BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Has Gameplay been Sacrificed at the Altar of the Evil Gods of Graphics?

 
 
Fungus of Consciousness
07:42 / 05.02.08
Hey one an all.

I'm an old fart gamer. So old I've been eaten by Grues! I remember when the original Atari console revolutionised gaming with cutting edge graphics and sound. I've sat there for 15 minutes waiting patiently for the cassette to ofload it's 2kb of data onto the Vic 20's primitive circuitry. I remember ASCII grapics. I remember monochrome monitors, green or orange (I was a green man)?

And I remember fun! But has anyone else noticed that games are seeming to become... welll... generic. I meantake a look at your local games shop. Notice how many "First Person Shooter MCXXXVIII" or "FIFA 2090" or "Project Generic Racing 8" or variations thereof there are? Where is the innovation. Where are those little gems like Lemmings or Oddworld or Elite? Where are the games that let your imagination do the work? Are adventure games dying a slow, painfull death? Has Gameplay been Sacrificed at the Altar of the Evil Gods of Graphics?

I believe that gaming diversity has become a victim of rising costs of gaming developers. Every day it seems that an independent developer has closed its doors or been taken over by the Electronic UbiEGA type giants. So who is to blame, is anyone to blame? Or is it soemthing like middleware development programs? I remember playing Battlezone and letting my imagination fill in the areas between the wireframes. Is my imagination failing me? Or has Gameplay been Sacrificed at the Altar of the Evil Gods of Graphics?
 
 
Thorn Davis
08:06 / 05.02.08
I think gaming's starting to see real independent aesthetic emerge, to be honest. Online distribution is opening up a new avenue for games that isn't subject to a chokehold from the retailers who want to allocate shelf space based on advertising, brand recognition and so on. It's been the case in the PC market for a while, where people were able to distribute stuff quite easily on the net, but now it's easier than ever. Stuff like Portal has found a huge audience thanks in part to online distribution like Steam, a service that has given greater exposure to off-the-wall projects like Darwinia. I never would have clocked that game in the shops, but online delivery gives things the chance to build momentum.

Even something like the XBox, which has a reputation for pumped up shooters featuring men in big body armour is using X-Box Live to deliver unusual games like Space Giraffe. Something like that seems to encapsulate the very spirit of unusual, innovative games that jettison conventional ideas. Now XBox live is offering older Xbox games for download - among the titles is Psychonauts, and unusual game that was critically acclaimed and failed to find its audience first time around; thanks to new models of ditsribution it's getting a chance to be played. I dunno. IMO it seems like for everything you said up there, the opposite is sort of true.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
08:06 / 05.02.08
Well, let's start with the basics. What is the most recent game you've actually played? Second up, what do you feel characterises "gameplay"? You've identified three things that you feel are expiring - gameplay, the adventure game genre and innovation - personally I don't think that those three are necessarily related. You can have very playable games that are not innovative, and adventure games that are not at all innovative. So, what is the connection between these elements, in your view, and in what way are they threatened by developing graphics sophistication? As far as I can tell, the issue here is that development costs are so high as to discourage experimentation and risk, which is a very fair criticism. However, what really kills development houses may not be innovation, but bad product. Core didn't go belly up because the Tomb Raider games became too innovative - quite the reverse, really.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
08:20 / 05.02.08
Ah, interpost. Yeah, I was thinking of Portal as something that does something recognisably original. You could make a case for Bioshock or Stalker, as well, for doing unexpected things with the FPS model. Also, Darwinia, which is almost precisely in the model of the "Cult" game - or Claymation Kung Fu, also released through Steam.

This is before we look at all the things that may not get the advertising in the gamer press so much, but are not just sustainable but very popular. Viva Pinata springs immediately to mind, or Darwinia, Upload (although there's a retro element in those) - hell, Guitar Hero. Totally different interface, entirely new approach to the rhythm game. And on portable platforms you have Phoenix Wright, Ace Attorney, Brain Training, Warioware. Also, the delivery of online content - not just by download, like Steam or Laser Squad Nemesis, but also in-browser - the job of the small development houses (that is, the bedroom coders) who used to bung magnetic tapes on the shelves has been supplanted to a great degree by bedroom coders creating Flash games, which then get picked up by the bigger houses. Meanwhile, Jeff Minter is still off doing his thing, now on XBox Live, I believe (ah, yes - Thorn mentioned Space Giraffe).

