There comes a time, though, when nostalgia must be caged, for the sake of the medium's evolution. When 10-year-old game designs are passed off as modern game ideas, something is definitely amiss. No single genre is entirely guilty--the fact is, any particular one could definitely benefit from some sort of conceptual overhaul. When developers do interesting things within a genre, people tend to notice. Unfortunately, so does the development community at large, turning yesterday's innovation into this year's trite convention.

　　Our editors are airing their grievances today. We asked them to name the genre they felt was most stagnant and in need of a next-generation makeover. Their answers are probably not that surprising, though their arguments are definitely enlightening. Agree or disagree, let us know.

　　Magazine Editor

　　Click for full size image With literally thousands of games being released each year, it's no surprise that some genres eventually become as overdone as someone's first Thanksgiving turkey. For every quality release in a genre, there are dozens of wanna-bes fit for the shovelware bin. But if I had to choose one genre that needs a major overhaul, it would have to be fighting games. It's not like fighting games are the only guilty party, though. Most other genres haven't changed all that much over the last decade, either.

　　Click for full size image Fighting games have been fairly stagnant since they first hit the scene in full force in the early '90s. Like all other genres, fighters have gone through the typical technological innovations, such as the transition from 2D to 3D. But the gameplay has consistently remained relatively the same. It's not really the fault of game designers--development houses have tried to make fighting games more conducive to the 3D environment by including flying (Bio F.R.E.A.K.S.), level interaction (Dead or Alive). But consumers haven't exactly received these attempts at innovation with open arms. They have proven time and time again that they are more than happy to buy fighters designed around the repetitive block/attack patterns found in the early arcade hits, like Street Fighter II.

　　Sure, new team-up attacks and supercombos have been incorporated into the mix, but in the end, it still boils down to taking turns attacking and blocking. And 3D fighting games have yet to use the third dimension with any success. Though the characters may be built of polygons, they still maneuver along a 2D plane, and the graphics of 3D fighters still incorporate the traditional side view that was introduced over a decade ago. I'm at the point where I no longer care how many different attacks Blanka has, because they all do basically the same thing at different ranges.

　　Click for full size image But it wouldn't be right to criticize a genre if you didn't have suggestions to make it better. I have a couple of ideas that just might work. First of all, let's get a true 3D fighting game to market. How would this work? Well, for starters, it would have to be accomplished with a split screen. That doesn't mean that you wouldn't be able to see your character or his/her attacks. It would still be played from a third-person viewpoint, and to alleviate the problem of constantly missing one another, a lock-on feature similar to Zelda's Z-lock could be engaged at all times. This would keep your characters facing one another no matter how much distance was between them. I remember getting so good at fighting in Ocarina of Time that I could strafe around the enemy and jump in to slash at the most opportunistic moments. This system would be completely awesome if it became the entire focus of a game and had a chance to be refined.

　　Like I said before, though, fighting games aren't the only guilty party here. But that genre stands as the most glaring example of a genre that hasn't taken the next step in its evolution. With games like Super Smash Brothers and the Power Stone series, I can see that some companies have started to take the steps necessary to move the genre forward. But companies that notoriously release pointless sequels to preestablished franchises help keep the genre in a funk.

　　Executive Editor

　　I really think that every genre could stand to be reinvented, but not simply for the sake of change. But until game companies stop remaking the same eight games over and over again simply because they're known sellers, I don't think we'll really see too much innovation out there. The newer, more powerful hardware could be used for more than just prettier graphics, but ultimately, I think that improved graphics will be just about the only improvement to come out of the next 12-18 months.

　　Click for full size image The platform genre hasn't really seen any major changes since Super Mario 64 came out in 1996. The 3D platform games that come out these days are, in many ways, identical to Mario's first 3D adventure. Sure, the graphics may have gotten better as hardware has improved, but deep down, modern platform games are still wrestling with some of the same issues. Camera angles, for instance, have been particularly tricky, and most 3D third-person games still put you in spots where you can't tell what the hell is going on. Reinventing the platform game doesn't sound easy, but I think there's definitely some room for improvement there.

