sponsorship

It's time for video games to move forward, but designers (and publishers) seem to be dead-set on keeping them stuck firmly in the past. Here are five ways they can turn the tide.

It's time for video games to move forward, but designers (and publishers) seem to be dead-set on keeping them stuck firmly in the past. Here are five ways they can turn the tide.

#1 Stop Treating Women Like Whores

Sexy is fine. Titillating can be fun. But when you show stupid jiggle-physics and scantily-clad girls cooing and moaning and wriggling, you show yourselves for what you really are: sex-crazed children. And don't think for a minute that the mainstream media doesn't pick up on this. If you can't stop demeaning women (with skimpy outfits and hyper-sexuality) and men (by glamorizing massive musculature and testosterone-dripping masculinity), then get the hell out of the industry. Frankly, nobody wants you here if you're going to make us all look like fools. Let's face it: the last thing we need is another Hot Coffee-style sex scandal, especially when this crap is so puerile and insignificant to begin with. Do we really have to corrode society just to sell a few thousand more units? Why don't we just show everyone naked and copulating and be done with it?

Chief Offenders:

• Dead or Alive (originator of the bikini-and-jiggle physics combo)
• Rumble Roses (good, clean fun...while wrestling in the mud)
• Tomb Raider (if you possessed breasts like Lara's, your spinal column would implode)
• Fear Effect 2: Retro Helix (there's nothing wrong with lesbian affairs...until you launch marketing campaigns around them)

Memo to game developers: Yeah, yeah, TV and movies struggle with similar problems, so maybe video game developers aren't the only evildoers here. Still, you can buck the trend--just look at Beyond Good and Evil, a game with a hip, normal-looking female lead character. You won't find any jiggle physics, crotch-thrusting or bikini splits there, just an average girl with average looks. HOW REVOLUTIONARY!

#2 Your Storylines Suck--Get New Ones

Ok, so here's a big one. Why is it that half the games on the market begin with your character as the sole survivor of some mysterious holocaust? As you stumble over the bloody bodies and piece together the ghastly clues, you come to realize that--HOLY CRAP!--the spaceship/planet/laboratory was invaded by aliens/parasites/demons!!! This storytelling cliche can be traced to the original Doom (and further back to films like Aliens) and it used to be a truly novel approach. Now it's just evidence of a much larger problem, a massive creative malaise. Stop, please. Also please cease employing stories that revolve around parasites, killer viruses, or zombies (please note that Halo's Flood fit ALL THREE of those criteria).

Actually, while we're at it, please immediately cease all scenarios in which your character gets captured halfway through the game, only to escape and reclaim his lost weapons piece by piece. Also, no more troubled heroes or "mwa-hahaha!"-style villains. Inter-dimensional gateways are also frowned upon, unless you do something something really cool with the premise.

Chief Offenders:

• System Shock 2 (we forgive you!)
• Halo (at least Bungie waited 'til the third act to introduce the Flood)
• Half-Life (look deep inside yourself and admit the truth)

Memo to game developers: Guys. Doom was released 13 years ago. Enough with the lazy survivor-meets-invaders storylines. If you're hot to show an invasion of some sort, why not show it through the player's eyes while it's actually in progress? Why not let the player be an active participant in shoring up the defenses? Why not let the player act as an invader? There's just no excuse anymore. Do something new.

#3 Enough with the Epics

While we're on the topic of game storylines, it's high time to stop revolving around the thoughtless drivel that sees a) the player as the hero; b) the hero taking on impossible odds to defeat some oppressive enemy force; c) the hero saving the world, or perhaps even existence itself, by beaning enough baddies in the head with his magical sniper rifle. Action games are particularly guilty of this transgression, and it now seems that every game and sequel must play with bigger and bigger odds. Surely the hero can't shoot his way out of the alien-infested space terrorist hideout armed only with a BB gun seconds before the black hole swallows the galaxy! All set, naturally, to an overheated operatic choir on the soundtrack. This is all pointless. After all, you're the hero: you know you'll win if you quick-save enough.

