I think Gaming is slowly dying.

[ShadowsofHope]

First off, gaming is not doomed. Stop the doomsday preacher act already, it's annoying.

Secondly, what constitutes as an "art game"?

Thirdly, what makes an "art game" artistic?

Fourthly.. I know it's not just me, but every doomsday thread seems to have the same common thesis at it's core" "There are games being made that I don't like, henceforth gaming as an industry is dying!".

Addendum: While you (and many others) have a decent point about DLC, get over yourself.

 

[starkiller212]

You could say pretty much the same things about movies, TV, music, literature, probably any entertainment medium. We live in a capitalist society, so of course businesses will always try to make money from what they do first and foremost. That being said, there will always be both good and bad games and developers as long as anyone still plays games. And if you honestly think there are no more innovative or artful games being made anymore, then I am sorry that you have missed out on all of the amazing games that have been released in the last few years.

 

[Awexsome]

Not gonna lie... that's getting to be a pretty close representation of the type of stereotypical PC elitist whiner on these forums.

 

[boag]

Gaming has been dying since the 1970s, and Manbearpig is the culprit.

 

[Bakuryukun]

I've heard a lot of people say gaming is dying lately, I've ALSO heard a lot of people say that the apocalypse is coming soon. Gaming isn't dying, gaming can never "die" even if the industry crashed again gaming would continue.

Usually when people say that "gaming is dying" what they actually mean is that it's changing into something they don't like.

 

[Adventurer2626]

Yep. So are the other industries because the economy sucks. Next topic? Those things are "hurting" the gaming industry, not killing it. Hell, I'm sure if it collapsed over night many of us would make our own blasted games if we needed to. Also, keep in mind that this is a luxury industry; they always get lose business first when funds get tight. Okay, well, usually. What's "dying" at the moment is the innovation in the industry with the franchise cash-cowing. But that's an unstable model as you can count on people getting bored more easily than entertained. Sooner or later the stale game devs get the boot and fresh off the farm idealists get hired to spruce up the gaming library. We don't know for sure what's coming. Maybe it will collapse with the immense pressures from the economy and stockholders and whatnot. Or maybe it'll bounce back.

As much as it's looked down upon by "hardcore gamers," Facebook-style games get a lot of business. Same with the Wii games. Fringe nerds and people who don't usually do gaming get brought in to help keep the drive of the industry going. Look at the piece of a game that Mojang released. A blocky, cartoony game where fight generic enemies and collect resources in a sandbox is competing with multi-billion dollar companies like Activision with well established franchises. We haven't even begun to tap our creative potential.

 

[starwarsgeek]

I think gaming is slowly improving.
Fans of Extra Credits, a lot of this will sound familiar...

Nintendo's DS and Wii brought in a lot of new fans. This, along with social networking, browser, and smart phone games have led to a broadening demographic. Gaming is finally approaching universal acceptance. Social networking, browser games, and smart phones expanding as gaming platforms, along with Wiiware, XBLI/Aracade, PSN, and steam give independents several low-budget platforms, which provides them with more chances to take creative risks. This is where great innovation will come from in the future.

Several major developers (especially Nintendo and Capcom) are bringing older styles back to the mainstream, while others (Bioware, Bethesda, Blizzard, Rockstar, and...Capcom...again) are making games that are bigger and more detailed than ever before. Huge genre variety, even in the AAA industry? Yes please!

This console industry has had the fortunate side-effect of lasting long enough for graphics technology to advance without gaming, which will hopefully have the long-term effect of consoles (as long as they are the dominant platforms) never having to be extremely expensive to be a major technical upgrade over the predecessor. In addition to gaming lagging behind and having cheaper tech, graphics are slowly peaking, meaning less of the budget will be spent on detail--they'll rely more on style and put more money into writing, acting, ect.

DLC can easily be abused (like Capcom does. Hey, they can't be 100% good, can they?), but it also offers unique opportunities for developers and publishers--they no longer need to be at the mercy of gamestop's used games system. I'll use Modern Warfare 3 as an example. They could have the online capabilities as on-disc DLC that costs $20. Why would that be a good thing? Because they could sale the actual game disc for $35. Fans spend less money, those who aren't interested in the online scene are more likely to buy new, others could buy the disc one week and unlock the online a couple weeks later if they couldn't afford the whole thing at once, and Activision would make more money because those who buy used still need to unlock the online--overall, we spend less, they make more. Oh, and DLC offers the opportunity for smaller, cheaper expansion packs with easy delivery. Both of these will make games more profitable, which offers more freedom for creative risks.

