Support NeoGAF

Arulan · Feb 19, 2015

I just stumbled across this article written by Felipe Pepe, the person in the process of assembling his CRPG Book Project.

The Ministry of Hype: The danger of letting the gaming industry curate its own history

Recently I was asked to give a short lesson about CRPG history in a game design class of about 30 students. I started by asking how many had played Skyrim. All raised their hands. Then I asked how many considered themselves to be really hardcore fans of the Elder Scrolls series. About 60% kept their hands raised. The next question: "how many of you played Oblivion"? Now only 20% still has held their hands high. Only two hands remained in the air when I asked about Morrowind, and none at all when I asked about Daggerfall and Arena.

When I confronted them about that, they were somewhat embarrassed, but also claimed that those were old games, that had dated badly and were outclassed by newer releases. Now, let's stop here for a moment.

None of them had ever played Arena or Daggerfall. They don't have any first-hand experience on its gameplay and couldn't come to that conclusion by themselves. So where did that prejudice come from?

Let's be honest here - the gaming industry is hype-driven. Every new release is the best thing ever and will blow your mind. No secret there, you can see the same thing in movies, books and music - no one releases something saying "this is my new X, it's not as good as my previous one but please buy it".

But the gaming industry has one unique trait: It's the only one that will attack their previous release to make the new one look better.

The good folks at No Mutants Allowed made an interesting article about this back in 2006, when the Fallout 3 previews began to appear. Although the press had loved The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion - 94 on Metacritic -, less then a year later they had come up with a wave of new-found criticisms, of things they now considered broken in Oblivion and supposedly fixed in Fallout 3.

I'll refrain from posting too much of the article, but I encourage you to read it. It makes a lot of solid points about what is an unfortunate part of this industry.

Fugu · Feb 19, 2015

I wholeheartedly agree, and I think it's important to note that this is at least partially because the videogame press is completely devoid of integrity and is dominated by publishers with a vested interested in convincing people that new games are better than old ones even when they're not.

darth_infamous · Feb 19, 2015

I mentioned this on Twitter when I first read this article but it's one of the pitfalls of comparing games to other mediums like books, music, and movies. Games are in iterative process; the next one will always take the lessons the previous game learned and apply them in new way. This is the primary reason why games are always looking towards the next big thing.

Savantcore · Feb 19, 2015

It certainly works the other way as well. Call of Duty, for example, is constantly held to the same standard as the one before it (and the new release is often criticised in the comparison).

JayEH · Feb 19, 2015

Good observation guess I never really noticed that before but it happens all the time.

Beartruck · Feb 19, 2015

Elder scrolls is kind of a bad example because the first 2 games actually have aged incredibly badly. I agree with the overall point though.

Trago · Feb 19, 2015

Beartruck said:
Elder scrolls is kind of a bad example because the first 2 games actually have aged incredibly badly. I agree with the overall point though.

Graphically? Sure, but feature wise, the later games in the series have yet to surpass Daggerfall.

Fugu · Feb 19, 2015

darth_infamous said:
I mentioned this on Twitter when I first read this article but it's one of the pitfalls of comparing games to other mediums like books, music, and movies. Games are in iterative process; the next one will always take the lessons the previous game learned and apply them in new way. This is the primary reason why games are always looking towards the next big thing.

Games are iterative but that doesn't mean they're constantly improving, especially when iterating turns into focus grouping. I see no problem comparing games to literature (or, for more parallels, movies) because there are few examples of newer games being unequivocally superior to their older counterparts.

Not Spaceghost · Feb 19, 2015

Every time I see the words "archaic design" I get a little sad because that automatically implies that it's bad because it's not from at least 2012.

It was just a difference design philosophy, one that had different priorities, if it was enjoyable back then then the only thing that keeps you from enjoying it today is yourself. The fact that other games came out since then and did something that game did "better" or more "streamlined" should not reflect negatively on the quality of the older product.

