Game Generes - We Ever Going To See Some New Ones?

[oDDity]

I've reached the point where I can't stand the idea of playing ANOTHER shooter or ANOTHER strategy title. I'm not quite there with RPGs yet, but it's getting close.

They bore me now, I feel I've seen it all before, only with slightly diffeent graphics and a slightly different plot.

Yes, we've seen attempts at cross breeding genres to make mongrel hybrids, usually with genetic flaws, but are we ever going to see some fresh new genres - something we've never seen before or even thought of?

Or, on the other hand, is this it? The genres we currently have are all we're ever going to have, and for the rest of gaming time, we're just going to suffer these same genres regurgitated endlessly.

THe stealth genre is under-represented at least, so it still has some milage left in it, but the big three - FPS, RTS and RPG -ane bustng at the seams, one more generic title stuffed in there and it'll blow - and take half the planet with it as well.

[gleeful]

well my hope rests on the merging and evolution of the existing genres if not new ones per se.

 

i'm about as bored as you i guess with run-of-the-mill fpss for their linearity and mostly triggered events and enemies. they all feel like interactive movies to me.

 

the only somewhat classic rpg i truly enjoyed in the last few years was the Gothic series.

 

what i want are simulated worlds with AIs that have their own agenda and react "intelligently" to any given situation. i want the freedom to act as i see fit and have the world react to me.

 

i do not want to feel that things just happen for my sake - i wanna be part of a living world, not the friggin center of the universe.

 

i know that's pretty vague, but maybe you get what i mean.

 

kind regards

gleeful

[Darkness_Falls]

I know what you mean. But there will be new genres, I can almost guarantee. I liken it to the late 19th century I think it was when they thought they had nearly invented everything there was to be invented. I'm glad they were wrong.

 

I think the only thing that will keep me interested in the current genres, for the time being, is the increased abilities of future PCs. There's still a TON of improvement that can be had with regards to AI, graphics, sound, etc. I get amazed by technology sometimes.

 

The thing that I hate about most FPS games is that there are so few enemies/NCPs. I've played nearly all the way thru Doom 3 and I think I can count the number of unique NCPs on one hand... maybe 1.5 hands. I get bored fighting the same enemies time and time again through most games. NCP/character skins/textures are re-used so much in a given game that you get bored with looking at them. How is it that in real life nobody looks the same, yet in a video game everyone looks the same? Technology will allow much more variety some day. I also hate townspeople in video games. They just stand there, barely have a purpose, are dumb as a rock, or have some stupid pre-scripted thing going on. Nothing innovative at all. I've been waiting a long time to have much more advanced interactions with townsfolk and see them actually have a highly advanced purpose and way of carrying out their lives. I think 3-D games will play a huge role in gaming some day. No, this wouldn't be a new genre, but it would be something to keep me interested in the given genres. (I know you can do 3-D games now, but again... there's a huge amount of improvement that could be had over time (technology).)

 

Even though the genres are saturated, there will always be a shining star to put a new twist on things, or create a world we haven't been to and want to visit. I know this doesn't result in 'new genres,' but there's always new stories to be told. You read a lot. There are a fairly limited set of book genres, but are you bored with books? Maybe there's hope you won't always be bored by the same-o, same-o genres.

 

Regardless, I still feel there will be new genres introduce over time. With advances in technology, I feel new genres will be introduced.

[oDDity]

I guess I'm looking at it the wrong way. THe ultimate goal in the future will be to do away with genres completely, and give he player freedom to play as he wishes in a large virtual world. Still, that's a long way way, and on the meantime we're stuck with genres, and boy are they getting tedious.

[Darkness_Falls]

Yeah, I cringe every time I go to the gaming store looking for new titles and only see more WWII FPS games; magic games, tedious adventure games or MMORPGs.

 

I've almost gotten to the point where I prefer just sticking with titles I like (franchises) and wait for them to build a new version of it (Thief, Age of Empires, Civilization (tho it's gotten to be too much for me), etc.) -- and hope the new version is good. And then in-between these I just play filler games, sleeper hits and various surprise blockbuster games that happen to come out.

 

I can't wait to try Age of Empires III.

[Napalm]

Yes we are going to see a new genre very soon. Open ended vastness, as you said. This is one of the future goals of multiple of the large companies. Go look at some of the unreal three technology videos, where there developers talk about it being there next goal. Or morowind oblivion. System are getting closer to being able to handle vast continuous enviorments, with open ended do what you want style play. As more computer handle the games it will probably become more common. I don't think we'll see new genres (its like books, most books fall under one catagrory or another, they don't make new ones) however we'll see great advances in The level of interactivity.

[Macsen]

I think Thief III under Looking Glass was going to go down the way of huge open vastness.

