Is gaming dying?

[Bragr]

Only if you look at a very narrow field of AAA games from a select group of publishers, but overall it's bigger and better than ever.

 

[Zej]

It's growing and becoming more normalized, in a sense where there isn't much stigma around it as a medium anymore, but it may have been segmented to each community surrounding the game instead.

It's very much a saturated market being drowned by AI slop ,asset-flips, and unfulfilled promises.
I still try to find games for a certain itch, but I've also been getting more reliant on game recommendations on youtube to purge through some of the noise. (CA Brown, SeanSeanson, Triple Iris, to name a few.)

 

[Ikagura]

I think indie games have a lot of issues (regarding 0.99 bucks shovelwares) but that's why you gotta dig for the goods.

 

[Asian girls lover]

We're all gonna die someday.

 

[Zooey]

Not just game devs, but celebrities as a whole (not that game devs are celebrities but some kind of are and some think they are) - we would all be much better off if they just made their games and didn't comment on everything or try to make a platform to put their opinions everywhere.

Everyone's opinion sucks. Your opinion sucks, my opinion sucks, my mom's opinion sucks. Just do your job as a game dev/actor/singer/gaming "journalist"/whatever and leave the political talk or bullshit opinions for your immediate social circle.

Look at Miyamoto for example. I love the man but I don't know anything about his beliefs or personal opinions. He doesn't have social media or any controversies or anything. I'm sure we disagree on something but it's not my business nor does he try to make it my business. He just does his job. I love that.

Can you imagine if we had all this social media back then? Miyamoto would be called a scam artist for reskinning Doki Doki Panic and passing it off as a Mario game. "He lied to us! He's a thief!!"

I just wish we could go back to a simpler time when devs were allowed to make games without being harassed for every little thing. Was recently reading about what the indie dev of Soulash 2 had to go through because he wouldn't add a feature. Gaming culture has just gotten way too nasty.

 

[regnor]

I would say so in terms of innovation. People say indie games are better, but really most indie games are just reskins of each other (another roguelite deckbuilder, anyone?) or remakes of games from 30+ years ago. And of course big companies rely too much on sequels and even remakes/remasters now. Not too surprising though since gamers crave homogeneity.

 

[Egg (McMuffin) Man]

People say indie games are better, but really most indie games are just reskins of each other (another roguelite deckbuilder, anyone?) or remakes of games from 30+ years ago

You're not wrong. 99% of the time when I hear about an indie games it's supposed to be "Exactly like Zelda" or "exactly like Harvest Moon" and somehow that lack of creativity is a selling point. I really dislike that.

Of course there's a lot of indie games that aren't like that, but overall most indie games are just.... Meh. But every now and again there is an absolute gem of an indie game that more than makes up for all of the slop.

 

[lil_thang]

a lot of things have objectively improved in general broad speaking terms vis a vis the overall quality of things in life.

gaming as a medium is larger than ever.
even indie gaming (especially indie gaming now lul, the barrier to entry and thus bar for quality is so low now)
it just so happens that as a results of its ubiquity, it is now generally on the whole part a lot shittier le tragedy of le commons eternal september style.
simply a matter of scale and numbers game before such a thing happens to any medium.

 

[Strategist's iconStrategist]

You're not wrong. 99% of the time when I hear about an indie games it's supposed to be "Exactly like Zelda" or "exactly like Harvest Moon" and somehow that lack of creativity is a selling point. I really dislike that.

Of course there's a lot of indie games that aren't like that, but overall most indie games are just.... Meh. But every now and again there is an absolute gem of an indie game that more than makes up for all of the slop.

I mean, those types of games exist because there's an audience for them and they are underserved, but I wish indie gaming wasn't just that. I remember when indie gaming started to become commercially viable in the 2010's there was more creativity with games like Braid, Flower and World of Goo.

 

[Ikagura]

To be honest if an indie game gets inspiration from a franchise that basically went dead it's not a bad thing.

Of course it can still have its own identity but you cannot make an action/adventure game without it being slightly like Zelda (like how side scrollers are like Mario or fighting games are like Street Fighter).

 

[VidiyaGaemer]

The thing is, even as recently as the PS4, there was still hope for the kinds of games I enjoy in the form of Japan Studio. Things like The Last Guardian and Gravity Rush 2 still were coming out. The closure of it was a regrettable mistake that essentially left the PS5 without a solid Japanese presence. I feel like besides those games, the PS5 wasn't worth it. Still waiting for that game to make me validate the PS5 purchase.

Tangent aside, it does feel like gaming is at a low point, or changed for the worse. Games are digital and mostly on PC, which takes some of that magic of relatively inexpensive consoles with exclusives to draw you into their ecosystems away. As gamers grew up, things like controller gimmicks have become frowned upon and looked on as childish. So alot of newer games and game hardware are the same concepts and play it safe. Gaming has simply become too much of a money seize and too little of entertainment in the ways I remember fondly. I can only hope the future has better in store for gaming for my tastes.

 

[iamthemilkman]

AAA game developers in America are going through a rough patch, no doubt. Thankfully, European and Asian developers are delivering.

