WRONG ASPECTS IN THE GAME INDUSTRY, AND POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS

Posts

Pages: first 12 next last
THE BAD ASPECTS

1.Violence and action for the sake of action
The fact t that do exist more games involving violence, conflict and destruction, than compromise, negotiation and building, did help on making society intellectually militarized. This conflict mentality did lead to making the social networks in battlefield, taken by rival gangs which fight for turf in a way that mirrors the offline gangs behavior.

2. Excessive immersiveness
Games, both online and open world offline ones, evolved to offering growingly more complex and detailed game worlds, filled with secondary missions and parallel minigames that went to take more and more time from the players. This excessive time spent in the virtual world makes gamers stray from the real world, leading to a psychological addiction similar to the alcohol and drugs ones, and in some cases even more damaging.

3. Lack of trust in the gamers
Politics of DRM and intellectual property protection treats the gamers and potential delinquents, and not like someone who just wants to have fun with the products paying a just price for then, and using their code to create new things.

4 Psychological suffering by the gaming professionals
Many companies forces their employees to work many hours after their expected shifts, causing physical and mental damage to them. Games are made for being fun: they also should be fun for the people who work in their development and distribution.

5. Monopolist and concentrating production logic:
The way the industry works perpetuates subordination relationships between developed countries and regions where the game production units are located, and those who consume them. The former concentrate the means of development in a way that ends up generating a vicious circle where the latter are much less likely to be able to compete in a competitive manner, with products from dominant countries and regions controlling almost the entire market.

6. Encouraging of hate groups:
The gamer world is known to be a stronghold of several problematic groups, such as incels, MRAs, white supremacists, and other hate groups. Effective measures are not taken to keep these groups under control.


POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS

1. Don't reward violence:
Creating games where avoiding violence is rewarded, and using force for no reason is punished or at least strongly discouraged.

2. Avoid excessive immersiveness:
Create games whose mini-games and side missions do not divert the player too far from the main mission. Limit immersiveness to well-defined pedagogical and plot-building purposes.

3. Trust the integrity of people:
Create open source games, with great possibilities for customization by players who want to create new experiences. Make the DRM policy more flexible when it does not completely end it.

4. Change work practices:
Adoption of fair and humane work practices by the industry. Avoid glorifying workaholic behavior and encourage employees to seek to live and work in the healthiest way possible.

5. Balancing the game:
Create games that can run on older, less powerful computers, so people get used to technically simple, but well-made games. This will allow poorer people to have access to games of the same quality as the most favored, thus allowing more countries and regions to become game producers.

6. Making games hateful for those who hate others:
Stop creating games that encourage machismo, racism, homophobia and other forms of prejudice. The more humanist and inclusive games that are produced, the less reason the extremists will find to identify with them. ''
SunflowerGames
The most beautiful user on RMN!
13323

I certainly think something should be done about the excessive OT developers are putting in. When I work OT hours at my job, I either get paid for it to can use the hours to take paid time off. I'm not sure that game developers are being given adequate compensation for what they're doing. Also, working too much is mentally draining.

I'm not really sure I agree with anything else you put up here. Some of it sounds like nonsense.
idk this reads like a bot/google translate post so i don't know if I get half what is being said here. but not like i got anything better to do

The fact t that do exist more games involving violence, conflict and destruction, than compromise, negotiation and building, did help on making society intellectually militarized. This conflict mentality did lead to making the social networks in battlefield, taken by rival gangs which fight for turf in a way that mirrors the offline gangs behavior.

Aside from what's just popular, i think it's just easier to program an entity to just pop out of existence after a health bar drops. I do think there's something to be said about all media desensitizing us to violence but I think it might also be a reflection of how we view violence rather than an influence upon us. Though I think it's worth evaluating what is actually "bad" about violence because there is some context needed here, violence being wielded by an imbalanced power dynamic is usually more concerning than say self defense or idk punching a nazi.

It is very noble and elegant to design a system where you talk things out but otherwise you are asking for another genre or game mode or at least reskinning the game so health is turned into a social meter or something. You've simply just created another market that a certain group of people will flock to rather than eliminating violent video games.

I don't get the gang stuff, i guess you mean kids on fortnite working together?

Games, both online and open world offline ones, evolved to offering growingly more complex and detailed game worlds, filled with secondary missions and parallel minigames that went to take more and more time from the players. This excessive time spent in the virtual world makes gamers stray from the real world, leading to a psychological addiction similar to the alcohol and drugs ones, and in some cases even more damaging.

