What I've found though,
as the year has paced itself along, is that I am really all that
excited. A few years ago, around this time, I was usually buzzing
with anticipation. I couldn't wait to see the new games that were
going to be announced. I wanted to see just how the industry would be
innovated. I wanted to see the changes that would occur. Now though,
I find myself just idly waiting. While I am still looking forward, I
find that I presently am not excited.
Somewhere along the
line, something caused me to lose that initial excitement. Their are
a few culprits that could end with a finger pointed in their
direction. It could be the endless tide of first person shooters,
with their yearly installments and never truly evolving gameplay. Or
maybe it is to blame on the mobile gaming trend, with it's over
saturation of games that are basically the exact same. It was
difficult to really figure out why it's so hard to get excited, but I
think I have actually managed to nail it down.
The blame could be said
to rest on the simple fact that innovation and change just aren't as
blatant as they once used to be. In older days, we would look at a
new console and be blown away by what we were seeing. Graphics crept
closer and closer to being real with every step. Games became more
complex and all the more immersive as new technologies came in to
existence. The biggest jump obviously would have been when we made
the leap from the Super Nintendo and Genesis to the first
Playstation, and the excellent Nintendo 64.
When we were seeing
those consoles for the first time. We were truly seeing something
different. We were greeted by the sight of true 3D imagery for the
first time. Instead of jumping and running on a 2D plain, Mario could
now jump and run wherever he could see. This changed gaming, and
people took notice.
As things went on, we
were greeted by similar jumps in technology and things were well.
Microsoft gave us the first dedicated online service for home
consoles in the form of Xbox Live, Nintendo delivered the first
motion based home gaming system. Now though, the jumps seem smaller
in significance, and as a result, don't quite create the massive
explosion of anticipation that we would normally have expected. So
far, we have received on of the next generation consoles, and been
given a small glimpse at another. And it feels like we are just stuck
right where we had begun.
Nintendo was the first
of the big three to make a mistake. While anyone in the know was
aware of what the Wii U was, those in less attentive groups may have
missed the point entirely. The biggest issue may simply be the name
of the device. Wii U doesn't really sound like a new console, does
it? What it actually accomplishes is sounding more like an expansion
to the already existing Wii. Which, as they found out pretty quickly,
could confuse their targeted consumers without much pause.
This may seem like a
marketing problem more than anything, but I'm blaming it more on the
fact that there just isn't enough different about the Wii U. It still
has the same rectangular Wiimotes, it still possesses the same name,
and has only slightly upgraded graphical ability. The biggest
addition to the console, was the tablet-styled controller. While a
nifty little idea, and certainly something worth exploring, it really
doesn't feel like something you can sell an entire console on(Couple
that with so far, a ghastly line up of games, and we aren't doing so
good).
So let's go over that
again. Nintendo expects people to pay $300 for a console that they
already probably have at home, some slightly flashier images, and a
tablet controller. Call me a skeptic, but was the success of the Wii
not resting solely on the shoulders of the motion control. At the
same time, was that not also hinged on the idea that the more casual,
non hardcore market of people would be into the idea? Why release
another more casually aimed device, if you had already nailed down
that market?
I could probably go on
and on about the failures of the Wii U, but that really isn't the
point of this entry. So let us refocus our eyes to someone who is
actually targeting a more core audience- Sony, who has officially
announced their next generation console, the PlayStation 4. What we
get here, like the predictable name, is actually of no surprise.
Details so far are fairly slim, but what we do know has not really
given me a whole lot of hope.
Like we would expect
from a new piece of hardware, the PS4 comes equipped with a lot of
upgraded internals. Normally, I would be all kinds of excited about
this, unfortunately this doesn't make much of a difference to me. We
have seen games already running on next generation engines and
hardware, and the difference isn't big enough to really cause much of
a stir(at least as far as I'm concerned).
In fact, the only big
change that Sony has applied, like Nintendo, is to the controller.
What we get now is a clusterfuck of gadgetry that is really hard to
understand. Like a lot of people withing the core gaming community,
I'm fond of my controller. I'm more than happy to see that Sony did
not kill it in favor of the motion craze. At the same time, I'm not
exactly jumping for joy at the amount of stuff they decided to strap
on to the predictably named DualShock 4 controller.
These additions include
a small touch pad on the front of the controller. While and
interesting concept, that builds on today’s trends, and makes an
attempt at capitalizing on them. I really fail to use the practical
use for any core gaming experience. Along with it they have upgraded
the six axis system from the previous controller. One thing instantly
comes to mind though. Wasn't the motion gimmick on the DualShock 3
all but ignored during the life span of the PS3? The answer is a
booming yes. Why do we need this again? Why would Sony decide it was
necessary to include once more?
While the other two new
additions seem far more useless, the third addition to the controller
is by far my least favorite. Sony has seen it fit, to include a share
button. Of course, trying to take advantage of the ever popular
social media craze. This little button, will allow users to quickly
share game footage and stats, all at the click of a button. While I
have had a few moments where I would think, “Hey, that was
awesome... Too bad no one saw it.” I can also come to one simple
conclusion, no one actually gives a fuck. I could only name a few
select people on the entirety of my Facebook list that would even
bother to click play on a shared video. So again, this feels like a
limited, and almost unnecessary addition, just trying to take
advantage of a craze that will inevitably die out(At least I hope...
).
Now, while I do feel
that Nintendo and Sony haven't quite brought enough to the table. And
yes, I will be fair and say that Sony still has a lot to show us. We
still have one of the big ones remaining to try and wow us. Yet even
they aren't on a good track yet. Microsoft has a devil on it's back,
and it is casting a shadow bigger than I would have though. That
devil has a simple name Always Online.
While that idea doesn't
instantly make me want to lift a pitchfork, I can see where some
people would come to blows over it. I live in an area where my
internet is always steady and very rarely cuts out. In essence, I am
already online twenty-four hours a day. This really, would not change
a whole lot for me. I am aware though, that not everyone has that
luxury. You hear internet horror stories all the time. People unable
to connect, or those who lose their connection constantly.
On top of that, we have
already had a few mishaps involving the concept. Diablo III and the
newest Sim City both released and played with the idea of needing a
constant connection to be accessed. This created all kinds of server
related issues, and to put it simply, pissed off a whole lot of
people in the process.
This is where I get
confused by the idea of Microsoft building such a concept in to their
next home console. The biggest trend in gaming these days is
accessibility. We have already seen how always online can go wrong,
and how people react when it does. It just seems like bad business
for one of the biggest technology developers in the world to ignore
such blinding evidence. Are we to believe that they are so crass and
full of themselves that they would blindly ignore it. While I do see
where they could get away with it, I also would like to put faith in
the idea that they are a little bit more savvy than that. And I'm
putting my two cents in now, the next branded Xbox will NOT require
an internet connection at all time. Simply on the preface that it is
a dumb fucking idea.
With all that said, we
are not entirely doomed. Smaller gaming platforms are beginning to
surface. Mobile gaming is on the rise, and crowd funding has become a
real thing(Though, to keep length in mind, I will bypass those topics
today). There are still ways games can be innovated. And there are
plenty of people out their who want to see it happen. Maybe we just
need to rely on someone who is willing to take the risk. Someone who
has nothing to really lose, and the world to gain. Maybe that's what
the stagnant nature of the big three is showing us right now. I just
hope I'm proven wrong.
No comments:
Post a Comment