Game design by numbers.

Having seen both the Sony and Microsoft conferences over the last 24 hours, I can't help but feel a worrying convergence in the games market.  Only a few of the games weren't big number sequels or copies of other, already popular games.  Playstation All Stars: Battle Royale looked like PS3 Super Smash Brothers (with less lovable characters), as I said yesterday Forza Horizons looks like Need For Speed or Burnout and the similarities between COD, Battlefield, MOH Warfighters and Ghost Recon Future Soldier are startling.

Some of the stand out games of E3 (Beyond, Watch Dogs and The Last of Us to name the top three from Sony's conference) were new IPs and both doing something different to the rest.  With many of the games sticking to accepted formulae how do we expect to find the next big thing?

I worry we're stuck in something of an 80s action movie era.  The films came thick and fast with various muscle-bound, wise cracking heroes and sure, there were some hits, but the majority were forgettable movies with a by the numbers plot that could practically be interchanged.  Save the world... blah blah... kills the bad guys... yeah yeah... get the girl... and so on.  This could be said of many of the current set of hits.  Take a heroic protagonist/group of soldiers, put them in a world ending conflict and blow stuff up.

Why does this problem exist though?  I can only suggest that it's our fault.  Probably not yours if you're reading this as it's a pretty obscure gaming blog and only likely to be read by hardcore gamers.  But is it the masses of gaming that cause this.  Call of Duty sells like the proverbial hot cakes every year no matter how bad it's considered by the majority of players and why wouldn't EA, Ubisoft and co all want a part of that action?  Forza 3 (Metacritic 92) sold less than 4 million copies but Need for Speed The Run (Metacritic 68) sold around 4.6 million, it must be noted that NFS, whilst much worse, is on all formats.  Why wouldn't the excellent Forza try to become more like the mediocre Need for Speed if it can boost sales?

How do we change this problem then?  I implore everyone who reads this to try something different in gaming.  Go and download Journey on your PS3, The Walking Dead on everything, To the Moon or Frozen Synapse on PC.  Support smaller developers and let them give us games that take risks.  This has happened in movies with smaller indie film makers rising up to give us such film beauties as The Royal Tenenbaums, Lost in Translation and Up In The Air.  I'm not saying that I don't want to play the next Splinter Cell, (I really, really do want to play it) but I am saying get out there and try something little and give it a chance. it may surprise you.

No need to cry.

Quanitc Dream's David Cage said this week that we didn't need a new generation of consoles yet and set an ambitious 2017 date on the requirement of 'the next gen'.  Anyone who saw Kara, the remarkable video from the studio, will certainly agree that Cage is doing something that many don't.  However, is he correct that the current generation of consoles is too tilted towards violence and RPGs and that we don't need a new generation of consoles for another five years?

Firstly, are we oversupplied with violence?  To get an idea of this I took a look at the top selling games on Xbox 360, PS3 and PC.  Thirteen of the top fifteen 360 games could be construed as violent or RPGs and eleven of the top fifteen PS3 games fit in to to the same category.  This certainly does seem to back-up the idea that we are perhaps oversupplied with these games but is Cage taking too simplistic a view on things.  Perhaps the games being made are there because they sell.  Hardcore gamers complain about the likes of Call of Duty and its identikit clones but perhaps that is because we, the gamer, continue to buy them.  Quantic Dream's own Heavy Rain sold well at around 2 million copies (as of GDC 2011) but this doesn't begin to touch COD MW3's 6.5 million day one sales in the UK and US or MW2's 18 to 20 million total sales.  Perhaps game designers aren't lacking imagination as Cage said, perhaps they are simply caught by the unavoidable fact that our hobby is many people's business.

On the second suggestion of no new consoles until 2017, I'm torn.  The most interesting games I have played in the last few months have not needed more polygons or better hardware.  To The Moon, Journey or Lone Survivor have all been interesting, quirky, different and thrilling in their own ways.  The industry is full of people and teams pushing boundaries and finding new and exciting way to use the hardware they are given.  I believe that David Cage and his team are capable of doing remarkable things with the current generation of hardware and I can't say I'm too ready for more.  After seeing the Wii U and it's difficult to comprehend tablet controller, I worry that one day we will pine after this generation of controller based gaming.  Without some brave souls I worry the ever increasing expense of console manufacture and game design will drive developers to need to appeal to the chattering masses.

What do you think?  Do you want more David Cage and something from Kara or are you happy to see more COD and it's itterative sequels?  Do we need a new console generation or are those wanting it setting us up for an incremental decline to casual gaming?

And here is that video... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-pF56-ZYkY