The State of the Industry
In a nutshell,
- Nintendo is
kicking serious ass, and its execs are
giddy with joy.
- EA admits that
they should have backed the launch of the Wii rather than focusing on development for the PS3 and Xbox 360. Undoubtedly they, and many other large publishers, have already shifted their focus.
- Sony execs are
in denial and seem to be hoping that consumers will yet "come around" and realize that the PS3 is the only serious platform for real gamers.
- Microsoft's Xbox 360 platform is popular, but the red ring of death defect is
costing them dearly and
it shows.
- All of the PC gamers are
still playing
World of WarCraft.
Labels for Gamers
Just a bit of reaction here to a post
over on Infendo:
Jack: my wild prediction is that MGS4 and Halo 3 are going to be considered colossal duds
comparatively speaking
then the industry will go into this huge insecure era of self retrospection
David: bah .. just look at EA .. they’re getting into new games, moving away from ports-only, and embracing Nintendo’s philosophy
there are no more “gamers”. that term is dead.
you don’t say “oh, that person is a cell phone user” .. it’s just becoming a ubiquitous term
Jack: true. i was thinking back on the 80’s and 90’s, as i am wont to do, and i remembered there was no such thing as a hardcore gamer
hardcore gamer = what you get when your audience is shrinking and becoming an obscure niche
David: hardcore, to me, is a person who plays any game they can get their hands on.
but to most people, it’s a guy who plays Halo/GTA/MGS/etc
[...]
David: it’s the opposite in the film world, where a movie buff generally likes the smaller, independent films .. oddball stuff
a “hardcore” movie buff wouldn’t be used to describe someone who is generally interested in blockbuster movies.
I think perceptions will change soon ..
and they’ll have to
terms like “hardcore” or “gamer” no longer mean anything, at least to me
Jack: i’d call it the myth of the hardcore gamer
a marketing term drummed up by people like Microsoft to sell Xbox’s
to a certain demo
unfortunately, it was responsible for shrinking and alienating the market
For my two cents, I absolutely agree about the terms "gamer" and "hardcore gamer" as they're talked about here. Video games are mainstream media now, like television or pop music; there's scarcely a need to label people who are into it because it's no longer an eclectic activity. And yes, there is a perception out there that "hardcore" gamers are into stuff like Halo and GTA, and if they're
really daring, maybe Metal Gear Solid or Ghost Recon. To me, a hardcore gamer is somebody who cares about the stuff that's difficult to appreciate--not the mainstream blockbusters.
I don't doubt that the industry will go through some adjustments in its handling of the "gamer" demographic in the coming years. Nintendo has already started a potentially huge trend here; I think that one of the secrets to the success of the Wii is that between the Wii, the Xbox 360, and the PlayStation 3, the Wii is the only console that
doesn't market itself as being for extreme and/or hardcore gamers. This could be considered evidence that the majority of the market for video games is
not made up of insecure elitist seeking ego validation from the marketing machine of their favourite brand. Now there's a thought that should strike fear into the hearts of the marketting minds at Sony and Microsoft.
Sportsmanship
In case you missed it,
Gabe posted an inspiring story of sportsmanship on Penny Arcade the other day. The following short excerpt is only a portion of his tale:
Each of these kids when they lost shook the others hand and thanked them for the match. The winners complimented the losers Pokemon and strategies while impressing on them that it really was a very close game. I know they weren't my kids but as a thirty year old gamer with a kid of my own I could not help but be extremely proud of all of them. Their passion for the game was totally infectious and I've decided to throw away my spreadsheets.
It's pretty freakin cool that Pokemon inspires that kind of sportsmanship. Unfortunately, according to Gabe, there are also those players who equate taking the game seriously with sanctimoniously crushing lesser opponents to inflate their own fragile egos. This is hardly surprising--I can't think of any multiplayer activity that doesn't suffer from this dark flip-side to the sportsmanship coin. Some people simply don't try hard enough to balance the demands of the game against being a considerate person.
