Enslaved Writer Thinks Games Industry Has Grown Too Fast

[FloodOne]

Much like the movie industry, videogames have the indie sector. They will make the games to fill in the gaps, but few people will ever get to play them.

Not true. Digital Distribution is changing the game, maybe for the better. Smaller, more innovative and risky titles can be pushed through these channels.

 

[TheBluesader]

I'm a little confused. Does Mr. Enslaved Writer want to see the video game equivalents of character-focused, low budget movies, or does he want to see low budget video games that do the same kind of stories as character-focused, low budget movies? Because while the first is debatably a thing, the second is not: video games are not movies, so no one should be expecting a video game that perfect simulates a type of movie.

Now about the first sense, if that's indeed what he meant. Where is it written that the development path movies have taken is the model for all other forms of new media? Video games and movies share a lot of elements, but they are very different things. Look at the development of comic books - they didn't follow movie's development history history (they started small and goofy, got big and goofy, then got small and serious, then got big and serious, then got big and goofy, and now you can get whatever kind you want). If anything, games seem to be mirroring that development path.

Finally, I must of course mention that small, character-driven movies equivalents are not necessarily anything games should be aspiring to. So let's say there is an equivalent type of game. Do we want it? Is it fun to play? Will anyone care?

Again, games and movies are different things, and as we all know, you can't compare apples to oranges. Maybe writing for both movies and games has confused the issue for Mr. Enslaved Writer.

 

[cabalistics]

There have been many beautiful thought provoking games and he just hasn't played them. Also Taxi Driver would make a terrible game no one would want to play it. Videogames are very different from movies and the way they evoke emotional responses are more involved so in the hands of a good games designer and writer you can have as deep an experience as a movie

 

[Disembodied_Dave]

I think Independent Developers are filling those gaps.

 

[Sebenko]

We've got indies, right?

I don't want to stoke their egos any more, but they seem to be the only games that interest me at the moment.

 

[Schlagwerk]

The lack of italics make all the difference in the world.

And yeah, that's really what indies are for.

 

[Buchichu]

supply and demand, my man.

if the people who appreciate games actively buy indie games or enter the industry with the commitment to make better games (rather than "big bucks" games) it'll get done. Painting everything so black and white seems kind of ignorant for a filmmaker, don't you think?

 

[ChromeAlchemist]

I dunno.

I think he may be wrong. We did have a lot of those "mid level" games in the 90's. A lot of them were good too.

I agree that today we have AAA or small indy productions that are like that college kid making Black and While footage of creepy kids in hallways... ok maybe that's just LIMBO.

But, there is a gap now, I'm willing to argue that a lot of mid level good games were in the 90's.

Were System Shock and Thief the Dark project AAA titles?

How about the original X-Com?

Quality games that weren't tiny indy games or blockbusters.

Quite a few more.

I'm counting a lot of the very old classics as Small Indy games. A lot of the stuff from the Commodore 64 era literally was 1-3 people in a garage for very good product.



I hereby declare that the 1990's were the John Hughes 1980s of games!

That was two generations ago though. He's talking about now, where basically the only universally accepted way of making big cash is through AAA. I doubt anyone actually starts developing an indie game and expects a huge return on it.

No, he isn't talking about now, he's talking about the history of the industry never having several phases of development.

They did. Games may have had those stages a lot faster than the movie industry but they didn't jump over them completely.

I agree the indies don't expect a lot of cash, but there are a few that have done pretty well for themselves off of Steam or XBL.

I'd like to see more single A games again. I'm not sure that I wanna see B games though.

Could you name a couple of A titles that were released on home consoles? Personally, I feel like the PC and console environments are rather separate, and that phase was only on the PC as I can't think of many titles being held in such high regard without being AAA on consoles.

I mean the PC is still getting games like Amnesia: Dark Descent and The Void. These games are ultimately what he is saying are missing from the video games market, and he's right because they are high quality but low buzz titles on the PC that many haven't played mainly because they are absent from the rest of the market, much like X-Com and System Shock 2, which were also on the PC and sold next to nothing.

