Innovation lacking in computergames.

[fable]

[QUOTE=Xandax]I do however still hope that something will arise in the near future (couple of years) and release a non-main stream game (much like when Baldurs Gate hit the market) which then will becom hugely popular, but turn the developers into main stream (like Bioware) and start doing stupid games aswell. [/QUOTE]

Heh! I hope so, too, but unless the indies get more money, I see them relocated increasingly to the sidelines. We'll just have to see.

[Dottie]

[QUOTE=fable] I'll take an RPG over a shooter, anyday, whether in first or third person.[/QUOTE]

I have different expectations and needs when playing RPG or FPS games. The problem is that the trend you are talking about in RPG's exist on the other side as well. Developers add some kind of awful story and a few dialogues, witch of course does not help a FPS a bit, it just brings annoying interruptions to the game. I think this is more a question of brining together two genres witch can't be more different than destorying RPGs with action and pretty graphics.

[Magrus]

[QUOTE=fable]Heh! I hope so, too, but unless the indies get more money, I see them relocated increasingly to the sidelines. We'll just have to see.[/QUOTE]

This is the problem. Those independants need more money to grow, and yet without that kind of money, they won't sell enough to grow, and won't get money unless they grow.

Personally, if I have to games I like, and know I'll like, I'd rather give the money have to an independant company. More sales going to the little guy not only gives them more money, but also the motivation to keep working. Even a small burst of 30 new sales a few years after their last game was put out could jump-start their desire to make a new, original game. It might take them 10 times as long to create a game half as long, and with 1/5 the graphics. Yet, most independant's are comprised of only a small handful of people altogether, not large teams like the big corporations.

I tend to appreciate the games that end up with a combination of better control and interface that can be used today, with so-so graphics anyways.

The only problems I've found are a lot of them can be buggy. Which...heh, those billion dollar companies with 50 person teams working on a game for 2 years can't seem to get rid of either. Funny that huh?

[Erenor]

The bugs will exist no matter what in my opinion. No game can be perfect, though some come close. My problem is with Movie games that are thrown together by EA Games or similar companies in only a year or less. The graphics suck for the most part and the controls and actual gameplay are lower than average too. They expect the game to do well if it looks okay and the movie does well in the box office. What a rip-off.

[dj_venom]

[QUOTE=Erenor]The bugs will exist no matter what in my opinion. No game can be perfect, though some come close. My problem is with Movie games that are thrown together by EA Games or similar companies in only a year or less. The graphics suck for the most part and the controls and actual gameplay are lower than average too. They expect the game to do well if it looks okay and the movie does well in the box office. What a rip-off.[/QUOTE]

Yes, I'm sick of those too. The first major one that I can remember was Harry Potter 1. Although never having played it, I read about how bad it was and how stupidly the game worked. Unfortunately, I did buy Lord of the Rings 1. It was not worth the money and was simply a hodge bodge of clips and old games/engines made to sell for cash. However Return of the King was a much beter game.

[QUOTE=Fable]Just for clarification's sake, both Larian's dev and myself view Morrowind as an RPG, severely lacking in some respects, very generous in others. Diablo, though, is an action title, even in third person. It has only the most basic aspects borrowed from RPGs. I agree, we're likely to see a concentration on FPS games, but the emphasis that we were going for in our conversation was the "shooter" part of "first person shooter." I'll take an RPG over a shooter, anyday, whether in first or third person.[QUOTE=Fable]

There's another major problem though with the new first person shooters. Games like Doom 3 are trying to have a storyline. The original Doom was simply point and kill, and that was a first person shooter. Now, if those games that don't need a storyline start having ones, we could see them start to be labelled as not just FPS, but in ones that have half-decent storylines, RPG. If FPS and RPG were to mix, then all would be lost. What I meant to say was, if this occurred, then all innovation would be lost. An FPS that was allowed to be labelled differently would cause other developers to do the same, and then the innovation would be lost.

[fable]

Now, if those games that don't need a storyline start having ones, we could see them start to be labelled as not just FPS, but in ones that have half-decent storylines, RPG.

Labeled, certainly. But storylines don't make an RPG; a throughly interactive environment does.