Have publishing+marketing trends damaged creative games?

[Rogue Trooper]

This came up the other day on here and i've heard it on various other forums over the years, that by taking games into the mainstream with the Playstation, game deigners got far less creative.

I beg to differ, as a Playstation owner at the time, i saw the likes of:

MGS (very creative use of the PS1 hardware for 'Boss Fights'), Devil Dice, Parappa The Rapper, Ape Escape, Legacy Of Kain/Blood Omen, I.Q, Sheep, the Tenchu Series, Tomba, Jumping Flash 1+2, Trap Gunner, Power Diggerz, N20, Skull Monkeys, Oddworld, IS:Internal Section (another great looking tunnel shooter in Stun runner mould), Team Buddies, Parappa The Rapper, Carnage heart, Warzone 2100, Silent Hill etc etc.

People often say Sony only interested in 3D, yet Rapid Reload, Worms, 2 Xcoms, numerous Retro compilations from Capcom, Williams etc.

Plus as mentioned elsewhere, you can trace the origins of Loaded back to the SNES, Alien Trilogy to the Mega CD and Tomb Raider to the Jaguar CD.

By time Playstation 2 was ready to be replaced, it'd seen things like:

Ico, Shadow Of Rome, Gregory Horror Show, Bombbastic, Blood Will Tell, Psychonauts, A Dogs Life, Strech Panic, Ring Of Red, Fahrenheit, Ever Blue 2, Herdy Gerdy, SOS, Mister Mosquito, City Crisis, Killer 7, Kill.Switch, Fantavision, God Hand, Mark Of Kri, Gitaroo Man, Mad Maestro, Frequency etc etc.

I'm NOT defending either platform here, just very curious as to why Sony is singled out, where as Sega/Nintendo+Ms all escape somewhat untouched in comparison.

I'm of the thinking that it was ONLY due to the massive installed user bases of PS1+PS2 that a lot of developers were willing to risk creative ideas on the machines.

Over to you good folk.

[TL]

I wouldn't say the end of creative games as such no.

But did change the industry for the worse.

It made gaming mainstream, faceless corporate and devoid of identity. It was started by the PS1 and pushed even further with the PS2.

Now we are left with two faceless corporations with no personality, heritage or significant legacy in gaming as the two big players.

I would give anything to get rid of Sony and MS and replace them with Sega and Atari, two companies with a real history, identity and personality that lived and breathed the video games industry.

[Vyothric]

Don't really have much to say about the Playstation. The only games you listed that I've played are Blood Omen, Worms and Silent Hill. Didn't play Blood Omen or Worms on the Playstation and I hated Silent Hill.

[tomwaits]

To me, the PS1 was the start of 'modern gaming' and dumbed down videogaming to reach mass market appeal. I don't really blame Sony, but they were definitely the lead platform in the transition.

Linear, slow paced, story driven, save point to save point gaming with heavily integrated cinematics. yawn! 6-8 hours of game, then it's over. Games with no scores/high scores = limited replay value. Limited skill required because you can always reload from the last checkpoint until you reach the next one. Endless sequels until the franchise is dead... recycling the same game engine with new levels/cinematics.

Modern gaming is great for business. 'Finish' a game and rush out to buy something else. Sequels appeal to the fanbase. Using the same game engine for 3 or 4 games cuts development time and costs.

There were plenty of exceptions, esp on the PS1, but I definitely point to Sony as the transition platform that brought popular gaming from pick up and play, arcade style, go for a new high score, etc. to playing through the latest ____ game.

[Rogue Trooper]

I wouldn't say the end of creative games as such no.

But did change the industry for the worse.

It made gaming mainstream, faceless corporate and devoid of identity. It was started by the PS1 and pushed even further with the PS2.

Now we are left with two faceless corporations with no personality, heritage or significant legacy in gaming as the two big players.

I would give anything to get rid of Sony and MS and replace them with Sega and Atari, two companies with a real history, identity and personality that lived and breathed the video games industry.

Interseting post, i'm still not yet seeing exactly what sony did that Sega or Atari etc did'nt.Sega and atari indeed have history, but as a buyer of their devices, i have to say it's a very mixed history.

