4 ms·
You kid--but it's the sad reality of most modern games (or at least the ones that generate the most press). Rather than just putting a new "pretty face" on the
by bcrescimanno 16y ago
You kid--but it's the sad reality of most modern games (or at least the ones that generate the most press). Rather than just putting a new "pretty face" on the same old shooter concept that's been the norm for the past 15 or so years, I'd like to see game companies get back to innovative gameplay concepts. Interestingly, I see far more of that innovation coming from the indy publishers who don't do anything in the realm of "crazy 3d graphics" than I see coming from studios churning out "DOOM clone v 29345.2"
- awj 16y agoYeah, unfortunately as you ramp up on art assets to get to the level of "crazy 3d graphics", the people holding the money tend to want more and more of a sure thing. 'DOOM clone v 29345.2' will inevitably sell boatloads. 'Toasty the toaster & the raspberry jam rebellion', not so much.
- narrator 16y agoWhich is why Braid and Minecraft did so well, even though they were largely programmed by single individuals instead of large teams. They took risks that the big studios wouldn't take.
- mistermann 16y agoTrue, but for every Braid, there were how many hundreds or thousands of failures? You can't blame the guys writing the huge cheques these days to expect likely success. That being said, if they were smart, they'd be setting up some skunkworks projects on relatively small budgets....which I'm not aware of.
- bcrescimanno 16y agoThat's my point--all of the "big innovation" money gets thrown at graphical innovation. I'd love to see game companies innovating in other areas.
- Qz 16y agoYou mean like Kinect? That wasn't chump change by any means.
- bcrescimanno 16y agoI amend my statement to, "almost all"