So, yeah. The half-dozen most popular titles for the conventional gaming consoles (XBox and Playstation) tend to be football sims, FPSes, 3PSes or driving games, because that's what a majority want to play - although even within that you have games like Mass Effect, which have recognisable elements but through technical and compositional innovation not only deliver new experiences but also raise the bar and find new tricks for other games produced by smaller concerns.

So... you don't get many text-only adventures any more, although people are still producing them, for the same reason that not many Routemaster buses have been made outside the enthusiast sector. Point-and-click games are still going, and stylus-based gameplay obviously gives them a new lease of life, albeit on a different technology base. There's a chunk of stuff going on, but, yeah, it's in the context of a more mature entertainment industry. However, the existence of Hollywood blockbusters doesn't mean that art cinema, or me-my-friends-and-a-mini-DV-camera Citizen Kanes don't exist.
 
 
miss wonderstarr
10:33 / 05.02.08
And I remember fun! But has anyone else noticed that games are seeming to become... welll... generic. I meantake a look at your local games shop. Notice how many "First Person Shooter MCXXXVIII" or "FIFA 2090" or "Project Generic Racing 8" or variations thereof there are? Where is the innovation. Where are those little gems like Lemmings or Oddworld or Elite?

Surely the fact that they were innovative implies that the majority of games back in the day (not sure which day you're talking about... Elite seems to be 1984, Lemmings 1991) were, well, generic.

I think you may be getting a bit rose-tinted about this. Most text-based adventures were, as I think Haus is suggesting, not remotely innovative in their form, and I believe most were pretty samey in their content (like arcade games, generically the adventure game was surely based predominantly around fantasy/SF, just as the comics form has been predominantly tied to a single genre ~ something like Melbourne House's "Sherlock" was a rare exception, I'd suggest).

I'm old enough to have written for Crash: Micro Games Action in the 80s and honestly, there were a lot of bog-standard clones of a successful form out there at the time, on the Spectrum (and I suspect the same was true across C64 and Amiga, as a game used to be produced for all the popular platforms). With a bit of time, I think I could find you a dozen clones of Atic Atac/Sabre Wulf, with near-identical gameplay and similar sprites ~ and how many forced-perspective isometric games followed in the wake of Knight Lore (which itself was only an improvement on Ant Attack)?

Not to mention the fact that in the early 80s, every software company was trying to approximate the popular arcade machines ~ so you have bog-standard stuff like (I'm making this up, mostly) Mac-Man, Pac-Eater, Munchman, Millipede, Space Raiders, Space Intruders (actually I don't have to make it up, scarily it is all coming back to me).

I have no doubt you can name innovative games of the 1970s-1990s that seemed to come out of nowhere. But I think someone well-acquainted with games of the last ten years could quite easily do the same with the contemporary scene.
 
 
Fungus of Consciousness
11:24 / 05.02.08
Haus - You are very argumentative. I love it!

I was just citing those as examples, there was no relations hip. As for how many games I have played recently..... well lets just say my wife regularly accuses me of being a nerd. And I often have to sneak new games into the house.

I guess it might have been easier to innovate when the artform was new.

The Sims, MMO type games, the upcoming Spore are all recent things. Yes very rose coloured glasses and something of a trip down memory lane! Xbox live has actually shown me just how rosy those glasses were. For example, I LOVED Gauntlet. So when I saw it on XBL I donwnloaded it. And realised that not only did it play horrible, it looked nothing like the way I remembered it.

Anyway. I guess that's that discussion. OK close down the thread!!!!!
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
12:06 / 05.02.08
Another game worth mentioning in this context is Uplink- absolutely knack-all in the way of graphics, but stunningly playable.

I don't think we should close the thread- there's still discussion to be had even if you may think you've got an answer. And God knows more active threads are badly needed in G&G!

