The evolution of designs rather than narratives...

[Zodd]

Are the call for the evolution of video games misplaced by focusing on improving the narrative of games rather than creating new genres by creating new game designs?

A past issue of Game informer had a 2 page spread of the origin of video game genres, For example:

1st shoot em up was spacewar
1st beat em up was Kung fu
1st 2d fighting games was Karate champ


There really have not been any new game designs created to generate a new genre for a long time. At most, its mainly been a mix of the standard genres to form a better narrative story.

[brandman]

Which issue of Game Informer was that? And what about motion control genre? Touch screen genre? Those were recently made genres. But yeah, there are new genres few and farther between as time goes by. Yet when is the last time you saw a new genre in theater? We humans only have so many emotions and senses to appeal to.

[Zodd]

Which issue of Game Informer was that? And what about motion control genre? Touch screen genre? Those were recently made genres. But yeah, there are new genres few and farther between as time goes by. Yet when is the last time you saw a new genre in theater? We humans only have so many emotions and senses to appeal to.

Game Informer issue 217....... 2 last pages on the issue.

Motion control and touch screens have only changed how the player interact with the games......they did not create a new genre.

Mario is still jumping in 2d or 3d.....only now you are able to create a game where you touch the screen to make him jump rather than press a button.


The survivor horror genre always stick to the same design:

Limited inventory
Puzzle solving
Monstrous enemies
Dark Atmosphere

When we are scared and in terror......are we really thinking about how many bullets we have left? Or how many bandages we have on us to cure ourselves from injury?

Is a monstrous enemy always needed to instill fear?

What if a game forced you to play for a long period of time or else all your saved game gets erased.....wouldn't that create a fear of losing your hard work?

There are so much game designing that have not been tapped into or experimented on to create something completely new.

[brandman]

Game Informer issue 217....... 2 last pages on the issue.

Just checked, and I own it. I can scan the pages in question if anyone wants to read that issue in particular.

BTW Zodd GI lists "Kung-Fu Master" as the first Beat 'Em Up, not just Kung-Fu.

Motion control and touch screens have only changed how the player interact with the games......they did not create a new genre.

Mario is still jumping in 2d or 3d.....only now you are able to create a game where you touch the screen to make him jump rather than press a button.

I see your point, but new control method always create new genres. Take for example Cut the Rope for iOS. That produced a whole new genre that technically wasn't possible before, and even if it was, it was never a realized game/concept until the wide availability of iOS enabled devices.

[Zodd]

Just checked, and I own it. I can scan the pages in question if anyone wants to read that issue in particular.

BTW Zodd GI lists "Kung-Fu Master" as the first Beat 'Em Up, not just Kung-Fu.

....you're correct, sir.

I see your point, but new control method always create new genres. Take for example Cut the Rope for iOS. That produced a whole new genre that technically wasn't possible before, and even if it was, it was never a realized game/concept until the wide availability of iOS enabled devices.

Mmm......I didn't consider iOS games......

[Cronozilla]

Wouldn't cut the rope be considered a reflex puzzle game?

I've always had the impression that the most stiffing thing that happened to video games was the rush to create genre classifications. Then developers and publishers just made to the mold, rather than really just creating something abstract and running with it.

And now, it's just ... you have to be in Genre X or Y to even be paid attention to.

There have been new genre advents and genres have expanded, though.

[Zodd]

Then developers and publishers just made to the mold, rather than really just creating something abstract and running with it.

Exactly.

Mario, Zelda, Mega Man, Metroid, Sonic, Dragon Warrior, Street Fighter 2,......They are considered classics because of game design.....not because they had powerful emotional impact on the player.

Maybe we have forgotten that

Are there even Game Designers anymore? I don't think so to a degree. The Indie scene is a great place to begin the process of bringing back design again...but the designers are still copying the same genres of the past but with a gimmick.

There are more Game Directors rather than designers.

[disorderlyvision]

I think there are still fresh ideas and slightly new genres popping up frequently enough. Games like Katamari Damacy, loco roco, etc are hard to classify.

Also, Your definition or criteria for a genre may be overly broad so that you lump a bunch of games together that aren't all that similar. Rocket knight adventures and bubsy are very different games yet both are considered platformers.

There are a lot of nuances you could look at to call something a new genre. I guess the best analogy i can come up with is with metal music. Some people lump it all together as metal, but to people who appreciate and understand it there are dozens of sub-genres: Death metal, metalcore, hardcore, grind, thrash, sludge, doom, funeral doom, glam, technical, mathcore, southern, christian, etc etc...

[Nemoide]

I think brushing off the creative design of games because of being in an established genre can be doing a pretty big disservice. I mean, you can look at Child of Eden and say "eh, it's a rail shooter with rhythm elements" or "it's pretty much Rez with better graphics" but that's really not conveying how creative that game really is.

(Maybe I'm a little confused about your claim; it seems to me that you're saying that because there aren't new genres of games, that game design is stagnant.)

[brandman]

Wouldn't cut the rope be considered a reflex puzzle game?

True, it could be lumped with the likes of Tetris and QBert.

Well he/she got it right:

I think there are still fresh ideas and slightly new genres popping up frequently enough. Games like Katamari Damacy, loco roco, etc are hard to classify.

Another game that was hard to classify was Spore.

I've always had the impression that the most stiffing thing that happened to video games was the rush to create genre classifications. Then developers and publishers just made to the mold, rather than really just creating something abstract and running with it.

And now, it's just ... you have to be in Genre X or Y to even be paid attention to.

There have been new genre advents and genres have expanded, though.

I have to agree with you on that. Especially with today's cookie cutter shooters. Then again we had the same thing happen to platformers after Mario and Sonic, to puzzle games after Tetris, and to music games after Guitar Hero and Rock Band.

Mario, Zelda, Mega Man, Metroid, Sonic, Dragon Warrior, Street Fighter 2,......They are considered classics because of game design.....not because they had powerful emotional impact on the player.

I dunno 'bout you guys, but I was pretty emotional when that baby metroid saved meh life in Super Metroid.