News Modern games have a "creativity problem"

That's why I love retro gaming, some of the old stuff rocks.

 

Barring a complete reinvention of the shooter genre, I think it's good that the controls are all largely the same. It allows experienced players to start a game for the first time and to immediately feel comfortable. It removes the controls as an obstacle to getting started, unless it's your first time playing a shooter.

However, I think it's important to remember that Sakurai is coming from a very different angle here: that of a Nintento developer. They simply don't have two analogue sticks and a pair of triggers to play with. He would be FORCED to be more creative in developing a control scheme for a Nintendo shooter. Perhaps that's the root of his statements here - he's trying to put a positive spin on what is arguably a serious shortcoming in all Nintendo controllers.

 

This is coming from the guy who has been remaking the exact same game for 11 years.

Pot, meet Kettle.

 

LMAo, so true, in fact, nintendo more then any other company are guilty of a lack of imagination in games, making the same games for 15 years.

 

Perfectly put.

Couldn't help but think while reading "Wait... the guy who made SSB and then simply cloned it two more times onto new consoles is talking about creativity?"

 

I love shooters because they're competitive and you can easily adapt between games, not all shooters feel the same and not all are designed in the same way... I feel I can easily adapt between Battlefield and Left4Dead and then maybe even Shattered Horizon and they all feel different, but you got the same basic controls...

 

Anyone tried playing other games with guitar hero (or similar) controllers?

 

Sorry what? Go make another Mario please.

 

I think it's worth noting too, and I do hate to generalise but here goes, the guy is from Japan, and Japanese gaming culture is hugely different to the west now. And that difference can be summed up with this simple sentence, "Japanese games have been **** for years."

If I was living in a culture that produced crap games I'd sense there was a problem too.

I used to think Japanese games were great. Fatal Frame, Virtua Fighter 5, FF7, Resi Evil 4, there are some gems in there from recent history, but mostly these days it's just this factory crapping out tat that I'd be offended to use for a coaster. I'm sure somebody will correct me and point to a good recent Japanese game, but I'll pre-empt that by pointing out that no, that game isn't any good and the person who pointed it out is wrong. So there.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwvCl4mgG7g

This is the sort of thing he likes.

 

huh, when i saw the words "creativity problem" i thought he was going to go after the fact that our "game of the year" lists contain ~10 iterations of "nameless soldiers kills lots and lots of bad guys/terrorists/aliens/zombies". I like the idea of almost all shooters having the same basic controls, it makes it easy for experienced gamers to bring their reflexes into new games. though I always use custom keybinds anyways.

 

"You know creativity is a dual edge sword in the gaming world of today. Gamers hate change always have and always will. I embrace new ideas even if the game isn't as good or a triple A title. For example Rouge Warrior on Xbox 360, while it's no call of duty or big budget title with lots of development time and money it does do something that not one other FPS does, you can take cover into third person which contrary to reviews works well and has saved my butt on many occasion.
Then you pop right back into first person, I love this...think of call of duty or battlefield 2 and being able to hug a wall in third person the dynamic of the game and MP would change quite a bit. It's the same with Unreal 2 Lilandri Conflict, gamers saw the game running in third person and it barely sold, yet what gamers should have done is the fact that you can play it in FP just like Unreal Tournament, you can set the options up without melee weapons or third person to play it like classic unreal.
No one bought this, it was at one time 5 dollars new at gamestop. Some gamers back then when I showed them this game they said I didn't know you could still play it like good ol Unreal? Duh...Unreal Tournament 3 came out and while better looking then Unreal 2, Unreal 2 was a better game in design and flexibility while playing...gamers hate change, if you change a shooters controls or anything else the game will fail, look at Advent Rising one of the best ever games created and yet because of the controls (flick) targeting people hated this game, guess what you don't even have to use it, and you can play the game in first person.
You see gamers want enough of the game to be different to fee new, but also want enough of it to be like what they are used to playing so there is a happy medium, don't put a cover system in a third person shooter and see the reviews treat it...like crap. I generally buy games that most do not to see how they are, and I find many diamonds in the rough this way, some not so good either but more often than not these are good games. I love Mass Effect one and two, and Battlefield 2, and Darksiders, Burnout Paradise, but I also love Bulletwitch, Two Human, X Blades, and yes Rouge Warrior, there is just something fun about that game that I love playing it, is it great...no, is it good...yes in many ways, s it perfect..not at all.
Creativity doesn't sell, God of War comes out, and sells millions of copies but it really just took a Devil may Cry violent approach in 3D with great story and it was awesome, but that too became the standard, you see it in Dante's Inferno, Darksiders, Devil May Cry 4, and Bayonetta although Bayonetta is way more action packed than the God of War series....sorry fan boys love me some Bayonetta.
Most games taking a chance on something really new...usually fail....sadly. You have to have the best of both worlds in a game but we are responsible for that. We buy those games and while the next Halo will be fairly cool it really is the same game I have been playing since part 1, which is why I stopped after 3.
Creativity is there you just gotta know where to look ..................."

