Have AAA Games Have Stopped Innovating?

ultimatebob

Lifer
Jul 1, 2001
25,134
2,450
126
Do you agree with this author of this article that AAA game producers no longer attempt to innovate?

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/art...-Says-AAA-Games-Have-Stopped-Doing-New-Things

It makes sense to me... AAA games costs tens of millions of dollars to develop now, so they stick with tried and true characters and gameplay elements to insure a return on their investment. It doesn't help that all of the big publishers are mostly owned by publicly traded companies as well.

It seems that all of the innovation comes from the mobile platforms now.
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,052
357
126
No I disagree. Most games are evolved from other titles in a particular genre. They do something different all the time. You just won't necessarily see a Super Mario Bros 3 type of innovation any longer.
 

ultimatebob

Lifer
Jul 1, 2001
25,134
2,450
126
No I disagree. Most games are evolved from other titles in a particular genre. They do something different all the time. You just won't necessarily see a Super Mario Bros 3 type of innovation any longer.

Do you really think that something like Halo or Call Of Duty has really changed all that much in the past three releases?
 

cmdrdredd

Lifer
Dec 12, 2001
27,052
357
126
Do you really think that something like Halo or Call Of Duty has really changed all that much in the past three releases?

Halo sure has. Especially the MP modes, and the movement feels very different in Halo 5 than previous titles. CoD I haven't played in a long time but I'm sure there are small incremental changes to various things. I know people were complaining about the verticality of the maps in one edition of the game for example.

Like I said, evolution not revolution. There isn't very many industry shaking titles like SMB3, Ocarina of Time, the first Halo game, Oblivion. That game where people say "wow this changes what is possible with the genre" doesn't come around very often any longer. The Witcher 3 is close in terms of how an open world RPG can be handled.
 
Last edited:

Lil Frier

Platinum Member
Oct 3, 2013
2,720
21
81
Do you really think that something like Halo or Call Of Duty has really changed all that much in the past three releases?

Go play Halo: Reach. Then put in Halo 5. You'll have your answer VERY quickly, and it's that Halo is one franchise that is constantly changing things. Even Halo 4 to Halo 5 was a pretty big change, given what it added (clambering, ADS for most every gun) and subtracted (loadouts, optional Armor Abilities).

I don't have time to read that article right now, but I'll say two things:

1. Look at indie gaming. So much of it is iterative bullshit. You have 8 billion platformers, how are they innovative? How about racing games that just try to compete with Forza (like Project CARS and Assetto Corsa), rather than be something big and new. Some of the biggest independent ventures on have been sequels (Shenmue 3), iterative releases (Planet Coaster), and generally unoriginal.

2. What IS innovating? If it's games like Gone Home, I want no part of innovation. I can't stand the interactive movie/walking simulator garbage like that. Now the new indie cliche seems to be disabilities, be it Beyond Eyes (where you're a blind person) or that game where you've got clinical depression or that upcoming Sony offering where the main character has PTSD or whatever. Gaming's "innovation" hasn't been about fun games, it's been more about political statements and stupid stuff of that nature. It's an entertainment medium that's becoming politicized by a lot of indie (and, now, bigger) developers. It's wretch-inducing garbage, IMO.
 

TeknoBug

Platinum Member
Oct 2, 2013
2,084
31
91
Going from Fallout 1 & 2 to Fallout 3 was innovating, but going from Fallout 3 to 4 wasn't, Fallout 4 is pretty much 85% identical Fallout 3. Lots of sequal games these days just really aren't changing that much, some changes for the worse (like FIFA).
 

Skel

Diamond Member
Apr 11, 2001
6,216
674
136
Going from Fallout 1 & 2 to Fallout 3 was innovating, but going from Fallout 3 to 4 wasn't, Fallout 4 is pretty much 85% identical Fallout 3. Lots of sequal games these days just really aren't changing that much, some changes for the worse (like FIFA).

I had been told a few times that the proper change between titles is 20%. If you change more than that you risk losing your core audience. No clue how true it is, but looking a lot of games it seems that way.
 

Fulle

Senior member
Aug 18, 2008
550
1
71
Whether or not something is "innovative" or not is often thrown around as some hugely important thing, but I honestly don't think it matters. At all.

For example, the steak dinner I had last night wasn't innovative. Some simply seasoned grilled beef, with some baked potatoes with butter. Freaking delicious, IMHO. Much preferred by me, to some fancy smancy innovative tofu bullshit my sister cooks.

With games, same deal. Was there anything shockingly innovative about Bloodborne? I'd say not. It's just a well crafted game, and it's glorious for it. I wouldn't want Bloodborne PS Move addition, but that's just me. Some people liked Twilight Princess Wii's waggle controls, so there's an audience for gimmicks, but what I want is just a well crafted game. If a game is filled with new ideas, all the better, but it's not a pre-requisite for greatness.
 

