I don't know about anyone else but I grew up playing party games. I grew up a Nintendo kid, so Mario Party and Mario Kart and Super Smash Bros. were games that I was raised on. And even today I find myself going back home or into someone's room, just to pop in my old disc of Mario Party 4 and go to town against whoever was unlucky enough to play with me (I'm competitive). The point is that these games are integral parts of our childhood and yet whenever you think about them today, you can't really recall any modern gems coming up and taking their place. This could possibly be because we were idiots as kids and now that our standards are higher we don't find the same drivel fun anymore. But then why is it that it's still fun to play the mini-games in pokemon stadium? No amount of nostalgia could get me to play voltorb charge if I didn't find it a little fun. So, we're left with this gaping question of why has party games fallen off the edge and what can we do to get them back. Well let's delve in, shall we?
Low Risk, High barrier to Entry
The first issue with party games is that fact that they are intended to be low risk options for publishers. Publishers expect a certain number of families to buy a given party game, according to the amount of families who bought the same game the year before. This leads to incredibly formulaic creation processes where creativity is stifled and similar mechanisms are being reinforced. For example, the repeatably press (insert button here) mini-game is one that has be reinvented for essentially every single Mario Party game. Whenever you come across this game it's usually to fill something up or to make you move. Sure the novelty of the game probably stuck around from Mario Party 1-5, but by the time I got to Mario Party 8 I was so tired of pressing the A button so fast my finger fell off. But the developers continue putting this game in because it's the low risk option and with the barrier to entry for video games being so high, developers can't afford to take anything but a low risk option.
Aggressive consumer feedback
Since the barrier to entry is so high for video games, publishers would much rather take these risks on gamers they perceive to be more susceptible to new forms. These gamers tend to be teenagers (14-18) and more experienced, which developers hope will lend them to being more willing to pick up new game play. They perceive the bottom line audience of party games to be casual gamers, so they make sure the games keep the same formula.The reality of the matter is that there is a mix of casual gamers and hardcore gamers playing these party games. Hardcore gamers want to sit back and play mario kart too. But they don't enjoy playing the 5th rehash of rainbow road (ok sometimes nostalgia kicks in, but come on Mario Kart you essentially rehash every single stage you've ever made in your latest game). Also, even casual gamers can admit that party games have simply lagged in terms of innovation. They don't change. Every party game is just like every other party game. What happened to the ground breaking multi-vehicle races of Diddy Kong racing? Before Smash bros, Clay fighters showed you can take fun semi recognizable characters and toss them into a fighting game. These games were huge risks and given huge rewards through purchase. Consumers need to counteract this lag by refusing to buy these party game rehashes. That's the only way.
A Microcosm of the industry
Party games represent the worst case scenario for video games, which I guess in retrospect isn't too bad. It highlights how the high barrier to entry prevents publishers from being willing to take risks, regardless of the potential profit. This leads us to keep recreating the same game, only applying comsetic changes to the game itself. Sometimes this works. Sometimes all people want to do is play a shooter in a recreation Jurassic park. But eventually even your own fantasy land gets tiring when the game play is the same thing being reused over and over. Some ways to combat this is by having an indy game sub publisher (ahem Sony) or by offering funding to flash games that earn a certain amount of viewership. Regardless, developers and publishers need to take these risks and we as consumers need to send them the message that we want some change. If publisher have a creative outlet, then the industry will see people being much more engaged every single time a new gem is created and marketed.
Low Risk, High barrier to Entry
The first issue with party games is that fact that they are intended to be low risk options for publishers. Publishers expect a certain number of families to buy a given party game, according to the amount of families who bought the same game the year before. This leads to incredibly formulaic creation processes where creativity is stifled and similar mechanisms are being reinforced. For example, the repeatably press (insert button here) mini-game is one that has be reinvented for essentially every single Mario Party game. Whenever you come across this game it's usually to fill something up or to make you move. Sure the novelty of the game probably stuck around from Mario Party 1-5, but by the time I got to Mario Party 8 I was so tired of pressing the A button so fast my finger fell off. But the developers continue putting this game in because it's the low risk option and with the barrier to entry for video games being so high, developers can't afford to take anything but a low risk option.
Aggressive consumer feedback
Since the barrier to entry is so high for video games, publishers would much rather take these risks on gamers they perceive to be more susceptible to new forms. These gamers tend to be teenagers (14-18) and more experienced, which developers hope will lend them to being more willing to pick up new game play. They perceive the bottom line audience of party games to be casual gamers, so they make sure the games keep the same formula.The reality of the matter is that there is a mix of casual gamers and hardcore gamers playing these party games. Hardcore gamers want to sit back and play mario kart too. But they don't enjoy playing the 5th rehash of rainbow road (ok sometimes nostalgia kicks in, but come on Mario Kart you essentially rehash every single stage you've ever made in your latest game). Also, even casual gamers can admit that party games have simply lagged in terms of innovation. They don't change. Every party game is just like every other party game. What happened to the ground breaking multi-vehicle races of Diddy Kong racing? Before Smash bros, Clay fighters showed you can take fun semi recognizable characters and toss them into a fighting game. These games were huge risks and given huge rewards through purchase. Consumers need to counteract this lag by refusing to buy these party game rehashes. That's the only way.
A Microcosm of the industry
Party games represent the worst case scenario for video games, which I guess in retrospect isn't too bad. It highlights how the high barrier to entry prevents publishers from being willing to take risks, regardless of the potential profit. This leads us to keep recreating the same game, only applying comsetic changes to the game itself. Sometimes this works. Sometimes all people want to do is play a shooter in a recreation Jurassic park. But eventually even your own fantasy land gets tiring when the game play is the same thing being reused over and over. Some ways to combat this is by having an indy game sub publisher (ahem Sony) or by offering funding to flash games that earn a certain amount of viewership. Regardless, developers and publishers need to take these risks and we as consumers need to send them the message that we want some change. If publisher have a creative outlet, then the industry will see people being much more engaged every single time a new gem is created and marketed.
No comments:
Post a Comment