As for your criticism of cash-cow franchises and leader-following, well...some cash cows have routinely been a source of great innovations (especially Zelda and Mario), and even when they aren't, they still get tons of money for the developer/publisher to fund riskier games (like...Capcom. Again). And leader-following has always been an issue with gaming (and entertainment as a whole). At least today, there are more leaders to follow, which--in a weird, backwards way still kind of leads to more variety. In FPS's, instead of "Doom clones", we have "Call of Duty Clones" and "Halo clones"





To summarize, not only has Nintendo gotten a pretty big broadening demographic, but social networks, browser flash games, and smart phone games have become more accepted as gaming platforms while helping to expand the gaming demographic even further. Indie developers, who are naturally a source of major innovation, have more platforms than ever to access. Even in the AAA industry, developers are expanding into multiple genres (both retro and newborn), which leads to innovation and variety from even the big companies that don't take big risks. DLC, while it can be abused easily, offers a chance publishers to fight back against the used game system, which will result in more profitable games that can take more creative risks. Cash cows and leader following will always be around, but they aren't necessarily problems. Gaming isn't slowly dying; it's slowly improving in every area at once.

 

[beniki]

*shrug* It's popular now. For every Dark Knight analogue of a video game we're going to get the disappointing yet somehow money making Transformers 2.

We've got good and bad. That's always been true. The point is, these days we've got more. So no. Gaming is not dieing, and it's kind of silly to be saying that in the face of all we've got coming to us just in the next month...

 

[Omgsarge]

Gaming...is dying? Just because the big industry is ripping us of and doesn't show that much innovation? Sounds like mostly Hollywood to me.

Honestly, gaming is thriving. They creep into every aspect of our lives. They took cellphones by storm. There have never been more indi-games released ever and the low budget market is bigger than ever. Games are getting increasingly recognized as an art form by people all over the world.

I think gaming is changing, not dying. Why do people always have to be so extreme. Making random absolute statements will not help your position.

 

[ckam]

I wouldn't say it's dying, but more-so becoming more of a cash grabbing machine than anything else... Damn it.

 

[Dr Snakeman]

I think someone needs to watch Extra Credits.

Quoted for great quantities of truth. Seriously, the Escapist already has guys who are paid to rant like this, and they do it far better than the OP.

Gaming isn't "dying", it's just changing. The Extra Credits team has already discussed this in detail. OP is obviously new here, so I'll cut him some slack for not being familiar with the prevailing thought about this topic on this site.

 

[Adzma]

As long as the fanboys flock to CoD and its various clones I'm sure gaming will be fine. Look up some indie games. They're the main source of enjoyment in this day and age.

 

[The Stonker]

You're quite the pessimistic elitist person aren't you?
First of all, cash ins will always exist, always and for fuck sakes, sure, video games have been aknowledged as art but that doesn't mean everybody has to be fancy pantsy artsy.
Personally, I think that gaming is doing quite well and it won't be dying at all.
They said the same about card games and they said it about RPGS.

Video gaming is here to stay.

 

[Vykrel]

there are more gamers now than there have ever been, and gaming is a multi-billion dollar industry. despite increasing piracy, lack of originality, and ridiculous gimmicks like motion control and whatnot, i dont see gaming "dying" any time soon, if ever.

personally, i think it would grow much more nicely if all the casual gamers would get their heads out of their asses and try playing real games... games that can be considered art.

and people that just arent willing to play anything that isnt uber-popular need to try other games as well. Call of Duty multiplayer is absolutely filled with these people. next time you play against a group of tenth prestiges, take a look at their gamerscore and games played. i like to do this every once in a while, because i already know what ill see before i even look. they almost always have less than 2000 gamerscore, despite being a 2 or so-year old account, and their games played consist of nothing but CoD, Madden, Guitar Hero, Rockband, and possibly Halo. they usually dont even have the campaign half-completed for CoD, even though they likely play the game almost every day.

people have no idea just what they are missing out on.

 

[Vykrel]

(double post :/)

 

[zerobudgetgamer]

Hmm, perhaps instead of saying that it was dying, I should have used the word stagnating. Or specified that the creativity is dying. And by dying I mean everything getting streamlined, AAA games being the only things that get anywhere, everyone following the leader and getting samey-samey games that have been oversimplified. 2011 seems to be one of the best years for unique games, but my point still stands

Oh, and Cliffy B said Gears 2 was not ported because of Pirates. http://kotaku.com/5056532/why-no-gears-of-war-2-for-pc-well-piracy-for-one

You do realize there's a MASSIVE difference between those two, right? Dying implies the industry is in a serious fix and is at risk of going completely bankrupt; Stagnating only implies moral/ethical bankruptcy.