 

I think Masahiro Sakurai must have a translation problem. Having consistent controls across similar genre of games is essential for ease of use and to be able to pick up the game and play it without having to re-learn a new set of controls or to have to customise the controls each and every time, though I do find it necessary on some games to tweak the controls a little as needed.

Working on the Nintendo 3DS with it's own limited controls comprising of a D-Pad and 4 Buttons, oh and a stylus is hardly cause to go ranting about limits of control systems, at least computers have 100+ keys and multi-button mouse options available in addition to gamepads, joysticks, stearing wheels, flight sticks, etc.

What we do need is stronger more consistent story lines and a greater sense of overall realism to give us a complete experience and so that we feel truly part of the game not just sat at a desk looking at a screen. Something that takes us further than even an interactive movie ever could, I don't just want to see the game, I want to feel that I am not just in the game but a real part of it too.

Guildwars 2 seems to be heading in the right direction with dynamic events:
http://www.guildwars2.com/en/the-game/dynamic-events/

 

I disagree with the realism comment. So many games are fun because they AREN'T realistic. Do wizards and elves really battle orcish hordes? Um, not around here they don't. But how can you look at all of the hugely popular games based around that genre of literature and say that there aren't some amazing, fun, and brilliant games there?

What I think is a better idea is to not do a half-assed job on realism. Games that try to be realistic and aren't tend to be boring. Either make the game realistic, or discard any pretense of realism. Fantasy games, space games, and even cartoon-ish games can all be very fun, because they don't try to be realistic and end up failing at it. None of the Blizzard games are realistic, but don't even try to tell me that just about every game they've made has been a huge and enduring success, with millions of players. Nothing Nintendo makes is meant to be realistic, but they're also a gaming legend.

I'd even go so far as to say that realism can inhibit the creativity of the games. Stop churning out identical WW2 Allies vs. Nazis games, or Afghanistan U.S. vs. Terrorist games. Don't be afraid to push the limits with a sci-fi or fantasy game, or even to release a FPS game like TF2 that drops and pretenses of modeling any historical war, and just says "It's RED vs. BLU" and instead devotes its energy to making a game with a ton of variety and interesting combat situations beyond just exchanging SMG fire on the beaches of Normandy, and doesn't take itself too seriously in the plot department.

 

Games have been pretty uninspiring as of late, but it certainly isn't due to controls.

 

...could it be possible that CONSOLE PLAYERS as a whole ruined the FPS?

A fit-for-toilet-paper game like Halo comes along and becomes a hit because the poor console player just doesn't know any better. They never played the Half-Life series and seen how creative the FPS can be. So developers eager to sponge up the console market's cash come along and churn out crap after crap and spoon-feed it to the crowd, while turning a deaf ear toward the mouse-and-keyboard crowd's cries for a higher standard.

I may be biased. I would give consoles a try... if they came with a mouse and KB and ran windows.

 

Wut? the FPS was born on the PC, not console... that is why you feel trapped, trapped into buying recycled console crap, trapped into buying the next COD or HALO re-hash.

Now please..... GTFO

 

The console experience does ruin perfectly good franchises - Call of Juarez is my biggest bugbear - the first one was excellent, the consolified sequel sucked, so you may be onto something there. I'll be giving Crysis 2 a wide berth, that's for sure.

I do find it strange how the Orange Box was not that popular when it was ported to the the consoles - but maybe the use of subtle humour, physics-based puzzles was too much for some people? Modern Warfare 2 is incredibly popular on the consoles - possibly because it requires no intelligence to play it.

 

I think Orange Box sold pretty well on consoles, but the PC experience is obviously where its at. Not only do you get updates, its cheaper too.

 

That's.. A bit rich, coming from the Smahs Bros. developer, isn't it?