Where's the video game industry heading in the coming yrs?

#1 Posted by ro2nie (6 posts) -

What do you think will be driving video game innovation in the next few years?

oculus rift/console wars/gaming on linux (steam)/etc, etc...

Been asked to research this topic (by asking for people's opinions) for an assignment for uni so I'd really appreciate if you could give some thoughts on this. Many thanks

#2 Posted by Flame_Sapphire (2 posts) -

Honestly, I don't think VR will really take off just yet, its all up to the developers and how much support it gets in the future. As far as console wars goes, it's going to still be a hot issue. The PS4 and X1 are still in a stage of infancy so right now, there are not a lot of games out for either consoles. Once again, it's all in the hands of the developers right now. They all have to make the choices to either keep doing the same thing without changing their formula and just bank off of their product (A la Activision), or actually take some big risks and do something new and imaginative that will actually refresh gaming as a whole in some way. Now Steam.. I feel that Steam is definitely on the rise, especially seeing it as a haven for indie games, and I've seen a lot of good titles released through them.

#3 Edited by wiouds (5018 posts) -

It looks like gaming is going to the tiny games or indie game and will stop working on high end games. Which is going to kill innovation in gaming by a huge amount.

As for VR, it base off the subjective and overrated ideal of immersion. a tiny number of games are better first person. More games are hurt when you shoehorn in something so I can see the oculus rift as something that hurts gaming.

The publisher want a pure DD market. With that statement alone you should ask why they want it and what does it mean for the gamers.

#4 Edited by Zjun (146 posts) -

In the coming years, gaming will be expensive. Prices on consoles, console games and accessories will not get better.

#5 Posted by Behardy24 (2678 posts) -

@zjun: oh I hope not. I don't think anyone wants a repeat in gaming history where arcade titles that you can beat in one sitting that costed a fortunate (like 70+ dollars).

#6 Posted by vickyjohn1 (35 posts) -

video game industry is just booming now...yearly several games and tournament are happening.. the count of online gamers has been increased.. may be above 40 aged people may play tiny games for mind relaxation..but not everyone..

#7 Posted by loafofgame (424 posts) -

@wiouds
said:

It looks like gaming is going to the tiny games or indie game and will stop working on high end games. Which is going to kill innovation in gaming by a huge amount.

Well, I don't think we can rely on high end games for narrative, gameplay and art design innovations. They could innovate in those areas, but it seems the market is holding them back. Real innovation on any level (except maybe visuals) is pretty risky when it comes to the big titles. I mean, the AAA side of the industry might be the place where innovation should logically occur (because of all the knowledge, money and technology), but it's not really innovating as much as it could (or should). I think it really depends on what kind of innovation you want...

#8 Edited by withe1982 (450 posts) -

Unfortunately not to a very good place IMHO as F2P (pay to win) and indie games seem to be on the rise and AAA titles continue to lose money hand over fist.

I play a number of FTP games myself and quite enjoy them but lets just remember what they are created for. They are here to try and milk as much money out of the consumer as humanly possible. The current FTP revenue is rising 50% year on year and that will not go unnoticed by the industry as a whole.

Also don't get me wrong, I love that the industry is embracing the indie market at the minute and a number of upcoming titles from indie developers look fresh, exciting and innovative. I just hope that doesn't ring the death knell for some bigger studios who will just stop financing the big budget titles and instead rely on smaller teams bringing out smaller games more regularly. Just look at the recent closure of Irrational Games and recent lay offs across the board as an example of what may be to come.

It seems that the days of spending upwards of $10,000,000 on a game may be over as developers are just not recouping enough on their investment to make them economically viable.

Just enjoy the big budget titles now while you can as in 5 years time we'll all be playing flappy bird on our consoles (shudder)

#9 Posted by wiouds (5018 posts) -

@wiouds said:

It looks like gaming is going to the tiny games or indie game and will stop working on high end games. Which is going to kill innovation in gaming by a huge amount.

Well, I don't think we can rely on high end games for narrative, gameplay and art design innovations. They could innovate in those areas, but it seems the market is holding them back. Real innovation on any level (except maybe visuals) is pretty risky when it comes to the big titles. I mean, the AAA side of the industry might be the place where innovation should logically occur (because of all the knowledge, money and technology), but it's not really innovating as much as it could (or should). I think it really depends on what kind of innovation you want...

Not all innovations are big and shows. There are many times that the best innovations are tiny and easy to miss. Level design has been improve some much. The staging of the shootouts in FPS have been improved so much and yet most games do not care or yelling it is the same thing over and over again.

