Seventh Generation: The Years of Stagnation

[j_factor]

Except there hasn't been an online revolution this gen, just an incremental increase over previous gens. If any system was "revolutionary" with online gameplay, it was Dreamcast. But even then, there was online console gaming before that. If downloading games is the new revolution, count me the fuck out.

Anyway, almost every game in the past 20 years builds upon something that came before it. Truly "new", completely different types of gameplay have been extremely few and far between (and for good reason). I doubt any game released anytime in the near future (or the recent past) is going to have anywhere remotely near the status of the first platformer, the first racing game, the first adventure game, etc.

On the other hand, now that I've typed that, I'm not even sure that that's a great thing to look at. The first racing game was an early arcade also-ran called Night Driver; the first adventure game was this text-based thing that ran on a PDP-10 that very few people have played; the first scrolling platformer was an obscure arcade game called Jump Bug that most people haven't heard of.

[AD2101]

The idea for this topic started when I first witnessed a video for Soul Calibur IV. Now, thanks to a review on Classic Game room on Virtual Fighter 5 I am almost completely convinced that the console market / games are in full blow stagnation. The only way I can describe it is if you ported all the Sixth Generation games on to the Seventh Generation consoles.

lol I would be screaming stagnation too if I had to judge an entire generation of gaming based on what I saw in a fighting game.

I really don't think this generation is off par with the innovation we've seen in past console generations. In fact, I think it might be more so with games like LittleBigPlanet (as much as I don't like it) with its level creation and its whole "sharing" mentality, COD4 for what it did for online play, games like Bioshock and MGS4 for what they did in storytelling and plot twists (which is what I'm all about), Mirror's Edge which is an idea which has never really been done before, Fallout 3 for reasons already mentioned, and I'll even give a toss out to Dead Space for creating an environment I didn't think was really possible yet.

Come to think of it, seeing as I totally neglected the Wii in my above rant, including the Wii into all of this makes this probably the MOST innovative generation I've seen maybe ever in my lifetime. You can disagree but that's my take on it all.

[MrMatthews]

Except there hasn't been an online revolution this gen, just an incremental increase over previous gens. If any system was "revolutionary" with online gameplay, it was Dreamcast. But even then, there was online console gaming before that. If downloading games is the new revolution, count me the fuck out.

Anyway, almost every game in the past 20 years builds upon something that came before it. Truly "new", completely different types of gameplay have been extremely few and far between (and for good reason). I doubt any game released anytime in the near future (or the recent past) is going to have anywhere remotely near the status of the first platformer, the first racing game, the first adventure game, etc.

On the other hand, now that I've typed that, I'm not even sure that that's a great thing to look at. The first racing game was an early arcade also-ran called Night Driver; the first adventure game was this text-based thing that ran on a PDP-10 that very few people have played; the first scrolling platformer was an obscure arcade game called Jump Bug that most people haven't heard of.

I agree with everything you said (and thanks for reminding me again about the dreamcast).

This generation is unique, however, in that at least two of its systems boast an all-encompassing "online experience" in terms of multiplayer and digital downloads. I personally get a lot more out of the latter than the former, but that's another argument entirely.

And "revolutionary" does not technically mean being the first to do something, I think. The first fighter was what ... Karate champs or something? But I think we can all agree that the first bona fide fighter hit was Street Fighter II. All it takes is one game in each genre to light the fire, and all the other developers are throwing in their own fuel (which in turn burn with varying strength and longevity).

Most of those titles were already on the market long before the last generation, so all developers could do was present those concepts in different ways that hopefully felt fresh and new.

[Zebbe]

Video game stagnation began when the Mega Drive was discontinued in Japan. It will never fully recover.

[TheEdge]

lol I would be screaming stagnation too if I had to judge an entire generation of gaming based on what I saw in a fighting game.

They were the first games that popped into my head. I'm sure I can name countless shooters on the new consoles that all can be used as examples of stagnation. All I see is same games with better graphics.

"Resistance: Fall of Man" is a clone of Call of Duty with an even more linear path. The only thing that makes it look vast is because the environments are huge but your actual path is narrow.

Also.....

GTA4 is another rehash of the last 3.

Stagnation! All around me. Change the Aquarium water for god sakes!

[AD2101]

I'm sure I can name countless shooters on the new consoles that all can be used as examples of stagnation. All I see is same games with better graphics.

GTA4 is another rehash of the last 3.

Again, I'd be screaming stagnation too if I were judging things based on shooters, fighters and Grand Theft Auto.

I think your playing the wrong games, honestly. Play some of the titles from my last post then let me know if the water is just as stagnant.

[j_factor]

And "revolutionary" does not technically mean being the first to do something, I think. The first fighter was what ... Karate champs or something? But I think we can all agree that the first bona fide fighter hit was Street Fighter II.

That's kind of my point. When Street Fighter II came out, one could've easily argued that it wasn't really revolutionary, it just did what Karate Champ (and IK+, Karateka, etc.) did, only better and more popularly. Almost all games build on games that came before it. Progress comes in steps; it's really hard to draw the line at what is and isn't new.

