- Games, Toys, and Hobbies»
- Computer & Video Games
Why All of the Video-Games Suck in 2017?
The FPS (first-person-shooter) genre of video-games is one that I have a weakness for. The reasons are a mixture of nostalgia from the younger days playing these games on the PlayStation 2 and Xbox 360, but also due to the level of innovative game engine design that came with the innovative works of the original Infinity Ward development studio, there most notable works being Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare and Modern Warfare 2. This was a games developer that took what Medal of Honour were doing well back in the early 2000s, and made their every bit better competing franchise that would ultimately put them out of business.
Call of Duty are still around in 2017, and they are great? Hmm, Call of Duty are still actively releasing video-games each and every year in November, but there has not been any innovation in the franchises game engines since 2009 - when Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 released. The reasons for the original Infinity Ward team of developers falling out with Activision was that the games publisher was unwilling to give them the freedom to wonder into any war time era that they so desired, and as a result the Infinity Ward lead developers left to start up their own development studio, Respawn Entertainment, later releasing the game series, Titanfall and Titanfall 2. Titanfall is perhaps one of the few exceptions as there is certainly innovation in this games engine, but this is lacking severely in the Call of Duty franchise.
Call of Duty’s business model is built on complacency, as they are fully aware of the surrounding marketplace, and there is no pocket hole for competing games innovations, as Call of Duty has maintained their brand awareness, brand loyalty, and their fair share of controversies over the web. These strong controversies are a good sign for the Call of Duty IP (intellectual property), as this means that video-games around the globe are still showing substantial interests in the franchise, and often times investment interests, as the franchise has maintained their high retail price for new copies of their latest titles until they are superseded by the newer Call of Duty title launch. This is only possible if the game is seeing high-demand, and perhaps the worst case of franchise fatigue came in 2016 with the release of Infinite Warfare, and it seemed like a flop in the eyes of the mass consumerism for next-generation video-games, but the title still sold more than 10 million copies throughout its one-year life cycle. The cost of a new Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare has dropped considerably in retail costs for £15, down from the high premium price of £50.
The fact that Call of Duty has not changed considerably in game engine functioning is somewhat worrying because in 2017 they are running of fumes as it is. There is only so much that can be done with game engine design unless it is not only improved upon, but rather entirely changed. This would be a worrying state of affairs for the Call of Duty IP if they were thrusted into a situation where their game engine has been entirely changed, as this would alter the entire feel of the game, especially the multiplayer, as this is where the mass audiences have the highest expectations. Call of Duty: WWII is set for release in a few days, but the only improvements have been the graphics design to push the standards higher to match the Xbox One X and PlayStation Pro capabilities to stream gameplay in 4K. This is great, but the innovations are substantially reliant on the works of separate industries aside from the gaming industry, as gamers are not completely silly to think that things are not quite right in Call of Duty in 2017, and this is the neglect on game engine innovations.
Even Battlefield 1 is a disappointment in 2017, as the game engine is still straggling behind Call of Duty’s elite game engine. The quality of gameplay, feel in relaxing into playing the game, and the overall gamer experience is till far superior on the Call of Duty franchise in 2017 for FPS’s but there is a certain level of complacency that cannot be ignored. Titanfall 2 might be a better example where innovation in game engine capabilities have been enhanced and improved on, but the futuristic era of gameplay seems to have been shied away from for many of the gaming community. Destiny 2 has been blowing up on the next-generation gaming marketplace, but this is a substandard game, and only works as a franchise of mass proportions because they have tickled the intrigue of the past Halo community, and from there they have created something quite unbelievably oversaturated.
The problems in video-games today is the overall lacking of innovations, as games publishes are spending billions of dollars on new games titles but they have neglected the innovating smaller developer studios who are creating gaming platforms to replace the big franchises in gaming today. Worst part is, no one is talking about the lacking in innovations, as giant games publishers (Activision/Blizzard, EA, Ubisoft) are biding their time until the next big thing comes out, and this could even be the next-next-generation console.