Some times it is best to enjoy a game for what it is, not what you think it should be.

darkside31337 · Feb 19, 2015

Interesting article, agree that games definitely do not follow the models of other media, honestly its more like tech in that pretty much everything tech device is based on the concept that your old outdated shit sucks and you should catch up with the times - even when that isn't true at all. Like games sometimes the new tech is actually worse than the old stuff.

Which makes sense because unlike other media that stays mostly static pretty much throughout the course of time, video games are constantly evolving.

cooljeanius · Feb 19, 2015

Meanwhile, Zelda games are kind of the opposite of the situation in the OP due to the Zelda cycle: whenever a new one is revealed, people all of a sudden find all sorts of things they liked about the previous one despite having disliked it previously.

Edit: turns out the article does actually mention Nintendo games; the OP just didn't quote that part...

Lucumo · Feb 19, 2015

So around 18 students are "hardcore fans of the Elder Scrolls series" but only two played Morrowind and none the prequels? What a joke that class seems to be. No wonder AAA games aren't becoming better (well, that could be one of many reasons).

vesvci · Feb 19, 2015

Let's be honest here - the gaming industry is hype-driven.

But the gaming industry has one unique trait: It's the only one that will attack their previous release to make the new one look better.

So, manufactured hype is a common thing with video games, according to the article. Shocking.

Interesting read. Learned about

Roberta Williams

too.

inky · Feb 19, 2015

Very interesting. I'll give it a read.

From the excerpts, I absolutely agree. This is the same reason why when David Jaffe came here rambling about used games and about how games and digital goods don't depreciate, I called bullshit on that. And many others did.

Let's forget about the obvious advancements on tech for a minute that create some sort of "outdated" public perception. The industry itself depreciates its own games at an incredible rate. They have no problems calling their 2013 version bad if that helps them sell the 2014 version, and if it is any good they'll only use it as a stepping place to sell you the 2015 version.

This may sound like oversimplifying, but it's very true. Collectors and people who want to preserve old games have known about this too. Studios themselves would rather forget about their own games unless there is a remaster/remake to be sold, than allow, encourage or spearhead proper preservation of their games. They don't encourage revisiting them because it gives them little to no money. Most of them are simply not interested, and thus, are sending the message that their products are disposable, immediately replaceable with the new and the fresh and not worthy of going back to them.

Obviously, not all of them are like this, but the industry is very responsible for this issue.

Haunted · Feb 19, 2015

Jim talks about this in the video about Molyneux he did recently. Hyping the new release while throwing the old one under the bus.

Trago · Feb 19, 2015

This is a very important article to read. I hope is doesn't get too glossed over because of the Order Review thread.

bomblord1 · Feb 19, 2015

I've personally observed the opposite effect. As time goes on the older ones tend to be more highly regarded and the newer ones are said to be "crap".

stuminus3 · Feb 19, 2015

darth_infamous said:
Games are in iterative process; the next one will always take the lessons the previous game learned and apply them in new way.

Why we still got ~~monkeys~~ Deus Ex: Invisible War?

Finale Fireworker · Feb 19, 2015

This is hugely important and everybody should read it. It's a crucial understanding that all players should have.

Because it's true that some games age badly. Maybe even many games, because as new technology and experience develops games only stand to improve. But players also pick and choose games that are apparently unplayable by today's standards.

Players can sometimes judge a game on what it isn't instead of what it is, and they can choose not to enjoy it beforehand. People play old games over and over again for nostalgia, and others discount those same games for being too dated to play.

I think a great example is MGS1 and Super Mario Bros. These games are simultaneously timeless and dated because some people grew up with the series and others find traveling back difficult.

I know somebody who wanted to play MGS1, but gave up extremely early in the game because he kept dying. He said he would spend an hour trying to clear two rooms and then get killed the second he stepped into another one. He found it "impossible." He said the game kept killing him cheaply and it was garbage.

So I asked him, "now that you know about the lasers, would you run into them next time?"

And he said no.

And it's like he suddenly got that games used to be designed with failure in mind.