　　The genre that I feel could use some new blood the most is the RPG genre. Most games adhere strictly to the conventions of the genre, straying only once or twice to make the game feel just different enough to warrant playing it. But beyond just the basic concepts of battle systems, character classes, and attributes, we need some new storytellers in the RPG department. Too many RPGs take the "plucky young lad, unsure of his destiny" approach. By the end of the tale, this lad has saved the world, fallen in love, and lost at least one of his close friends to the game's main bad guy. RPGs like Persona 2 break away from this all-too-familiar narrative, and it'd be nice to see more developers stray from the pack.

　　But there's a larger question to ask here. Will any game developers actually take a big enough chance to earnestly rethink our current genres? Are there any game developers out there that are actually willing to try anything truly new and exciting? Or will the sales and marketing staffs continue to place a greater focus on the ability to ship a game on top and at budget than on making a cool product? We'll see, but I have to believe that it's going to get worse before it gets better. The hardware is there, but the software still has a few steps to go.

　　News Editor

　　Compared to other forms of visual entertainment--particularly film and television--the video game industry is in relative infancy. So, it's amusing to me when people talk about the lack of innovation in the gaming industry, when the industry itself has only been around for little over two decades. Particularly when innovation is still present in the ancient-by-comparison film industry, despite the fact that there really aren't any virgin film genres. The reason is that for a product to be viewed as innovative it doesn't require sweeping changes, but rather a vision by the creators to introduce subtle elements of creativity. Having said that, one genre that could use some creative injection is console role-playing games.

　　While maintaining aspects such as character development, special attacks/magic spells, and epic storylines, developers would be well served to work with a diverse palette of time settings, locations, plotlines, and characters. Does this sound familiar--a catastrophe, usually environmental and supernatural, unleashes an evil that has been subdued for several thousand years, and a young, usually reluctant, hero must save all humankind? I'm virtually on the brink of going postal, after being constantly barraged with console RPGs with that played-out plotline over the last several years. There have certainly been a few innovative console RPGs in that time, but they have been anything but frequent.

　　The RPG formula works well. In fact, it is one of my favorite genres, when executed properly. But can we please show a little innovation, with creative stories and unique new worlds and characters? Perhaps console RPGs could take a cue from PC RPG makers, who at least make an effort to create unique characters, locations, and plots. What about an RPG set in ancient Greece? Or one set in a contemporary environment, perhaps something like communist Russia during the height of the cold war? Hit points and experience points might seem like they would be out of place in a contemporary setting, but if presented properly, they can easily be accepted as a necessary part of character evolution.

　　Executive A/V Producer

　　The one genre that I think totally needs to be reinvented is the classic beat-'em-up. The genre used to be packed, back in the 2D era, with games like Double Dragon, Final Fight, and Streets of Rage. It seemed that the genre nearly all but died once video games went 3D, presumably since most games couldn't handle having that many characters on the screen at one time. But with the PS2, the Xbox, and the GameCube, this limitation no longer applies.

　　Click for full size image The Bouncer, of course, has been called a "3D Final Fight," and it does indeed play very much like a classic beat-'em-up. I feel that the Bouncer is a start, but I certainly hope developers are looking at ways to expand the genre--simply pummeling enemies one after another gets old real fast. Developers should look at the genre with the idea that almost anything is possible, with no rules, no boundaries, and no limits as to what they can do. For instance, imagine a classic beat-'em-up game like Final Fight where the object is to simply save your friend's daughter from an evil criminal madman. Instead of having predetermined paths laid out before the players, developers could make it so you simply have a starting point and an ending. How you get from the beginning to the end could be decided entirely by you. Do you get someone who has a car to drive you? Do you enter a high-rise building and take an elevator to the top in hopes of finding a chopper? Do you try and make it on foot? Do you take a bus? The point is that developers could prepare different consequences for the choices you make. Say you decide to take someone's car by force--you'd have to deal with the police and all of the goodies that come with that scenario, such as barricaded streets, gunplay, car chases, and so on. The point is to give the player complete freedom in a way that's not going to bog down the gameplay. You wouldn't need an elaborate storyline or even a whole lot of cutscenes. All you would need is to give players an obstacle, and a handful of means to solve it.

