Some would say being overly-critical via is a Generation-Y trait. You’ve probably heard the stereotype – people born after around 1980 are more demanding than previous generations. For the record I’m a Generation-X baby, and while it’s ‘cool’ to bag anyone born after you, I’m not really sure I buy into the whole debate. My generation is certainly not without its flaws – we are responsible for the Transformers movies being made for a start. It’s probably got very little to do with being born in a certain era, but more to do with how we choose to communicate. This includes how we choose to communicate about games.
There has been a rise in instant communication tools where we can bypass the burden of having to actually talk to people with the wonders of text messaging, instant messaging and the rise in online comment threads like those here at PALGN. While one can generalise, I think it’s fair to say that this type of communication has led to more extreme views being aired in the public forum. People often say things to you online that they wouldn’t say in real life, and their opinions become much more extreme as they try and provoke a response and differentiate themselves from the mass of opinion floating through the drivel of cyberspace. We all want to be a unique snowflake and want people to care about what we think, even though they rarely do.
PALGN's training program is pretty intensive stuff.
No longer do we have to wait for magazine articles to find out about games, and no longer do we just get dribs and drabs of information about games; now we can track them through their entire development cycles. For example, those cool cats at Naughty Dog are updating the public on the progress of Uncharted 2 through Twitter. With game developers using these avenues to promote their games, so have our avenues increased for giving our feedback and opinions (constructive and otherwise) on these games. Back in the day, you had to write a letter to the editor (do people even use pens anymore, or only styluses on touch-screens?) to voice your opinion on games and what you want to see. More often than not your opinion would never see the light of day. Nowadays, every Backyard Benny can spam the internet with their 'informed' opinions on how crap the new Max Payne game will be based on half a dozen screenshots.
Videogame developers are using this to their advantage. They selectively release these screenshots and videos and no doubt trawl through the comments and use it as feedback to build a game around. It cost them very little to gather this information. However, it seems to me that game developers are listening to us far too much, and it’s dangerous for a number of reasons. The first is that gamers generally aren’t technically-savvy, and while they may think being able to control a flying pig to collect midgets might be a cool scenario, it may not actually be any good based on the available technology. So this often means we are getting concepts that don’t work.
The second issue is that many of us aren’t creative people by nature and aren’t employed in creative fields. Our imaginations are often limited to what we’ve already seen. For example, how many times have you heard someone suggest that combining two games would be awesome? For example: “Wouldn’t it be great if you combined the open world of Grand Theft Auto with the graphics and shooting mechanisms of Killzone 2”. Unfortunately, game developers will often tailor their games to suit this feedback, which has seen many games starting to look and feel the same. I’ve mentioned it before, but consider Resident Evil 5. Even though Resident Evil 4 was very successful and highly praised, there was a small – but vocal – minority criticising the controls in the game. People posed the question: “Wouldn’t Resident Evil 4 be even better with Gears of War controls?” The end result proved that no, it wouldn’t be better, it made Resident Evil 5 feel too much like every other shooter on the market.
A life without videogames? Kill me now.
As the Transformers movies have proven, game developers who cater too much to fans only gives them what they expect and not really what they want. What most of us want – deep down – is innovation. Sure, we’ll still buy God of War 15 when they release it in 2030 even if it has the same gameplay and only slightly better graphics. However, I think the success of original niche games like Shadow of the Colossus and ICO, and more recently, original mass-market games like Prototype and InFamous have proven that people are hungry for innovation.
A couple of recent examples have also made me raise an eyebrow and question the world’s gene pool. Consider the ridiculous debate over which is better – InFamous or Prototype. Which is best? Who cares! They are both great games, and if you happen to prefer one type over another, do I really need to know about it? Sure, I’m the ultimate hypocrite – I’m here writing an opinion piece about other people’s opinions. But my point is why are we debating whether Prototype or Infamous is the best game? Why not just applaud them both for being good, original games in a market that is full of tired sequels, and bag the games that truly deserve it?
And the winner is...you.
Many of us seem to get rather bogged down in the detail and forget to have fun. I have absolutely no issue with Prototype and InFamous getting 9 out of 10 scores. Both games are a lot of fun. While they may have their flaws, shouldn’t the fun factor be one of the most important features? We get bogged down with visuals, tiny glitches and comparisons to other games, but if a game is fun and we enjoy it, shouldn’t that be the most important thing? Every game has glitches and bugs. Every game has loopholes that can be exploited. Hell, humans have yet to make an infallible piece of software (just ask Bill Gates) so why do we expect our gaming software to be flawless?
This overly-critical view is also affecting reviewers. Many gaming publications and websites have a policy that games rated 9 or above need to be editorially approved. This is not a criticism of PALGN (please don’t beat me again oh wise overlords), but lots of media outlets are doing this as a response to complaints from an overly critical minority. Giving a game a good score is somehow seen as a bad thing by some people. They will complain that the game has too many flaws to be given such a high score, they ask why their favourite game wasn’t also given a 9 and so on. Hence there has been a trend to give 7s or 8s out of 10 because it doesn’t tend to attract criticism. The other trend I find rather worrying is for reviewers to really lay the slipper into a mediocre game even if it’s only slightly lacking. I noticed this with games like Wolverine which were decent and fun, even if it was a bit unspectacular and repetitive. However, some reviewers took the opportunity to give it an unfair review. So what we are now seeing is a lot more games getting marked down that don’t necessarily deserve to be, but fewer games getting high scores.
At the end of the day, we expect too much from games (myself firmly included). This is a golden era for gaming and one that I have no doubt we’ll look back on and fondly remember. Forget the past. I was there, gaming wasn’t any better than it is now. It was different, but not better. So let’s appreciate gaming again, swallow back that vile we feel compelled to blurt out about games, and get back to basics. Remember why it is that we love games and forget the minor annoyances in the game you’re playing. It’s time to start having fun again.
My Favourite Waste of Time will be going on a short break while we relocate Jason to a dingier cellar.
Loading...
