Have video-games become TOO mainstream?

  • 67 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by Star0 (451 posts) -

It seems to me the vast majority of video-game developers are much more likely to 'play it safe' and release titles that will virtually guarantee sales based on market trends, such is the size of the market and the data they can draw from it. The unwritten rule of video-games being an extension of art has long since been eroded, in my opinion. I think this has had a detrimental effect on the medium as a whole and stumped its growth. No longer is expression at the forefront of developer's minds. Instead, mass appeal has become the 'acid test'. I believe the video-game industry, as a whole, has been tainted by its moumental rise in popularity. Developers are far less willing to take risks and the result is a pool of similar ideas and similar games. I think the industry desperately needs a new era of innovation, but I don't think that will happen until there's another crash.

What are your thoughts?

#2 Edited by wiouds (5402 posts) -

It is sad when people only see the large things as improvements to gaming. There are a ton of things being improved in gaming and many you may not notice.

It is sad when twisted people when people stand up and cry for thousands of people to loose their jobs just because they think it will improve the hobby.

It is sad when people think the US game crash would bring anything good to gaming. While trying to send the NES to US, Nintendo was being a care as they could. This mean rejecting some games to be ported over. It became an are era where innovation was stalled.

#3 Posted by Archangel3371 (16075 posts) -

I think it's great that gaming has become mainstream. Personally I'm playing more great games now then I ever did and it's all thanks to gaming becoming as big as it is. There will always be those developers out there trying new things and want-not or following their vision, they're still out there and they're still making the games that they want.

#4 Posted by jer_1 (7451 posts) -

Indie devs are about the only thing worth paying attention to. It's been great to see people finally understanding how important the indie scene is in gaming.

#5 Posted by wiouds (5402 posts) -

@jer_1 said:

Indie devs are about the only thing worth paying attention to. It's been great to see people finally understanding how important the indie scene is in gaming.

Indie games getting too much focus is one of my biggest worry right now. It is starting to hurt gaming.

#6 Edited by jer_1 (7451 posts) -

@wiouds said:

@jer_1 said:

Indie devs are about the only thing worth paying attention to. It's been great to see people finally understanding how important the indie scene is in gaming.

Indie games getting too much focus is one of my biggest worry right now. It is starting to hurt gaming.

I have to completely disagree with you here. I've seen a lot more indies actually live up to the hype (there is next to zero hype in indie gaming) than I ever have with AAA games. Indies just make more creative and entertaining games for me. I want more of them, and from what I see coming down the pipeline that's whats happening more and more. AAA just isn't needed now like it was 5-10 years ago. This is great to me!

#7 Edited by wiouds (5402 posts) -

@jer_1 said:

@wiouds said:

@jer_1 said:

Indie devs are about the only thing worth paying attention to. It's been great to see people finally understanding how important the indie scene is in gaming.

Indie games getting too much focus is one of my biggest worry right now. It is starting to hurt gaming.

I have to completely disagree with you here. I've seen a lot more indies actually live up to the hype (there is next to zero hype in indie gaming) than I ever have with AAA games. Indies just make more creative and entertaining games for me. I want more of them, and from what I see coming down the pipeline that's whats happening more and more. AAA just isn't needed now like it was 5-10 years ago. This is great to me!

I have yet to play a indie game that game the AAA games.

Other than one gimmick ideal, indie games have no innovation. I find many AAA games have more refinement and improvements to ideal in them even if they are hard to notice.

Worse is they show you just need on gimmick and you can sell games even if most of the game is not good.

There is just some much hype for indie games these day and yet they do so little.

One reason I am worried about the over hyping and overvaluing of indie games is that it will reduce the rate in which games are improved.

#8 Edited by turtlethetaffer (17117 posts) -

If you only look at the absolute biggest releases then I could see how you'd think that way. But if you look an a smidge beyond you'll see there are plenty of great games being released that are all about the expression of the creators and not just a money grab. And the thing about gaming is that money grabs can still be a lot of fun.

#9 Posted by Minishdriveby (10302 posts) -

It's a good thing that more and more people are recognizing video games as a medium. It is NOT and will NEVER be a negative. If nobody was interested in the medium, then it would have detrimental effects. Growth brings new ideas, developers, jobs, and games to the industry. Plenty of developers take risks; creativity is not dead. I would still call mega-blockbusters like Call of Duty art; although they are made and fulfill a different purpose, they are still the creative expression of culture.

#10 Posted by jer_1 (7451 posts) -

@wiouds said:

@jer_1 said:

@wiouds said:

@jer_1 said:

Indie devs are about the only thing worth paying attention to. It's been great to see people finally understanding how important the indie scene is in gaming.

