I read the article about David Jaffe's take on the gaming industry's focus on cinematic delivery vs. gameplay evolution yesterday, and I've been thinking about it since.
For starters, let me point out that I realize this is a subjective issue with no right or wrong answer, and I'm not trying to pick a side and say "Jaffe's great!", or "Jaffe sucks!", but, for the record, I do respect the man, appreciate his input and the way he speaks from the heart. I don't know the man personally, so maybe he's an A-hole, but, from my perspective as a consumer, I really have nothing bad to say about him.
At any rate, I was thinking about his argument last night while playing through more of "Resident Evil: Revelations", and his point kinda hit home with me. I do like the game, and am enjoying it, but gameplay-wise it offers nothing new. On the flipside, the production value is top notch, 3D effects aside (which are also great, IMO). What this has resulted in, so far (maybe halfway through), is another game that entertains me cinematically, but really is lacking any challenge or depth. It's not really stimulating me physically, thumb-wise, if that makes any sense.
I thought about it more today, discussed it with a gamer buddy of mine, and believe that Jaffe's point can't be made more evident when bringing motion controls into the discussion. Hardware deficieny aside (like Nintendo not implementing Motion Plus from day 1), I believe most developers really dropped the ball with motion gaming. With this generation we had arguably the most radical divergence from the norm in the history of gaming, and although it did well in spurring the growth of the casual market, it eventually fell flat in the hearts of serious gamers.
To be fair, the blame shouldn't fall entirely on developers. Many gave a good stab at it. I thought Nintendo did well with some games like "Wii Sports" and "Skyward Sword". Perhaps there wasn't enough time for the concept to evolve against budget deadlines and other business factors that inevitably and realistically restrain unbridled idea development. Or maybe the casual crowd was the true target after all, leaving diehards unfullfilled and disappointed.
From my personal experience with friends, the Wii came blazing out of the gates, igniting gaming parties of players enthralled and bedazzled by the opportunity to partake in virtual activities in ways like never before. Soon after, Sony and Microsoft took note of this success and developed their own tech.
Then, after a couple of years, it stopped. Like so many fads before it, people moved onto the next thing, or back to their old hobbies. It never progressed.
Perhaps motion controls could only go so far, and it's life expectency had been reached and fully exploited. Or, perhaps developers and publishers realized it would just be easier to stick with what's already made them successful up to that point and avoid the risk. There's no denial by me that motion controls are more a niché than the norm, but isn't there a way that both motion and standard controls can coexist to enhance the gaming experience in a way that neither can do on their own? I point to "Skyward Sword" as a case study in how this can be achieved. IMO, we need more of that.
Anyway, I just wanted to get that off my chest. Maybe we need a better interface. Maybe developers need more time to master the tech. Either way, I believe Jaffe was correct in addressing the issue, not for everyone, but for those like me who believe in the untapped potential that's been explored, yet not fully delivered.
- 3
Comments (2)
No comments:
Post a Comment