 

[Egg (McMuffin) Man]

it's not a bad thing.

It's not a bad thing, but the developer should introduce new ideas and innovate on the concept. Why would I play a game that's exactly like Zelda (according to the ads) when I can just play Zelda?

 

[LightningmanEXE]

the problem with putting devs as the face of the social media, is that sometimes the reason a game came out as absolute crap is a choice made by the bean counters or upper management. you can't just go out and say:

"yeah, sorry, we were underfunded, understaffed, stressed, half of us didn't want to work on this, and we were instructed to place in a predatory gambling system with 10 currencies by our bosses."

you'd never work for that company again, and no one in charge would be held responsible anyway. devs are just bad pr meat shields. I don't think gaming is dying, I think passion for game design is underfunded and compromised.

 

[medisinn]

Gaming is fine. AAA gaming is struggling, but that's because it's been infected by corporate bullshit. Out of touch executives make out of touch decisions and the hard-working developers and artists are the ones who pay the price. It's the same with movies, TV, journalism, etc. The corpos looking to cut costs and minimize effort to maximize revenue don't care about art, because they aren't artists. Business and art are inherently different, there's of course overlap but what is creatively fulfilling isn't what looks best to investors and vice versa. It reminds me of when I worked for a plant laboratory startup and the CEO and sales people exaggerated our production numbers and had us send out bad-looking rootstock because it looked good to investors. Which is fine, until it's not because you pissed off all of your customers and clients with a bad product. These companies know the games aren't ready, but because they don't want to upset the shareholders, buggy and incomplete games get pushed out, and it's like there's an assumption that they will still sell well and be liked by people. Followed by surprise when it doesn't happen.

Indie gaming is doing well, and has the capacity to be doing AMAZINGLY well at any given moment. On any given day, a game can come out that can go viral because it does something new or does something familiar in a new or satisfying way. You never know where the next Balatro will come from. Konami isn't making Castlevania games for some reason? That's okay, indie devs will make great metroidvanias and sidescrollers influenced by them, like Bloodstained, Infernax, and a whole bunch more. Squaresoft won't port Parasite Eve to modern platforms or remake it? Someone is making .45 Parabellum Bloodhound inspired by Parasite Eve. That's not to mention romhacks and translations of games that people do for free out of love for the game(s). Technology is no longer an issue, developers seem to have the means to go for whatever style suits them, and more developers should do that. A game doesn't have to look realistic to sell well.

I mean, there's also mobile gaming, which apparently makes more than console and PC gaming combined. Even if the industry imploded, mobile games would keep things going until the more conventional games are able to be made again.

 

[E0N]

...but AAA gaming is having issues.

Only the western AAA industry. The rest of the world especially Japan is doing great.

As for your general question, no gaming is not dying. In fact it's been better like never before. Just look at how many quality games got released in last 3 years and you will see. Indie, AA and Japan are all thriving. There's also more games coming out from non-mainstream regions (SA, SEA, EE, SoA) which wasn't a thing 10 years ago. So gaming is far from dying. People only look at the western AAA games and starts panicking for no reason.

 

[SwordBreaker40]

No gaming in general is not dying a large portion of the AAA industry is hurting bad because they believed that catering to a select few morons would make them more money and now that decision is biting them in the ass. And now does select few morons sitting on the internet crying that the company is not on their side like they are so delusional and believe a company is there to stand on their side and support them. AAA companies want 1 thing and one thing only your money and nothing else.

I will say keep buying indie games and AA games and you will se that game industry is still healthy as it can be.

 

[sysuah]

I wish it died a decade ago, stayed longer than it's supposed to, I myself welcome another gaming crash to let things sort itself out and the market sometime to heal the wound caused by journalists and government bodies tainting it with their psychological operations and major games and publishers companies getting restructure (Nintendo and Sony) ... And Jason Schreier is on the list of those I want to wake up to news being shot...
But this is not a perfect world

 

[Lee__Kanker]

I sure hope AAA dies a horrible death

I didnt need devil may cry 5 to cost 80 milion

 

[Ikagura]

It's not a bad thing, but the developer should introduce new ideas and innovate on the concept.

Innovation is a double-edged sword imo: if you don't have a proper focus of your new concept it could easily end up being worse than something good that doesn't reinvent the wheel.

Look at Nintendo (especially Miyamoto's stance on F-zero) producing gimmicks which either worked fine or overstayed their welcome (like Starfox Zero).

I'd rather have a good indie game reviving a lost feeling of a series that no longer gets produced even if there's one small different mechanic than a game pretending to be inspired by another but has an entirely different gameplay feel.

Pizza Tower told us it's like Wario Land but is more like a racing platformer like Rayman Origins/Legends and Sonic with some Wario aesthetic compared to AntonBlast.

Why would I play a game that's exactly like Zelda (according to the ads) when I can just play Zelda?

Marketing and actual game aren't necessarily the same. A top down action/adventure game may remind you of Zelda but doesn't make it a Zelda-like. CrossCode despite being a top down Action-RPG akin to the Mana or Ys games is still its own thing.