I can't tell you how many times, for example, I've joined a party in World of WarCraft and quickly noticed that one of the players is loud-mouthed, bossy, and ultimately incompetent. One starts to suspect a problem when something isn't quite right about the tone with which the guy demands to be summoned, or perhaps tries to volunteer somebody else to run to the instance with him to summon. Maybe he asks for party leadership so he can invite his friend; maybe he even gets it and neglects to offer it back. Maybe he starts making sloppy pulls, or fails to let the tank draw aggro. Maybe he's even single-handedly responsible for a wipe. The cherry on top is always when, at the end of the instance, this guy needs a BOP that obviously isn't useful for his class, and then claims to be a noob or simply falls silent to the cries of outrage from his party members. I wish that I were merely inventing this example, but those of you who play WoW know that I am not.
One thing to realize about WoW is that a character's abilities are not solely determined by their level, talents, and gear: the attitude and alertness of the player can count for more than all of those other things combined. I've out-healed Priests five levels above me simply because I was paying attention and they weren't. People tend to forget that being arrogant can actually seriously cripple a player's abilities in any multiplayer game if that player fails to be a team player because of their attitude.
I've also had experiences playing Magic the Gathering where conceit and self-righteousness have hindered the process of players learning from each other. Here we have a very information-rich game with great potential for players to express themselves and be constantly forging new territory, and yet I find that something about the culture of it tends to drive egos towards their most fragile state. When everybody is bitterly defensive and out to put others down, a game is bound to have a dysfunctional culture surrounding it. As is the case with WoW, some of the coolest people I know play MtG, but there is also no shortage of petty assholes playing it as well.
I just one to make one quick point, and I know with every fiber of my being that it will go unheeded, but nevertheless it is a simple point to make: if one really does fancy oneself as being a "hardcore" player of any game, then one has no burning need to prove it--least of all, to prove it by acting like a dick. There's a world of difference between simply being a great player and frantically scrambling to get other people to acknowledge one's greatness. However, by the time that any given player grows up enough to realize this, somebody else has already been born to take up their old habits, so I guess we're perpetually stuck with shitty sportsmanship.
Too bad there aren't more Pokemon fans out there; they would probably make great WoW players.
Jagged Alliance 2 for Cheap on Steam
Jagged Alliance 2, which is something of an old classic in strategy war-games, is available at the discount price of $5 on Steam. Better yet, for $8, you can get it packaged with Disciples II, to make a huge stockpile of turn-based mayhem. I could scarcely hold myself back.
I also downloaded and tried the Lost Planet: Extreme Conditions demo on Steam. On the minus side, it holds up poorly by PC gaming standards (this isn't exactly Battlefield 2142 in terms of depth) and it's a system resource hog (likely the result of a lazy port.) On the plus side, it's a Capcom game, and my Xbox 360 Wired Controller for Windows XP was much cheaper than buying an actual Xbox 360. :) The PC port isn't a seamless experience, but Lost Planet: Extreme Conditions is a solid game (although not a particularly remarkable one) and I definitely enjoyed the demo. There's a reasonable chance that I'll buy the full game.
I've also been tempted to get Devil May Cry 3 (Special Ed.) on Steam since I have, and extremely enjoy, the PS2 original. I've heard conflicting reports that DMC3 on PC is a disappointing port that doesn't play as well as its PS2 counter-part, although some people say that with a good game-pad it plays just fine. I'm reminded of the PC version of Resident Evil 4, however, which looks worse when the screen resolution is cranked up because the textures are suddenly inadequate. I don't know whether or not this is as much the case with DMC3 but I wouldn't be surprised. Frankly, I'm half-tempted to pay the $20 just to find out. It's a shame that there isn't a demo for it.
There's also a pretty good chance that I'll get Gears of War for PC when it comes out. Basically I'm just doing whatever I can to avoid getting an Xbox 360 (and an expensive hi-def TV to go with it) since I have a perfectly good gaming PC already. PC games also have the advantage that they're easier to play at work during lunch breaks and the like. Most of all, however, I'm just stalling to try and get a better feel for whether the Xbox 360 or the PlayStation 3 will come out on top before I commit to either one (I still think that the PS3 is more likely to win out and I'm rooting for it.) Having one of each is an option that I'd like to reserve as a last resort.