 

But there are arguments for and against this. If you have a huge world where the player can do anything he wants it's unlikely to have the same care and creativity poured into every part as a game where you are on a linear course.

 

See WoW for example. It's huge, but every quests is almost exactly the bloody same. There are about sixty models with different textured variations from world to world.

 

An FPS mmorpg could be fun.

[Fingernail]

The level of interactivity and developer control, especially that of narrative control is nowhere near advanced enough to create something as perfectly crafted as HL2 in an open-ended vast game environment; it's tight sequences and integrated plot only work in such a linear environment.

 

The argument is that people make their own stories; but in reality, what fun is that? MMORPG's pit players alongside each other to make stories, in some cases at least, but it's not until we have decent on-the-fly INTERESTING REALTIME PLOT generators that this type of game will be nearly as entertaining as a Thief, or a Deus Ex.

[gleeful]

The level of interactivity and developer control, especially that of narrative control is nowhere near advanced enough to create something as perfectly crafted as HL2 in an open-ended vast game environment; it's tight sequences and integrated plot only work in such a linear environment.

HL2 is a great example as it is the anti-thesis of all the things i want from a game.

 

after about an hour of being intrigued by the pretty graphics / great art-direction / flair the disappointment set in and soon after - sheer boredom.

 

why? because i realized that i had no freedom whatsoever - i had to do every single thing exactly the way the programmers had intended it to be done.

 

i felt like a prop whose sole purpose it was to trigger those nifty sequences they had set up for me.

 

and that just doesn't cut it for me anymore.

 

i had expected at least the amount of freedom i had experienced in Far Cry. not a great game by any means but i had much more fun playing it than i had with HL2.

 

because my enemies "had a life" and weren't just triggered my way, they had a decent AI and i could choose how i wanted to play it (do i sneak by, do i snipe them one by one or do i just go in with all guns blazing).

 

i seriously hope that the fps-genre gets a well-needed kick in the butt soon, else i ain't buying anymore.

 

kind regards

gleeful

Edited May 7, 2005 by gleeful

[Napalm]

look at Elder scrolls 3 morrowind though, They successfully created a huge world that had an interesting plot, but lsoa vast openend place to explore. I felt tht was wonderfully done, and they used old tchnology to do it.

[SneaksieDave]

I was just about to mention Morrowind. And it's a mixed bag, IMO.

 

On the one hand, it's enormous (I've STILL only explored 1/3 of the world - hey, I'm thorough), and there is a ton to do - quests, char improvement, exploration, hunting, etc. But on the other hand, there's actually too much open-endedness. Somehow these two sentiments co-exist in my mind: 1.) Morrowind is excellent and I love it, and look forward to Oblivion, 2.) Morrowind is boring as hell and I often don't play for months because there's "just no reason to do so."

 

So it's a touchy territory, to NOT make things focused on a particular gameplay niche/genre. Morrowind took a great concept and spread it too thin. Love it, though, despite that flaw. For the most part. Or something.

[gleeful]

I was just about to mention Morrowind.  And it's a mixed bag, IMO.

another great example how to not do it.

 

morrowind was non-linear and huge but it was dead.

 

most of npcs were pointless (nothing to say, nothing to do).

 

most of the landmass was pointless (bleak and ugly too).

 

most of the things you could do were pointless (ie not much reaction from the world).

 

none of the npcs had a life (they couldn't even sit down for christsakes).

 

the game was awfully balanced (i was an invincible, multi-millionaire within 12 hrs and thus not motivated to play on).

 

having said that i'm still very much looking forward to oblivion. i think that this time they could really pull it off as each elder scrolls game was a significant step forward.

 

kind regards

gleeful

[oDDity]

I agree about morrowind, gleeful, exactly how I summed it up myself at the time. It was still great to play for a while though, and I thought it was one of thoese games that could have been truly great with another year or two of development put into it. I was actually angry at Bethesda more than anyting for getting so close and then dropping the ball.

Hopfully Oblivion will be that truly great game.

Vast open worlds and open ended gameplay will only be interesting when AI reaches a certain level of realism. So programmers can give AI a personality and set them loose, rather than dialogue trees, and then they can makes theirs own sentences up on the fly and ask as answer quuestions. That's a long way off, obviously. Currently dialogue has to be written for every single NPC and for ever possible eventuality, and that is very limiting.

Edited May 7, 2005 by oDDity

[Fingernail]

I think the problem I have with MMORPGs is that, aside from a few small and crappy ones, they're all either high-fantasy Morrowind style, or sci-fi space exploration/combat games.

 

I would KILL for a Thief-style City (or even a world of competing cities) MMORPG, with a loot economy, guilds, merchants, thieves etc. Be a noble by day, and rob others by night kind of thing... hire others to guard your property, etc. Buy your way into politics.