With the Lynx, Atari had THE best hardware, but starved it of software, lot of promises, but too little, too late.Something Sony is doing again with Vita, not having learnt from PSP.

With Sega, MD was amazing and i bought into the MCD hype, £270 for a machine that hand better sprite abilites than the SNES (yet needed extra colour palette hardware), yet Sega  fit to pump FMV ridden dross onto a platform that could only initally do what? 64 colours on screen in FMV.Madness.Then there was the plans for Saturn+Neptune...2 models of same hardware, ended up with stop gap 32X.

Dreamcast had 1 shot at getting good headway before PS2 launched and who do Sega Europe put in charge of it? someone who's background is in making+promoting Pop Video's.DC was a fantastic piece of kit, but the online potential was squandered, as was the marketing budget-I bought my DC at launch and i still rate it higher than the PS2 as a piece of hardware, but it was painful to see how Sega handled it.

[Rogue Trooper]

To me, the PS1 was the start of 'modern gaming' and dumbed down videogaming to reach mass market appeal. I don't really blame Sony, but they were definitely the lead platform in the transition.

Linear, slow paced, story driven, save point to save point gaming with heavily integrated cinematics. yawn! 6-8 hours of game, then it's over. Games with no scores/high scores = limited replay value. Limited skill required because you can always reload from the last checkpoint until you reach the next one. Endless sequels until the franchise is dead... recycling the same game engine with new levels/cinematics.

Modern gaming is great for business. 'Finish' a game and rush out to buy something else. Sequels appeal to the fanbase. Using the same game engine for 3 or 4 games cuts development time and costs.

There were plenty of exceptions, esp on the PS1, but I definitely point to Sony as the transition platform that brought popular gaming from pick up and play, arcade style, go for a new high score, etc. to playing through the latest ____ game.

Again, very interesting post, but as of yet, no-ones really touched apon what the Playstation did that only it did.

Linear games like Myst, 7th Guest, Burn Cycle, Star Wars:Rebel Assault, Mystery Mansion, Night Trap, Sewer Shark could be found on CD based platforms like CD-i/ MCD/3DO/PC CD, hell 7th Guest been found on SNES CD.Things like Wipeout? well you've got F-Zero on SNES or Gran Chaser on Saturn, High Octane on PC.

For myself, the real Sony dumbing down came with PS2:Eyetoy+Singstar reaching out to non-gamer, no need to worry about controllers, wave your arms or hold this Mic etc, from a buisness point, totally under standable, but look at where it went from there..Kinect, Wii, Move....

[dcultrapro]

regarding Sony this is what I posted in the other thread, maybe more suited there. I wouldn't say I hate Sony any more just from my perspective a lot of things changed as a direct result of their legacy, as per below comments:

-------------------------

RT: My comments regarding the Playstation were more aimed at its aggressive and successful campaign to make a video games console a cool piece of kit that every kid HAD TO HAVE... instead of the geeky frowned upon hobby that it had always been up until that point, or at least that's the impression of the hobby that I always had when I was a kid.

as I said in another post I fully concede that Sony has done no more or less in terms of dodgy dealings etc this generation, if anything Microsoft are causing more harm than good themselves. And obviously the PS2 was the first major sign that Sony was giving in to its financial urges, they saw the publics response to the Playstation and dollar signs chi-chinged into their eyes as they plotted and schemed on how to cash in with the PS2 and I tip my hat to them their plan worked out BRILLIANTLY. They fooled the masses who loved the PS1 into thinking the PS2 was a must buy, even though, IMHO, it was a piece of utter garbage, and they ran laughing and skipping all the way to the bank.

I wasn't saying the Playstation 1 was itself SOLELY at fault as a console, rather I was intimating that the Playstation BRAND on the whole was pretty instrumental in transforming the gaming industry as I knew it into a massive bloated cash cow for shady conglomerates to take advantage of

my two cents

[tomwaits]

To me, the PS1 was the start of 'modern gaming' and dumbed down videogaming to reach mass market appeal. I don't really blame Sony, but they were definitely the lead platform in the transition.

Linear, slow paced, story driven, save point to save point gaming with heavily integrated cinematics. yawn! 6-8 hours of game, then it's over. Games with no scores/high scores = limited replay value. Limited skill required because you can always reload from the last checkpoint until you reach the next one. Endless sequels until the franchise is dead... recycling the same game engine with new levels/cinematics.

