4 ms·

> The minor tragedy in all this was not so much the end of interactive movies, given what intensely problematic endeavors they so clearly were, but rather that

> The minor tragedy in all this was not so much the end of interactive movies, given what intensely problematic endeavors they so clearly were, but rather that the latest games’ vision proved to be so circumscribed in terms of fiction, theme, and mechanics alike. [...] A shocking percentage of the new games being released fell into one of just two narrow gameplay genres: the first-person shooter and the real-time-strategy game. Citation needed? This feels like fuzzy language used to protect an unverifiable claim. What is a "shocking percentage?" Looking at (say) Wikipedia's list of notable games from 1998 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998_in_video_games https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998_in_video_games) I see a reasonable mix of genres. In fact, "shooter" games (searching the page for the number of uses of 'shoot') seem to share the top spot (21 results) with "role-playing" and "sports" games, the latter genre being neglected entirely in the article. (Noting that some games are listed as multiple genres) From the article's earlier longing for the simpler time of gorgeous, hand-crafted 2D art, I wonder if the author simply misses classic-style adventure games. In response to that idea, however, I point out the Old Man Murray article (https://www.oldmanmurray.com/features/77.html https://www.oldmanmurray.com/features/77.html) on the death of adventure games: in brief Murray argues that the genre became so wrapped up in its own puzzle conventions that it became impenetrable to new players.

zerocrates 6y ago
This blog focuses more on computer gaming than console gaming, which tilts the balance more toward those genres. There is a bit of a tendency to overlook sports games in most "gaming" discussion, I'd say, despite their significant popularity, but they've also never been as much of a force on the PC as on consoles or arcade. If you read the blog, you'll also note that that the author makes no secret of his fondness for graphical and text adventures, and the blog has covered both extensively, including their declines. Interestingly, particularly since you brought up 1998, the Old Man Murray article you linked to was written by Erik Wolpaw, a well-known game writer who later worked with Double Fine (founded by Tim Schafer of LucasArts fame, the designer of 1998's Grim Fandango, basically the swan song of the LucasArts adventures) and Valve, purveyor of 1998's acclaimed FPS Half-Life.
- Majromax 6y ago
  > This blog focuses more on computer gaming than console gaming, That's true, but on the other hand the article quotes a Sierra executive as saying: > “What we think of today as a computer or a videogame system,” wrote Ken Williams of Sierra that year, “will someday assume a much broader role in our homes. I foresee a day when there is one home-entertainment device which combines the functions of a CD-audio player, VCR, videogame system, and computer.” ... which exactly describes a console. Not quite the consoles of the late 90s, but 2000's Playstation 2 was price-competitive with stand-alone DVD players. It feels selective to lament the path of the game-industry as a whole while defining that industry to exclude the systems that look like the supposedly-unfulfilled prediction above. Perhaps this is just a problem of context, since I'm coming to this series of articles in medias res through with this 'part 5' link. > There is a bit of a tendency to overlook sports games in most "gaming" discussion, I'd say, despite their significant popularity, but they've also never been as much of a force on the PC as on consoles or arcade. Honestly, I think if we're going to name overlooked genres, the elephant in the room is the hidden-object genre. These games aren't often included on _lists of games_, but as I understand it they're quite popular and profitable, especially on mobile platforms.
- chongli 6y ago
  There is a bit of a tendency to overlook sports games in most "gaming" discussion They kind of should be overlooked, if you're talking about a particular year in gaming. They don't follow the same release cycles as other games. Most of the time, the only prominent change from year-to-year is the update to team rosters and player statistics. In that sense, sports games are more like an annual subscription to a single game (with the occasional engine update or refresh) than a series of games. Of course, there are some (non-sports) game sequels that are little more than a content refresh but they are the exception and often receive negative criticism unless the content itself is really good.
- megameter 6y ago
  The blog has touched on sports briefly, in discussing EA and Madden. Something that really does need covering, though, is the context of sports games in the early 90's, when they were starting to portray the gameplay in full, in real-time, for a mass market. The sports had always been there, but they were generally categorizable into management simulations(on computers) or simple arcade interpretations(coin-op and consoles), with only a little bit of crossover. That changed in the 90's, as sports games started to boast increasingly comprehensive featuresets while maintaining an arcade become-the-star-player feel; they represent a path that is clearly "outreach" and yet distinct from interactive movies, from puzzle games, and from Doom. Also, the numerous claims over the origins of Madden NFL make for an amazing tale.

zerocrates 6y ago

This blog focuses more on computer gaming than console gaming, which tilts the balance more toward those genres. There is a bit of a tendency to overlook sports games in most "gaming" discussion, I'd say, despite their significant popularity, but they've also never been as much of a force on the PC as on consoles or arcade. If you read the blog, you'll also note that that the author makes no secret of his fondness for graphical and text adventures, and the blog has covered both extensively, including their declines. Interestingly, particularly since you brought up 1998, the Old Man Murray article you linked to was written by Erik Wolpaw, a well-known game writer who later worked with Double Fine (founded by Tim Schafer of LucasArts fame, the designer of 1998's Grim Fandango, basically the swan song of the LucasArts adventures) and Valve, purveyor of 1998's acclaimed FPS Half-Life.

Majromax 6y ago
> This blog focuses more on computer gaming than console gaming, That's true, but on the other hand the article quotes a Sierra executive as saying: > “What we think of today as a computer or a videogame system,” wrote Ken Williams of Sierra that year, “will someday assume a much broader role in our homes. I foresee a day when there is one home-entertainment device which combines the functions of a CD-audio player, VCR, videogame system, and computer.” ... which exactly describes a console. Not quite the consoles of the late 90s, but 2000's Playstation 2 was price-competitive with stand-alone DVD players. It feels selective to lament the path of the game-industry as a whole while defining that industry to exclude the systems that look like the supposedly-unfulfilled prediction above. Perhaps this is just a problem of context, since I'm coming to this series of articles in medias res through with this 'part 5' link. > There is a bit of a tendency to overlook sports games in most "gaming" discussion, I'd say, despite their significant popularity, but they've also never been as much of a force on the PC as on consoles or arcade. Honestly, I think if we're going to name overlooked genres, the elephant in the room is the hidden-object genre. These games aren't often included on _lists of games_, but as I understand it they're quite popular and profitable, especially on mobile platforms.
chongli 6y ago
There is a bit of a tendency to overlook sports games in most "gaming" discussion They kind of should be overlooked, if you're talking about a particular year in gaming. They don't follow the same release cycles as other games. Most of the time, the only prominent change from year-to-year is the update to team rosters and player statistics. In that sense, sports games are more like an annual subscription to a single game (with the occasional engine update or refresh) than a series of games. Of course, there are some (non-sports) game sequels that are little more than a content refresh but they are the exception and often receive negative criticism unless the content itself is really good.
megameter 6y ago
The blog has touched on sports briefly, in discussing EA and Madden. Something that really does need covering, though, is the context of sports games in the early 90's, when they were starting to portray the gameplay in full, in real-time, for a mass market. The sports had always been there, but they were generally categorizable into management simulations(on computers) or simple arcade interpretations(coin-op and consoles), with only a little bit of crossover. That changed in the 90's, as sports games started to boast increasingly comprehensive featuresets while maintaining an arcade become-the-star-player feel; they represent a path that is clearly "outreach" and yet distinct from interactive movies, from puzzle games, and from Doom. Also, the numerous claims over the origins of Madden NFL make for an amazing tale.