For example, someone said Gears of War was just RE4 with a different storyline. Well isn't RE4 just Resident Evil meets Tomb Raider? And Resident Evil is basically a clone of Alone in the Dark, and Tomb Raider is just Flashback in 3D and a different setting.

[MrMatthews]

That's kind of my point. When Street Fighter II came out, one could've easily argued that it wasn't really revolutionary, it just did what Karate Champ (and IK+, Karateka, etc.) did, only better and more popularly. Almost all games build on games that came before it. Progress comes in steps; it's really hard to draw the line at what is and isn't new.

For example, someone said Gears of War was just RE4 with a different storyline. Well isn't RE4 just Resident Evil meets Tomb Raider? And Resident Evil is basically a clone of Alone in the Dark, and Tomb Raider is just Flashback in 3D and a different setting.

How about Prince of Persia in 3D? That's what influenced Out of This World and Flashback, I'm sure.


And thanks for pin-pointing RE4's origin - I was trying to think of what games might have inspired it, and I supposed Tomb Raider without the platforming is about as close as it gets.

[InternalPrimate]

Stagnation? When in the history of gaming have we seen such community building? Mainstream games like Little Big Planet and Rock Band promote getting together and creating content for all to share. That may have been somewhat common for PC gamers in years past, but not so for console gamers.

And I hate to bring up the Wii in this conversation, since most hardcore gamers hate the console at the moment, but the system is the antithesis of your argument. Sure there's a ton of shovelware, but you can't ignore imaginative games like World of Goo, Boom Blox, Super Mario Galaxy, and Wii Sports.

I'm really liking the current generation of games. In contrast, I was extremely bored during the previous two generations when I would wait for a few major releases. If anything, Xbox Live Arcade, PSN, and WiiWare has completely turned this around. When waiting for major releases, it's nice to have some innovative options for a low price.

[gamevet]

the PS2 only had a few revolutionary titles: grand theft auto, Ico, and Shadow of the Colossus. The other games were just evolved games from the previous generation.

Ahem...Guitar Hero?

The XBox had, what? Halo? Doom3? Fable? Knights of the old republic? Were any of those revolutionary? Your answer will probably lead directly to my next example:

Burnout 3: Takedown may have came out on the PS2 as well, but the Xbox version defined the way an online racing game should be. It wasn't just about racing; it was about laying carnage on the rest of the field and laughing all the way to the finish line.

That's kind of my point. When Street Fighter II came out, one could've easily argued that it wasn't really revolutionary, it just did what Karate Champ (and IK+, Karateka, etc.) did, only better and more popularly. Almost all games build on games that came before it. Progress comes in steps; it's really hard to draw the line at what is and isn't new.

That's not true at all. Those old fighters were pretty much button mashers. Try mashing the buttons with an experienced Street Fighter II player and you'd be picking up your tokens off the floor. Street Fighter II, and the series, was about combos and the parry system. Even Mortal Kombat didn't have as deep of a fighting system.

[MrMatthews]

Ahem...Guitar Hero?

Really? Was Guitar Hero the first rhythm game?

It may be huge, but I can't see how a game with such insipid gameplay can be considered revolutionary. I play the same game on my steering wheel when I listen to the radio every day. For free.

[gamevet]

Really? Was Guitar Hero the first rhythm game?

It may be huge, but I can't see how a game with such insipid gameplay can be considered revolutionary. I play the same game on my steering wheel when I listen to the radio every day. For free.

I didn't say Taiko Drum Master.

Going by that analogy, Super Mario Bros. isn't revolutionary at all, since I was playing live platformers in my back yard as a kid.

Technically, Guitar Hero is a revolution of the game Simon, created by the Grand Daddy of videogames, Ralph Baer. Of course, he stole the idea (ironic twist) from Nolan Bushnell's game called Touch me.

Guitar Freaks was first, but on the home market Guitar Hero was a revolution. Guitar Freeks is a clunky game in comparison.

How is Metroid Prime any more revolutionary?

[j_factor]

Guitar Hero is just Beatmania with a Guitar controller.

[MrMatthews]

I didn't say Taiko Drum Master.

Going by that analogy, Super Mario Bros. isn't revolutionary at all, since I was playing live platformers in my back yard as a kid.

Technically, Guitar Hero is a revolution of the game Simon, created by the Grand Daddy of videogames, Ralph Baer. Of course, he stole the idea (ironic twist) from Nolan Bushnell's game called Touch me.

Guitar Freaks was first, but on the home market Guitar Hero was a revolution. Guitar Freeks is a clunky game in comparison.

I almost gave Simon a shout out in that last post, but decided I would rather compare Guitar Hero to banging away on my steering wheel instead, since that's about all the gameplay amounts to.

How is Metroid Prime any more revolutionary?

Metroid Prime was a far more engaging experience; mixing equal parts shooting action, adventure & exploration, platforming, and puzzle elements. Halo was just an FPS; only a few polygons and a headset above Marathon.

[Tanegashima]

Metroid Prime is a lot like Power Slave (Saturn, PSX) with platforming and puzzle elements too...