But truthfully, if a game was good in 1997, it is probably still good now. It just takes a certain frame of mind to play it.

Bobs Big Boy · Feb 19, 2015

We need more people devoted to preserving the history and fighting the hype. It is so easy to get into the cycle of playing all of the new things if you just follow videogames because that is the only path they promote. Once we have a longer history of videogames, maybe we can revisit and appreciate the context of the classics.

Most people do not go and watch the earliest films and read the earliest books, there is a point where the games will become culturally important fixtures and there will be pressure. We're getting there but King's Quest might not have been the monumental moment hey.

Edit: And thanks for sharing, I'm going to go dig up King's Quest sometime.

Makonero · Feb 19, 2015

bomblord1 said:
I've personally observed the opposite effect. As time goes on the older ones tend to be more highly regarded and the newer ones are said to be "crap".

The article focuses on PC games. The author admits that certain console games (due to the nature of console developers and virtual console-style emulation) do not go through this. Nintendo cultivates their backlog and releases games that reference it heavily (I.E. Smash Bros). But many publishers do not, and instead they promote new games by demeaning the old.

timetokill · Feb 19, 2015

This is one of the better articles I've read recently. thanks for posting it, OP.

twobear · Feb 19, 2015

I mean....Morrowind is pretty badly dated now. The worldbuilding is fantastic and some of the systems are fun but the basic gameplay (combat, magic) is awful.

Shalashaska161 · Feb 19, 2015

This is a problem with pretty much all computer software. It's definitely something to think about.

SerTapTap · Feb 19, 2015

Then I asked how many considered themselves to be really hardcore fans of the Elder Scrolls series. About 60% kept their hands raised. The next question: "how many of you played Oblivion"? Now only 20% still has held their hands high. Only two hands remained in the air when I asked about Morrowind, and none at all when I asked about Daggerfall and Arena.

So this is what it feels like to be punched in the gut over the internet.

Sad stuff, honestly. Film buffs, bookworms, band geeks, most people who consider themselves big fans will almost surely rush back and get "the classics" even if the modern stuff alerted them to band/series/author. Games are a growing medium so going backwards is a bit harder, but still. To say you're a huge TES fan and not even play Morrowind...not play the freely available Arena and Daggerfall that Bethesda provide...

I do hope it's mostly growing pains. I'd blame the difficulty of procuring old systems and games but all of TES is readily available for PC right now. There was even a huge set of the full series for <$50 that I saw.

Beartruck said:
Elder scrolls is kind of a bad example because the first 2 games actually have aged incredibly badly. I agree with the overall point though.

Arena and daggerfall are FREE though. To claim to be a hardcore fan and never even try them is pretty dubious. And they're still pretty amazing in many ways.

godelsmetric said:
I mean....Morrowind is pretty badly dated now. The worldbuilding is fantastic and some of the systems are fun but the basic gameplay (combat, magic) is awful.

There's mods--even at launch a big part of Morrowind was mods. Better Faces, some unofficial patches here and there, pretty up some things. Hit-roll is awful and I don't recall any mods to remove it, but it's hardly unplayable. And it's not like people play Skyrim purely for combat. I mean, I HOPE they don't. So that desire to explore should transfer well for Morrowind.

Ralemont · Feb 19, 2015

That they never tried them but said they were outdated anyway is the real issue. Had they actually played them and felt they were outdated it'd be a non-story.

Lostconfused · Feb 19, 2015

Blame marketing. It's easier to attack other and past products as inferior to distract from the flaws and limitations of the current product you are trying to sell.

Ralemont said:
That they never tried them but said they were outdated anyway is the real issue. Had they actually played them and felt they were outdated it'd be a non-story.

Not really. I think it's entirely fair to state that in the current state of enthusiast press the opinion of any game is shaped by a mob mentality.

duckroll · Feb 19, 2015

Shalashaska161 said:
This is a problem with pretty much all computer software. It's definitely something to think about.