Indie games getting too much focus is one of my biggest worry right now. It is starting to hurt gaming.

I have to completely disagree with you here. I've seen a lot more indies actually live up to the hype (there is next to zero hype in indie gaming) than I ever have with AAA games. Indies just make more creative and entertaining games for me. I want more of them, and from what I see coming down the pipeline that's whats happening more and more. AAA just isn't needed now like it was 5-10 years ago. This is great to me!

I have yet to play a indie game that game the AAA games.

Other than one gimmick ideal, indie games have no innovation. I find many AAA games have more refinement and improvements to ideal in them even if they are hard to notice.

Worse is they show you just need on gimmick and you can sell games even if most of the game is not good.

There is just some much hype for indie games these day and yet they do so little.

One reason I am worried about the over hyping and overvaluing of indie games is that it will reduce the rate in which games are improved.

Divinity: Original Sin, Star Citizen, Elite Dangerous, Nuclear Throne, Minecraft, Assetto Corsa, Insurgency, and about a hundred other kickass indie games ALL say hi!

I'd take all of these over any AAA rehash but that's just me, you always free to stay on the regurgitation-train of course.

#11 Edited by Star0 (451 posts) -
@turtlethetaffer said:

If you only look at the absolute biggest releases then I could see how you'd think that way. But if you look an a smidge beyond you'll see there are plenty of great games being released that are all about the expression of the creators and not just a money grab. And the thing about gaming is that money grabs can still be a lot of fun.

How accessible are those titles though? They're few and far between, that's the point. I'd welcome some suggestions.

#12 Posted by LoG-Sacrament (20397 posts) -

I don't think that big developers/publishers are going after guaranteed sales. Older styled adventure games or Baldur's Gate-like RPG's would have guaranteed (if relatively niche) sales, but those same big developers and publishers won't make very many of those. They're interested in games with the potential to sell tens of millions. That's why safe games/movies/whatever media get made. It's more about financiers saying "This is what we COULD make."

Anyway, there are plenty of games that are niche or risky getting made now. We have a pretty healthy diversity in terms of budgets.

#13 Edited by wiouds (5402 posts) -

@jer_1 said:

@wiouds said:

@jer_1 said:

@wiouds said:

@jer_1 said:

Indie devs are about the only thing worth paying attention to. It's been great to see people finally understanding how important the indie scene is in gaming.

Indie games getting too much focus is one of my biggest worry right now. It is starting to hurt gaming.

I have to completely disagree with you here. I've seen a lot more indies actually live up to the hype (there is next to zero hype in indie gaming) than I ever have with AAA games. Indies just make more creative and entertaining games for me. I want more of them, and from what I see coming down the pipeline that's whats happening more and more. AAA just isn't needed now like it was 5-10 years ago. This is great to me!

I have yet to play a indie game that game the AAA games.

Other than one gimmick ideal, indie games have no innovation. I find many AAA games have more refinement and improvements to ideal in them even if they are hard to notice.

Worse is they show you just need on gimmick and you can sell games even if most of the game is not good.

There is just some much hype for indie games these day and yet they do so little.

One reason I am worried about the over hyping and overvaluing of indie games is that it will reduce the rate in which games are improved.

Divinity: Original Sin, Star Citizen, Elite Dangerous, Nuclear Throne, Minecraft, Assetto Corsa, Insurgency, and about a hundred other kickass indie games ALL say hi!

I'd take all of these over any AAA rehash but that's just me, you always free to stay on the regurgitation-train of course.

And you can stay at the snake-oil song and dance.

#14 Edited by Minishdriveby (10302 posts) -

@Star0 said:
@turtlethetaffer said:

If you only look at the absolute biggest releases then I could see how you'd think that way. But if you look an a smidge beyond you'll see there are plenty of great games being released that are all about the expression of the creators and not just a money grab. And the thing about gaming is that money grabs can still be a lot of fun.

How accessible are those titles though? They're few and far between, that's the point. I'd welcome some suggestions.

Do you have an internet connection? If so these games are extremely accessible.

@wiouds said:

@jer_1 said:

@wiouds said:

@jer_1 said:

Indie devs are about the only thing worth paying attention to. It's been great to see people finally understanding how important the indie scene is in gaming.

Indie games getting too much focus is one of my biggest worry right now. It is starting to hurt gaming.

I have to completely disagree with you here. I've seen a lot more indies actually live up to the hype (there is next to zero hype in indie gaming) than I ever have with AAA games. Indies just make more creative and entertaining games for me. I want more of them, and from what I see coming down the pipeline that's whats happening more and more. AAA just isn't needed now like it was 5-10 years ago. This is great to me!

I have yet to play a indie game that game the AAA games.