The Xbox One and PS4 Suck
The Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 were beloved consoles when they first released to the open market, but the next-generation consoles have been mostly snuffed by the wider gaming community, something that strikes a worrying discomfort for those who have made the swift transition to either the Xbox One or PlayStation 4. If the wider gaming community have been waiting for years to buy the next-generation console, then they may as well wait for the next-next-generation console.
Does the Xbox One suck? Nope, as there are the latest game releases in the latest improved graphics available on the Xbox One. This alone makes the console worth having, as the latest Call of Duty, Battlefield, Star Wars: Battlefront, and Dead Rising games are all exclusively available on the next-generation consoles. If you play a lot of video-games, and your friends are active online gamers, then chances are you would be limited to gaming fun without having the next-generation gaming platforms.
Not that nothing sucks about the Xbox One, as the downloading for every disc that you insert into the console is simply ridiculous and unforgivable. The Xbox One requires you to download digital data to your console for any disc game that you buy, making it near impossible to be a committed gamer without having to un-download certain games after the console memory goes too low. This is why it makes gamers wonder if the next-generation consoles are even modelled to sustain large game libraries, but instead to put the push on the wider gaming community to play the online functions more often, and to spend far less time on solo gaming offline. This has been a nightmare console for downloading space and speeds, which may be a subtle hint from the consumers that the next-next-generation console me need an alternate way of storing games, as not to cause dissatisfaction on the gaming console.
Does the PlayStation 4 suck? Less so than the Xbox One. This is due to the emphasis on gaming from the PlayStation 4 platform, as the Xbox One is aiming to appeal more to the variety of entertainment on offer; from gaming, Netflix/online movie-TV show streaming services, music listening, YouTube streaming, etc. The PlayStation also arguably has the better controller, as it feels more comfortable in the palm of your hand, something that comes as a surprise to most gamers since the Xbox 360 controller felt more comfortable to hold and use than the PlayStation 3 controller. Everything else that sucks about the PlayStation 4 is the same as the Xbox One console.
I own an Xbox One and PlayStation 4 console, and I confess, they suck:
Yes, this is a little condescending given that I have only recently just paused for a breath of intoxicated air, as the next-generation consoles are filled with such overwhelming marketing campaigns to tell you that these consoles are the ones that will break all grounds in innovation, gameplay experiences, and overall entertainment unit functioning, when in actual fact, they lack overall evolutionary innovation for the video-gaming industry as a whole. Sure, as I previously stated in an earlier paragraph, the next-generation consoles are worth having because they serve a purpose, enabling gamers to access the latest and greatest library of games. You know, Call of Duty: WWII, Destiny 2, Star Wars: Battlefront II, Titanfall 2, Playerunknown’s Battleground, Rainbow Six: Siege, and every other game under the sun.
Innovation, and its importance in video-game consoles and video-game IP’s: Whether or not you agree with the consensus that the next-generation consoles are merely creations to push the boundaries with graphics and pixels doesn’t matter, as this is the honest spoken truth. The next-generation consoles provide far too much digital access to be held under a single disc, hence the reasons why video-games on the next-generation consoles have to be digitally downloaded, and have access inside of the console to the disc. Next-generation console owners may as well buy all of their games direct from the Xbox or PlayStation online marketplace. Yes, this is one of the key changes to the next-generation consoles, as they want to encourage their console owners to switch entirely to the digitally ownership purchasing platform. This way, gamers will be tempted to pay higher prices in the earlier release of a games life-cycle, and they can micro-manage your full-game, DLC, and various other purchases, directing the marketing to your gaming needs.
Innovation is costly, and neither Microsoft (with their Xbox) or Sony (with their PlayStation) wanted to push the boundaries too far for their next-generation consoles that launched in 2013, as the technology is still being paid off from innovations done a decade ago. Sony nor Microsoft wants to lose many when they launch their new consoles, so they would both sooner bide their time until the debts are paid off so that they can be forced to move where the industry is going, so the only time the gaming community experiences the forces of innovation is when someone in the industry pushes the quality and potential for gaming in the future.
