The introduction of advanced graphics and gameplay capabilities completely changed how designers perceive games, and how they think it should be structured. Consoles like the PS2 and Xbox were able to gain the best of both, retaining both the older and newer style of game structure in their titles. This shift in how we see games wouldn't be all that bad were it not for the fact that it made many games spoon-feed the player, and swapping challenge for repetitiveness.
For example, in a first person shooter it is not enough merely to put more enemies in a certain sequence of the game, and give them a long process to run through in game to beat each one, like disarming them via button meshing. That isn't difficulty. Instead, it is better to engineer an improved AI quality for the enemies accessible via a higher difficulty setting. This is what makes game design a skill, as it is much more impressive to engineer an AI that keeps you on your toes, than it is simply to place enemy after enemy, and assign them to a simple button pressing sequence. This difference is something that most game designers seem incapable for understanding nowadays, it is almost as if they have fooled themselves with their own insistence to design games for all audiences.
Many game critics (Myself Included) are now complaining that game designers must think us to be completely stupid, and therefore feel that they need to give us constant guidance throughout a game. This mentality also leads game designers to hold off on challenging scenarios in game, and make the entire game too easy just in case the game is bought by someone who isn't smart enough to do it on his/her own. I personally believe that there are two ways of fixing this problem, the first and most realistic of which, is dividing titles into two categories upon release to the market, these categories being: "Mature" or "Casual". Purely being based on solid research into what age a person is able to take on more demanding challenges in a game. Now i know this may seen redundant when all games are given age ratings already, but obviously this system doesn't focus on challenge as i have seen people well over 18 who have no learning defects, be completely stumped by the simplest in game puzzles for a 16 certificate game.
The second and much more harsh being that this is the gaming industry, maybe we should get out of this current generation mind-set that digital entertainment is a commodity for everyone? Maybe we should focus specifically on true enthusiasts to the industry, making games become more difficult again, and therefore making people who aren't cut out of digital gaming become disinterested and move on to other forms of entertainment more suited to them.
This may come off as harsh, but the simple fact is that over the past ten to fifteen years, the gaming industry has focused less on its core consumer audience and more on other audiences for the purpose of expansion, and ultimately to make more money. Though from a business perspective, this has merit, it means that the quality of gameplay will deteriorate over the coming years. I merely say that they should take care to not lose the respect and interest of the audience they have already roped in since digital gaming first took off.
In conclusion, the gaming industry is mutating - not evolving, and we, as the core consumer, cannot rely primarily on the rare times when a truly good game is released.
For more of my content, check out my YouTube channel:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRuHF6kkh8VhlBOLLGftjRw?feature=
Or Follow me on Twitter, where i post new content whenever i can upload it:
https://twitter.com/McGinnBen
A big thanks to Jenny Lucy Ann Nott for her help and support