Other than one gimmick ideal, indie games have no innovation. I find many AAA games have more refinement and improvements to ideal in them even if they are hard to notice.

Worse is they show you just need on gimmick and you can sell games even if most of the game is not good.

There is just some much hype for indie games these day and yet they do so little.

One reason I am worried about the over hyping and overvaluing of indie games is that it will reduce the rate in which games are improved.

Although there is a large independent development boom which may lead to hyperbole of worth/importance, I think it's also important to not understate their importance. Often times independent developers and their ideas will become amalgamated with larger corporations that use their ideas in a heavily funded game, for example portal and portal 2 (although Valve is an independent developer itself).

#15 Edited by Star0 (451 posts) -

@Minishdriveby: My network runs on magic and is unreliable. Care to direct me in the direction of some of these games? I'm not seeing any examples.

#16 Edited by wiouds (5402 posts) -

@Minishdriveby said:

@Star0 said:
@turtlethetaffer said:

If you only look at the absolute biggest releases then I could see how you'd think that way. But if you look an a smidge beyond you'll see there are plenty of great games being released that are all about the expression of the creators and not just a money grab. And the thing about gaming is that money grabs can still be a lot of fun.

How accessible are those titles though? They're few and far between, that's the point. I'd welcome some suggestions.

Do you have an internet connection? If so these games are extremely accessible.

@wiouds said:

@jer_1 said:

@wiouds said:

@jer_1 said:

Indie devs are about the only thing worth paying attention to. It's been great to see people finally understanding how important the indie scene is in gaming.

Indie games getting too much focus is one of my biggest worry right now. It is starting to hurt gaming.

I have to completely disagree with you here. I've seen a lot more indies actually live up to the hype (there is next to zero hype in indie gaming) than I ever have with AAA games. Indies just make more creative and entertaining games for me. I want more of them, and from what I see coming down the pipeline that's whats happening more and more. AAA just isn't needed now like it was 5-10 years ago. This is great to me!

I have yet to play a indie game that game the AAA games.

Other than one gimmick ideal, indie games have no innovation. I find many AAA games have more refinement and improvements to ideal in them even if they are hard to notice.

Worse is they show you just need on gimmick and you can sell games even if most of the game is not good.

There is just some much hype for indie games these day and yet they do so little.

One reason I am worried about the over hyping and overvaluing of indie games is that it will reduce the rate in which games are improved.

Although there is a large independent development boom which may lead to hyperbole of worth/importance, I think it's also important to not understate their importance. Often times independent developers and their ideas will become amalgamated with larger corporations that use their ideas in a heavily funded game, for example portal and portal 2.

I am saying too much focus on the indie games is not a good thing for gaming.

I am saying thing like over hyping and overvaluing indie games indie games is not good and makes a bias.

I am saying there is a large amount of improvement and innovation in AAA games but not all of them easily noticeable.

I am not say that indie games have not value. They do have a place and so does AAA games.

Why should one side get have unlimited tolerance while the other side get no room for errors?

#17 Posted by Minishdriveby (10302 posts) -

@Star0 said:

@Minishdriveby: I do. Care to direct me in the direction of some of these games?

I would love to give you some recommendations:

AntiChamber
Luftrausers
Hotline Miami
Botanicula
Papers, Please
Risk of Rain
The Swapper
Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons
Year Walk
Thirty Flights of Loving
MirrorMoon EP
Gone Home

#18 Posted by Minishdriveby (10302 posts) -

@wiouds: I agree.

#19 Posted by Xeno_ghost (696 posts) -

@Star0: yes games are becoming more mainstream, just look at what they did to ghost recon future soldier. A prime example.

#20 Edited by Star0 (451 posts) -

@Minishdriveby:

You seem to have misconstrued 'innovation' to mean 'gimmicks'. I view most console games as regurgitated ideas. Some ideas are standards, others are used because they're proven selling points. The latter tend to be adopted with more ferocity. I do not believe new 'standards' are being created on any platform. I view the indie scene as being plagued by experimental devices, oftentimes included as part of short demo-like experiences with poor quality control, which do little to further the medium or introduce 'good' ideas. I do not acknowledge the indie scene to be an adequate alternative. I still think we're stuck in a viscous cycle.

Feel free to rebut.

#21 Posted by wiouds (5402 posts) -

@Star0: If you can view console game (not AAA games? or is this a hidden pro-PC gaming?) as regurgitated ideas then I can view most indie games as more flash that substance.

#22 Posted by loafofgame (785 posts) -
@Minishdriveby said:

@Star0 said:

@Minishdriveby: I do. Care to direct me in the direction of some of these games?