The video-gaming community are somewhat complacent, and will complain terribly little about the innovations occurring within the industry, as improved graphics and pixel performance has clouded the average video-gamers frontal vision and frontal cortex for information procession and emotional attachment. Better graphics, frames-per-second, and fancy micro-transactions have guided the gaming community down a dangerous path where there is over-chargings, and oversaturated pricing for items that do not even give a product or service level of satisfaction. The video-gaming market has been forced down the path of righteously improving the visual qualities within gameplay and cutscene stories, as a way of disguising the lack of innovation in the gameplay experience itself. The cracks of showing, as the gaming community seems to be clicking onto the sneaky business model tactics encouraged by the games console providers. It’s not the giant games publishers fault, so subsequently it cannot be the game developer studios fault, and that only leaves the large corporations that run the industry, Microsoft and Sony.
Apple should make a games console: Yeah, but Apple are oversaturated as they are, making the latest iPhone, iMac, Macbook, iPod, iPad, etc., so how could they justify the additional expenses of running a games console business? Well, with a little bit of faith in the people. When something is truly remarkable, especially in the technological industry, the people will gravitate to this place and have strong attachments to the brand and product/service on offer. Steve Jobs was a risky employee working for Apple in the 80s/again in the 90s/and the 2000’s - right up until the stage when cancer took his life, as he was the acting CEO for Apple before he unfortunately got the cancer diagnosis. Steve Jobs believed that making the product that you want, not that you see, was the success criteria for a technological brand/company, and these products/services will resinate with the global audiences, taking a sense of pride of personality statement with them wherever they go.
Apple is the largest technological giant corporation in the world, and running a games console business is going to cost billions in the makings, and hundreds of millions in market research efforts. Once the product is made, there is global marketing campaign and before they know it they are spending yet more billions on pushing their new product out onto the market place. Point being, the return on investment can take a decade, and Apple may not like this approach to their expansion in business activities under their existing business model. This could be the product that Apple makes that overtakes their sales for computers/laptops, and yet they are still ignoring the video-game market all-together. There can be the hopes of course, as it would not be a difficult product for Apple to launch, but it would come with its difficulties, especially if it does not appeal to the wider market, and could hurt their reputation as a technological providing organisation on the global market.
Apple: The Games Console Manufacturer That Was Not To Be (But, Could One Day Be):
Apple have dominated in every technological field that they have entered into, but they have left themselves out of the TV manufacturing market, the video-gaming industry, the search engine market, the home office software market, and they have not done any technological innovations in the kitchen appliances sector, and the majority of the living room technology has been avoided by the Apple corporation.
The video-game console, the Apple games console, has been avoided by the Apple technological corporation since the dawn of video-game consoles, but this has been largely due to the innovations costing large corporations like Microsoft and Sony billions of dollars every year because they are still paying off innovation bills from a decade ago, and it would be unwise for Apple to enter into the cramped video-game marketplace to only put themselves into tens of billions of dollars of debt within the first few years of operating.
Apple, seemingly have no ambitions and certainly no plans to enter into the video-game console market anytime soon, but this could all change over the next 5 years, as Apple have been eager to dominate the smartphone market by pushing their innovations ahead yet more years aside from their competitors, and this may have been a costly effort so that they can move resources around to fund an all new product/service innovation, and the video-game console market has hit an all time low in 2013, with sales figures staggering throughout the years since. Apple may see this as an opportunity for market entry, allowing the brand to seek out a niche smack-bang between Microsoft’s Xbox console and Sony’s PlayStation console, providing something that the other two have failed to. This, would of course be the console thats sole-use is for online gaming, and all of the single player offline gameplay will be left to the other competing brand manufacturers.
The Apple ‘online’ games console could enter into the market at a new age, next-generation console stage in 2020 onwards, as the video-game marketplace is making the switch to predominant online gameplay for the vast majority of the games console audiences. Apple is a brand that represents the brighter side to technological innovations, having introduced the smartphone market to the world, the app technology, the first premium tablet, the first premium MP3 player, and the best computer/laptop hardware on the market today.
© 2017 Dreammore