It's not a "problem" for software though. It's something that applies, but not in a problematic way. Non-gaming software are just tools. Tools get improved as time goes by and there is no real benefit to looking back and deliberately using older outdated tools. Software engineers are aware of this and it's not taken to be a slight. The same applies for physical tools. There can be an appreciation of contributions made in the past by those who pioneered progress in tools, but that doesn't require actually wanting to use an outdated tool. That's impractical.

The argument here though, is that games are interactive media and would qualify as entertainment and art. As such, what is valued should be somewhat different. Even as tastes change over time, and techniques applied to create these works evolve, in all other such media forms, there is more appreciation towards the history and legacy of defining works. But of course the logical conclusion is that gaming is just such a young form of media that a lot of people are still figuring this out, including the people who write about it.

Ralemont · Feb 19, 2015

Lostconfused said:
Not really. I think it's entirely fair to state that in the current state of enthusiast press the opinion of any game is shaped by a mob mentality.

I don't know what this means. Is it your argument that anyone who plays an older game and thinks it's outdated has been brainwashed by the media? Because this is pretty much the sister argument to saying people only like older games because of nostalgia.

Kai Dracon · Feb 19, 2015

Going with what Inky posted, the industry is heavily predicated on technological hype, which is required for selling new generations of technology. It seems an implicit consequence of that is the need to promote a simplistic, shallow mantra of "new and shiny is better than old and ugly!"

This still plays exceptionally well in the console arena, where there are still a lot of people who seem to believe great games become old junk as soon as a new console with more hype powers is released. Of course, a caveat is the technological nature of gaming means that new tech can make older games legitimately better.

But for the most part the industry does dismiss its past. And to a large degree, gaming culture still does as well. That may seem odd, considering trends such as "retro gaming". But that's the thing. The past of gaming is considered a cute distraction; a silly hobby for geeks who aren't hip and fashionable enough to be seen playing this year's Assassin's Creed. After all, the new game has a sticker on the case that says it has amazing graphics for popular adults.

Orayn · Feb 19, 2015

While I agree with the general thrust of the argument that gaming is hype-driven and publishers often have motivation to trash their old products in order to promote the new, I think the element of interactivity makes comparisons to classic movies a lot more difficult to swallow. The barrier to entry that comes from older control and UI paradigms is very real, to the point where playing the foundational games of the WRPG genre is more akin to reading Chaucer than watching a black and white movie. Chaucer is absolutely worth reading of course, and modern novels have no business billing themselves as new and improved versions of the "obsolete" Canterbury Tales, but the disconnect is definitely there and it's not surprising to hear that people aren't well versed in the history of a major genre or long-running series.

This is to say nothing of the fact that a lot of older games have been rendered completely inaccessible due to lack of backwards compatibility for anyone who limits their gaming to consoles. I wouldn't recommend that, but it's a common enough situation.

duckroll · Feb 19, 2015

Ralemont said:
I don't know what this means. Is it your argument that anyone who plays an older game and thinks it's outdated has been brainwashed by the media? Because this is pretty much the sister argument to saying people only like older games because of nostalgia.

I agree with this. I don't think the problem is so much people not liking older mechanics or designs, but rather that there is a general disinterest in giving stuff a chance or learning more about the roots of a franchise or genre. Willful ignorance is sad, but having a different opinion is not. Even with literature, there will be people who have a bone to pick with old classics. I don't think there are many people who are well read who automatically like something because it is defined as a classic. The discussion and debate is healthy and good, because it shows people are interested in talking about these things - be it positive or negative. The lack of interest in discussing older things in gaming is what makes the situation sad.

Syril · Feb 19, 2015

Sir TapTap said:
There's mods--even at launch a big part of Morrowind was mods. Better Faces, some unofficial patches here and there, pretty up some things. Hit-roll is awful and I don't recall any mods to remove it, but it's hardly unplayable. And it's not like people play Skyrim purely for combat. I mean, I HOPE they don't. So that desire to explore should transfer well for Morrowind.