Now I have no idea what you're talking about when you say everything's getting "streamlined." A large chunk of the reason games have become "simpler" is either because A. veteran gamers have been around their controllers of choice for so long that they could punch in a 1000-button sequence on cue while blindfolded, B. most find it alienating for a game of the same genre to have vastly different controls, or C. after roughly 2 generations of catering to the "hardcore" and "veteran" gamers - basically those who started on the generation past and are crossing over into the new generation - developers/publishers are FINALLY going back and trying to introduce gaming to the "new"/"casual" people out there, who typically never picked up a controller until now.

And as for making everything "samey-samey", uh, take a look at the SNES-Early PS1 era. Mario, Sonic, and Donkey Kong were all basically the same game with different aesthetics. Until the PS1/N64 era brought us 3D, 90% of all "popular" games followed the same side-scrolling formula; the only difference between THAT "samey-samey" era and this one is that the SNES era was allowed to create fantastically absurd scenarios to try to intrigue the young gamers out there.

And let's not talk about Cash Cows, shall we? Mario, Sonic, Donkey Kong, Megaman, Final Fantasy (Before X), Zelda, need I go on? Your beef seems to hang around the modern ideal of giving the first game an outstanding storyline that gets shat on with the sequel. Well, as valid of a point as that may be, it's not going to deter publishers from trying to get as much money as possible from a franchise.

Follow-The-Leader and Milking Cash Cows are such common business practices, not only in the gaming industry but in most modern media industries, that calling them out for adhering to them is like calling out a dog for licking its crotch every 30 minutes.

Now, onto your other points. Piracy is NOT just a problem with PC. Have you not been paying even a token amount of attention to all the crap Sony's been through lately? Before the whole hacking fiasco, they were suing a guy for millions of dollars because he created a means to bypass the PS3's security and play pirated games. Before this generation, PS2s were constantly cracked open, either to remove the region locks or the security to play whatever (pirated) game they chose. I have a buddy who owns a Dreamcast and had a buddy of his burn roughly 30 games for it many years ago, since he couldn't find them anywhere else. Piracy has been apparent in consoles for a long time, it just hasn't been as mainstream until now.

DLC is certainly your most valid point, but it might be a moot point for what it's worth. Remember, way back when subscription fees first started popping around, there were people who opposed them vehemently, for many of the same reasons people now are opposing DLC. I'm not saying it's right to have day-one DLC - personally I think that much is just a disgusting way to withhold content from the mass hordes of "Used" players - but who knows what may happen a decade or so down the line, when DLC becomes accepted and the gaming industry decides to create YET ANOTHER means of charging us to play their games.

Now, as many have undoubtedly said, true innovation, regardless of its form and regardless of industry, is expensive and ultimately risky. It's the exact same thing as putting all your money on a single number in Roulette. If you win, you strike it big, and everyone around you is envious, to the point of wishing they had made the same bet you did. However, if you lose, you're out of everything, and if you weren't careful you will have lost all means of playing again. So, instead of putting everything on a single number, most publishers will force developers to put their money on Red or Black, or in the present case "Realistic" or "Shooter". Sure, they won't make enough money to retire at an early age, but they'll at least be able to keep playing.

 

[lady man lady]

point number 2 has the most power for me, i am really hating what DLC has become

 

[infinity_turtles]

The gaming industry is becoming Hollywood. That sort of sucks, but I wouldn't say it's dying.

 

[EradiusLore]

a similar question was posed to the lead designer of travlers tails (lego games) at a seminar i was at. He said its actually growing more then any other medium in the world. its not stagnating as such; large companies have to spend millions to come up with AAA games so they are unwilling to move away from tried and tested methods. So yeah AAA titles tend to be the same games over and over. but indy devs are just as big and booming as the massive corps, and its the indy devs who can risk making new concepts. If a concept hits big on the indy market then AAA devs will consider bringing it into the open gaming market through one of their titles, that way no risk!

 

[sora91111]

I don't think so with this rest of this year's and next year's line up it looks pretty dang good. I mean look at Mass Effect 3 coming out as well as Skyrim which for some people seems to be their second coming of christ.