I've been feeling somewhat nostalgic of late, and started thinking back to mad sessions of Crash Team Racing and Halo: Combat Evolved (with a link cable, teams of 4 in separate rooms with occasional outbursts of semi-demonic laughing) With the recent(ish) release of the anniversary edition of Halo, which included, in my opinion, the incredibly useless feature of being able to switch between the graphics of the new and the original versions, and the massive rise of retro games (boom of 8-bit games on xbli, to name but one trend) it seems that looking back on gaming is something that everyone seems to be doing.
There is a point to my nostalgia, however. I started to wonder if we look back at those games for a reason. I doubt that it is because they are classics (some of my fondest memories are of playing Cel Damage which scored a measly 65 on metacritic*) or because they feature innovative game-play features or cutting-edge graphics. We look back on them because they are fun, and because we wanted to share that fun.
So, if there is a boom in retro-games, does that mean that modern games are fun deficient? I have to admit that I think they are. There are brilliant brilliant games out now, no doubt, but I can't remember the last time I ended up actually falling out of my chair from laughter due to a game**. I love Skyrim and Mass Effect and Halo: Reach; after all they are good games, but the focus on drama and storytelling and cinematic views has come at the cost of games being less fun.
Rather than ending this as a rant, I can think of an interesting question instead. What features would you rescue from games gone past, and what would you not be willing to give up from modern games?
*Although tellingly the user rating was 9.0 out of 10.
** I suspect it was the line 'There were iron posts lining the path all along the docks, apparently for tying up ships. It sounded like a load of bollards to me.' from Discworld Noir.
My immediate reaction was to think of the night we spent building a trebuchet on LBP. If we both had PS3 and headsets, we could have probably had a lot of fun with that...
ReplyDeletePersonally I want the ability to be more creative in my games. Games like Minecraft are kool but I don't want it to be OTT because Minecraft is creating stuff just for the sake of it. Before in Maple, you got a real sense of satisfaction with crafting stuff. But obviously I don't want to play Maple :P
ReplyDeleteI think games these days are often trying to emulate films too much in how they're presented. As you say in a game like Mass Effect that probably makes some sense considering its competing with rich sci-fi universes like Star Wars or Star Trek, and the idea of an interactive film where you decide characters fates and where the story goes is very appealing. However too many games either don't need to try to compete with movies, or when they do they aren't doing a good enough job about it.
ReplyDeleteI think its back to the old argument about gameplay over graphics, or in this case having a fun experience over a visual one. I'd go a step further even and say that many of the best gaming experiences I've had in recent years have been games that are comparatively 'simple' compared to most modern shooters for example. Games like Braid or Portal or Limbo were still quite visual experiences, but compared to Crysis 2 or Modern Warfare 3 I find myself looking back on those 1 or 2 button games with more joy. Maybe its that simpler games allow you to feel more immersed in a separate world and you can focus on the game itself, not on remembering combos or button uses.
However I think there are other factors here: the age we were at when we played these games, the novelty of playing them in a group before online multi-player (most my best memories involve multi-player it seems), the more YP-centric style to many games back then (simplicity ya see!). I think there is a lot to be thankful for in modern games too!
ReplyDeleteWe are of one accord? Incredible.
ReplyDeleteI agree, Edward, more creativity in games is a real necessity. Even if it's silly things like new ways to blow up enemies in FPS's, I always feel most proud when I do something funky and unusual, as opposed to mowing down enemies with a machine gun. The most memorable bit in HL2 is where you wander around Ravenholm with a bunch of rusty saw blades and the gravity gun, or the fight in the citadel where you fire workstations at guards. Let us feel that we're doing something amazing, even if we're not, and we will love you for it.
I'm not disagreeing here, just adding to what you're saying with a counter-point:
ReplyDeleteCreativity needs to serve each game on an individual basis I feel. As Ed has stated in a previous article about FF series, some franchises serve a very specific group of people and creativity isn't always the most important thing in those games (or in the case of James Bond! :P) - look at Mario Kart, Super Smash Bros, etc. Remember CTR was nothing more than a rip-off of Mario-Kart, just as Crash-Bash was of Mario Party. Doesn't mean there isn't room in the market for them, so long as the quality is there and they don't outstay their welcome.
While I'd always welcome more creativity and variety, lets not lose sight of the 'fun-factor' we started with. The reason we remember those games wasn't because they were unique (we had no yard-stick to compare them by) but because they were fun in their own right. Is Skyrim a vastly different, unique or generally more creative game compared to Oblivion? Not from what I've heard or observed. Is it better overall and therefore more fun? Absolutely.