Modern gaming is great for business. 'Finish' a game and rush out to buy something else. Sequels appeal to the fanbase. Using the same game engine for 3 or 4 games cuts development time and costs.

There were plenty of exceptions, esp on the PS1, but I definitely point to Sony as the transition platform that brought popular gaming from pick up and play, arcade style, go for a new high score, etc. to playing through the latest ____ game.

Again, very interesting post, but as of yet, no-ones really touched apon what the Playstation did that only it did.

Linear games like Myst, 7th Guest, Burn Cycle, Star Wars:Rebel Assault, Mystery Mansion, Night Trap, Sewer Shark could be found on CD based platforms like CD-i/ MCD/3DO/PC CD, hell 7th Guest been found on SNES CD.Things like Wipeout? well you've got F-Zero on SNES or Gran Chaser on Saturn, High Octane on PC.

For myself, the real Sony dumbing down came with PS2:Eyetoy+Singstar reaching out to non-gamer, no need to worry about controllers, wave your arms or hold this Mic etc, from a buisness point, totally under standable, but look at where it went from there..Kinect, Wii, Move....

Except for the PC version of Myst, I don't think any of those early FMV games were very successful. I also think there was a transition around the start of PS1 from 'FMV gaming' like the titles you listed to 'cinematic gaming'... the FMV now advanced the story but the gameplay stood on its own as well. The PS1 audience really bought into titles like FF7, Resident Evil, and Tomb Raider... partially because of Sony's marketing... and the industry embraced the cinematic franchise model.

Looking at the wiki list of top selling PS1 games:
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_be ... ideo_games)

the list is primarily made up of franchises that started on the PS1. Again, I don't really blame Sony since some are 3rd party, but I'd consider some of those franchises as the start of 'modern gaming'.

And... how often can a sequel really be considered 'creative'? The PS1 had 5 Tomb Raider games, 4 Twisted Metals, 4 Final Fantasy games, 3 each of Resident Evil, Crash Bandicoot, Tony Hawk, Tekken, Spyro, etc. and those games are the majority of the top seller list.

Also... for a direct comparison of what Playstation did that the others didn't, how many franchises received similar milking on the Saturn or N64?

[Rogue Trooper]

Thing is though, the 1st Final Fantasy game the Playstation got was Number 7.

Metal Gear Solid:Well Hideo had just been waiting for technology to catch up, so he could make the 3D game he wanted, Metal Gear had been a NES/MSX series prior to that.

Wipeout:as i said earlier, jus Sony's version of the future racer, you can trace it back to F-Zero or indeed Powerdrome on ST/Amiga.Sony bought Psygnosis purely because of their experience in 3D games.

Tekken series came from arcades and look at Virtua Fighter it's had what? 5 'proper' games plus likes of VF:Kids, so here NAMCO not really doing anything Sega were'nt.

House Of The Dead had 4 games, lost count of just how many Sonic games there's been on MD, MS, GC, Mobile, handheld etc, so again, are Sega really any more creative than Sony? lot of thier coin-op's been racing games of 1 type or another.Then you've a number of Shinobi games....

For myself, 1st games to use FMV properly in games were: Realms Of The Haunting on PC and Command and Conquer on PC/PS1.

Thing with how many franchises had so many sequels on Saturn/N64:

Resident Evil+Final Fantasy:Had the system used CD rather than cart, i'd say you'd have seen those.

Tomb Raider, as i've quoted from various sources in the Saturn thread, because Saturn required more resources to create games than Playstation, publishers willing to scrap Saturn versions and loose sales, as they knew they'd get far more sales on PS1.

PC had exactly the same number of Tomb Raider games as PS1 did it not? plus how many Wing Commander games? or what's Civ. upto on PC or Xcom? we had Xcom 1-3, Xcom:Interceptor, Enforcer with more spin off's planned.

[tomwaits]

There are always enduring franchises, but my point was that I think PS1 changed the way they were exploited. And how they were marketed for mainstream success. Every new title was designed as a cash cow... short, linear stories and quick sequels that re-use the same game engine... gameplay dumbed down for a more casual audience so that everyone can reach the ending and buy the next installment. Little replay value. I don't think there's much 'creative' difference between Tomb Raider 1 and Tomb Raider 3... or Uncharted 3.