　　Can you imagine a game like this? It could be so cool--you could make so many games using a setup like this. You could make a Fugitive game where you had to avoid the police while trying to clear your name. Developers could use it to make a superhero game, or any other style of beat-'em-up. All developers would have to do after investing the time and money into developing the engine would be to literally plug in different models, textures, and storylines.

　　Assistant Editor

　　Click for full size image A couple of years ago, I was the hugest proponent of console RPGs. I guess I was fueled by nostalgia, to tell you the truth; despite the fact that I realized that I was, in effect, playing slightly differing iterations of the same game, I found the fact that I was playing an RPG quite comforting. Nowadays, my attention span for the genre has seriously diminished. The last one I played of my own volition was Vagrant Story, and that probably doesn't even count. Aside from a few rogue deviations, the genre has not changed an inkling in the last 10 years, in terms of game design. Sure, systems have gotten more complex, and visual direction has been earnestly introduced to the genre, but the games are carbon copies of what we were playing on our 16-bit systems, albeit much refined.

　　Click for full size image The fact that console RPG fans are a staunchly conservative lot probably has a lot to do with this. Just hop over to any one of the community's message boards, and you'll be bombarded with evidence of this. Take, for example, Final Fantasy VIII. Many members of the FF otaku community bashed it to no end. Why? Because its visual design wasn't in keeping with what had been done with the series up until that point. Granted, its game systems were a tad more complex than the series' fans were accustomed to, but the gripes related to that definitely took a backseat. Even considering the slight design-related deviations, though, the game was undoubtedly "Final Fantasy." Despite all this, the game ultimately sold enough copies to make it a "Greatest Hit." Sort of makes you wonder how seriously the FF community takes its own criticism.

　　High What's the point of all this? Well, if developers get such negative feedback for even relatively insignificant innovations, do you think they'll feel encouraged to take the genre in new directions? Certainly not. Game developers, paid to think about cool game ideas as they are, are undoubtedly brimming with interesting ideas for the genre. Some even make it out of their heads--think Vagrant Story, for instance. Though Square deserves kudos for throwing FFXI online, we have reason to believe, as recent news hints at, that every preceding and subsequent chapter in the series will be more of what we've been seeing for the past 10 years. I sincerely hope I'm proven wrong; despite my criticisms of the genre, I'm a huge fan of the Final Fantasy series. The worlds crafted by Sakaguchi and company are no doubt cool, and I'd love nothing more than to see them used in relevant and interesting ways.

　　Production Even RPG fans will have to admit that many elements found in the games are getting a little stale. Random encounters immediately come to mind. Do developers really need to add hundreds of meaningless encounters to their games to artificially fatten them? In most games, random encounters serve as a buffer between cinemas--the tedium before the treat, if you will. Most RPG fans will have to admit that they don't care too much for the actual battle sequences, either--fact is, battles lose their novelty after the first few hours of gameplay in most RPGs, not counting the occasional pitched boss battle. At any rate, most RPG fans simply endure the battle in order to get to the good stuff--cinematic sequences and other forms of narrative exposition--things that, in the end, have nothing to do with interesting, intuitive gameplay!

　　Values If you look to PC RPGs, you'll encounter a whole different world--a world in which gameplay has continued to evolve as opposed to, well, you can insert your own filthy analogy. The "limited storage" argument--established in the heyday of the cartridge format--has not been applicable for going on six years now. Four gigabytes of storage space could be used in more interesting ways than storing eight hours of FMV.