. I guess an argument could be made that the quality of an FPS or TPS [sorry couldn't resist] relies heavily on the superficial graphical fidelity and technological feature list which improves with the evolution of gaming tech. We are a ways away from the first Quake aren't we?

I Held Out Hope That R-Type Final Would Sell Well Enough On The PS2 That The Shmup Genre Would Re-visit Biohazard Battle. My Cries Were Not Heard.
 
The sad reality is there is little or no chance for a packaged retail version of an RPG like King's Quest or shmup like R-Type to hit our local game vendor's shelves. This is sad, but I believe its warranted. Struggle and competition has always been necessary for any medium's creative output. Maybe if there were a suitable 16-bit franchise competitor those Mega Man X games wouldn't have been so repetitive. Capcom would also see their Street Fighter fan base shrink due to too many iterations, weird additions and being one of the representatives of a genre running on fumes and waning reception to the world of 3D fighting. Sounds a lot like the sport and music genres of last year [minus the 3D fighting part]. Again, I see no issue with developers going back to the drawing board. I'd just like to see it more.

Sport Games In General Consistently Bring Their Particular Brand Of Entertainment Whilst Changing Very Little To Core Gameplay.
 
I'm guilty of what I criticize. I have purchased every Hot Shots Golf -- knowing full-well that I only 'really' enjoyed two games in the series. Instead of treating our most beloved games as a BBC television series -- meaning that we enjoy these titles as insular experiences; we plow through these disposable pieces of art like the hundreds of porn movies that stock the shelves of my current place of employment. I'm not sure if there is blame to be placed. Is the gaming industry guilty of force-feeding our young impressionable wallets or does the dog wag the tail? Are game companies simply giving gamers what they want?

It's odd to think that the many formulas won't be changing any time soon. Can you see the day when a Halo or a Call of Duty struggles to break a million copies sold? Do we want to see that? As much as games are a medium of creativity and storytelling, gaming in this generation has made it crystal clear that this is very much a business. Big budget games need to perform well for studios and thus less risk is taken. We can only hope that the rising tide of dollar bills lifts most of the creativity boats. However, this current trend of low risk explains why most sequels feel more like "patch updates" or "1.5s" and less like a new adventure with your favorite hero.

I Pine For Large Scale Side-Scrolling Beat-em Ups, But Honestly, Maybe We Should Remember Streets Of Rage 2 Goodness. Memories Are Meant To Be Cherished And Seldom Revisited
 
Didn't mean to be a Captain Bring-Down. I reserve the right to be wrong at all times, but this is my current perspective. I do enjoy games [clearly], even the ones with numbers and Roman tacked on to them. Since there are so many different avenues to obtain games of any genre I really can't be that upset about the current trajectory of the gaming culture [or can I?]. The games industry has always produced sequels and clones of whatever the mainstream hits were at the time. Why should this generation be any different? If Gears of War 3 is a critical and financial success, I wouldn't expect to see Epic Games to put money and resources into an experimental RPG -- I would expect them to make another Gears of War game. It just seems like there is an imbalance [in the force]. Though the quality of games have improved the variety within each genre is questionable. No one wants to see their favorite genre in a slump, but the industry and gamer's alike need to realize when a particular style of game has worn out its welcome.
 
1
ISAIAH TAYLOR'S SPONSOR
Comments (11)
Redeye
April 22, 2010


I really don't see how first person and third person shooters will fall out of the limelight any time soon. I don't know about others personally but shooters for me have sort of trancended being a style of games like music games and top down shoot em ups and into being sort of an unkillable staple like an RPG. Simply put, moving in first person and shooting things is a mechanic that has a permanent place in my intrest in games now. I will always want to play games where I have two stick controls and shoot people be they traditional space marine shooters like halo or genre exploreations like borderlands. It's simply satisfying and brings me into the game world very well. FPS games may change and evolve as time goes on, but the idea of them just dieing off entirely seems to be a far fetched proposition.


Me_and_luke
April 23, 2010


I feel like I'm in the minority here, but I like that game developers are by and large uncreative.  It makes those occasional gems that much more special and memorable.  



It also seems like the indie game movement has grown exponentially as a result of a stagnant flow of originality, and I'm glad for it.  These simple, smart, fun, cheap,  bite-size indie games provide a welcome respite from the barrage of AAA titles (not that I don't enjoy many of the AAA titles; it's just nice to have some change).


Default_picture
April 23, 2010


I never liked 3-D shooters. The setting is always some dystopian desolate hell of place. There is a tendency to have a lot of characters who are rednecks. The stories are usually the game equivalents of B-movie scripts. I have never understood why anyone would buy these games.


Default_picture
April 23, 2010


And I feel like I'm being trained to be a mass murderer in some ultra-secret CIA experiment.


59208264_l
April 23, 2010


@Jeffrey Sandlin Hey man, I enjoy the occasional head explosion as much as the next guy. When I read your comment I couldn't help but think of either a column in Edge [a couple months ago] or Jason Wilson's comments on the last Bitmob [or maybe both...sorry...its been a long week at work] where he talked about how interesting it was to see Link in the 2nd person.