007ELmO

Platinum Member
Dec 29, 2005
2,046
36
101
Doing a lot of development on the side with the Oculus Rift, I think you will see the next gaming shift to VR. We will need a slightly lighter weight headset and battery operated, but what I've developed just on the side in short time frame is amazing, considering I have no game programming experience, but I am a programmer. To have 180 FOV essentially, but with headtracking, so it's essentially 360FOV.

I was considering setting up a simulation room with 3 projectors and edge blending to get 180FOV for simulation games (flying/racing). I may still do that, but after doing a little gaming on VR, I feel it's not necessary.

I would like 4K res in the headset too, and then you're really set. 1080p doesn't look horrible that close, but it can be improved.

When you have the idea that the user can physically look to the left with head tracking (vs. using analog sticks/etc), but still move forward, the reality becomes encompassing. You can look down off a cliff (when coded correctly), into deep space, and get vertigo. With VR headsets you open up a few new controller concepts. You can raycast the eyepoint of where a player is looking, and take action. The raycast is a specific Vector3 (x, y, z) pair (start point your eyes, end point what you're looking at). So once it intersects with another object (or set of objects), you can do something. I use it to navigate my "select a player" screen, just by having the player look at the player they want to choose.

I integrated the LEAP into having controllerless hand movements as input, but it doesn't feel super accurate and is tiring on the muscles, even when implemented correctly. The Kinect is probably a better hand/finger tracking implementation, but it's too expensive to think a consumer would have both the kinect and a VR headset in their house. so I've resorted to implementing control with a PS4 controller, but still using VR for the camera viewpoint.

Nintendo is known for advancing controller evolution, which opens up new ways for playing games, which can equate to newer types of games. I would be very surprised if Nintendo's next console had VR, though.

The rift has a lot of accessories coming out soon, masks that simulate heat, wind, water, smells. Think of walking into a burning house and feeling heat on your face (or maybe even melting it, where you must go to ER). There is also an omnidirectional treadmill (that most gamers won't use of course), but you stand in place and turn any direction and walk/run/crouch/jump realistically.

The rudimentary game I'm working on now, the engine is almost complete - given a level idea, I can usually create it within 60 minutes or so. I have a few game ideas I'd like to implement, just to see how it feels. My next project is an angry birds VR clone from the perspective of the bird.

The biggest benefit is sit down gaming, I don't see most gamers fit enough to actually move around for more than 15 minutes.
 
Last edited:

purbeast0

No Lifer
Sep 13, 2001
53,421
6,256
126
when 1/2 the games that come out this gen are "remastered" games of old, there is absolutely no innovation going on. and these companies don't HAVE to innovate because the masses eat this crap up. i mean look how many people on this forum alone were so excited for the last of us remastered (which was like not even 2 years old when it came out), or things like ff7 remake?

my gaming habits in general have died down a lot just because i'm less interested in a lot of stuff now. most of the stuff i do like is sequels now a days, although my favorite genre now a days is fighters. and people who don't know anything about fighters think that every street fighter game that comes out is the same as the previous one, and i can't blame them for thinking that, but they are completely different.

but other than fighters, i'm pretty much into arcade racers or story driven 3rd person games like uncharted, tomb raider, etc. i'm completely over the fps genre and haven't liked sports in over a decade. i can't do rpg's anymore either.

i do like the random indie game though, or games like geometry wars, but those usually only last a little bit for me.

without reading the article, i definitely agree that there isn't much innovation. but as cmdrdredd mentioned, i think it's more evolution than anything. it's just taking the next logical step with a lot of these games that i enjoy, which is just making them more cinematic and movie like in the experience.

i just enjoy fighters because they are literally the only multiplayer games where if you lose, it's 100% completely on you. there are no excuses as to why you lost, and i just enjoy that type of competition.
 

Lil Frier

Platinum Member
Oct 3, 2013
2,720
21
81
So 50% of them are remakes (not necessarily true), and that means nothing about the other 50% is innovative?

Bullshit Internet logic.
 

purbeast0

No Lifer
Sep 13, 2001
53,421
6,256
126
So 50% of them are remakes (not necessarily true), and that means nothing about the other 50% is innovative?

Bullshit Internet logic.

if you couldn't i was being sarcastic with my numbers i dunno what to tell you.

my point was that the majority of games coming out aren't doing anything new, and the tried and true formula is printing money so why would they do anything different.

i'm hoping what street fighter is doing for e-sports is going to help out that niche genre. last weekend capcom cup paid out $120k to the winner of the sf4 tourney. sf5 next year is going to be paying out even more at capcom cup. that's some serious dough.
 

Lil Frier

Platinum Member
Oct 3, 2013
2,720
21
81
I just want more characters added for Pokken Tournament. That's my care, with regards to fighting games, haha.