Is the gaming industry dying?

I don't see the gaming industry really going anywhere, IMO. The games in this generation aren't like they were in the last batch. The main issue I have with most of these current generation games is that so much effort is thrown into the way they look and the multi-player content and DLC, that the story line gets the shaft, and if it's not the storyline, it's the online gameplay,voice acting, controls, or the glitches. I'm not saying that there aren't any games with a good story line, but finding one with an appropriate length is what's really killing me. Maybe it's just because I'm limited to only PS3 games, but I really would like to see all that good stuff which drove the PS2/Xbox/Gamecube years.

The second factor that's killing the gaming industry is the cost of the games. I get the basic facts about how production=price, but if we could find a way to make it possible for games to be at least $40.00, and still have all the great aspects to make it something worth playing, the market would be better. However, with this recession that the American economy is in, it might take some time before we will see a rise in the purchasing of games/movies.

The third factor is the, I guess one could say, "flooding" of one type of game in the market. Nowadays, the big thing is FPS. It seems that everyone wants to make one, and to try and copy off of another game's success to do so (like CoD), or try to combine two aspects taken from other games (as in free running and Shooting in Brink) that the game developers don't realize how big of a piece of crap that they made until they see the income from that game and then lose their jobs. Kinda makes buying a game become pointless.

The fourth factor, of which the OP stated, is the reviews are killing games. Take this horrible, if not just raciest, review by this Xplay guy.

How in the hell they let something like this air on national television is beyond me. This game looks awesome, and I'm really dying to get my hands on a copy so I can test it out for myself. However, like many games, it has taken from others. The vehicle system and kill streak rewards could be cited from any number of FPS, but these are set apart in the function of that they can be upgraded. Although the story is short, it has some really heart and gut wrenching parts that make you wonder, 'Holy S***, how did that get into the game?'

The fifth factor that is crippling the industry are remakes that blow. Everyone like the Final Fantasy series when it first came out, and began to enjoy the cinematic's and it's unique fighting/attacks. However, as the series began to progress, it suffered from many of the factors in my first paragraph. Take away the story/controls/things that made the first few awesome, and then you are truly screwed.

The final factor, again, stated by the OP, is that the Japanese gaming industry tries to introduce something new to the market, but can't get it translated or have to keep it in their country because we don't have any understanding of it here. Does this mean that there aren't any games that we have from Japan? No, but sometimes the voice acting stinks when it comes to translation of video games. If you ask me, some games are better off with the Japanese voices and English subtitles (although, the literacy rate is dropping, which is why some games don't have them at all.) Take the Yakuza series. If you haven't see or heard of this series, but seen the game for cheap in the store somewhere, don't hesitate to grab it. This game does one thing I've never seen in a game before: provide videos that actually show the things that happen in the last game. Sure, they can go for at least 10mins, but these add on to it's epic story line. Sure, it's a Sandbox game, and the combat isn't much, but the story will make your heart go out to the main character(s) like they were real people.

In short, yes, I do think the Industry is dying, but it can recover; just as soon as we get out of this Recession and titles become more impressive.

No.

There are some OK points in the OP, but some nonsensical comments as well.

All I have to say is that I don't play modern games. Not only because I'm a cheap bastard and have a bad PC, but because they don't interest me. Not one bit. I still play Quake (the whole Quake series, excluding 4), Starcraft: Brood War, and Baldur's Gate, along with some other classics and random oldschool games. If I do venture into post-2005 territory, it's to play relatively small games for relatively short periods of time, like Terraria or Minecraft. They lose interest very fast.

"The Industry" isn't dying, but it's changing. Whether or not you like it doesn't change that fact. The masses do.

I think this entire thread is a "it was better back in the old days" rant.

Gaming industry isn't dying. When your economy is in the tank. You lose that fringe consumer that bought games because he could afford a half ass crappy fps or skyrim. Less liquid consumers, less cash to put in r&d, less drive to make meh games, more willingness to build better games for people to want= Better gaming systems and industry. Plus the hardcore gamers buy everyfuckingthingoutthere. This is like bitching in japan about the anime industry losing money because pirating in the west when the 10billion convert to american green backs dollars are made on niponese beardnecks one 125$ two ep bd at a time. Yeah they lose a consumer that they never had in the first place.

Tell your company or franchises to make better games so the normals would wanta play bf3 or what ever shitty game on the here and now.

This generation is full of big budget games and triple A titles. But where is all the simplicity and originality? Big budget games are fun, but they get old. Even now I could turn on my old Sega Saturn and play Nights and have fun. And games like Nights have a unique charm that most games lack; indeed many games are like hollow shells IMO. Multiplayer and shooting is all the rage right now and as a result we get CoD or BF3 or any other CoD clones. I'd rather play IWBTG and eat my heart out. What happened?

If big budget games don't cut it, then it's time for the indies to rise up. But then, everyone supports the major developers only. As a result, indie companies die almost as soon as they put their games on Steam. The gaming industry is getting harder and harder to enter and competition is so fierce that most Indies don't last long enough to see their game achieving recognition.

Last generation we had a huge variety of different games, but now, it's easy to see that most of it has disappeared.

This, pretty much. Now, I won't say that I like every change that comes, but I think it's silly to get a nearly apocalyptic attitude because of that.

I find it funny that "casual games" are often cited as death of video games. After all, the very first games were pretty much what one would call casual nowadays.