I dunno, perhaps soon we'll get more A titles on the XBLA and PSN. Like the indie games we're getting now, but with a larger budget:

 

[LawlessSquirrel]

Maybe we're not likely to get some shining gem of an inspired project amidst the crowd of Triple A titles, but that's what the Indies are for. They have the opportunity to take risks and take on projects that big companies would turn down in a heartbeat. It would be best for a happy medium, but nowadays Indie-quality is getting closer to mainstream.

I guess by film analogies, the big companies are...bit companies, focussed on blockbusters; the Indies would be the art-house films that are most likely going to go overlooked, but are cheaper and potentially more inventive.

 

[Rect Pola]

While I get his point, that's kinda where independant arms of a big studio could fill that gap.

 

[Traigus]

Could you name a couple of A titles that were released on home consoles? Personally, I feel like the PC and console environments are rather separate, and that phase was only on the PC as I can't think of many titles being held in such high regard without being AAA on consoles.

I mean the PC is still getting games like Amnesia: Dark Descent and The Void. These games are ultimately what he is saying are missing from the video games market, and he's right because they are high quality but low buzz titles on the PC that many haven't played mainly because they are absent from the rest of the market, much like X-Com and System Shock 2, which were also on the PC and sold next to nothing.

I dunno, perhaps soon we'll get more A titles on the XBLA and PSN. Like the indie games we're getting now, but with a larger budget:

I can't say that I can for the current Gen of consoles. PS3 and 360 have pretty much been AAA from the start. I still own every 360 game I have ever bought. Looked in the box just now and anything I saw that was really good was a AAA... but many were made by companies that were not that big in the 90s / early 2000s.

I'd argue that the PS2 had games in every segment though. Everything from AAA to Shovelware crap. Less so for the first X-Box, but still moderately true. So there were some good things in the early 2000s for console, not just the 90s for PC.

Huge number of games at that time and we can argue what was a AAA at the time or merely an A game by budget if you want. But there were a lot of good games (technology permitting) made by not huge places that were received well and made good enough money for the companies to do decently... and to my regret often become or be eaten by AAA studios. Take a look not everything on that list can possibly be just AAA or indy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_PlayStation_2_games

(not sure which set of code this forum uses so not a clicky)

I'll weed through it later today for specific examples of my own.

Again, not arguing there isn't a gap now. Just saying that the author guy is off saying we never got that kinda stuff. We just didn't get it for a long long time.

 

[boholikeu]

I think people here are missing the point about the "Taxi Driver" quote. He's not referring to indies (which the video game industry already has), he's talking about a medium budget movie that still manages to do something "different" like Taxi Driver did.

I guess in that regard Portal or Mirror's Edge are like Taxi Driver in that they both tried to do something new with the first person perspective, but games like that are still few and far in between.

 

[Dioxide20]

Much like the movie industry, videogames have the indie sector. They will make the games to fill in the gaps, but few people will ever get to play them.

Not true. Digital Distribution is changing the game, maybe for the better. Smaller, more innovative and risky titles can be pushed through these channels.

I see what you mean, digital distribution really is making indie games shine, but they aren't shining anywhere near as bright as the super games that get their own marketing teams with 100 million dollar budgets.

 

[Stevepinto3]

Blah blah blah, we still have indie games. Just because an industry is at the point where it's producing multi-million dollar hits doesn't mean it's incapable of innovation or producing unexpected hits. This can all pretty much be answered by the Innovation episode of Extra Credits.

And one other note, another Judge Dredd? All I can think of is this;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q6cyDsuNx_U

 

[Booze Zombie]

I can see where he's coming from, but I disagree.
There always will be good quality media, I mean, modern Hollywood starting falling to shit until all of the studios were like "shit, people want smart stuff again... every goddamn decade".

 

[TheRightToArmBears]

First things first, you missed that he wrote The Beach. That book is awesome.

He does have a point. Unfortunately, whilst those kinds of games do get made, they never have a large effect on the industry.

And also, he's doing the new Judge Dredd? YES!!!