Also you could basically say the same for any games of the same genre:

• Why playing the latest FPS when I can just play Doom with mods?
• Why playing fighting games instead of Street Fighter II the World Warriors?
• Why playing platformers when Mario exists?

 

[Egg (McMuffin) Man]

Innovation is a double-edged sword imo: if you don't have a proper focus of your new concept it could easily end up being worse than something good that doesn't reinvent the wheel.

Look at Nintendo (especially Miyamoto's stance on F-zero) producing gimmicks which either worked fine or overstayed their welcome (like Starfox Zero).

I'd rather have a good indie game reviving a lost feeling of a series that no longer gets produced even if there's one small different mechanic than a game pretending to be inspired by another but has an entirely different gameplay feel.

Pizza Tower told us it's like Wario Land but is more like a racing platformer like Rayman Origins/Legends and Sonic with some Wario aesthetic compared to AntonBlast.


Marketing and actual game aren't necessarily the same. A top down action/adventure game may remind you of Zelda but doesn't make it a Zelda-like. CrossCode despite being a top down Action-RPG akin to the Mana or Ys games is still its own thing.

Also you could basically say the same for any games of the same genre:

• Why playing the latest FPS when I can just play Doom with mods?
• Why playing fighting games instead of Street Fighter II the World Warriors?
• Why playing platformers when Mario exists?

Innovation doesn't mean adding weird and unnecessary gimmicks. It means introducing ideas that build upon the foundations left by the previous game and improve it.

A great example of this is Pocky and Rocky. In the original arcade game from Taito you had a range attack and a melee attack, that's it. Don't get hit. But in the SNES game they built upon the foundations of the original game and introduced new mechanics that improved and refined the gameplay. Most notably, they made it so that your melee attack can be used to repel ranged attacks, which was a MAJOR improvement. The game feels the same as it predecessor, and yet it feels new and fresh because of the innovative new mechanics and it sets a bar that all future games in the series must strive to reach.

The answer to all 3 of your questions is innovation. I could play newer FPS instead of DOOM because the newer ones have innovated upon the concept and refined the experience. It's the same reason why you might play Super Mario Bros even though you could just play Pac Land. Super Mario Bros brought innovation and built upon the foundations that Pac Land brought to the table.

I think a lot of gamers misunderstand this word in recent years. Innovation doesn't mean cramming weird gimmicks into your game. You mentioned F-Zero; F-Zero X innovated on the foundations left by the original. Star Fox 2 did the same (unreleased until more recently, but still). Kirby's Adventure brought innovation after Kirby's Dream Land. Super Mario 64 innovated. Link to the Past innovated. Pokemon innovated, and then Gold and Silver innovated further. Dragon Quest innovated on the ideas of older PC games. Metroid innovated on the ideas of that Apple II game who's name currently escapes me and then Super Metroid further innovated on the concept. Portopia innovated. Otogiriso innovated and gave birth to multiple genres in the process. None of the games I mentioned have gimmicks.

Innovation is about ideas. And if you're going to make a game inspired by Zelda, you should introduce new ideas that refine the concept instead of making a boring lesser clone. I should want to play your game for the same reason that I would want to play the next official 2D Zelda. Lack of innovation is also why a lot of gamers complain about certain franchise that release the same cookie cutter game every year or two.

 

[Ikagura]

Innovation is about ideas. And if you're going to make a game inspired by Zelda, you should introduce new ideas that refine the concept instead of making a boring lesser clone. I should want to play your game for the same reason that I would want to play the next official 2D Zelda. Lack of innovation is also why a lot of gamers complain about certain franchise that release the same cookie cutter game every year or two.

Ubisoft is bad about the lack of evolution for the franchise I agree.

But in the meantime gamers also dislike having to get out of their confort zone.

BotW and Echoes of Wisdom were also being criticised by Zelda fans for not being like the Zelda they knew.

Zelda II was a prime example of a sequel delving too far from the original.

I still think that several indie games still managed to feel innovative despite how many Metroidvanias and Roguelites were made.

 

[Egg (McMuffin) Man]

Ubisoft is bad about the lack of evolution for the franchise I agree.

I actually had a completely different franchise in mind when I typed that. I've never played AC.

BotW and Echoes of Wisdom were also being criticised by Zelda fans for not being like the Zelda they knew.

I don't understand this. I've been a fan of Zelda for over 20 years and Botw/TotK play exactly like a modern 3D version of the classic games.

Zelda II was a prime example of a sequel delving too far from the original

Zelda 2 was a completely different type of game. It was innovative, but it abandoned the foundation that was laid down by it's predecessor. In many ways I think that Neutopia was probably more accurate as a Zelda 2.

I still think that several indie games still managed to feel innovative

Sure, and I wholeheartedly agree. I can think of several highly innovative indie games. My complaint wasn't about those games. My complaint was about the generic slop that floods the indie market.

 

[moonbits]

youtube has a lot of these videos lately, people need to take a chill pill and touch grass.

 

[fake-kun]

youtube has a lot of these videos lately, people need to take a chill pill and touch grass.

I'm practically a hikikomori and I agree with you.