Are we out of game ideas?

[Ashhearth]

As someone who is going to school for game design and spends time in the labs talking to other people. The amount of potential for new game ideas is there. Some even get thrown in our projects when we make stuff for class. As it's been said previously though, companies don't like taking lots of risks. The ideas and potential for great new creations are there new worlds, monsters, stories and what have you exist you just have to give it time.

I suggest looking to the Indie scene you may feel a little better about the future of gaming there. Its why crowdfunding games have also become such a huge thing. You will be more likely to find things there that take risks because that is what you have to do to get noticed. Take a chance on a few game ideas and if it sells congrats.

 

[Pheonixe]

If you're desperate for some silly, wacky, and beautifully crappy original ideas, I'd recommend checking out www.freeindiegam.es [http://www.freeindiegam.es/] every couple of days. There's always interesting stuff on there.

 

[IBlackKiteI]

Rest of history? No.

For the foreseeable future? Most likely.
As long as the economy stays like it's been, safe and sure bets will be the meat and potatoes of our gaming diet.

This is pretty much it.
There's most definitely tons of really cool concepts a lot of devs want to get going, they just feel, probably rightfully so, that if those concepts were made into fully fledged games they'd be too alien for audiences to handle and crash massively.

 

[Frybird]

Define "game ideas".

In terms of genre, it's hard to come up with something entirely new.
In terms of putting a narrative or gameplay-twist on an old one, there's indie games.

As for Triple A Games, publishers won't put money in them, and rightfully so, since fresh Triple A Game Ideas will be bitched to death 2 of 3 times by so called "gamers" as they usually cannot deliver on the polish and refined quality of games that have a number behind them.

 

[Veylon]

I keep a link to Three Hundred Game Mechanics [http://www.squidi.net/three/index.php] for occaisions such as this. Have a look see and maybe inspiration will be sparked.

I guess I've never seen a game where you own a chemical plant and have vats of chemicals that can be mixed, heated, and transferred according to a series of instructions that you yourself program. I'm thinking something a little like SpaceChem, but more expansive and following real-world chemistry and thermodynamics.

Or a game where you play as a recurring Sauron-esque villain who is perennially defeated by the forces of Good, but can squirrel away resources and lay long-terms schemes to manipulate the world to his advantage even during the ages when he has been sealed away.

 

[Casual Shinji]

I think were out of people who are willing to fund original ideas more than anything.

 

[BreakfastMan]

Nope. I have at least two game ideas going around in my head at the moment that I am fairly certain haven't been done before, in any form. This says to me that we have not, in fact, run out of ideas. If a schlubby, overweight 20-year old college student can have interesting ideas, so can people who actually make games on a consistent basis.

Could also be that you are mistaking devs reusing ideas that work or taking inspiration from other works for "running out of ideas" or "ripping stuff off". People seem to make that mistake often, I find.

 

[chikusho]

Time after time the same ideas appear in every form of "game" imaginable...
This can partly be blamed on companies playing it safe so they break even, but then i thought about it.
Then i realised that most game scenarios and ideas have appeared in some form, in some game somewhere.
Even indie games are resorting to re-using ideas in a different scenario.
Has the time finally come? Are we doomed to re-releases for the rest of gaming history?

Looks like someone has never heard of the indie-scene...

 

[somonels]

Realizing the world is ultimately just a rehash is just part of a developmental phase he is going through. Don't blame him for being ignorant, he'll get over it once he develops an additional layer of thought in the subject matter.

Gaming has never been as diverse and accessible.

 

[Madman123456]

Frankly, after so much Innovation is being poorly used and implemented, see motion controls where we have quite a lot of Games that would be better if controlled with a "traditional" Joypad, that i have to groan at every new Invention. I think if i'm going to place a bet that the PS4's Controllers new features will be used in ways where they distract from the gameplay.

Regarding innovation in the actual games: It can be found on the sidelines of the big budget titles. "Skyrim" doesn't bring that much new stuff to the table. Openworld sandbox in which you fight dragons with magic.
But i have fought many "big" enemies over the years and appreciate the compromise Bethesda had to find: Dragons would fly around a bit because they don't appreciate you giving them a really close shave with your battle axe. But they do eventually land to take a bit of the tasty you sandwich. Not too much flying around because you're bored dodging dragonfire and throwing your possibly useless range attacks at the lizard but the fights have at least some flying around just so you wont wonder why these dragons even have wings.

Very nice dragon AI.

Innovation in the entire game right down to its premise can be found in the indie market. I'd recommend flashgame sites but you might die of old age before you sorted through a million tower defense games; some of which have innovative new features at least.

But innovation in games isn't dead.

 

[Zeh Don]

Not even close. Seriously, anyone who thinks this is even remotely true really needs to step back from the AAA Scene for a moment.

In terms of sheer game mechanics, we're limited in what we can sell to an audience in terms of "new" experiences, because if it's new then audiences won't know if it's good or bad and if they like it, and thus will shy on the side of caution. It's why new I.P.s sell worse than sequels - not because they're bad, but because, frankly, no one knows if it's any good the first time around. No one knew what a survival horror game was when they first came out, but once you pull it off, you've got an entire genre to yourself.