I don't think adding a shopping list to your gam is really that damaging. Now loot boxes I think are a decent argument for the gambling addiction territory because it involves actual monetary value and psychological manipulation practices. But that's a different thing from what you mentioned. Putting a bunch of content in your game is there if people want it, and depends on the personality type of who's playing it.

If all games were built to have less filler content people would just be dumping hours into a variety of games rather than the 200 or so in the latest assassins creed. It's ok to spend time on something as long as you enjoy it. That just sounds like.... a hobby. If it's causing problems in your school or your work than you have bigger problems to deal with than a game developer's design choices.

Politics of DRM and intellectual property protection treats the gamers and potential delinquents, and not like someone who just wants to have fun with the products paying a just price for then, and using their code to create new things.

DRM = bad is all i got from this.

Many companies forces their employees to work many hours after their expected shifts, causing physical and mental damage to them. Games are made for being fun: they also should be fun for the people who work in their development and distribution.

I mean the problem isn't making the work "not fun" it's giving workers rights and freedoms to not have to be forced into a set of unfavorable expectations or have actual vacation days. This is like a huge "easier said than done" thing to solve though... though i guess it applies to most of this post.

The way the industry works perpetuates subordination relationships between developed countries and regions where the game production units are located, and those who consume them. The former concentrate the means of development in a way that ends up generating a vicious circle where the latter are much less likely to be able to compete in a competitive manner, with products from dominant countries and regions controlling almost the entire market.

yeah that's capitalism i guess. the market is doing what it's designed to do.

The gamer world is known to be a stronghold of several problematic groups, such as incels, MRAs, white supremacists, and other hate groups. Effective measures are not taken to keep these groups under control.

you're listing some really EXTREME specific political groups rather than merely the unfortunate result of the culture that advertised heavily to boys in the 80s and has remained mostly that way since. It's worth investigating the root of the problem than just saying gaming = white supremacy. As yeah certain groups will take advantage of unsuspecting people who like being edgy in a CoD lobby as a recruitment tactic. But I would say stuff like Facebook or a 2 hour long youtube video of an avatar complaining about tumblr to be far more damaging at this point. It's a complicated web to address.

Stop creating games that encourage machismo, racism, homophobia and other forms of prejudice. The more humanist and inclusive games that are produced, the less reason the extremists will find to identify with them. ''

Again it's a bit more complicated than that because I don't know any current mainstream games that go out of their way to do this (ie you can create something subconsciously racist without even fully realizing it) It's not like there's a game that you can get at the store that just says "racism simulator." The problem is more on games that are kind of apolitical about certain issues or aren't willing to normalize things that should be normalized. Cyberpunk 2077 for instance """""tried""""" to be inclusive towards gender expression and ended up botching it completely because it misunderstood a lot of things. The developers technically followed your "advice" but uh can't say the results were that great. There's a lot of nuance as to why that is.
author=Nicoliver
Create games that can run on older, less powerful computers


99.9% of the games hosted here at RMN meet this requirement !
Sooz
They told me I was mad when I said I was going to create a spidertable. Who’s laughing now!!!
5354
I'm just gonna say that a lot of these are things that the people on an extremely small site dedicated to a super niche, unpopular style of gaming have zero control over or potential to influence. Ultimately most of these problems are just the result of large game publishers being focused solely on how to make a shitload of money, and that's as far away from what's going on here as Mortal Kombat is from Style Savvy.*

Also there's not really any strong evidence that any single entertainment form can strongly influence individuals in ways that said individuals weren't already inclined.** It's more likely that video game violence and machismo are an outgrowth of a culture that prizes violence and machismo, not the other way around.

I am v. on board with the idea of making more inclusive and nonviolent games because more variety = more good. Playing combat games can be extremely fun. Playing nonviolent and friendly games can also be extremely fun. If we have a lot of different games, then we have a lot of different ways to have fun, which IMO is the ideal situation.

*Both of which own.

**There is some room for debate in very specific terms- certain types of FPS games are similar enough to army training that there might be a cause for concern re: lowering the inhibition against shooting, but there'd be a need for a lot more data.
Folks, thank you very much for your feedback regarding my text.

I didn´t made it just for flaming sake, but for getting answers from gamers and developers to learn how to develop quality games with much less budget than an Ubisoft, an Activision or a Valve from next door. I would like to see a new CD Projekt Red here in my country, Brazil, or another Third World country, and I want to find out the best way to make it easier for a such a company to come into being.

