Roughly twice a year, the videogame industry showers us with a batch of new releases. Each season we are treated to a new blockbuster, the “best game ever,” something bright and shiny to keep us entertained. But how many of these games are truly original or groundbreaking?
The sad truth is – hardly any. While there are notable exceptions, such as the quirky “Katamari Damacy” or the beautiful “God of War,” many releases take a time-tested formula and add their own bits of flavor. Take a look at the Madden Football series. Each year a new version is released with a slightly better passing or defense/offense system, yet it’s still NFL. Nothing has fundamentally changed about the gameplay; it just looks slightly better than last year.
So, why do so many games look like each other? Why isn’t there more variation in what we can play? In my opinion, there is only one reason: Previous success for a game or intellectual property drives the developer to make several sequels in order to capitalize on the initial product. Although this can lead to incredible profits (“Grand Theft Auto: Vice City” has made over $300 million since release), it makes other developers look at that success and try to emulate it.
When Medal of Honor was released for the Playstation in 1999, other developers saw the game-playing public’s craving for World War II first-person shooter games and began to make their own. MoH’s success inspired the creation of “Call of Duty” in 2003 mostly because there were three MoH titles released in 2002 alone, all of them successful to varying degrees. Gearbox Software is about to release its own WW2-themed sequel (“Brothers In Arms: Earned In Blood”), perpetuating a specific game style that has lasted almost six years. Am I the only gamer who is tired of one particular style and content being driven into the ground? How many more variations on Axis versus Allies can we have?
It’s no coincidence that some of the more recent creative titles, such as “Katamari Damacy,” “Shadow of the Colossus” and the Tony Hawks series are console-only; consoles are inherently limited, whether in control scheme or hardware, so the games must be immersive and different for them to sell. Console developers must be ever-more creative in using their available resources; they must always strive to find different game styles and types. When we look at PC games, however, the shelves of our local retailers are filled with a slew of clones all difficult to tell apart. Perhaps the power and resources of today’s home computers are so overwhelming that developers fall back on tested formulae.
Today, developing and publishing games are incredibly expensive with a single title costing $10 million or more to produce. This seems to be the biggest factor in deciding what route to take when making a new game. Many companies think it safer to extend an established subject and have almost-guaranteed success rather than gamble on a new type of game. But it is this variation in gameplay and design that drives the industry to evolve. Without the advances made by games such as “The Sims,” “Myst,” “DooM,” “Super Mario” and “Tetris,” we could still be playing “Pong and Space Invaders” — just with flashy 21st century graphics and sound. And none of these games (with the possible exception of “The Sims”) cost anywhere near $10 million.
For every game that drives the industry to diversify and evolve, there is a host of clones of existing games. Some companies try to spice things up by adding violence, adult language or nudity. The “Grand Theft Auto” series, which contains all three, springs immediately to mind. GTA started as a top-down 2D game on the PS1 that gathered very little support. It was only when GTA moved to a 3D universe that people really started noticing the game. GTA’s success has necessitated the developer to find more ingenious ways of selling their sequels. I think we’re all familiar with the infamous “hot coffee” modification, and undoubtedly this has damaged the general public’s view of the game industry. However, you can’t deny that more people will buy the next GTA game just to see if anything else risque has been added. But GTA isn’t innovation or creativity at work. The developer found a successful formula and has stuck to it through three consecutive games.
So what can gamers look forward to? The future is uncertain. There will always be a need for some types of games because of the huge audience that exists and will continue to do so. There need to be advances in videogame hardware that will generate new avenues of gameplay; virtual reality headsets have been a dream for over 30 years without success, but their day is coming. Games such as “Archer Maclean’s Mercury,” where you control a ball of mercury around an obstacle course by physically tilting your Nintendo DS, could light the path for games that need physical interaction. Sony’s EyeToy is a step in this direction although it needs much better games to release its potential.
The videogame industry needs to evolve to survive. Game designers must begin to challenge the status-quo and push out of their comforting yet restricting surroundings. We need to look at games from a different perspective, not just as fun but as entertainment and education. Sure there will some dreadful mistakes made along the way, but this is part of evolution — something we should not shrink from but embrace.
The Guildhall at SMU is an intense 21-month graduate program in digital game development. The Guildhall offers a Masters of Interactive Technology in Digital Game Development degree or a professional certificate. The curriculum was designed by expert teachers working with leaders in the gaming industry to provide students with a solid foundation in game development. Visit http://guildhall.smu.edu.