I would love to give you some recommendations:

AntiChamber

Luftrausers

Hotline Miami

Botanicula

Papers, Please

Risk of Rain

The Swapper

Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons

Year Walk

Thirty Flights of Loving

MirrorMoon EP

Gone Home

To add to that:

Faster Than Light

Don't Starve

Terraria

Vessel

Braid

Stanley Parable

Child of Light

Valiant Hearts

Divinity: Original Sin

Transistor

Machinarum

Rogue Legacy

The Binding of Isaac

Spelunky

Path of Exile

And I would also say that several recent mainstream titles are very good (in my experience): Dishonored, Metro: Last Light, Borderlands 2, X-Com Enemy Unknown, Dark Souls II, (dare I say) Hitman: Absolution. And I haven't listed any games I haven't got any experience with, but still think they'll be good when I play them: Starbound, Wolfenstein, Trials Fusion, Shovel Knight, GTA 5, Bioshock Infinite, Mark of the Ninja, Civ 5. It probably also depends on how many games you play, which genres and on what platforms. I can understand why people think all the AC titles are lazy rehashes, but well, you don't have to play them all. I've only played the first one, so when I'm going to play AC4 I'll probably have a very good time.

#23 Edited by c_rakestraw (14773 posts) -
@loafofgame said:
@Minishdriveby said:

@Star0 said:

@Minishdriveby: I do. Care to direct me in the direction of some of these games?

I would love to give you some recommendations:

AntiChamber
Luftrausers
Hotline Miami
Botanicula
Papers, Please
Risk of Rain
The Swapper
Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons
Year Walk
Thirty Flights of Loving
MirrorMoon EP
Gone Home

To add to that:

Faster Than Light

Don't Starve

Terraria

Vessel

Braid

Stanley Parable

Child of Light

Valiant Hearts

Divinity: Original Sin

Transistor

Machinarum

Rogue Legacy

The Binding of Isaac

Spelunky

Path of Exile

And I would also say that several recent mainstream titles are very good (in my experience): Dishonored, Metro: Last Light, Borderlands 2, X-Com Enemy Unknown, Dark Souls II, (dare I say) Hitman: Absolution. And I haven't listed any games I haven't got any experience with, but still think they'll be good when I play them: Starbound, Wolfenstein, Trials Fusion, Shovel Knight, GTA 5, Bioshock Infinite, Mark of the Ninja, Civ 5. It probably also depends on how many games you play, which genres and on what platforms. I can understand why people think all the AC titles are lazy rehashes, but well, you don't have to play them all. I've only played the first one, so when I'm going to play AC4 I'll probably have a very good time.

I'd also add:

Bastion
Gunpoint
The Banner Saga
Frozen Synapse
The Novelist
Octodad
Samurai Gunn
Thomas Was Alone
VVVVVV
SpaceChem
Super Meat Boy
Kentucky Route Zero
Hexcells
140
0RBITALIS
Action Henk
Dear Esther
Dustforce
DEFCON
Auditorium
Splice
Papo & Yo
The Floor is Jelly
Guacamelee
Little Inferno
World of Goo
NightSky
Proteus

#24 Posted by turtlethetaffer (17117 posts) -

@wiouds said:

@Minishdriveby said:

@Star0 said:
@turtlethetaffer said:

If you only look at the absolute biggest releases then I could see how you'd think that way. But if you look an a smidge beyond you'll see there are plenty of great games being released that are all about the expression of the creators and not just a money grab. And the thing about gaming is that money grabs can still be a lot of fun.

How accessible are those titles though? They're few and far between, that's the point. I'd welcome some suggestions.

Do you have an internet connection? If so these games are extremely accessible.

@wiouds said:

@jer_1 said:

@wiouds said:

@jer_1 said:

Indie devs are about the only thing worth paying attention to. It's been great to see people finally understanding how important the indie scene is in gaming.

Indie games getting too much focus is one of my biggest worry right now. It is starting to hurt gaming.

I have to completely disagree with you here. I've seen a lot more indies actually live up to the hype (there is next to zero hype in indie gaming) than I ever have with AAA games. Indies just make more creative and entertaining games for me. I want more of them, and from what I see coming down the pipeline that's whats happening more and more. AAA just isn't needed now like it was 5-10 years ago. This is great to me!

I have yet to play a indie game that game the AAA games.

Other than one gimmick ideal, indie games have no innovation. I find many AAA games have more refinement and improvements to ideal in them even if they are hard to notice.

Worse is they show you just need on gimmick and you can sell games even if most of the game is not good.

There is just some much hype for indie games these day and yet they do so little.

One reason I am worried about the over hyping and overvaluing of indie games is that it will reduce the rate in which games are improved.