I did actually find a mod to remove hit roll, but since weapons skill affects accuracy and nothing else apparently, it just makes it so all of your weapon skills go to 99 whenever you're not in a menu.

Ralemont · Feb 19, 2015

Kai Dracon said:
This still plays exceptionally well in the console arena, where there are still a lot of people who seem to believe great games become old junk as soon as a new console with more hype powers is released. Of course, a caveat is the technological nature of gaming means that new tech can make older games legitimately better.

Is this actually true? How many gamers peg Unity as the best Assassin's Creed? What about Advanced Warfare for CoD? Battlefield 4? Resident Evil 6?

I think the article is overstating the degree to which gamers buy into media hype. Does it happen? Oh, sure. But ask any Playstation gamer to list his top 5 PS console games. How many of those will be PS4? What about PS3?

Robert at Zeboyd Games · Feb 19, 2015

Orayn said:
While I agree with the general thrust of the argument that gaming is hype-driven and publishers often have motivation to trash their old products in order to promote the new, I think the element of interactivity makes comparisons to classic movies a lot more difficult to swallow. The barrier to entry that comes from older control and UI paradigms is very real, to the point where playing the foundational games of the WRPG genre is more akin to reading Chaucer than watching a black and white movie. Chaucer is absolutely worth reading of course, and modern novels have no business billing themselves as new and improved versions of the "obsolete" Canterbury Tales, but the disconnect is definitely there and it's not surprising to hear that people aren't well versed in the history of a major genre or long-running series.

Definitely. It's much easier to go back and play the NES Dragon Warrior games than it is play the Ultima games. Early Western RPGs are rough.

Issun · Feb 19, 2015

Great article, I totally agree, but I feel conflicted about the way he talked about King's Quest.

I never played any of the games but after seeing the Ken and Roberta's appearance on the game awards I felt like I should. Not just the reboot, the classics as well, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Many reboots suck but at least they can spark some interest in the classic game he is based of, and isn't that a good thing?
As long as the reboot doesn't try to bury the older game it and treats it with respect I think it's ok.

Bobs Big Boy · Feb 19, 2015

It might also be fair to say, Skyrim is a bigger moment for Elder Scrolls becoming cultural currency than the first couple games. Someday maybe it is more likely to be revisited than the earliest games of the series. Morrowind is still everything that I identify as being interesting about the series and it's too bad that wouldn't have been the peak but it's hard to revise that history and give it more importance even if it is critically exceptional and there is an argument for its foundations.

Lostconfused · Feb 19, 2015

duckroll said:
Willful ignorance is sad, but having a different opinion is not.

There is no time to play every game ever, willful ignorance is a thing that everyone engages in at all times. People are willfully ignoring specific genres right now and it has nothing to do with age.

Ralemont said:
I don't know what this means. Is it your argument that anyone who plays an older game and thinks it's outdated has been brainwashed by the media? Because this is pretty much the sister argument to saying people only like older games because of nostalgia.

Sure yes lets go with that. Since both stem from point of view of ignorance. Nostalgia is based on flawed human memories and experiences that aren't accurate or detailed when compared to reality.

Edit: Or not. Lets just say I agree that nostalgia is terrible and should be discounted as useless as worthwhile judgement. I am not saying that someone who has an negative opinion of an old game is ignorant but it is entirely possible that they had preconceived notions that shaped their opinion of it. Preconceived notions that might have created a negative or positive opinion, if they were negative to begin with then the individual might not have honestly engaged with the game and had a lesser experience for it.