I am, however, going to add a summary- feel free to PM me if the request goes through and you think it should be changed.
 
 
miss wonderstarr
12:23 / 05.02.08
I think it was a good discussion and just because I wasn't necessarily agreeing with you doesn't mean I wanted to shut you up! I was hoping you'd respond and disagree with me in turn.
 
 
All Acting Regiment
13:41 / 05.02.08
It's certainly worth recognising that having good graphics doesn't neccesarily make a good game, and that in many ways it's easier to do reaonably fancy graphics than it is to make something fun to play (anyone who's experimented with a map editor will be aware of this) although I don't think that's connected to any drop in the quality of gameplay standards.

If that has occurred, and there's a lot of evidence on this thread to say that it hasn't, it might have something more to do with the trend for 'realistic' violence - gangs, 'real' guns, real-world locations and so on. Like graphics, these elements are very 'loud' and could be used as a stand-in for actual fun. A bit like how if you market a boring rock band as 'authentic' and get them to slag off Kylie minogue on their myspace page, you'll probably sell a lot of units. The blog UK Resistance seems to take that line, anyway.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
17:53 / 05.02.08
It's interesting that you mention Oddworld, because that's a game that's often cited by people as an example of innovative design from the PS1 era, when it's actually nothing of the sort. It's a puzzle platformer. There have been squillions of those things over the years. It's not much more than Flashback crossed with, I dunno, Lost Vikings, say, and with added fart jokes.
 
 
Digital Hermes
20:13 / 18.02.08
A friend and I were discussing this not long ago. I came from a position much like the title of this thread, and my friend debated the opposite side.

What came to light was that the gameplay and graphical choices made 15-20 years ago had to do with the limitations of the technology at that time. When all you had were blocky pixels, you had to illustrate almost like an impressionist, giving a feeling for a character, if not a photo-realist depiction.

With all the tools available to game designers now, it's no wonder that a person playing Oblivion can be lost in the graphics alone. I sure was. Some of these designers are the same people who made those much-loved games long ago.

If you consider gaming an art form, at least a nascent one, then you might consider us moving through phases. Already, we're starting to see games that have innovative gameplay along with stunning graphics, despite all the sports games that fill the shelves.

And none of this invalidates the quality of the past. I'm constantly playing games that are comparatively ancient, and the gameplay is still as compelling as it was when I started.

The only other bugbear to mention is nostalgia. We as geeks are a nostalgic breed, and what we consumed as young geeks tends to rule us as older ones. Savoring and old and pleasant memory might allow 'old guard' gamers such as myself access to these older games, something inscrutable to those just getting into it now. Graphics we remember fondly might be jarring to someone weaned on the Xbox 360.
 
 
DrJab
14:48 / 11.03.08
I accept it isn't exactly ground-breaking in interface, concept or execution but CoD4 has friggin excellent graphics and the way it played out like a movie and the ending specifically just made it totally worth finishing.

Specifically, there is a mission where you get to play through something that happened in the past as the SAS commanding officer. As a result of this I actually found myself caring about what happened to him in the end. IMHO this was a pretty unique way of telling a story and developing a character (albeit not beyond being an arse-kicking action hero but who cares?)

Also, wtf'in deal with Bioshock. Tense sure but I found it SO BORING! System shock 2 was far better...

Finally, check out: World of goo
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
00:04 / 12.03.08
That's great. How do you think the balance between graphics and gameplay in these has been achieved, or lost?
 
 
DrJab
09:56 / 12.03.08
I will discuss CoD4 specifically as this is the one game I mentioned which I have pretty decent experience.

I don't think there was a balance in CoD4 per se... it seemed there was an emphasis on making both the graphics and gameplay as good as possible given a limited budget and development time. However, I guess I might admit that the developers could have worked even harder on the graphics to produce something like Crysis but that this would have likely come at a cost to gameplay (as seen in Crysis itself).

I guess they kept with a fairly simple but successful & popular formula used in previous versions of CoD but, at least for me, the intertwining of the two story-lines and certain surprise developments within those stories just made for an especially positive gaming experience.