I think that the most efficient way to achieve this would be not to try to compete directly in what the Americans, Canadians and French are better or simply have more money to do, but with a company that makes games that, even though not having the technical capacity that they have, be artistically beautiful, and at the same time also laid-back. For me, this company could find it´s place in the world by making games that are technically simpler, but at the same time have a solid gameplay, pedagogical significance and a well-constructed storyline.

I do not believe, and in fact I not even want, that this hypothetical company should be able to compete face to face with the ones from OECD countries, but it could compete in some marginal markets in which they are weaker.
My intention is not really to force any company to do anything different, but to encourage the creation of a small or medium-sized company whose differential be to counter the dominant logic of game production.

I heard about a movement called '' Slow Food '', in which chefs would serve people food in a different logic compared to ordinary restaurants. If regular restaurants offered people bad, expensive food, and also treated badly their employees and the environment, ''Slow Food'' proposed to do the opposite of that.

Of course that in Slow Food people did still pay for their food and the employees could not act in whatever way they wanted, but neither customers nor employees would feel treated as mere commodities within the company's gears.

Inspired by this, I tried to imagine ways on how to create a production company that would be the equivalent of that in the gaming world, something that could be called '' Slow Gaming '', so to speak.

I don´t do this because of any leftism on my part, but because I consider that if there is a market for Slow Food, then perhaps it could also exist for a '' Slow Gaming '', if a developer that worked in this logic could emerge.
Sooz
They told me I was mad when I said I was going to create a spidertable. Who’s laughing now!!!
5354
I think what you are describing is crowdfunded indie games.
Kind of that. I think that the company should be above all a professional one, but it would make games with an indie feel. It should limit itself to a certain maximum size, for ensuring maximum efficiency in its production.

I think that it would look for profit not by selling the games themselves, but unique merchandise related to them.

For me, it could even be part from a larger company, if one got interested in aquiring it, but working as a standalone unit specialized in games that be products of artistic excellence like the Pixar or Ghibli movies.
Sooz
They told me I was mad when I said I was going to create a spidertable. Who’s laughing now!!!
5354
The main obstacle here is getting the cash. Most game companies are funded by an outside entity that wants results, in the form of profit.

It is very easy to say "there should be a company that makes good stuff and doesn't do bad stuff." It is very difficult to actually follow through.

Also merch is something you offer after you get big. Nobody wants to buy merch for a thing they don't know unless they are me buying grab bags at conventions
Backwards_Cowboy
owned a Vita and WiiU. I know failure
1737
While we're on the topic of bad things game companies do, I just want to throw in the practice of releasing unfinished, barely playable games that started to grow in prevalence once the ability to patch console games via internet updates became feasible.

Ubisoft and EA are two of the more notorious ones, though Activision has hopped on the bandwagon the past 5 years or so, notably with Call of Duty: WWII which didn't work for nearly two weeks after launch.

The Wii and 3DS were probably the last consoles to not have this issue, as Nintendo really didn't want games to have online functionality, including patches or updates. If your Wii or DS game had to update, it was a shocking moment and only occurred in the most game breaking of cases, and mostly just with first-party Nintendo games. Nintendo has since fallen from grace, with many of their games having Day One patches, or in the case of Animal Crossing, removing half of the content of previous titles and re-adding it as free DLC at a later date under the false pretense of "so everybody experiences it at the same time" rather than admitting they ran out of time to finish the game before the already-delayed release date.

Before the "always-online" era of gaming, if you bought Ar Tonelico II for the PS2, you were stuck glitching past the late-game since, if a certain battle was allowed to reach the enemy phase, the game would take up too much memory and the PS2 would freeze up. If your copy of GTA San Andreas had Hot Coffee, or your TESIV: Oblivion had nipples, that shit got recalled. These were big deals. Now, if your game is literally broken even 90 days after launch (lookin' at you, Cyberpunk and Fallout 76), it's all good and you can still ask $60.00 for your colossal waste of production costs.

Not to mention how Open Betas (and more recently, "playable Alpha") have turned players into free game testers, a job that used to pay people an average of $73,000/year, but that people now pre-order just to get access to.
Open betas aren't even betas any more, they're usually just demos.
I like how betas got redefined twice as polar opposite things.

Just because something is in a bad quality or riddled with bugs doesn't mean it's an alpha. Alpha is like when the game mechanics are completely undecided and there are just gray blocks littered all over the place. Too much hyperbole is used to equate "unfinished" or "unplayable" to that state when it is in fact not. Otherwise we're going to resort to omegas or something.

