Contemporary gaming is not a patch on the older games

[Lark]

In terms of strangeness and creativity:-

A world is invaded by aliens which is draining it of colour, so a wizard creates a flying ball which he can pilot remotely to fight the aliens, killing them and releasing drops of colour which can be captured to restore the world to colour.

Then the weirdness which is Shadow of the Beast, combining fantasy, sci-fi and just madness, all two dimensions, simple game play but very imaginative.

There's tons of others, weird dreams, ancient suit of anti-rad, bounder, the jet set willy series, monty mole series, head over heels etc.

By contrast all the modern games have to offer is a single format which has been ceaselessly cloned, I'm not surprised that updated versions of head over heels or wizball exist online, fixed up by programmers, or that games like shadow of the beast have been rebooted but it does mean that there's that sort of archeology of earlier more imaginative or creative ages going on.

Do you think that earlier games were more creative than the present and what do you think contributes to the advent of a creative epoch which winds up being the source of later concept mining?

 

[Virtual ghost]

Do you think that earlier games were more creative than the present and what do you think contributes to the advent of a creative epoch which winds up being the source of later concept mining?

To be honest I was thinking about opening a thread like this.


For me games/gaming were generally more creative in both design and gameplay.
The main reason for this are:


1. Back then you didn't have youtube or communities that present you with solutions. You had to figure everything on your own or at best in combination with your friends and you trully had to use your brain in many situations. Often you didn't even have the list of key/action so even that you had to figure on your own.


2. 25 years ago video games were something that was made by enthusiast for enthusiasts. While today gaming is industry like any other: it wants to be available to the average consumer, it earns billions, it has typical management/marketing structure, it is regulated by many laws etc. Also 25 years ago only very progressive/smart people had something on which you can play a video game, so in order to keep people interested you had to provide something more mentally challanging. Also in games you were free while today they give you: guides, notes when you will be attacked, how many levels you have left, friends send you massages that pop up all the time .... and all of that has basically killed the creative side of gaming. Since the logic has shifted from explortation to obedience.


3. Most of the modern games forgot the basic rule and that is that the game should be entertaining, how exactly they will be entertaining is complex issue, but this is their basic purpose. Playing the same level over and over just so that you get 1000 wins achievement is texbook autism in my book and parhaps the most important flaw on modern games. In a way this is like modern block buster vs. Charlie Chaplin film. The modern one may have "everything" but it just wouldn't do the trick to the degree that it should.


4. Due to hardware games used to be a lot more simple in the terms of graphics and therefore they were much easier to consume as games of some sort. Since the details of graphics didn't allow such explicity in violence or drama and therefore it was harder to take them seriously or get trauma out of them. Video games used to be games while today I am not sure that the "game part" truly fits what we actually have.


So yeah, I think that some processes should be reversed at least to some degree. Especially since we are getting more and more "zombie people" because of this.

 

[Luke O]

More games nowadays look like style over content or just sleeker looking copies of their ancestors.

 

[tinker683]

Do you think that earlier games were more creative than the present and what do you think contributes to the advent of a creative epoch which winds up being the source of later concept mining?

Well...yes and no.

Games back in the day were simpler (due to limitations of the technology and budgets) so they were easier to pick up and go with, but they were also a niche market so you could experiment with them more.

Nowadays games are these YUUGE giant productions with complete orchestral soundtracks, voice acting, and a shitload of high end animation. I can understand why they're 'clonish', because of such huge production costs they need to make sure they turn a profit. I remember reading an article somewhere about how gaming is in decline because it's just so damned hard to make profitable games these days, especially in relation to the advent rise of the indie and smartphone gaming markets. It's why pre-orders and DLC have become such a thing, it's one of the few reliable ways they can make money.

It's an unfortunate conundrum we gamers have found ourselves in.

 

[Dr Mobius]

No games are more creative now; because of the lack of hardware issues. For instance I could use the term side scroller, (up, down, left, right, jump shoot, a short circular life-cycle, and a overarching threadbare plot.) which would encompass the vast majority of “old games”, not exactly Citizen Kane is it?

The advent of the console generation (Slowing down the graphics race.), online distribution services, and the rise of indie gaming through things like Kickstarter, Indegogo, and Steam Greenlight has completely reshaped the industry. For the first time the consumer is no longer beholden to massive gaming production companies. Right now is a renaissance for gaming; hence the incredible glut of games. If you're not find creative unusual games; its because you're not looking in the right place.

As for personal creativity...... does it get any more creative then modding? Check out NexusMods

Most of the complaints seem more directed at blockbuster titles, (Call of Duty, Battlefield etc.) then at the gaming industry in general. It would be like me judging the film industry on Marvel films alone.

 

[Cellmold]

I'd look towards indie developments for more creative elements.

But if you're looking at the larger industry and mainstream it's bound to follow the pattern (expounded upon by others in this thread already) of standardisation, stagnation through reluctance to risk things beyond that standardisation & repetition of the same titles and style of play. All for the sake of consistent profit and thus security.
It's a larger issue overall though.

The creativity of stories and premises is still developing. The Stanley Parable, Journey, Limbo, Planetscape: Torment (though I guess that can be considered old) as just a few examples I've seen and/or played.

I think it's that there is now more to sift through to get to them than there used to be. Not to mention the horror of pay wall systems, particularly in app games. However while it's possible there might be some upper limit to humanity's creativity as a whole, I'm not sure we're done yet.

I may revisit this thread after work for a more in-depth post.