This has me thinking of how cool it would be to experiment with where we put the camera [or eyes] on a character in games. What happens if we have a Third-Person Shooter game, but the camera is behind the hip [like in gun fights in Call of Juarez: Bound In Blood] or if we took the camera from Skate and worked with that level of experimentation.



The point I'm getting at is. We know FPS & TPS games aren't going anywhere anytime soon. But does this prevent experimentation in an industry where the bottom dollar and the bottom line leans more towards familiarity than outside-the-box thinking?


59208264_l
April 23, 2010


@Bryan Glynn



I recognize that 'everyday can't be a sunny day', but this article is also asking that game publishers and developers become clearer with their intentions with a game. Wouldn't be awesome to play a game set up like Lost or the Wire? If a publisher comes out and says, "Hey this is a 5 part game. After that we're doing something else...period." it be nice to see some follow through.



But then I look at a Denis Dyack and wonder. Sometimes you can't predict how well [or not well] a game will be received. What if a developer only had intentions of making a single story and based on crowd reception, they are 'inspired' [not just by the possibility of $$$] to put creativity in a story. Its a fine line.



I'm sure these bite-sized games we have all come to love and enjoy have benefited from a larger [possibly more formulaic] title trailblazing the way for their success; Braid is to Mario what Half-Life is to Doom. I could be wrong. I'm not seeing a lot of Braid's or Half-Life's being made that frequently so you could have a point.


59208264_l
April 23, 2010


@Courtney D_Boulay



You know what? I have noticed my cellphone reception has been slightly fuzzier and static-y than it was pre-Battlefield Bad Company. lol


Redeye
April 23, 2010


@Issiah I understand the call for more variety and experimentation and honestly I think we will be getting a lot more of it going forward. I just think that discounting the genre based off of it's stupidest tropes doesn't always fly. For example I am a Halo fan, and I'm not a halo fan who tolerates it, or a halo fan just because of the multiplayer. I was a halo fan back when the original game was on the X box and dispite seeing its fanbase get swelled by a rather negative group of rude fratboys, and being a little underwhelmed by the sequels I still greatly respect and admire Bungie's accomplishments in the FPS space. They are not perfect, and they aren't always original, but they really give a shit, and it comes out in their games and their support of their community. Something I can't always say the same for with the other big gorillas in the FPS space.





Just because the other big names in the genre are crapping out sequels with horribly stupid storylines and cranking out multiplayer DLC to farm for money, everyone assumes that any FPS that makes money that didn't release on PC is derivative and stupid. It's not really accurate at all.



You can't really understand shooter fandom in any one group by looking at the whole. I bet you know next to nothing about Metal Gear online right? It turns multiplayer shooting on it's head with a lot of weird experimental nonsense but no one really gives a crap because it's unpolished and it didn't become the next big thing. You can't blame people for taking baby steps when taking a long stride means falling off of a cliff.


59208264_l
April 23, 2010


@Jeffrey Sandlin



Small caveat: I played Halo on PC for about 4 years and I've played MGO for about twelve minutes. For better or worse, I get what you're saying. Bungie changed online gaming [not just online shooters], so I will forever tip my hat to them. It does say something that not only you, but Bungie realizes that the series has gotten stale over time and has put their best efforts [I'm sure] in squeezing out ODST and Reach out of a contractual obligation.



I can't wait to see what they do next. I think that's the biggest compliment I could give to a company that ushered in a franchise that I currently could give two craps about. I also recognize that...this may not be a fault of their own Bungie has bosses too. It kinda goes back to what I was originally saying, there needs to be some better form of intellectual property managment to inform publishers, "Hey, let's wait a few years for this game. That way we can build a natural hype and not spend 70 million dollars in ads in order to end the fiscal year in the red."



But hey...I'm just spitballing here. I'm sure there are tons of ideas that could help the many franchises that exist in the shooter world.


Redeye
April 23, 2010


@Issiah A great deal of the things Bungie is doing with halo reach actually seem to be an attempt to improve on the franchise, atone for their mistakes, and set a high standard for the series after they leave it. I don't think they are crapping it out, but that remains to be seen as it hasn't released yet.





As for the games being crapped out and hustled by their publishers rather then being given room to breath, that isn't the sole purvue of shooters. Just look at music games, they died off more then likely because of guitar hero being treated that same way. And skateboarding games! They lost huge because of that same thing....what i'm saying is that Activision is killing the gaming industry.....I know, it's a news flash LOL.


59208264_l
April 23, 2010


lol it all fits! Activision was also behind the stoppage of the newest King's Quest being released.



Seriously though, Activision wasn't ALWAYS like this [or maybe they were and we just didn't see it 20 or so years ago.], but juicing a franchise isn't isolated to just them -- although they are quite good at it. Capcom, EA, Sega are all guilty of this or have been at some point.



When you make it to an 'Activision level' you have so much power. We can talk tough here on the internets, but no one is depending on us to map out a three-to-five year plan as to how a fortune 500 company stays in the black. Actually, I'm wrong, these companies need us because as much as we complain...we buy into a lot of the hype.



You Know What They Say About Absolute Power...


You must log in to post a comment. Please register or Connect with Facebook if you do not have an account yet.