 

Now THAT would be something I'd subscribe to. I just don't much care for this Orcs & Wizards crud.

[Macsen]

I would KILL for a Thief-style City (or even a world of competing cities) MMORPG, with a loot economy, guilds, merchants, thieves etc. Be a noble by day, and rob others by night kind of thing... hire others to guard your property, etc. Buy your way into politics.

 

Now THAT would be something I'd subscribe to. I just don't much care for this Orcs & Wizards crud.

Me too, I even started planning something similar. Dark Mod II, perhaps?

[Fingernail]

Hehe....perhaps if we hack the D3 netcode...

[Macsen]

Alright, screw this single player crap. :lol:

 

I wonder how the game would work though. I suppose all guards would be NPC. You could choose whether to be a normal Thief, a Pagan Sneak, or some kind of sneaky Builder monk. A number of disused buildings would stand about town, that guilds or single players can move into and put cash into renovating. But then other players could sneak into your building and grab your gold, so you'd need to hire guards.

[Fingernail]

Aww hell naw;; all characters played by humans, gottobe

 

A real fully functioning steampunk/victorian/medieval city

[Macsen]

Aww hell naw;; all characters played by humans, gottobe

 

A real fully functioning steampunk/victorian/medieval city

But everyone would want to be a Thief. No one would want to be Benny, patrolling around the mansion for hours on end.

[Fingernail]

well yes and no, but it could be fun to guard against thieves as well.

[Macsen]

well yes and no, but it could be fun to guard against thieves as well.

If guards had to be real players, the Thief to guard ratio in the city would be about 10/1. There's be no obstacle to thieving, you'd just rampage about trying to stuff as much gold into your pockets as possible. Being able to hire NPC guards and servants (to make health giving food) would be a must for the owner of a large mansion. Of course, if you were part of a guild the HQ would most likely be well protected by players, but if you wanted to work independantly you'd need some other protection.

[Ishtvan]

I like playing simulators, put together by companies that really care about making it as close to real as possible. I think in doing so, they get away from a lot of the genre restrictions, especially if they have a dynamic campaign where you just do your part in the middle of a huge war going on around you. Sure there might be some missions with well defined objectives, but how you accomplish them is up to you, and there's no need for some trite story; there's a war going on, you do your part, eventually one side can no longer fight, both sides lose, the end.

 

I'm not just talking about war machine simulators either. I liked the game Mafia a lot, because even tho a lot of the individual missions were fairly linear, to me the free roaming sections were a very immersive simulation of a 1930's city. The vehicle physics were very realistic, AI got in traffic jams and started honking at eachother, police would pull you over for going thru a red light, then you could decide whether to bribe them, shoot them or make a run for it. Even the gun combat was sort've realistic (If you took a shotgun to the back, game over). I wish it had gone deeper to let you build up your own crew, decide how to earn, influence city politics, etc, but it did not.

 

So I think the more the developers care about adding in realistic optoins, and realistic consequences for those options, the more open-ended the game becomes, and the less they are pidgeonholed into the conventions of some genre.

[Domarius]

i do not want to feel that things just happen for my sake - i wanna be part of a living world, not the friggin center of the universe.

Games can already do this today. It just makes for a boring game.

 

Take the X-Wing series for example.

 

You pretty much always fly a mission as part of a squadron of ships. You soon find that they are fairly dumb, and you should do a bit of tactical advice to get the mission to run well, as WELL as trying to fly and fight like Luke Skywalker...

 

If they were all as good as you, the chances of you making a difference would be a lot slimmer, and there's probably a 75% chance of the mission still suceeding if you just sat there and let them do all the work.

 

In other words - boring.

[gleeful]

that's not what i mean at all.

 

i just don't want to feel like everything is just happening for my sake (ie nothing much is happening that i haven't triggered).

 

give me npcs that have a job, have likes and dislikes, friends and enemies, get hungry, get thirsty, get tired etc.

 

give me animals that go hunting, eat and sleep and possibly procreate.

 

give them all a group AI that reacts to certain events and changes their behaviour.

 

i want the illusion of a living, breathing world that actually reacts to things i do (or other npcs/animals do) like you would expect.

 

you still need plot-strings and drama of course (ie missions) but those things aren't mutually exclusive.

 

kind regards

gleeful

[Ishtvan]

That's why I'm looking forward to STALKER. I don't know if they went back on this promise or not, but supposedly there will be AI's trying to do the same quests/missions that you are able to do. (this probably doesn't apply to the main storyline quests, but still it's pretty cool that if you sit on your ass the AI will get hired to do your job and you'll be out of luck )