Self-Help Through Gaming
It's no secret that video games aren't given as much credit as a form of artistic expression or a medium for conveying ideas as other kinds of media such as mainstream print and film media. In my experience, any respectable gamer understands that a large part of the experience of playing a good video game stems from achieving things and attaining a sense of accomplishment. This aspect of gaming is easily misunderstood or unrecognized by non-gamers who see little more to the practice of gaming than slouching in front of a screen and adopting a zoned-out demeanor. Never-mind that reading books and watching TV programs is equally sedentary, if not more-so. The social stigma yet persists that video games are a lower form of entertainment, although this view is quickly starting to erode.
Finding inspiration and the drive to succeed is not an easy thing in life. Some people are in the right situations or have the right personality type to be able to seize the day and achieve things, but human nature is to settle into a comfort zone and to need a lot of prodding to be willing to move from that spot. Self-help books and motivational "how to succeed" presentations are popular resources that some people turn to when one feels compelled to do more with one's life and does not know where to turn, but I often wonder just how much good this sort of passive learning really does, aside from manipulating one's emotions and providing a fleeting rush of ambition. It's one thing to read about forming a plan, setting goals, working steadily, and dealing with roadblocks. It's something else entirely to actually set out to do those things on a daily basis and affect a lasting change on one's own life.
In my opinion, people should turn to video games to teach them about ambition and motivation. A good quest game teaches one about exploring possibilities and searching for a way forward. A good RPG teaches one about making steady progress and investing in the future. A good action title teaches that practice makes perfect and diligence is key to success. And in each of these cases, the player is learning these lessons through active participation. For instance, a quest game doesn't merely preach that one should explore possibilities; rather, it makes one explore possibilities and rewards one for doing well at it. These lessons are implicit in that the player succeeds through applying their ambition and finding motivation within themselves rather than merely reciting rhetoric and going through the motions. Instead of merely reading about what it is like to be ambitious and successful, the player becomes ambitious and successful, if only on a small scale.
There is, of course, a large difference between achieving things in a video game and achieving things in real life. A common trap that gamers fall into is becoming hooked on thrill of achievement in video games and not having the same discipline towards their lives outside of electronic fantasy worlds. Some individuals may even crawl into the escapist world of video games in a destructive attempt to blot out reality altogether. But perhaps there is less of a gap between actively making achievements in a video game and doing so in reality than there is between merely reading (or hearing) about how to make achievements and actually making them. Modern video games have started to reach a point where the line is blurring between social connections, skills, and occasionally even material wealth acquired in a video game and those same things formed outside of a game.
Online friends can become real friends--provided that they are real people, of course, and not merely scripted characters. Computer savvy acquired through gaming often translates well into a marketable workplace ability. And, incredibly, a small but growing number of people are actually able to create real-world wealth by selling services in massively online game worlds. As video games have become more sophisticated, the lessons that they offer in how to succeed have come to more closely mirror the nature of real world society. It is already the case that remarkable success in a video game (not unlike a remarkable athletic achievement, perhaps, or some other impressive performance skill) is already recognized as a real-world achievement. As future generations come of age, this trend will take stronger root.
An important point to recognize is that not all video games are created equal. A common tactic employed by some publishers and producers in the video game industry is to make their games too easy (idiot-proof, in some cases) in order to provide players with a cheap sense of achievement that does not require true effort. In much the same way that if one is serious about self improvement through books, movies, or music then one must seek out those works that push boundaries and are challenging to appreciate, one cannot confine oneself to video games that are merely cheap thrills and expect to be moved by them. There are great video games out there which can be a source of personal growth for the player, just as there are great books and great movies which provide perspective-altering experiences for an alert audience.
My bias is obvious: not only am I a great lover of video games, but I enjoy reading, watching movies, and listening to music, and I feel that all of these activities can serve as routes to personal growth and self-improvement. For the purposes of my arguments above, I take this view to be a given, and scarcely even bother to argue that a moving piece of art can do more to motivate and inspire than mere advice on how to set goals and work towards them. In this sense, my argument is two-fold: for the art lovers, consider that much in the way that more traditional forms of media can be much more than mere escapism by contrasting the real world and providing new perspectives, video games have that same potency to convey messages and change how people think and feel. And for the self-help fans, consider video games as a potential source of exercise and a way to put principles of self-improvement into practice on a smaller scale as a stepping stone towards making real changes in one's life. Just make sure to do some research and try some of the true classics of gaming before giving up on the whole spectrum of what it has to offer.