Long-running franchises on other platforms usually offered a significant improvement over the previous installment. Even Nintendo, who are always blasted for exploiting their franchises, has only ever released one Mario Kart per console generation. Or one F-Zero. The PS1 had three Wipeout games and a 'special edition'. The Nintendo 64 and Gamecube only had one Mario platformer each... seems like every Playstation platformer has two or three installments on each console.

I think PC gaming evolved to 'modern gaming' alongside the PS1, but the PS1 probably led the way... at least as far as sales and households. 

[TL]

Yeah I totally agree Tom, very well put.

Any many of those games that did debut on PS1 were then flogged to death even more on the PS2.

[Rogue Trooper]

There are always enduring franchises, but my point was that I think PS1 changed the way they were exploited. And how they were marketed for mainstream success. Every new title was designed as a cash cow... short, linear stories and quick sequels that re-use the same game engine... gameplay dumbed down for a more casual audience so that everyone can reach the ending and buy the next installment. Little replay value. I don't think there's much 'creative' difference between Tomb Raider 1 and Tomb Raider 3... or Uncharted 3.

Long-running franchises on other platforms usually offered a significant improvement over the previous installment. Even Nintendo, who are always blasted for exploiting their franchises, has only ever released one Mario Kart per console generation. Or one F-Zero. The PS1 had three Wipeout games and a 'special edition'. The Nintendo 64 and Gamecube only had one Mario platformer each... seems like every Playstation platformer has two or three installments on each console.

I think PC gaming evolved to 'modern gaming' alongside the PS1, but the PS1 probably led the way... at least as far as sales and households.

Quick post:

Are you familar with the 8-Bit Dizzy series? C64/Speccy/CPC published by Codemasters etc.

Between the ORIGINAL game in 1987 and 5 years later, the series saw:

Dizzy
 Fantasy World Dizzy
Treasure Island Dizzy
Magic Land Dizzy
Spellbound Dizzy
Dizzy Prince Of The Yolkfolk
Fantastic Crystal Kindgdom Dizzy
Go!Dizzy!Go!
Fast Food Dizzy
Kwik Snax
Dizzy Down He Rapids
Dizzy Panic
Bubble Dizzy.

13 games (inc spin-offs) from 1 franchise in 5 years!!!!!!!!!!!


And folks say Sony milk a franchise? :-)

[Rogue Trooper]

Yeah I totally agree Tom, very well put.

Any many of those games that did debut on PS1 were then flogged to death even more on the PS2.

Sega then, STARTING with OUTRUN (and yep, lot of unofficial sequels/spin-offs, but it's a franchise):

Outrun
Outrun 3D (MS)
Turbo Outrun
Outrunners
Outrun 2
Outrun 2 SP
Outrun 2006:Coast To Coast
Outrun Online Arcade
Outrun Europa
Battle Outrun
Outrun 2019.

[Rogue Trooper]

Yeah I totally agree Tom, very well put.

Any many of those games that did debut on PS1 were then flogged to death even more on the PS2.

CAPCOM with it's Megaman (aka Rockman) series, ready for THIS?

MEGAMAN 1-10 (10 games)

Megaman X Series (11 games)

Megaman Zero Series (4 games)

Megaman ZX Series (2 games)

Megaman Legends (3 games)

Megaman Battlenetwork (8 games)

Megaman:Starforce (3 Games)

TOTAL OF:41 games!!!!!!!!!

[Rogue Trooper]

Yeah I totally agree Tom, very well put.

Any many of those games that did debut on PS1 were then flogged to death even more on the PS2.

Back to SEGA, this time, Phantasy Star:

Phantasy star 1-4
Phantasy Star Collection
Phantasy Star Generation 1+2
Phantasy Star Gaiden
Phantasy Star Adventure
Phantasy Star 2 (8 Text adventures)
Phantasy Star Online
Phantasy Star online Eps 1-4
Phantasy Star Universe.

Now do you see why i fail to se why JUST 1 company gets blammed for flogging a franchise?