Hollywood, here we come
This just proves what I was talking about here.
I think the two most significant trends in gaming in 2004 were the increased emphasis on in-game product placement and advertising, and Valve's sale, and, perhaps more significantly, authentication, of "Half-Life 2" over the Steam service.
The continuing and lamentable "E.A.-ization" of the conventional games industry: consolidation into a handful of publishers with developers organized into dronelike factories and teams of dozens or hundreds, and eight-figure budgets.
I think we're firmly in the age of the blockbuster now, and I don't know how I feel about that. Most of the biggest games of the year were "events" that cost a crazy amount of money to develop and took many, many years to polish and get right. That's a bit of a scary trend, because I don't see where it stops --projects will get bigger, teams will grow, tech will continue to become more important, and all the rising costs will inevitably lead to fewer risks in design. I'm a sucker for unusual and innovative games, so this worries me.
The only problem is that it's much harder to develop independent console (PC is a different story) games than it is to develop indy movies. Moreover, games tend not to age as gracefully as movies, where they can be "discovered" years after their creation, which is what happens to many independent films that become successful.
posted by askjghaskjgh @ 6:06 PM
0 comments