Indie games are all about being a great song and dance with little behind them. Any type of deep innovation for them are also a risk since most they have a very limit resource for the tiny things.

#10 Posted by loafofgame (424 posts) -

@wiouds
said:

Not all innovations are big and shows. There are many times that the best innovations are tiny and easy to miss. Level design has been improve some much. The staging of the shootouts in FPS have been improved so much and yet most games do not care or yelling it is the same thing over and over again.

Indie games are all about being a great song and dance with little behind them. Any type of deep innovation for them are also a risk since most they have a very limit resource for the tiny things.

I understand it's not all about huge innovative leaps (sound design, for example, is one of those areas that relatively quietly keeps improving), but I don't think indie games have little behind them. The AAA side is limited by publishers and audiences. If I want a challenging puzzle platformer or a survival game I can't really turn to any big titles. I can only speak from my own experience, but in recent years I've had the most fun with indie titles like Terraria, Super Meat Boy, Don't Starve, Spelunky, Antichamber, Faster Than Light, etc. These games are well made and have quite a lot of depth to them and I won't find that kind of gameplay or art style in the big titles. But well, if your primary genres are first and third person shooters or action/adventure games, then there's not a whole lot of innovation to find in indie titles. It depends on your personal taste. I need indie titles for variety in gameplay, art design, music, etc. Both sides have their pros and cons when it comes to innovation.

#11 Posted by ojmstr (967 posts) -

Everything will be just like before but people demand better graphics, better voice acting, new intuitive gameplay and not just "the same old" been there done that. Online and offline games will melt togheter as you can see is really trendy at the moment and as years past by Virtual Reality will be the new standard of gaming eventually.

#12 Posted by wiouds (5018 posts) -

@loafofgame: I am not saying indie games does not have a place in gaming but I am that the way some overvalue indie game. They are showing that all you need to get praised is to do one thing good. I want games as a whole to be improved and not some new game-play over here and a new art style over there. Worse when they are not usable to other games.

My favorite genre is JRPG and WRPG. WRPG itself is one of the few genre that as decade lately and the indie games are not impressing me that much. Indie JRPG are not much better and much more rare.

the staging of shootouts (the time from when you first see the enemies to when all threats in the area are gone) in Shooter have been so innovative this gen that I can no longer go back to the older shooters. Doom is not history. The staging of its shootouts is so poor. The normal for it shootout is that enemies in in room and shoot enemies until dead. The largest flaw with Rage is that it followed more of Doom staging without looking at the innovation that happens.

Comments claiming that indie games are only source of innovation in one of the things get to me. Along with those that always talk about immersion as if it has true value.

#13 Posted by udUbdaWgz1 (627 posts) -

anti-consumerism, excessive greed, oversaturation and widespread mediocrity.

#14 Posted by loafofgame (424 posts) -

@wiouds
said:

@loafofgame: I am not saying indie games does not have a place in gaming but I am that the way some overvalue indie game. They are showing that all you need to get praised is to do one thing good. I want games as a whole to be improved and not some new game-play over here and a new art style over there. Worse when they are not usable to other games.

My favorite genre is JRPG and WRPG. WRPG itself is one of the few genre that as decade lately and the indie games are not impressing me that much. Indie JRPG are not much better and much more rare.

the staging of shootouts (the time from when you first see the enemies to when all threats in the area are gone) in Shooter have been so innovative this gen that I can no longer go back to the older shooters. Doom is not history. The staging of its shootouts is so poor. The normal for it shootout is that enemies in in room and shoot enemies until dead. The largest flaw with Rage is that it followed more of Doom staging without looking at the innovation that happens.

Comments claiming that indie games are only source of innovation in one of the things get to me. Along with those that always talk about immersion as if it has true value.

Fair enough. I certainly agree that indie games are not the only source of innovation. The improvement of AI, complex environmental level design, visuals and sound (elements that have to do with developing technology) certainly seems to rely on bigger titles. That said, I do not feel the really good indie games only do one thing well. They are just as much a collection of well worked out elements as the bigger titles, be it achieved with more limited resources. I think indie games can share in the innovation as a whole when it comes to the less technological aspects of games, like art style, story and gameplay concepts (and conceptual development in general).

But well, I guess I'm more optimistic, because I don't share your view that the industry will turn out to be completely focused on small and indie titles. Indie (or mobile) titles might provide fiercer competition, but I don't think they will dominate the market. At one point it'll balance out, but the AAA side might not be as powerful or important as it used to be, which could be seen as a good, but also a bad development...