This fact really limits us creatively because we have to begin game pitches with "It's like Halo but..." or "It's like GTA but..." in order to get funding for a prototype that we can then use to demonstrate the game, and then get green lit for full development.
That is, unless the Publisher asks for a vertical slice - which a lot still do - in which case the game has to be stripped back to be simple enough from a design point of view that building out an entire level with every game mechanic complete is relatively cheap, otherwise it won't get funding at all.

If you're skipping the Publisher model entirely, than your ideas boil down to what you can afford to do. You might personally have the greatest open world game that will ever be made fully designed in your head - but you don't have the US$60,000,000.00 needed to make it. So, retro games, small mobile titles, or niche genres with simplistic assets are the best you can cough out.

As computing power becomes a non-issue - and we're pretty close to that point, actually - game development itself will open up to the masses. That's where you're going to see the magic happen. A million people will a million new ideas dropping the next Minecraft onto the internet every six months.
Then... the industry will loop around again. We'll grow tired of the never ending cascade of small indie titles that will flood and drown the gaming population. You'll be so tired of yet ANOTHER new genre mash up, that we'll long for a really, really, really well made, high quality and expensive game experience. And we'll slowly move back to the AAA model again, only with the new developers that are getting on their feet today.

No, we haven't even seen the best ideas, let alone ALL of the ideas. Not even close.

 

[PH3NOmenon]

And that is why games that do innovate for innovation's sake deserve to be cut a little bit of slack.

And why Jim is wrong in this video:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/jimquisition/7005-Innovation-Gamings-Snake-Oil


But it's not as dire as you paint it, OP. From where I'm sitting, there's still plenty of interesting titles around.

 

[Trivun]

I think the problem is also that people already in the industry are scared to try new things, whereas the best new and innovative ideas are coming from people outside the established industry. On the one hand, we see plenty of great and unique ideas in the indie circuit because of that, but on the other there are plenty of people like myself who have good, interesting and new ideas, who can't find anyone to fund or work with on projects purely because of not having the contacts or whatever in the industry. Then it becomes a vicious cycle of trying to get collaborators and funding only to find ideas stifled or downplayed by an industry that's scared of the status quo. In my case, it's down to not having programming experience and nobody with programming experience being willing to help (on that note, if anyone with artistic or programming experience wants to help me with my game then get in touch for details ).

I would love to see more unique game ideas, particularly when it comes to telling well-written stories in a new way. However, while the industry is the way it is I can't see it happening outside of indie titles, which unfortunately tend to have a habit of drowning in a sea of other indie games unless they're really really good...

 

[Guffe]

I think we've come to a point where we can't make "original games" anymore, there are so many that someone can always pull a refrense point to something older. Just find something you enjoy and play it as a new game and don't look back in time too much.

 

[dementis]

Its okay, there's still supergiant games and their wonderful titles. Transistor looks like a wonderful game.

 

[Maximum Bert]

Then i realised that most game scenarios and ideas have appeared in some form, in some game somewhere.

Depending on how pedantic you want to be you could discount all or almost all ideas in history as unoriginal being as they are just built off personal and shared experience I mean stories only have about 7 or so original tales I think it is and I would say they can still be pretty creative.

Taken to a lesser form as in forming something new from your collective experience and calling it new and original I would say we are far from out of ideas and never will be humans are amazingly creative just as they are amazingly unoriginal but lets not forget that creativity can come in many ways and that not all so called original games are good or all unoriginal games are bad.

For large triple AAA games I think we will still see innovation but on a smaller scale than before usually I find that if a studio is stifled to much they will sink the publishers may like safe projects as it makes financial sense its just that it eventually stagnates and dies so then something new but not to new (dont want to scare people) has to come out.

Also with things like Indiegogo and kickstarter I think we will see some newer or rather out of favour ideas taking off again again if its to out there I really doubt it would get funding because as much as people like to talk about originality in gaming its really not supported especially in the looks department as thats immediately visible and can turn people on or off straight away but believe me you are highly unlikely to capture the mass market with a bizzare art style, usually its either bold and warm and cartoony or focused on graphical realism. Although I suppose Japan is more open to abstraction on visuals than western markets are.

 

[Requia]

As computing power becomes a non-issue - and we're pretty close to that point, actually - game development itself will open up to the masses. That's where you're going to see the magic happen. A million people will a million new ideas dropping the next Minecraft onto the internet every six months.
Then... the industry will loop around again. We'll grow tired of the never ending cascade of small indie titles that will flood and drown the gaming population. You'll be so tired of yet ANOTHER new genre mash up, that we'll long for a really, really, really well made, high quality and expensive game experience. And we'll slowly move back to the AAA model again, only with the new developers that are getting on their feet today.

No, we haven't even seen the best ideas, let alone ALL of the ideas. Not even close.

I find it hilarious that you mention being close to the point that hardware isn't a limit and Minecraft in the same breath, Minecraft's designs makes so many compromises in order to deal with memory and CPU limitations (even if the GPU never exactly breaks a sweat). Little things like the length of a redstone pulse, the burnout of rapid pulsers, even the item despawn times are all based around hardware limits. It'd be a different game if it were built 10 years from now, even if it looks the same on the surface.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

No, but there are a f***load that are either unfeasible or outside publishers' comfort zones at the moment.