Gaming's greatest challenge

[Manji187]

Inspired by a thread that touched upon the subject of "advancing the medium", I thought it would be interesting to approach it from the other side.

Consider this. Gaming has certain proclivities; because all games are in fact simulations of space and physics it is so much easier to measure progression by navigation and/ or the interaction with objects (whether animate or inanimate). Oftentimes the interaction comes down to destroying them. This is a big reason why shooters and hack & slash games are so widespread; they represent the "natural" usage of a game's engine. It is what game engines support best.

The proliferation of the 30-something heterosexual white male with brown hair as the protagonist, on the other hand, is a developer choice. As is the colour palette (brownish gray and grayish brown included). As is the setting. As is the (general lack of) exploration of psychological/ philosophical themes.

Also, what is up with always having to be the Hero? What is up with always having to save something or someone from the Big Bad? Are those two essential ingredients for escapism without which it is simply impossible?

TLDR: So...what do you think is the greatest challenge for gaming as a medium, i.e. the obstacle that has to be overcome in order for gaming to become more than it is today? Why do you think it is the greatest challenge, and how can it be overcome?

 

[Smooth Operator]

Well the main thing is to establish to ourselves and others that games are in no way a lesser medium then the others, and that they can tackle all subjects without people flipping their shit.

And more importantly that problems in the real world will be present in this medium as well, this isn't a children's playground anymore ladies and gents.

 

[Sean Hollyman]

I think one of the biggest challenges is making a sequel that can top the previous installment in every way.

 

[Manji187]

Well the main thing is to establish to ourselves and others that games are in no way a lesser medium then the others, and that they can tackle all subjects without people flipping their shit.

And more importantly that problems in the real world will be present in this medium as well, this isn't a children's playground anymore ladies and gents.

One day, I'd love to live in a world in which this is truth but the day obviously hasn't come yet.

Sure, games are not lesser in potential but they are lagging in the accurate portrayal of a lot of psychologically mature themes. Currently, they often also fail to engage our consciousness in a reflective manner. Not many games actually enrich one as a person, making him or her think deeply about something.

I'm not saying every game should be like that. I like my mindless fun now and then. But more games offering enriching/ transformative experiences (not necessarily fun ones) would be nice.

 

[Manji187]

Not sure, the industry doesn't take much risks and I think that's a problem.

That's right, but I feel the gaming community as a whole does not exactly demand radical innovation either.

Also, as a group, gamers are not represented in the way workers are in unions. We can have demands and voice them in different ways (social media etc) but no way to enforce them in relation to developers/ publishers.

 

[Zhukov]

I'd like to see more developers set their sights a bit higher than "Let's make a game where you kill stuff and increase your virtual penis statistic."

Those games are fun and all, and I have no problem with them existing, but it would be nice if there was some other stuff.

 

[aguspal]

I think one of the biggest challenges is making a sequel that can top the previous installment in every way.

While I cant think of a proper example right now (except Borderlands 2, but I havent personally played it so it dosnt counts... yet), Theres plenty of games that already did this IMO. But then again, opinions.


EDIT: There goes one for ya: Bioshock 2. Unless you are one of those people that thougt the original was somehow better in the history, in that case I am screwed.

 

[Joccaren]

Does the player have to be a hero?

That depends on the type of game. If its shooting stuff up though, or fighting, inevitably yes [They could be the Villain but same sort of classification IMO: Someone important]. In a game you must be someone important. Whether this is from the beginning where you're some super spy on a mission, or whether you're important simply because you are doing important things for the plot. You should be the center of at least one running plot, or else the game is disinteresting and boring.

There are a number of games in which you aren't some great hero who goes around saving the world, but in most you are someone pivotal to the plot in some way. If you weren't, the story wouldn't be engaging. What interest should you have in the story when it just passes you by, ignoring you and treating you like you treat most NPCs in games? About the same as watching a movie I'd suspect, and watching a movie in this case would be the better option as the rest of the game isn't trying to stop you from watching the story unfold.

 

[Jordan Li]

I think the main problems are the fact that video games needs a lot of resources to make and the fact that they are really long.
I mean writing a book just requires knowledge of a certain language. Making a video game needs programmers, artists, musicians, sometimes a writer, anyone in between. Unless somebody can do most of the things by himself, the artistic vision is in great risk. Paying people and getting money from people doesn't exactly give room for risk either. Also, there are very few experts of the medium.

 

[Ix Rebound]

to stop taking things that was in the original game and tacking them on as DLC, and having all the future DLC be free
.......... a boy can dream

 

[Vuliev]

Also, what is up with always having to be the Hero? What is up with always having to save something or someone from the Big Bad? Are those two essential ingredients for escapism without which it is simply impossible?

The prevalence particular, uh, thought process (?) is present in every entertainment medium, from books to movies to TV to games to everything else. We like cheering for the hero--we like seeing the bad guy get his due. Seeing that bad guy win (or the hero lose) works, but it's much harder to pull off. It's not inherently a bad thing.

As for the challenge? Major publishers need to stop fretting about "broadening the audience." They can have their few mainstream, broad-base titles for their main income, but the need to stop butchering franchises to appeal to every possible consumer on the face of the planet. All it does is ruin the franchise.

 

[Racecarlock]

The greatest challenge, in my opinion, is realizing that we don't need movie critics to declare our medium as serious and deserving of respect. We don't need to keep trying to convince ebert to play every day the same dream. We don't need to make every game introspective and deep. Sure, they can be that way if they want to, but I highly doubt breast jiggle physics and lollipop chainsaw are holding the industry back by not being "serious". Why would they have to be? The serious, introspective, and deep games will find an audience, and then no more will I have to hear that me playing call of duty, or any FPS for that matter, makes me a moron who is destroying the industry.