Genre Wars: Fantasy and Sci-Fi
Posted on Jun 22, 2011 in History
Since I'm really awful at keeping these posts regular, I may start writing shorter posts. I'll probably start talking more about programming (since I find it easier to write about), but I'll try not to stick to one topic for too long.
So let's talk about genres. News and general excitement from E3 has started discussions about some notable games in both the fantasy and sci-fi genres: The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, Fable: The Journey, Final Fantasy XIII-2, Dust 514, Halo 4, and too many others to mention here. These kind of games allow me to springboard into some discussion about the two genres, similarities, and differences.
The Quality of Game Sequels 3: Sequel Harder
Posted on Apr 1, 2011 in History and attached to The Quality of Game Sequels: The Sequel
Oops, skipped a week there. I've gotten addicted to Final Fantasy XIII! It is actually relevant to this blog post - however, this is the first Final Fantasy game that I have played, so I cannot really comment on how it improves on previous iterations of the series. Anyway, back to scheduled programming...
Following on from the last two posts on game sequels, we can see that there are plenty of good sequels out there in the game industry. When compared to the movie industry, for example, games seem to have a higher success rate than movies. That said, we have plenty of bad sequels, as well. There's also plenty of sequels that the game world is crying out for, but they have never been made.
The Quality of Game Sequels: The Sequel
Posted on Mar 14, 2011 in History and attached to The Quality of Game Sequels
After a discussion I had on the topic of last week's post, I want to talk about what makes a great sequel. Last week I talked about some good sequels, but never really went into much detail of what makes a sequel a good sequel. There are several different types of sequels, and each type has different conditions to work right.
The Quality of Game Sequels
Posted on Mar 10, 2011 in History
Sequels are popular in the game industry - even more so than in the movie industry. It's understandable why they are so popular: If a game sells well, it almost guarantees that a sequel will sell just as well, if not better. I'm not really all too fond of this situation - let's call it "sequelitis" - because constant sequels tend to reduce creativity and innovation from developers.
Some sequels are done well - improving on the mechanics of the previous games, while, at the same time, expanding gameplay and introducing new concepts. This is the focus of the post this week. But, we also have the bad sequels - quick cash-grabs by greedy publishers trying to churn out content to make as much profit as possible. And then there are the ridiculous examples that don't really have any right to be called sequels at all. Those will wait until next week's post.
Developer Cash Printers
Posted on Feb 1, 2011 in History and attached to Fall of the Independents
Last week I looked at several development studios who were bought out by larger companies. Some of them faded away, some of them got screwed over, and some of them were successful and retained creative control over their projects. As a follow-up post to this, I want to take a look at independant studios which have created a 'safety net' of sorts to prevent themselves from disappearing into the mouth of one of the publisher giants.
Fall of the Independents
Posted on Jan 21, 2011 in History
As time rolls on, we often see smaller, independent game studios bought up by larger companies. I'm sure many people have seen some of their favourite studios crushed by the hand of the publisher giants. But there's also the other side of the fence - independent developers who have been purchased by big-name companies, but retain creative control over their games.