#15 Edited by ojmstr (967 posts) -

All you guys need to do is to check out this video >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uiwIaJ3Qg8 That`s innovation and those games are what will sell a very high percentage of the new systems, not indie games. Without these next gen AAA games there wouldnt be any groundbreaking inovation. The gaming companies that makes these AAA games are direct competitors and they are practically forced to be inovative in order to make the most original new gaming experiences.

#16 Posted by wiouds (5018 posts) -

@loafofgame: The Journey got game of the year by many but I have yet to see anyone say anything good about the game play. It all amount the art style and music.

There only some much that the indie games can add to gaming.What we need is a boost to the middle ground gaming. The one that are not AAA games but are higher than indie games. Also they need to be given some leeway.

#17 Posted by loafofgame (424 posts) -

@wiouds
said:

@loafofgame: The Journey got game of the year by many but I have yet to see anyone say anything good about the game play. It all amount the art style and music.

There only some much that the indie games can add to gaming.What we need is a boost to the middle ground gaming. The one that are not AAA games but are higher than indie games. Also they need to be given some leeway.

Journey was never about the gameplay. For as far as I know (I haven't played it) it was a virtual experience with an element of play to it. It showed that a different approach within the realm of videogames can be appreciated by a large amount of people. And all the critics flocked to that project, arguably because they saw it as one of those games that might broaden videogames' horizon, that might make videogames a more universally respected art form. Journey broadened the definition of videogames and/or showed alternative ways to use videogame technology. But it most certainly did not innovate in any technological or pure gameplay sense.

I wouldn't see Journey as a typical indie game, though. Most indie games focus on gameplay and/or story, because those elements aren't immediately compromised by limited technological resources. Anyway, I don't play on consoles, so I don't know what the indie scene looks like over there. But yes, there's indeed only so much indie games can add to innovation and we most definitely need high end games to develop further.

#18 Edited by groowagon (2740 posts) -

@wiouds said:

It looks like gaming is going to the tiny games or indie game and will stop working on high end games. Which is going to kill innovation in gaming by a huge amount.

it's actually vice versa. indie games innovate, big titles don't. big publishers want games squeezed from the same old mold, since they are so afraid of taking new risks.

many devs are jumping on the Kickstarter-train for that exact reason; they can finally start doing what they want to do. stuff that big bad publishers never allowed them to do.

#19 Posted by wiouds (5018 posts) -

@wiouds said:

It looks like gaming is going to the tiny games or indie game and will stop working on high end games. Which is going to kill innovation in gaming by a huge amount.

it's actually vice versa. indie games innovate, big titles don't. big publishers want games squeezed from the same old mold, since they are so afraid of taking new risks.

many devs are jumping on the Kickstarter-train for that exact reason; they can finally start doing what they want to do. stuff that big bad publishers never allowed them to do.

I am still more impressed by what changes and innovation that the big games are doing. I have yet to see an indie game that make me say it is more innovative than the big name games and I am getting sick of the mindless praising of indie games. A part if indie games is allowing a downgrading of games.

#20 Posted by BranKetra (47864 posts) -

I imagine a mix of the immersion of Oculus Rift and the ability to move around like with Google Glass in about four or five years. Before that, developers are going to be fitting settings for the PS3 and Xbox One. Nintendo might make something that will change the industry again by partnering with the Oculus Rift makers and Facebook.

#21 Edited by platinumking320 (663 posts) -

Ask yourself that question again if Hilary's in office by 2017.

As far as content and subject matter goes, who knows if some mega media-advocacy unseen maelstrom will be underway to chastise and shame-away all popular mature action game-film, culture that dudes gravitate to, you may be seriously pressed in your older years to find titles that aren't unisex and thoroughly pacificed for all general audiences.

I think the "Hot Coffee" blowup. in 2005 was the first real sign.

And crodgy old Leiberman ain't stopping either.

Or maybe its all b.s. and I'm just dreaming.

#22 Edited by RenegadeSteve (129 posts) -

@ro2nie: Your dam profile picture had me pressing on my monitor trying to kill a bug that wasn't even there LOL

#23 Posted by Zjun (146 posts) -

@zjun: oh I hope not. I don't think anyone wants a repeat in gaming history where arcade titles that you can beat in one sitting that costed a fortunate (like 70+ dollars).

I'm with you, but it seems that's where we're heading.. 60 $ games is starting to be the norm -- which too many games don't even deserve that price.