Although there is a large independent development boom which may lead to hyperbole of worth/importance, I think it's also important to not understate their importance. Often times independent developers and their ideas will become amalgamated with larger corporations that use their ideas in a heavily funded game, for example portal and portal 2.

I am saying too much focus on the indie games is not a good thing for gaming.

I am saying thing like over hyping and overvaluing indie games indie games is not good and makes a bias.

I am saying there is a large amount of improvement and innovation in AAA games but not all of them easily noticeable.

I am not say that indie games have not value. They do have a place and so does AAA games.

Why should one side get have unlimited tolerance while the other side get no room for errors?

I'm not even talking about indie games. Just games from lesser known studios that are great in their own right.

#25 Posted by Minishdriveby (10302 posts) -

@Star0 said:

@Minishdriveby:

You seem to have misconstrued 'innovation' to mean 'gimmicks'. I view most console games as regurgitated ideas. Some ideas are standards, others are used because they're proven selling points. The latter tend to be adopted with more ferocity. I do not believe new 'standards' are being created on any platform. I view the indie scene as being plagued by experimental devices, oftentimes included as part of short demo-like experiences with poor quality control, which do little to further the medium or introduce 'good' ideas. I do not acknowledge the indie scene to be an adequate alternative. I still think we're stuck in a viscous cycle.

Feel free to rebut.

Turtle mentioned games "being released that are all about the expression of the creators." You asked for examples. I listed examples of the artist have full creative control over their work.

#26 Edited by Star0 (451 posts) -

@Minishdriveby: Yes and I was referring to my original point because I don't believe those games are innovative. Expression for expression's sake does not make for good games.

#27 Edited by jer_1 (7451 posts) -

@Star0 said:

@Minishdriveby: Yes and I was referring to my original point because I don't believe those games are innovative. Expression for expression's sake does not make for good games.

Your opinion is obviously no good if you believe all of these excellent games are not good for the industry.

#28 Posted by Minishdriveby (10302 posts) -

@Star0: Okay and innovation for innovations sake doesn't make for good games either. You changed what you wanted examples of. Of course, your going to get a list of games that show artistic expression if that's what you asked for from turtle and me.

#29 Edited by Star0 (451 posts) -

@Minishdriveby:

No, I anticipated the response because I wanted to distinguish between artistic expression and innovation.

Now I'll pose the question -

Which of those games mentioned or any others you've played recently do you think are 'innovative' and why?

You can't have "innovation for innovations sake", you can have different levels of innovation in terms of the impact they have in whatever field, but by definition they're always going to be better than what's gone before. If not, then they can no longer be innovations. Expression is one thing, but innovative expression is something completely different. That's what I feel the industry is lacking.

@jer_1

There's no need to make this personal. Why are those games excellent and good for the industry?

#30 Edited by jer_1 (7451 posts) -

They're good for the industry because they show MILLIONS of people that AAA isn't completely necessary and that it doesn't take tens of millions of dollars to produce some of the best games on the planet. Divinity: OS is a prime example of this, it is a brilliant game and no corporate shitbag (which includes every and all "AAA" publishers) was necessary to make it.

Indies are great for the industry in my opinion.

#31 Edited by Star0 (451 posts) -

@jer_1:

Okay, that's one game. Good. Now, what makes it brilliant?

#32 Edited by jer_1 (7451 posts) -

@Star0 said:

@jer_1:

Okay, that's one game. Good. Now, what makes it brilliant?

Geesuzchrist, watch some freakin' lets play's you lazy ass. The game is pretty damn amazing, and it's quite easily the best RPG of the year.

Let me get that for you...

Google is your friend.

#33 Edited by Star0 (451 posts) -

@jer_1 said:

@Star0 said:

@jer_1:

Okay, that's one game. Good. Now, what makes it brilliant?

Geesuzchrist, watch some freakin' lets play's you lazy ass. The game is pretty damn amazing, and it's quite easily the best RPG of the year.

Let me get that for you...

Google is your friend.

The thing with empty statements is that the receiver usually queries the sender for some sort of rationale, but in this case, I think I'll spare myself the patronisation.

Google is my friend. Indeed.

#34 Edited by loafofgame (785 posts) -
@Star0 said:

@Minishdriveby:

You seem to have misconstrued 'innovation' to mean 'gimmicks'. I view most console games as regurgitated ideas. Some ideas are standards, others are used because they're proven selling points. The latter tend to be adopted with more ferocity. I do not believe new 'standards' are being created on any platform. I view the indie scene as being plagued by experimental devices, oftentimes included as part of short demo-like experiences with poor quality control, which do little to further the medium or introduce 'good' ideas. I do not acknowledge the indie scene to be an adequate alternative. I still think we're stuck in a viscous cycle.