How was this balance reached? I really wouldn't know - you'd have to ask the developers. My point was simply that whilst CoD4 has some of the best graphics of recent games, it has not (IMHO) sacrificed anything for gameplay (in fact I reckon it is one of the most playable games I have encountered in nearly two decades of gaming).

So, in answer to the thread summary, I guess what I am saying is;

"not really".
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
13:02 / 12.03.08
it seemed there was an emphasis on making both the graphics and gameplay as good as possible given a limited budget and development time

That's an interesting point- I'd guess the majority of games are designed with this same ideal in mind. Given unlimited money you wouldn't have to worry about it. I suppose, then, the next logical step is that, when the budget is limited, which do you sacrifice first? The CoD games seem to be pretty well balanced in this respect, but they do have quite a lot of money. Sorry to keep going on about Uplink, but that guy had sod all cash- graphics pretty much went out the window so he could focus on the gameplay. I'm wondering if some of the bigger studios (ie those which will get TV slots and the like and need lots of juicy on-screen action) may sometimes go the other way.
 
 
MACC
18:04 / 10.05.08
I agree with Fungus (the topic starter), 100%. That's what I've been preaching over and over for ages. The new generations just want brighter eye candy instead of concerning themselves with the actual games' content. Are the new generations too dumb to understand that they're simply being feeded the same games over and over again with slight thematic or graphic changes? Do they care? It dazzles me. I know I'm starting to sound more and more like my grandparents but I do believe the new generations are lost. They have total lack of criteria, they're complacent consumers. A breed of review hungry zombies uncapable of judging games (or whatever) by themselves, and hoping someone else to rate everything by them.
 
 
Spatula Clarke
19:33 / 10.05.08
What a load of shit. Is the air too thin for you up there in yr ivory tower?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
19:54 / 10.05.08
Are the new generations too dumb to understand that they're simply being feeded the same games over and over again with slight thematic or graphic changes?

Yes. They are so dumb. They are being feeded. Those dumb feeded people.
 
 
MACC
18:22 / 11.05.08
First-Person Shooters
Massively Multiplayer
Real-Time Strategy
Action Adventure
Role-Playing
Racing
Action
Other Strategy Games
Adventure Games
Virtual Life Games
Top Rated Games
Most Popular

Take your pick.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
18:24 / 11.05.08
What does that actually mean, MACC? Do you mean that the majority of games produced fall into one of these categories? I would certainly agree with that. However, the majority of books produced could be filtered into about as many classifications, or indeed the majority of board games, films, electric whisks, sex toys or chess pieces. What's your point, if any?
 
 
Spatula Clarke
20:46 / 11.05.08
Top Rated Games

Yes. Stupid, stupid people, playing games that are good.

C'mon, try and make this a bit more difficult, will you?
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
20:47 / 11.05.08
I think MACC was just copying and pasting a list from the left-hand column of a gaming website, Randy. You credit him with too strategic an intention, I believe.
 
 
My Mom Thinks I'm Cool
21:42 / 11.05.08
I agree with Fungus (the topic starter), 100%.

did you, by any chance, read the replies in the thread? have you checked out all the strange, innovative, beautiful games recommended by people here?

or did you just read the thread topic and jump right in?
 
 
STOATIE LIEKS CHOCOLATE MILK
00:31 / 12.05.08
The new generations just want brighter eye candy instead of concerning themselves with the actual games' content

This would be the new generations who've rushed out and bought GTA IV in ludicrous quantities, right? Because that has NO content whatsoever. It's almost as content-free as BioShock was. Fuck, it's only got SLIGHTLY more content than Medieval 2!!!

Yeah. Games these days. NO fucking content. People who buy them MUST be morons.




For fuck's sake.
 
 
Alex's Grandma
01:19 / 12.05.08
You forgot 'adult' as a caregory, MACC.

Perhaps all of us forget this at our peril.
 
 
one point, oh
15:29 / 13.05.08
I would argue that crap games have always been around and that mediocre games have always been the norm. There has always been a surplus of generic storylines and games that basically plagiarise last year’s hit game gameplay mechanics. It’s not like the past was exactly rosy – the videogame crash of 83 was almost singularly brought about by the vast, vast quantities of truly terrible games that were being released. A market so used to shit that even Custer’s Revenge got published and so saturated that copies of ET had to be buried.

