I've been thinking a lot about the quality of games being released lately compared to the past, and it got me thinking about something rather interesting.
I remember playing shorter, less visually involving games in my youth than today. I would be able to play the same game over and over and over again, never changing the difficulty level (if it even had one). In the case of Goldeneye, I could play the same level over and over, for the sheer fun of the gameplay - this was, after all, the only first person shooter I owned. This lasted for years. I've lost track of the number of times I've played Zelda through and through, attempting 100% completion. I would play the Half Life chapters "We've Got Hostiles" and "Surface Tension" over and over because I was terrified of the aliens in the game, and this chapter offered human enemies. The Final Fantasy series kept me working through my A-levels and GCSEs as a tantalising reward to so many hours work. Super Smash Brothers, an accidental buy, turned out to be a game which brought many of my social circles together to play.
Nowadays, however, I have trouble staying focused on a single game for that long. I play the story through, have a go at multiplayer (if it's present) and maybe stick with it for a week until I've earned all the unlockables, and then move on to the next thing. I have many more games now than I ever did as a child, and I'm less satisfied with my gaming now than I was then. The exceptions here are the Fallout, Dragon Age and Mass Effect series, which I've put hundreds of hours into, though they are starting to wear out for me. (just thought of another thing - I put much more attention and care into PC gaming than console gaming. Not sure what this reflects.)
I don't think that this reflects a reduction in the quality of games being produced. Graphics, visuals and animation are better than they've ever been - studios employ professional artists for their environments, professional writers for their scripts, professional actors to bring the characters to life - millions of dollars are pumped into development studios by the publishers. Studios fifteen years ago would laugh if you told them these things happen nowadays. The truth is, games are much, much better today than they were before. So why do people complain that gaming is being dumbed-down?
I believe that this reflects a shift in the gamer population and demographic, rather than the development studios. People play household video games, on their own, from a very early age, all the way through their youth and beyond. I started gaming heavily before I left junior school, and never looked back. In addition to these young gamers, the affordability of new consoles and games outside of the arcade probably brought many teenagers and students in to the scene.
What I believe has happened, is that these people now form the core of the gamer demographic. Years and years and years of gaming have eroded our attention span, not helped by the "ping!" of unlockables and achievements as we sought more and more content in our games as they developed. Research (I forget which, but. . . well just trust me, I read it. . .) has indicated that heavy gaming has negative effects on the development of the frontal lobe structures in children (woops) - a region related to attention span and long-term goal-seeking - it's something to do with neurotransmitters or something. cortisol or adrenaline etc.
Essentially, as our mentally challenged, central demographic has grown up, we've indicated through our purchases that we want harder and faster and MOAR, which publishers have been happy to jump upon. Think how many Call of Honor/Medal of Duty games have been released in the last four years (hint: many). Just one of these games may have tided me over for four years all by its lonesome fifteen years ago. . . the quality is there, but I have to put it down because it's bored me - all the "ping!" and "achievement get!" is exhausted - I've got nuttin' left to play for.
I've lost a little cohesion. Hmm. Best to stop here. Blame the brain damage. Please let me know your ideas and comments
(end-note - Thinking about it a bit more, I've always been more interested in games that I can play on my PC than on consoles - I've stuck with them for much longer, and come back to them after a while for more. This maybe shows a division in the industry - console games are cheaper and faster to produce than PC games - you don't have to optimise for the wild variation in hardware that's present on PCs. Hence - publishers can pump out more games for consoles than PCs. This pro'lly means that I treasure the PC games I have due to the scarcity of truly awesome content. Lookit me with all my introspection).
I remember playing shorter, less visually involving games in my youth than today. I would be able to play the same game over and over and over again, never changing the difficulty level (if it even had one). In the case of Goldeneye, I could play the same level over and over, for the sheer fun of the gameplay - this was, after all, the only first person shooter I owned. This lasted for years. I've lost track of the number of times I've played Zelda through and through, attempting 100% completion. I would play the Half Life chapters "We've Got Hostiles" and "Surface Tension" over and over because I was terrified of the aliens in the game, and this chapter offered human enemies. The Final Fantasy series kept me working through my A-levels and GCSEs as a tantalising reward to so many hours work. Super Smash Brothers, an accidental buy, turned out to be a game which brought many of my social circles together to play.
Nowadays, however, I have trouble staying focused on a single game for that long. I play the story through, have a go at multiplayer (if it's present) and maybe stick with it for a week until I've earned all the unlockables, and then move on to the next thing. I have many more games now than I ever did as a child, and I'm less satisfied with my gaming now than I was then. The exceptions here are the Fallout, Dragon Age and Mass Effect series, which I've put hundreds of hours into, though they are starting to wear out for me. (just thought of another thing - I put much more attention and care into PC gaming than console gaming. Not sure what this reflects.)
I don't think that this reflects a reduction in the quality of games being produced. Graphics, visuals and animation are better than they've ever been - studios employ professional artists for their environments, professional writers for their scripts, professional actors to bring the characters to life - millions of dollars are pumped into development studios by the publishers. Studios fifteen years ago would laugh if you told them these things happen nowadays. The truth is, games are much, much better today than they were before. So why do people complain that gaming is being dumbed-down?
I believe that this reflects a shift in the gamer population and demographic, rather than the development studios. People play household video games, on their own, from a very early age, all the way through their youth and beyond. I started gaming heavily before I left junior school, and never looked back. In addition to these young gamers, the affordability of new consoles and games outside of the arcade probably brought many teenagers and students in to the scene.
What I believe has happened, is that these people now form the core of the gamer demographic. Years and years and years of gaming have eroded our attention span, not helped by the "ping!" of unlockables and achievements as we sought more and more content in our games as they developed. Research (I forget which, but. . . well just trust me, I read it. . .) has indicated that heavy gaming has negative effects on the development of the frontal lobe structures in children (woops) - a region related to attention span and long-term goal-seeking - it's something to do with neurotransmitters or something. cortisol or adrenaline etc.
Essentially, as our mentally challenged, central demographic has grown up, we've indicated through our purchases that we want harder and faster and MOAR, which publishers have been happy to jump upon. Think how many Call of Honor/Medal of Duty games have been released in the last four years (hint: many). Just one of these games may have tided me over for four years all by its lonesome fifteen years ago. . . the quality is there, but I have to put it down because it's bored me - all the "ping!" and "achievement get!" is exhausted - I've got nuttin' left to play for.
I've lost a little cohesion. Hmm. Best to stop here. Blame the brain damage. Please let me know your ideas and comments
(end-note - Thinking about it a bit more, I've always been more interested in games that I can play on my PC than on consoles - I've stuck with them for much longer, and come back to them after a while for more. This maybe shows a division in the industry - console games are cheaper and faster to produce than PC games - you don't have to optimise for the wild variation in hardware that's present on PCs. Hence - publishers can pump out more games for consoles than PCs. This pro'lly means that I treasure the PC games I have due to the scarcity of truly awesome content. Lookit me with all my introspection).
