Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

1402145 Posts in 68043 Topics- by 61634 Members - Latest Member: KamZone

August 17, 2022, 09:33:50 AM

Need hosting? Check out Digital Ocean
(more details in this thread)
TIGSource ForumsPlayerGamesHave video games been stagnating for the last two decades?
Pages: 1 2 [3]
Print
Author Topic: Have video games been stagnating for the last two decades?  (Read 4276 times)
Foxwarrior
Level 0
***



View Profile WWW
« Reply #40 on: November 17, 2021, 10:15:20 AM »

As far as single player games, I think Spelunky was an important development for video games.

If I may ask, why Spelunky specifically?

It gave people the idea "what if a roguelike was an action game" so it's the reason for the modern roguelike genre.

Is AI really the main factor that holds games back? I think we have very advanced AI algorithms at this point. But my impression is that most developers gave up on using them in games. Not because they are not feasible, but because games with highly developed AI tend to be less fun than games with "stupid" AI.

Yeah I wonder about this one... more intelligent but more inconsistent AI is actually quite annoying most of the time. Making smarter AI could work okay if you also made them better at explaining their reasoning to the player I guess.
Logged
Gio603
Level 0
**


View Profile
« Reply #41 on: November 17, 2021, 10:54:08 AM »

... Minecraft ...

... Pokemon Go ...

On these two I do agree! While I'm not sure that either was the first of its kind (Minecraft had at least one antecedent, I think), both were perhaps turning points in the degree to which they succeeded at what they did, thus not only gaining attention but also becoming exemplars.

(Just as DOOM may not have been the first FPS, but was perhaps the FPS that really defined and popularised the genre in its early days.)

If you are referring to that infiniteminer game, I don't think it's appropriate to call it Minecraft's antecedent. Yes, the concept is similar but the rpg/survival element is really what made minecraft massively more fun. The bridge between survival + mining for material is the key.

As for pokemon go, I think it had a real antecedent, and I think it was a similar game to pokemon go but instead of pokemon it's random monsters. But, because it was made by the same studio, I think it's more like an evolution albeit using a more recognizable brand (just like dragon ball fighter z).


It gave people the idea "what if a roguelike was an action game" so it's the reason for the modern roguelike genre.
Interesting!
Logged
Thaumaturge
Level 10
*****



View Profile WWW
« Reply #42 on: November 18, 2021, 08:10:57 AM »

It gave people the idea "what if a roguelike was an action game" so it's the reason for the modern roguelike genre.

Ah, that is a fair argument for it, I do think!

If you are referring to that infiniteminer game, I don't think it's appropriate to call it Minecraft's antecedent. Yes, the concept is similar but the rpg/survival element is really what made minecraft massively more fun.

Rather, I might argue that those elements that you cite are likely amongst the reasons that Minecraft was a greater success than its antecedent, rather than they make it so fundamentally different that it has none.

(Especially, come to think of it, as I seem to recall Minecraft first coming to prominence back in the days in which "creative mode" was the only available mode. However, this was some time ago, so I stand to be corrected!)

As for pokemon go, I think it had a real antecedent, and I think it was a similar game to pokemon go but instead of pokemon it's random monsters. But, because it was made by the same studio, I think it's more like an evolution albeit using a more recognizable brand (just like dragon ball fighter z).

I would argue that pretty much all antecedents are evolutions; I don't see the matter who made them as being important to that.
Logged


A Fantasy Top-Down "Space" Metroidvania
Itch page ~ Twitter
s0
o
Administrator
Level 10
******


eurovision winner 2014


View Profile
« Reply #43 on: December 31, 2021, 06:31:27 PM »

tbh i think a large part of it is just the natural course of a medium aging/"maturing". it's much harder to innovate in video games today than it was 20 years ago because all/most of the "obvious" innovations have already been made. tech breakthroughs that could lead to new types of games (a big driver of the rapid innovation in older games) are slowing down as well, though we're pretty close to one of those with AI right now.
« Last Edit: December 31, 2021, 06:38:12 PM by Silbereisen » Logged
Armorman
Level 0
**



View Profile
« Reply #44 on: March 24, 2022, 11:57:32 PM »

No.
Logged

Yes
michaelplzno
Level 10
*****



View Profile WWW
« Reply #45 on: March 25, 2022, 03:58:51 PM »

I've kind of flip flopped here and think that stagnate isn't the right word.

Basically, I see there being an opportunity for games that are like Saturday morning cartoons that isn't really being exploited due to poor communication and bad deals between the more traditional writers/creative teams and the interactive people.

The Rick and Morty game, where you go on an adventure and there is near incessant voice over work, was exemplary, in my own dreams of moving games forward, in that the narrative was really interesting with tons of voice over and interesting writing.

Even Mario and Sonic and so on are great characters, don't get me wrong, but they aren't really great compared to say Bart Simpson, Spongebob, or Boris Baddenough.

I think an interactive multiplayer narrative game with a lot of interesting characters and a lot of interactivity in the voice over work would be a fun project but I don't know if I'll ever get to work on it.
Logged

Pages: 1 2 [3]
Print
Jump to:  

Theme orange-lt created by panic