1) All opinion. I know friends who play ALL COD games, doesn't matter if it's COD4, MW2, BO or MW3. I would like to know if you have indeed played all of these different shooter franchises. Because COD and BF3 are as different as Halo, TF2 and Gears are. I can play UMVC3 for hours on end, one of my friends can play COD for hours on end, another friend can play Skyrim for hours on end. However, not all of us can do the same to all three games. It's just what games appeals to us the most.

2) The reason why shooters and multiplayer are the rage, is because it's "new" and a whole lot more accessible. Back then, only PC games had the power to play online, then the Dreamcast came out with online capabilities. A lot of people were just stuck playing by themselves or with friends who would go over, which still continued on until this generation of games hit. Unless one had an Xbox/PS2 (even then, the PS2 barely had any online games) and had online, it was the same old thing. This generation made online gaming more accessible besides having an Xbox or a PC.

3) Again, new companies have a hard time due to "new names/games" and how the economy is going. The economy wasn't as bad a decade ago, so there were more chances. One big problem, is that back then, there were TONS and TONS of new companies trying to get into the gaming industry, of course, some were horrible games and people were left with a hole in their wallet. So it isn't surprising to see that some people bear this in mind. One last point, is that games are more expensive to make nowadays as opposed to before.

Well to be honest, I played CoD 1,2,3 and 5. That's as far I will go. I don't have anything against FPS games, it's just that they just seem completely the same to me one game after another. In fact the only 2 FPS games that I felt was worth going crazy for was Portal 1 and 2. I tried BF3 before and I must admit, I played it about 4 hours before selling it to a friend of mine. But that doesn't mean I hate it though. BF3 is certainly a better game in IMO when put against CoD series.

What I find appalling about online is that not all of us have good connections. Many games that I play (or try to play online) lag horribly and I'm playing on my housemate's Xbox (as he doesn't play too much). UMVC3 is lagging horribly for me and as a result I gave up on online and started to play solo, but then what's the fun in that? Which also reminds me of one thing, games nowadays have underwhelming single campaigns/single player portions. If you do want to enjoy your game thoroughly you'd have to go online. I do not want to see my ass getting whupped time and time again because of lag. If developers can't do anything about lag the least they could do is offer an amazing single player and multiplayer.

Now, IMHO I would say games are much more expensive to make yes. But let us not forget, big budget does not mean a game will automatically shine. Just look at casual games; while I hate casual games you have to admit, in proportion to costs per game the casual gaming industry is dominating. Development costs for Angry Birds or Fruit Ninja are nowhere near as much as a CoD game or a BF game, and yet angry birds managed to sell 1.4 million and the game itself is as simple as tossing birds into a building. And while CoD managed to sell much more than this, Angry Birds can hold itself against CoD remarkably well in proportion to development costs and sales.

I find it funny when people point to CoD as being rehashed every year when it's CoD that is always innovating and coming up with great ideas.

It was CoD 4: Modern Warfare where they introduced the new multi-player scheme of leveling. Before that, multi-player was bland and just killing each other in different game modes. The leveling system gave players more bang for their buck.

Each iteration tries something new, while sticking with the tried and tested. You aren't going to see a major overhaul with each iteration because that would be bad business. Why would you change something to be completely different if the players love it and it sells? You aren't going to create a new game just for the fun of it. If you have something that's successful you keep going with it. That's business and the gaming industry is no different.

Some good innovation can be seen through out each iteration. Black Ops, for example, brought us a gambling system in which players could bet points and have to win through their own skill. Modern Warfare 3 has brought us Elite (which seems like a failure so far), and different kill streak modes besides just assault, etc.

If people are sick of CoD, it's up to other companies to step up because until they create something better no one will switch from CoD. As much as people like to say CoD followers are mindless, they aren't. If there was a better game, they'd switch. Eventually CoD's reign will end, but until then it's up to other companies to try and find a winning formula.

My only complaint is the rpg drought. Other than that, the game industry seems to be doing just fine from what I can see.

1) COD gets the blame for that, but so does Mario and Zelda, what has drastically changed between them after all these years? Doom 3 changed from the original formula of being a one-man army and tried giving it a scary atmosphere, it got bashed by some and praised by some. Luckily, the sales were at least good. Again, if a game gets too many changes, the fans might just leave the game as whole.

2) Multiplayer online is the moneymaker nowadays, thus why they make these games. It's just business, nothing personal. It's not their fault your online experience is good.

3) Angry Birds is a bad comparison, almost everyone in the world has a cell phone that plays games, but not everyone owns a video game console. Guess where do the sells come from? From the little kids, to the teenagers on their phones and to the adults. There is a bigger market on cell phone, tablets and laptops than video game consoles. A lot of people have cell phones, it's almost a given in Western countries that everyone in the household has a cell phone and a computer. Not so with video games. A bit biased if anything.

More or less, but if you miss the old days, go play old games :P

There's always going to be a community if the game was good enough.

In short, the rise in casual gaming has had little effect on more "hardcore" games. The only people who are going to play hardcore games play them regardless of the rise in casual game titles, and the same principle applies to the casual gamers; they're two audiences. To say that an increase in zombie stories is killing disaster horror is a similarly unfounded generalization. (Pardon the non-sequitur.

Also, you seem to be suffering from what I call "Butthurt Traditionalist Syndrome (BTS)," a disease which afflicts many people when they cannot bring themselves to accept a paradigm shift in a factor of culture or social attitudes. Common symptoms of BTS include: making pointless threads about the "death of X," acting as if possessing a shred of sense on the subject at hand, and minus-repping this post. If you suffer from two or more of these symptoms, you should see a healthcare professional so that you may discuss why your healthcare doesn't cover BTS care because even fake diseases are too costly not to be included as preexisting conditions.