But idk, games are getting too big and costly. Most likely crushed under the weight due to the standards set by games that come before it. It is really tempting to release a game a few months earlier because "We can patch it after" because that is the same corner cutting as "we gotta work the weekends" to meet certain milestones. It is a meat grinder and I don't think companies and their stakeholders are going to care that console lotchecks were incidentally things that could keep launches in check. It's either this or games will have to take longer to make or cost more. Or the industry gets burned to the ground idk.
Sooz
They told me I was mad when I said I was going to create a spidertable. Who’s laughing now!!!
5354
I'm severely internet poisoned because there are two things that I associate with the terms alpha, beta, and omega, and neither of them are video games. :V

author=Darken
Or the industry gets burned to the ground idk.

Waiting on this with marshmallows, chocolate, and graham crackers, tbh.
Backwards_Cowboy
owned a Vita and WiiU. I know failure
1737
author=Darken
It's either this or games will have to take longer to make or cost more. Or the industry gets burned to the ground idk.


I think we have one or two more console generations to go and that will happen. Once people realize that the jump from 4k to 8k will only be slightly perceptible to the human eye, or when game graphics consistently look realistic and processors reach an efficiency level where millions of NPCs can be rendered simultaneously. Then the gaming market will stagnate and/or crash. The past three console generations have only seen modest jumps, hence why so many games remain multi-generation releases for years after a new console comes out. PS3 and PS4 shared something like 75% of releases for a while after launch, and lots of early titles were remasters of PS3 games from a couple years prior. PS4 and PS5 so far share what, 95% of titles? Nintendo is the only company that locks people out of new games if they don't upgrade to the next console.

Hell, just look up youtube video comparisons of Marvel's Spider-man for PS4 Pro VS PS5. People are pissed at some of the graphical "updates" because they feel they look worse even though from a technical standpoint they are "better" (really just needing more memory and power to render). The continued success of free or low-cost games like Fall Guys and Among Us really show how little people care about the technical aspects of games these days; graphical enhancements between generations are starting to plateau, and people can't afford $60 - $80 per game anymore.
Idk if youtuber comments are a good indicator of anything, 4k to 8k is kind of a toss up because in some warped perspective you could argue 3D tvs were more obvious than your standard resolution increase and that didn't take off, yet 4k is doing well regardless of me thinking 1080p is fine. Not because the market was being logical about it, things either take off or don't. I have no idea if people care about ray tracing yet, it's hard to say if it makes a difference to sales. Though I think SSD and load times are probably the easiest thing to communicate even though like, your average laptop from 6 years ago had one. But even something as clear as that people might not notice or care. Regardless the average person isn't really buying the console for the specs, it is rarely rational, this applies to even the price.

Everyone said phones were going to take over gaming but then PS4 just randomly did better than the PS1. Based off of what? Fucking Knack? I think the idea of having a dumb whirring brick in the living room is going to be here to stay. Except I think the industry is going to crumble on the development side where games are just too big too fail and they tank the budgets and prompt another buyout then get replaced. Subscription services may or may not change priorities (gaming netflix) but eh MS has to lose money for a long time for it to sink in and I'm not even that confident in that.

Is $60-80 still too much? CoD: Modern Warfare from 2019 is the 19th best selling game of all time on par with Skyrim, Animal Crossing: New Horizons from 2020 is 15th, these are highly priced games (a lot of people bought a switch just for AC) competing with the likes of Terraria which fits the bill of a "cheaper" alternative. But Among Us and Fall Guys aren't even in the top 50 (yet anyway), just because something is popular doesn't mean something else isn't popular. Just because something is priced high doesn't mean it won't be desirable. Granted the pandemic makes it really hard to judge the horizon atm with the shortages of the newer consoles, though that's even further arguing how well games are doing.

Whatever happens I think workers are going to suffer the consequences more than the customers. Senior talent is cycling out pretty rapidly and fresh new 20 something yr old college graduate kids are being drained in and out. Teams will be imbalanced due to the constant flux of talent. Projects will just fail or get cancelled because they become tests designed to be failed and they either become NMS (launch poorly but patch it overtime as a service) or Anthem (launch poorly and just abort), and that crossroad becomes the only way to make big games.
Sooz
They told me I was mad when I said I was going to create a spidertable. Who’s laughing now!!!
5354
Graphics have always been a bit selling point, because they're extremely easy to demonstrate, and the human brain gets very excited about shiny things. It also doesn't matter much how good the actual graphics are, so long as the marketing can make them look good.