Feel free to rebut.

There's nothing to rebut here. You're stating a very general opinion, which is almost solely based on personal experience. It is quite likely that noone can convince you to think otherwise, because all they can offer in return is their own personal experience. Three users have given extensive lists of recent games they deem artistic, valuable and/or original (not to mention entertaining). Judging by your reaction to the first list you apparently don't think these games are innovative (assuming you have played them all). Well, then there really isn't a whole lot left to discuss. Unless you're willing to, first, clearly describe your definition of innovation and, second, discuss the individual games on the list(s) and explain why they are not innovative in your opinion.

But let me attempt to make this discussion a little less vague by asking: what do you actually want to see innovated? What would be an innovative game? And which genres are we talking about here?

#35 Edited by Star0 (451 posts) -

@loafofgame:

I'm trying to nudge people into explaining what they value and find innovative in those games, but it's proving quite arduous. Innovation in of itself cannot be subjective. You either like it or you don't, but it's still termed as innovative and will be an improvement if only on a technical level.

What would I like to see innovated? Gameplay mechanics. I'm tired of the same old, same old formula that most, let's say, first person shooters follow, for example. There hasn't been anything truly innovative in an FPS game as far as I can tell in aeons. An FPS title with a Day-Z framework, Fallout-style RPG elements, procedural missions and a day and night cycle would be great. It would be like Elite/Star Citizen, but in FPS form. Now that's something I would call innovative in concept. It hasn't been done before. It doesn't necessarily have to be something we haven't seen before, but packaged in a fresh way. From what I've been reading and watching it seems like H1Z1 and possibly The Division might be close to what I'm looking for.

I'd like to see more situational attacks from enemies in adventure RPGs based on certain armour you have equipped perhaps, maybe dynamic enemy health and damage as the player's EXP increases could also be something more games include.

I like the idea of a big open world with giant beasts. I'd like to see a developer retell Greek mythology in a steam-punk vision of ancient Greece. I was thinking that the main character could be a little Astro Boy-like kid and he'd control a massive creature after passing some kind of test or reaching a certain age, kind of like Olimar controls Pikmin, the difference being that the boy can also wield steam-punk weapons/projectiles etc. The creature could act on its own accord and the protagonist could upgrade both the creature's and his own 'powers' collecting parts from defeated enemies and exploring the Metroidvania-like open world to find secrets.

Moreover, an open world Minecraft/Delver-esque RPG with whimsical creatures and surreal structures is another idea I have. You'd play as an young sentient being of a telekinetic alien tribe who is tired of the monotony of his early life and decides to go on a journey of growth and self-discovery which effectively makes him an outcast. Many pixels later, an evil tribe from another land is shown to invade the planet and seizes control of all resources and enslaves your tribe. A telekinetic messenger relays this to you. It's up to you to develop and gain skills through heavily unguided exploration as well as key telekinetic messages from members of your tribe to progress and become powerful enough to defeat monsters, big and small, and save your family. Hefty list of obtainable items/weapons and skills, leveling up system, ability to leave notes for other players, ability to craft new weapons and items [e.g. potions] as well as structures such as bridges and cabins to more elaborate creations too. There would be an an online 'playbox' where you could meet other members of your 'tribe' with a 'play share create' system so you can save almost anything and import them into your own world. The game would show the struggle of going through adolescence and taking on responsibility, meeting different tribes [communities] and being diplomatic for the greater good and uniting everyone against a common enemy.

Going on, I've always wanted someone to make an underwater horror-survival game. If Soma manages to combine some elements from Half-life/Tomb Raider/Resident Evil/The Abyss/Event Horizon/Virus in an underwater setting bristling with weird docile and aggressive life forms both big and small then it will be stellar. Perhaps you've been modified by a malevolent machine that becomes sentient through some other worldly organisms, but your soul breaks the connection and you're left in both a familiar [fish, coral, plant-life etc.] and alien environment with the ability to sponge temporary 'powers' from various bacterium. The game would encompass puzzles, exploration and encounters with the main types of enemy - amalgamations of organic and synthetic beings providing a constant and increasing threat.

Lastly, I've always thought a procedural game where you could experience the challenges faced by different animals would be quite fun. You'd be able to switch into the leader of different species at any given time and perform objectives. It would be inspired by Shelter, but with many more animal types and perma-death. So you could be a deer one minute, let it be for a few seconds and then possess a snow leopard the next minute, come back and find that the deer is being attacked or is dead. It needs some fleshing out as a concept, but I reckon it could be quite cool, especially if it had Morpheus or Oculus Rift compatibility. Essentially it would be an eco-system management/adventure game...