Aces&Eights · Feb 19, 2015

This article is making me want to play Morrowind again. I remember all too well the clunky combat but good lord what a world and story.

sn00zer · Feb 19, 2015

Film dont get outdated nearly as bad as games because the way we interact with it stays fairly similar. You sit and watch. Game on the other hand are constantly reevaluating the ways they are interacted with, UI, number of buttons, number of actions, genre types etc. The constantly iterative process does "outdate" certain mechanics in a way any other business operation can be outdated and replaced.
Im sure many of these games still have incredible stories that hold up well (and have still yet to be matched), but game mechanics can absolutely become outdated over time, and yes there can be a game that is the best in its genre or series, that make other game seem no longer as good because mechanics have improved since then.
Stories, worlds, and characters are timeless, game mechanics are not.

timetokill · Feb 19, 2015

duckroll said:
The argument here though, is that games are interactive media and would qualify as entertainment and art. As such, what is valued should be somewhat different. Even as tastes change over time, and techniques applied to create these works evolve, in all other such media forms, there is more appreciation towards the history and legacy of defining works. But of course the logical conclusion is that gaming is just such a young form of media that a lot of people are still figuring this out, including the people who write about it.

I want to say this usage of "young form of media" is a copout, but upon reflection I guess it suggests another question -- when other artistic mediums were "young forms of media," did they act the same way about their older media? Did movie critics shit on silent films as soon as talkies came around? Do movie critics today crap on movies shot on film instead of digitally? Moreover, did the studios themselves do it?

I don't recall Lucasfilm saying that the original Star Wars trilogy was outdated when they were peddling The Phantom Menace. But I could be wrong, I didn't follow the marketing for that film. I also don't usually see remakes of films talking about how the original was garbage. I usually hear them say they're "reimagining it" or something that still holds the original in high esteem.

sfried · Feb 19, 2015

I'm pretty sure NeoGAF will disagree, but then again, GAF is a hyperidden community.

All aboard the Hypetrain, after all.

(Sorry for being so cynical, its just that I tend to hate most of the posters here.)

Edit: Back to topic: I've played a bit of Daggerfall in my day, and been meaning to play it again. I hope the Daggerfall Unity port is coming along fine.

duckroll · Feb 19, 2015

Lostconfused said:
There is no time to play every game ever, willful ignorance is a thing that everyone engages in at all times. People are willfully ignoring specific genres right now and it has nothing to do with age.

No one is arguing for everyone to play every game ever, or to be interested in every genre. The point is, there should be a larger level of interest from people who identify as enthusiasts. If someone identifies as a big Megaman fan, I don't think it is an unreasonable expectation that such a person should be interested at the very least in the history of the franchise. That does not even mean having played all the previous games, but there should be interest in doing so.

bomblord1 · Feb 19, 2015

sfried said:
(Sorry for being so cynical, its just that I tend to hate most of the posters here.)

Well sorry

lol

Lactose_Intolerant · Feb 19, 2015

Still the scariest thing in videogames
Vengeance!

I would still rather play Daggerfall than Skyrim.

Afrodium · Feb 19, 2015

I definitely agree that video game culture is too focused on what's to come rather than what's currently available. In the film industry, the biggest event of the year is The Academy Awards in which the past year of film is celebrated. In video games, the biggest event if the year is E3 in which the next year of games are advertised.

Lostconfused · Feb 19, 2015

duckroll said:
The point is, there should be a larger level of interest from people who identify as enthusiasts. If someone identifies as a big Megaman fan, I don't think it is an unreasonable expectation that such a person should be interested at the very least in the history of the franchise.

If we are going by the example in the OP then perhaps the people in that group are not fans of Elder Scrolls (or mega man what have you) but rather they are fans of Skyrim and maybe half of them also enjoyed Oblivion. Maybe that group of people is incorrectly identifying them selves as fans of the series when they only had one brief but rather enjoyable engagement with the franchise. Someone saying they are a fan might just be unwillingly lying and misrepresenting themselves.

duckroll · Feb 19, 2015

timetokill said:
I want to say this usage of "young form of media" is a copout, but upon reflection I guess it suggests another question -- when other artistic mediums were "young forms of media," did they act the same way about their older media? Did movie critics shit on silent films as soon as talkies came around? Do movie critics today crap on movies shot on film instead of digitally? Moreover, did the studios themselves do it?