As for the future of the behemoth that is the Gaming Industry, the main question is how much customers are going to be willing to put up with lootboxes and subscription services, since that seems to be the direction it's headed. That, and how much they'll tolerate the same game with a coat of paint.

As for popularity, a lot comes down to marketing and accessibility, which is the real power for big publishers. You have to be at least somewhat tuned in to gaming talk to know about most of the indie hits; you're not going to see Frisk or the Among Us spacemen on your box of Mountain Dew cans, or as a cardboard standee in Wal Mart. There's a massive market of non-geeks who are only familiar with the gaming equivalent of Coke or Pepsi and have no idea there's any alternative (and/or have no interest in it).

There's such a gargantuan force behind big publishers' games that even if they're demonstrably broken, a lot of people will buy them because That's What's There. Companies in general have spent a long, long time cultivating a culture of complacency in their buyers, so any kind of market collapse is more likely to look more like a very slow decline for a while, rather than an exciting explosion. More's the pity.
I think that games tend to become more and more a very wasteful industry. For example, just for rendering one character nowadays, is necessary to use more data and human work than for rendering a entire game of the 2D era, and the 3D games are not equallly more fun for us now than the ''1D'' ones of Atari and their competitors were for our grandfathers.

When I grew in Brazil, I had acess to relatively good consoles, compared to most of my neighbours. I could have a PS1 in the time when the PS2 was still a novelty, but I also had a Dynavision, that was a Brazilian made NES Clone, with which me and my friends had so much fun than with my then top of line PS1.

During this time, there was also a local company which copied games and other material from the internet, called Digerati, which sold through newstands a CD with a compilation of RPG Maker 2000 and 2003 games, along with the RPG Maker engines pirated by Don Miguel, that for me and my brother were so much fun as the best games from the big companies.

What I liked the most, was not just of playing the games, but also putting the game archives in my RPG Maker, and dissect then for learning how the developers made them. I could never do this with big company games without having speacialized abiilities in programming and without special programs and hardware for doing so.

With these editions of RPG Maker, I could see how amateur developers, like Kamau from the famed Legion Saga series, made their games so fun to play.

I wanted to develop a game with which possible amateur developers could do the same as me. Not just have fun with them playing the main campaign of my games, but even more fun navigating through my game archives for seeing how I made them so good, and learning from that how to make even better ones.
author=nicoliver
When I grew in Brazil, I had acess to relatively good consoles, compared to most of my neighbours. I could have a PS1 in the time when the PS2 was still a novelty, but I also had a Dynavision, that was a Brazilian made NES Clone, with which me and my friends had so much fun than with my then top of line PS1.

I like hearing stories about childhood Dendy/bootleg experiences, cause I used to think the NES youtuber boom (Angry Video Game Nerd) was just due to a lot of 80s kids re-discovering it but you take a lot of the international audiences who are limited or behind on generations + people like me who just liked emulating whatever was emulateable at the time and you get a whole array of people who grew up with things that aren't anchored to any prefixed date. It unfortunately shows how imbalanced the world economy is when a PS2 cost a fortune in Brazil, but I guess there's something to salvage when considering how approachable the NES was and how it empowered pirating/romhacking culture.
We in Brazil have to work the double or more for products that in the OECD countries are commonplace. An Iphone, for example? It´s considered a luxury item here in Brazil, bought mainly by people with a upper middle class background. We even have a local meme about poor people who live in the favelas and can´t even afford decent painting and plumbing for their homes, and spend three ou more months of their earnings for getting an Iphone. These people are called ''Ipobres''(''Ipoors), and enjoy a status similar to the ''welfare queens'' of America.


I always liked games which came with mission editors inclued on them. I never could make a good scenario myself, but I like browsing the game archives for knowing its units, constructions, how the developers edited the campaigns, etc...

I also played games through emulators, mostly the GBA and SNES ones, and through them I played classics like Actraiser, Zelda:a Link to the Past, Chrono Trigger, Advance Wars, etc...

I also played through Dosbox some even older, but also nice games, like Hidden Agenda and Master of Orion.


My familiy finances went very bad when my parents separated, but this didn´t mean I stayed without gaming when this happened.

I just couldn´t aquire anymore any videogames more modern than the PS2 or a top of line gaming computer, but I compensated for this by playing older or indie games, that could be played in the computers that I could afford.
Pages: first 12 next last