I would say, however, that in recent years (especially these past couple of years with the Wii and the DS) we have seen a slight movement towards pick up and play games - games that are instantly accessible to the widest possible audience. In this regard I suppose that modern ideas of gameplay have seen something of a shift of goal posts - we seem to be moving away from the idea that elaborate and complicated interaction (see elite/civilisation/morrowind) are equivalent to good gameplay, to the idea that simplicity, elegance and fun (see wii sports/guitar hero) are the key ingredients. Notice how I used Morrowind instead of Oblivion? Even Oblivion, which should still probably be considered on the elaborate/high time investment side of the fence, saw something of a push towards the middle ground with a much simpler interface with quick travel, the map and the quest system. This trend of simplification however is not the same as dumbing down, rather it is a process by which games are becoming more intuitive and immediate whilst leaving plenty of scope for innovation and originality.

I don’t know, maybe I’m seeing trend where there is not one, but it does feel like at least part of the market has moved towards accessibility in terms of gameplay (perhaps because the previous teenage male dominated, lots of time to invest market has been swallowed by MMOs).

As for storylines and narratives (a subject that I feel should be kept at least partly separate from gameplay) I would argue that, in games where story is relevant (a slightly different breed to the aforementioned guitar hero/wii sports), we have seen a push towards contextualisation and away from the arcade in such a way that I think we are seeing much more cinemographic experiences in today’s game blockbusters. For example, as has been mentioned already mentioned, GTA 4 is incredibly rich with story and politics like a modern day Scarface, where as its early predecessors were much more arcade-y to the point where the indulgence in violence seemed almost pornographic (i.e. it lacked context), and seemed aimed at drumming up hype in a sensationalist media. Sure there is a lot of cliché out there in plenty of popular games still, but perhaps less so than in the blockbuster movie market. I would also say that, even though games are in their infancy, we are starting to see a handful of designers like Fumito Ueda or Ragnaar Tørnquist (although Dreamfall wasn’t a patch on The Longest Journey) who have incredibly strong and independent styles of their own. So yeah, personally I think that storylines are better and more original than have ever been and frankly if you disagree you are probably just playing the wrong games.

Finally, in some kind of strange conclusion to all this, I’d like to say that in a way high production values, the vast investment of time and money video game now represent, are our savior. Whilst it is true that producers maybe somewhat scared to fly too far away from the status quo it is also true that there now is no way we will ever go back to the truly derivative slums of crash ’83. Furthermore, gamers are quite a discerning group of consumers, producers can’t afford to completely stifle innovation – it is not coincidental that some of the most successful games/consoles in the past few years were also some of the most innovative. So no I don't think there has been a negative effect, but I do think there has been a move away from somewhat geeky convolution and the ferverant detailing of the bedroom devoloper to a different kind of detailing, elegence and polish.
 
 
one point, oh
10:09 / 15.05.08
Having said all that, I am not completely averse to some retro appreciation - I just spent, like just now, not inconsiderable dosh on re-buying Skies of Arcadia for the Dreamcast (A console which I only reacquired recently in yet another spate nostalga-philia in order to replay Shenmue 1 & 2 back to back...). Which raises another point: Kodama needs to get herself out of bloody brain training and back to RPGs. FACT.
 
 
iamus
10:20 / 15.05.08
I have worked my way through plenty of games in recent years that:

A. Have Played

and:

B. Were Fun


With that first-hand, experiential knowledge I have come to the conclusion that I disagree with the main conceit of this thread. I'm going to write a paper on the subject. If anyone could spare me a Rizla, that would be grand.
 
 
the Fool
02:11 / 22.05.08
erm... isn't the Wii proof of the opposite of this thread premise. It sacrified better graphics in favour of nifty game play.

Wii Zelda got so many 'ooooh' momnets out me that were purely based on its interactivity. As did Mario Galaxy, though often that was due to its conceptual use of gravity. It either case it wasn't the WOW of the graphic that made the game.
 
  
Add Your Reply