I don't recall Lucasfilm saying that the original Star Wars trilogy was outdated when they were peddling The Phantom Menace. But I could be wrong, I didn't follow the marketing for that film. I also don't usually see remakes of films talking about how the original was garbage. I usually hear them say they're "reimagining it" or something that still holds the original in high esteem.

Historically, yes, when forms of media or even genres are still establishing themselves and finding their footing, there are poor attitudes in terms of critique, preservation, and awareness. They might not face the exact same problems as gaming in these aspects, because different media have different challenges, but looking at the Star Wars example, just think about how the original release of the original trilogy is still unavailable today in any preserved or remastered form. Only the special editions.

With books, it is not uncommon for genres which were considered disposable in their day and derided by mainstream critics to later be identified as something of extreme influence and value. Classics like Count of Monte Cristo were serialized tripe which weren't taken particularly seriously. Jules Verne's works were looked down on for being stuff for children with fantasies, and his works were heavily edited for commercial value. Very little of the original manuscripts are preserved, and there is little historical documentation of Verne's life and insights as a writer because it was simply not taken seriously at the time. If the attitudes towards such works did not mature over time with people taking a keen interest in looking back and finding value and importance in them, we would not be talking about them as classics today.

Lostconfused said:
If we are going by the example in the OP then perhaps the people in that group are not fans of Elder Scrolls (or mega man what have you) but rather they are fans of Skyrim and maybe half of them also enjoyed Oblivion. Maybe that group of people is incorrectly identifying them selves as fans of the series when they only had one brief but rather enjoyable engagement with the franchise. Someone saying they are a fan might just be unwillingly lying and misrepresenting themselves.

Sure, absolutely. But such misrepresentation is not uncommon, which is the point. The larger issue is not so much what a bunch of students might say about themselves, but the question of whether there is currently a healthy culture of preservation and historical research done in gaming. The answer is generally a weak "maybe", but it will likely improve with time. It's important to be aware of these shortcomings.

Teeth · Feb 19, 2015

Kai Dracon said:
But for the most part the industry does dismiss its past. And to a large degree, gaming culture still does as well. That may seem odd, considering trends such as "retro gaming". But that's the thing. The past of gaming is considered a cute distraction; a silly hobby for geeks who aren't hip and fashionable enough to be seen playing this year's Assassin's Creed. After all, the new game has a sticker on the case that says it has amazing graphics for popular adults.

You had me until here. On any enthusiast board, you are much more likely to see a common consensus that older games are the only true and hardcore "real games".

Games are iterative; trashing past works isnt necessarily about hyping the future as showcasing what is new and improved and maybe that you are listening to criticism. Tough to not look like you're dismantling older entries when you are trying to show where you've legitimately improved things. Of course, when all you're improving is the art or writing, it's purely subjective and older entries shouldn't really be compared. Additionally, removing what you think of as busywork or changing core systems for what you believe to be better may not land the same way with your audience. I don't know of many devs that purposely change things for the worse in their own eyes.

Lostconfused · Feb 19, 2015

Afrodium said:
I definitely agree that video game culture is too focused on what's to come rather than what's currently available. In the film industry, the biggest event of the year is The Academy Awards in which the past year of film is celebrated. In video games, the biggest event if the year is E3 in which the next year of games are advertised.

I dunno, neogaf GOTY vote is kind of a big thing. Enthusiast press treats GOTY as kind of a big thing.

Maybe gamers just have short memories, it's not like nobody attempts to look at the past year but rather things just end up being forgotten.

Support NeoGAF

History vs. Hype: "The danger of letting the gaming industry curate its own history"

Member

Member

Member

Unconfirmed Member

Junior Member

Member

Member

Member

Spaceghost

Tomodachi wa Mahou

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

sputum-flecked apoplexy

Member

Member

not me

Member

Member

not me

Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony

Member

Member

Member

not me

Banned

Neo Member

Member

Member

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Banned

Member

Banned

Member

Member

Member

Member

Similar threads