#36 Edited by wiouds (5402 posts) -

To me innovation is not just new ideal. All new ideal are gimmicks at first. A more important to innovation is the refinement of ideals.

Look at the FPS, There is a constant improving and refinement of ideals. They have improved so much recently and in countless tiny ways that is hard to describe.

Can Divinity OS change camera angle because it looks like NWN2 clone.

#37 Posted by Star0 (451 posts) -

@wiouds:

True, and like I said, "you can have different levels of innovation", but sometimes it's nice to see something totally unexpected. Developers have the power to do that.

#38 Posted by mohoc2000 (26 posts) -

@wiouds: I would argue the opposite. FPS lately has been very stagnant. With the exception of Arma 3, there has been no true innovation in the genre.

Where we see the most innovation happening currently is in the indie scene of game development. The big publishers are so risk averse we rarely see any new IPs anymore. It is all rehashes of old games, with some minor changes to make you pay $60 and another $60 for 12 maps that used to be fan created mods.

PS: Not all indie games are small games. Civ5, Elite:Dangerous and Star Citizen qualify as AAA by all measures, except advertising budgets.

#39 Posted by Star0 (451 posts) -

Quantam Break

Tengami

Toren

Star Citizen

Elite Dangerous

Limit Theory

The Forest

Infinity: Battlescape

Dreamfall Chapters

Rime

H1Z1

The Division

No Man's Sky

- All of the above strike me as games that have the potential to be innovative.

#40 Posted by SovietsUnited (2375 posts) -

I don't think there is much room for huge innovations anymore, I'd love to be proven wrong though.
Still, there are plenty of excellent games these days, regardless of mainstream appeal

#41 Edited by loafofgame (785 posts) -
@Star0 said:

@loafofgame:

I'm trying to nudge people into explaining what they value and find innovative in those games, but it's proving quite arduous. Innovation cannot be subjective. You either like it or you don't, but it's still termed as innovative.

You're not going succeed if you don't do the same. You've got to discuss those games and explain why they are not innovative. You can't simply state those games aren't innovative and then expect others to explain why they are. You are the one who started this discussion.

Also, innovation happens on different levels and in various ways, which means people can certainly argue about the level and area of innovation. Innovation does not simply mean 'to make changes'. These changes have to be substantial, but at what point something becomes substantial is very much up for debate.

@Star0 said:

What would I like to see innovated? Gameplay mechanics. I'm tired of the same old, same old formula that most, let's say, first person shooters follow, for example. There hasn't been anything truly innovative in an FPS game as far as I can tell in aeons. An FPS title with a Day-Z framework, Fallout-style RPG elements, procedural missions and a day and night cycle would be great. It would be like Elite/Star Citizen, but in FPS form. Now that's something I would call innovative in concept. It hasn't been done before. It doesn't necessarily have to be something we haven't seen before, but packaged in a fresh way.

Aren't Destiny and Borderlands 2 basically FPS's with a lot of RPG elements? Here we are already getting into blurry territory. I wouldn't call those ideas innovative, at least not substantially. Those are just existing formulas combined into something different. You're basically asking for something that feels fresh, but isn't actually fresh. I thought we were talking about something that redefines how it feels to play an FPS (something like the dismemberment mechanic in Dead Space, but even more substantial). If this is the kind of innovation you want, then I think we're getting plenty of that, just not in the genres you like, nor when it comes to the game elements you value. When I look at The Swapper I see a unique game mechanic that develops during the entire game (it's not just a gimmick) and that also has a narrative purpose. On top of that I see unique art design. At least, in my experience. When I look at Faster Than Light I again see original visuals and audio design, but also deep and original gameplay that is very satisfying. At least, in my experience. I can agree that there might be a lack of innovation in certain genres or certain elements of those genres (for example, narrative variety in 1st and 3rd person shooters is rather disappointing in my opinion), but I wouldn't go so far as to suggest that there is a general lack of innovation. Unless you want a unique, industry changing experience every single game.

#42 Posted by Minishdriveby (10302 posts) -

I think Super Meat Boy is fairly innovative on the tweaking of restart times to return you back to the game. It gives the player a faster refresh rate for them to continue what they were doing. There are no game over screens, and no lives (for most levels). This innovation as been mimicked in a growing number of games since then.

I would also site the mobile Free to Play market and the introduction of micro-transactions as another major and new innovation in the video game environment. It's quite a large innovation that has been trending. I'll use this example to show how not all innovations are perceived as positive.

#43 Edited by wiouds (5402 posts) -

@Star0: I do too but I would want a good overall game than just new ideals. I would like to see the ideal refined more.