Chief Offenders:

• Final Fantasy VII (Only Cloud can save us now!)
• Halo 2 (Only Master Chief can save the Earth now!)
• Advent Rising (Only you can save the human race now!)

Memo to game developers: How cool would it be if the hero died halfway through the game, and the player carried on as the villain? Or what if it slowly became evident--slowly!--that the player himself was the villain, whether on purpose or by accident? And how about this radical thought: what if there were no heroes and no villains, just ordinary people doing the best they could under supremely tough circumstances? Or how about a Reservoir Dogs-style scenario where almost everyone's a bad guy? No more excuses!

#4 Stop the Spectacles

Call it The Matrix Reloaded principle. The Wachowski Brothers foolishly tried to top the action sequences from the first, classic film. Instead of taking a different path, they spared no cost (whether financial or technological) to bring the absolute pinnacle of special effects and stunt work to the viewer. And if you've ever seen the second two Matrix sequels, you'll know that these fancy action scenes added nothing to the films because the films, frankly, stunk up the place. In fact, the elaborate special effect scenes were almost painful to sit through because it showed how out-of-touch the directors really were.

That's how modern video games are starting to feel. Doom 3 may look like filet mignon, but it plays like charred, gristly hamburger. What good are glitzy graphics when the game experience is locked in the mid 90s? If anything, they just draw attention to your other deficiencies. Instead of spending $20 million to make "THE NEXT HALO!!!,... why not spend $4 million to make five solid games with interesting themes? You might not sell 8 million copies, but with budgets like that, selling 300,000 units will make you serious bank.

Chief Offenders:

• Halo 2 (noticing a trend?)
• Doom 3 (good...but as good as the graphics?)
• Half-Life 2 (great...but as great as the physics?)

Memo to game developers: The Wachowskis could've spent $11 billion dollars on fight scenes and the second two Matrix flicks would've sucked just as hard. Or instead, the Wachowskis could've focused on making one worthy follow-up to their classic first film, and spending only as much money as was necessary to bring that vision to life. The result would've made fans happier and brought in just as much (if not more) green. Don't let your games become like the second two Matrix films. Don't pander to players with needlessly elaborate graphics, and spend only as much money as you need to. The rest will work itself out.

#5 Cinema is Sinful

Games aren't movies. Period.

So why is it that half the games on the market bill themselves as "cinematic experiences?" Are game developers suffering from such a collective inferiority complex that they think every game needs to play or seem like a movie? Must every game be stuffed to overflowing with cinematic interludes, elaborate set pieces, and intrigue-filled storylines that go nowhere? What is to show for all that expensive investment? Precisely nothing.

It's becoming incredibly expensive to design a triple-A caliber game title, and mimicking Hollywood is not going to help sales in any way. If you want proof, look to this summer's box office wasteland. People have grown weary of Hollywood and Hollywood's ways. They want something real. There are other downsides, too. If you developers and publishers out there persist in following the Hollywood model of production, two things will happen: production costs will skyrocket (for no good reason), and you'll be locked into a creative downward spiral as marketers urge you to appeal to the lowest common denominator. And that sucks for everyone.

Always remember that gamers are looking for games; if they want a great "cinematic experience," they'll order Casino through Netflix. Look at Nintendog's sales--they're spectacular. 'Nuff said.

Games are games. Let's keep them that way.

Chief Offenders:

• GTA: San Andreas (without a director, it turns out that Samuel L. Jackson sucks)
• Halo 2 (talk about big, rambling cinema scenes that go nowhere)
• Final Fantasy VII (developers forget the game would've been great without cinemas)

Memo to game developers: In the vast majority of cases, there's no reason to mimic the presentation, style, or conventions of a Hollywood film. Stick with being a great game. If that game happens to be Halo 3 or The Godfather, so be it. But if you're an industry exec and your goal is to turn the video game industry into "New Hollywood," please kindly provide your home address and phone number in the forum below so we can kidnap you and end the madness once and for all. Don't make movies.

Make games, dammit.

Games.net's Countdown to...