Here's something that came to my attention recently: Australian current affairs programme Four Corners is doing an investigation on gaming. Or, to be more specific, an investigation in seeing how gaming affects relationships and health (physical and mental).
If anyone is interested in finding out more, please go here
On Wednesday, I was watching the Gruen Transfer.
For those not in the know, it's a show on Australian TV which discusses advertising with how it works, the tactics utilised to sell a product.
And on this particular night, they finally discussed gaming.
I say finally because in my mind it has been a long time coming: There have been some brilliant gaming ads made in the past that would have been an inspired choice for Gruen to analyse - 'Michael' anyone? - but perhaps I should be grateful that it's happening.
Truth be told, there wasn't a lot revealed that I didn't already know. But Russell sure looked awkward...
This week I have been looking back at past issues of CVG and having a major nostalgia trip. It is fun to see gaming of the early nineties being documented in such manner, especially when one considers how many games of that era still hold up today.
Funny thing however is that I can't help but notice that many games of that era are overlooked. This is fascinating when one considers the games that have entered history in the years since: Final Fantasy 2 and 3 (4 and 6) never get a mention; the undisputed classic Super Metroid gets a score of 91%, 1993 goes by without any indication of something called Doom and the Lunar series, one of the highpoints on the Mega CD, are nowhere to be found.
I suppose much of CVG is through a British perspective as it was the magazine's country of origin. And it is likely that many of the console games were handled in it's sister magazine Mean Machines (which I never read and therefore have no attachment to). But it is fascinating to see a) a history that has since proven to show a narrow view of the story and b) a perception that isn't from Japan or the US.
How does the saying go: That history is written by the winners?
...Technical wizardry isn't necessarily a substitute for a good idea, and many of the games we're seeing today are substandard rehashes of ideas which are ages old. Why is this? Have all the good ideas run out? The simple answer is no. There are still plenty of good ideas out there, the the wrong people have them.
I'll try and explain: in the old days a programmer would come out with an idea, sit down and bash out the code on his machine. He didn't have to work for anyone, didn't have to worry about so-called quality control and could work whenever he liked. That was how the all-time greats like Manic Miner were born. So what's gone wrong now? Computer game shave become such big business that programmers are forced to work in teams to compete, often writing specific projects dictated by software houses. These projects are dictated by business - will the game make money in the long run? - and very few people are prepared to to take any risks with the result that many good ideas are left on the drawing board. The upshot of all of this is what when a truly great game like Streetfighter 2 comes along everyone jumps up and down and makes a huge fuss, when there was a time when people were banging out brilliant software left, right and centre!
At the end of the day, though, it's all up to you lot. If you go on buying the same old games the software companies will just go on producing them. If, however, you demand something decent then maybe the right people in power will take a long hard look at the future and realise that something has been lost. When was the last time ANYBODY wrote anything nearly as good as Defender?....
Unless you lot - the buying public - decides you want better more playable games you simply won't get them. Personally I'm sick to the back teeth of sub-standard licensed games and I for one am not going to tolerate it much longer. Start shouting for your games NOW!
Source (page 48)