@mohoc2000: I said there are a large number of tiny things that FPS are innovating. There are tiny and hard for me to explain but if you look you will notice them. I do not why you can just swap all that away for the stereotyped image of FPS. Most indie games new ideals are around for one or two games then just fade away. That is not innovation. I am getting sick hype make by new ideals that after a short time the ideal is gone. As for the FPS, I am still shock by something different with each new one I play.

At the end I do not care about innovation but the improvement of gaming and indie, AAA games and I hope the rise of AA games all improve gaming in different ways.

You know what innovation is a buzz words gamers like to throw around but it has no real measure, I am going to make a list of worthless words that gamers like to through around and should mean the rest of what they are talking about is worthless. Those words areare: immersion, innovation, realism, and realistic.

#44 Posted by hrt_rulz01 (6735 posts) -
@Star0 said:

It seems to me the vast majority of video-game developers are much more likely to 'play it safe' and release titles that will virtually guarantee sales based on market trends, such is the size of the market and the data they can draw from it. The unwritten rule of video-games being an extension of art has long since been eroded, in my opinion. I think this has had a detrimental effect on the medium as a whole and stumped its growth. No longer is expression at the forefront of developer's minds. Instead, mass appeal has become the 'acid test'. I believe the video-game industry, as a whole, has been tainted by its moumental rise in popularity. Developers are far less willing to take risks and the result is a pool of similar ideas and similar games. I think the industry desperately needs a new era of innovation, but I don't think that will happen until there's another crash.

What are your thoughts?

No I don't agree... I'm very happy with the quality of games being released nowadays. And I think there's a good balance of AAA & Indie-type releases throughout the industry too. A good example of the health of the industry overall I think is Ubisoft. Sure they release annual additions of AC etc, which some might say is "playing it safe", but then they will also release little gems like Child of Light & Valiant Hearts.

And as for wanting another "crash" in the industry, I sincerely hope that doesn't happen... and I can't see that it will.

#45 Edited by Minishdriveby (10302 posts) -

Oculus Rift developers -- I know some smaller independent Oculus Rift developers -- seem to be changing the landscape quite a bit. I would call the entire VR space extremely innovative.

#46 Posted by jun_aka_pekto (17025 posts) -

In my case as a PC gamer, from the time the first FPS game made its appearance, gaming has become more and more casual. Some of of my old brethen didn't like it and simply quit. Me? I went with the flow and still enjoying games up to now.

#47 Edited by Heirren (18471 posts) -

@wiouds said:

It is sad when people only see the large things as improvements to gaming. There are a ton of things being improved in gaming and many you may not notice.

It is sad when twisted people when people stand up and cry for thousands of people to loose their jobs just because they think it will improve the hobby.

It is sad when people think the US game crash would bring anything good to gaming. While trying to send the NES to US, Nintendo was being a care as they could. This mean rejecting some games to be ported over. It became an are era where innovation was stalled.

lol yeah no.

#48 Posted by wiouds (5402 posts) -

@Minishdriveby said:

Oculus Rift developers -- I know some smaller independent Oculus Rift developers -- seem to be changing the landscape quite a bit. I would call the entire VR space extremely innovative.

To me that is just 3D goggles with head tracking. We are still far away from VR. VR can be seen on a current monitor.

I am worried about what it could do to gaming and cause a more problems than improvements.

#49 Edited by Minishdriveby (10302 posts) -

@wiouds said:

@Minishdriveby said:

Oculus Rift developers -- I know some smaller independent Oculus Rift developers -- seem to be changing the landscape quite a bit. I would call the entire VR space extremely innovative.

To me that is just 3D goggles with head tracking. We are still far away from VR. VR can be seen on a current monitor.

I am worried about what it could do to gaming and cause a more problems than improvements.

It's still an innovation in technology. I think the Occulus Rift is some amazing new technology that has bigger implications than gaming.

#50 Posted by Ballroompirate (23601 posts) -

@jer_1 said:

@wiouds said:

@jer_1 said:

Indie devs are about the only thing worth paying attention to. It's been great to see people finally understanding how important the indie scene is in gaming.

Indie games getting too much focus is one of my biggest worry right now. It is starting to hurt gaming.

I have to completely disagree with you here. I've seen a lot more indies actually live up to the hype (there is next to zero hype in indie gaming) than I ever have with AAA games. Indies just make more creative and entertaining games for me. I want more of them, and from what I see coming down the pipeline that's whats happening more and more. AAA just isn't needed now like it was 5-10 years ago. This is great to me!

There are a few amazing indie games but there are A LOT of half assed indie games and kick starter games. There's a reason why Steam is thinking about getting rid of green light.

I have to say I've played a few indies that are better than your typical big budget games but they are very few of them that I can list.