Topic: Absolutely random thoughts

@Th3solution Yeah I think specifically military shooters might get dialed down during the coming generation but I don't think adventure games like Uncharted that involve gunfights are going away. So the context of the genre is definitely going to play a key role, as well as the settings of course.

But the problem is that new events might happen in the world during the coming years and it's hard for developers to predict this sort of things. They might choose one setting that becomes sensitive to include in the future. It's a very delicate topic and one that game developers are going to have to spend a lot of time discussing in order to reach a good solution.

@Th3solution I'm of the view that time travel will never be possible because even 1000 years from now could come back to present day and we would know about it, but we don't so therefore it will never be invented

The present is the past in the making

I imagined in the other universe, peoples and animals living together like Animal Crossing games.

@LtSarge hmmm, interesting thought. personally I think that violence in games is different to real life and In a way. Unless the person is an absolute loon, most people know the difference between life and games. Imagine if everyone acted the same way they did as playing GTA, man, the daily commute would be a whole nother experience.
So no, for me, violence in games will always be there because gaming and reality are too very different things

@nessisonett peep show is my favourite all time series, love the quote

@Emperor_Rusty Brilliant, always nice for someone recognising it! Torn between that, “Plumbing’s just Lego innit, Water Lego” or “Tally my bananas, Mr Taliban” 😂

@LtSarge I don't think things will change too much to be honest. I still expect Military shooters to continue - but I don't think the current 'theatre' of war to be used as a setting. If anything, we may see more modern conflicts from Viet Nam, the Gulf War, Middle East etc - things that may of been seen as 'too soon' - like Six Days in Fallujah - a game set during the war in Iraq.

As for post-apocalyptic games, I still think that 'Global Warming' could be the cause, but I'm sure developers could use their own 'fear' and potential worst case scenario's as 'inspiration' for whatever story or game-world they want to create.

Modern Military shooters too have often projected a 'what if' situation - a what if North Korea invaded the US (Homefront) or numerous times some dictator starts a chain of events leading to war against 'Western' allied forces - whether 'fictional' (like random-ov, something-stan - depending on where) or 'real' places like Pripyat in the Ukraine or Fallujah in Iraq for example. Arguably WW3 is a bit too close to 'home' right now too.

Point is, all these 'events' will serve as inspiration - even if not directly. Things like the Pandemic were 'explored' before Covid, but then we have had 'numerous' other 'scares' through the decades - Aids/HiV in the 80's, Swine Flu, Bird/Avian Flu, Mad Cow Disease, let alone numerous other plagues, diseases etc - all of which could serve as inspiration for a story. Its writing from your own experiences, fears and wealth of 'information' and visual references to draw from.

It could go to far with more devs drawing on their own 'fears' etc to create their Art as a form of therapy and to make their 'own' statement on the world. Make it more 'violent', more scary etc than things actually are or will be because then at least things aren't as 'bad' as their games are, a way to make a statement (stop now before we end up like this...) etc

Time will tell - as it always does but there has always been conflict and 'threat' of a war. I lived through the 'threat' of Nuclear War, that Cold War era. With the 'collapse' of the Soviet Union, that threat may of eased, but then the Middle East with the Gulf War, Iraq, war on 'terrorism', threats of Nuclear attack from North Korea, China in recent years seem to be threatening others - at least on the Political stage. It may well be 75+ yrs since the 'end' of the Second World War, but there has still been numerous conflicts, disasters, diseases etc to draw inspiration from.

The Last of Us was rooted in 'reality'. The Fungus infection may not affect 'humans' today but a mutated/evolved version 'could'. That's no different from the fears of 'Bird Flu' mutating and infecting humans. The fear of eating cows infected by Mad Cow Disease could of lead to that story too. It doesn't have to be a Covid-19 or current 'war' as the actual 'story' or directly influencing the game but the 'experience' and visuals from these can be instrumental in the development.

CoD4:Modern Warfare Death From Above mission where you are controlling guns in an AC-130 looked a LOT like those military video's we were seeing from the Gulf War - those 'precision' strikes in B&W (or in Negative) as armoured vehicles and 'dots' of people suddenly explode. You can see similar footage today, drone strikes. These 'images' are going to influence games - whether its images of people in Face Masks, Social Distancing etc or images of war.

As someone in the UK, I could draw upon what's going on and shift that to 'home' - What if the UK was invaded for example and use the real world, real peoples stories, real images etc as inspiration for the 'story' I want to tell. I have no real experience, but like others, I can look at images, hear the words of people that are living through that situation, try and put 'myself' and the environments I know into that to tell a more 'real' but still fictional story.

I don't think it will go the other way, become more 'child friendly' or less violence in general. I think the more 'violence' in real life, the more games/TV etc will reflect that. That's not to say that they will all glorify 'violence' as I'm sure some will use it to make a statement against violence - deal with the consequences, the losses and devastation. If anything, maybe even become more 'personal', closer to home situations but time will tell...

@kyleforrester87 @Th3solution Wouldn't a time travel device end up like every other technology where it gets cheaper and cheaper and can eventually fit into something portable. We'd probably have Apple coming out with a nicely integrated device called iTimeTurner followed years later by Google with the open source FluxCapacitor operating system that anyone can use as long as you include their Google TimeWarp service. Before you know it we'll be inundated with tourists from the future wondering what the lockdown years were like.

@render BUT THINK OF THE CONSEQUENCES!!

While a technology like that just would never exist, if it did and everyone had free access to it, it would just be chaos. Everyone trying to get ahead. I mean, even small things would probably result in changes so significant in the future that the time machine was never created in the first place lol. People would go back, do something to make their life better thus changing their future, only to be screwed over by someone else shortly after. The present would literally keep changing for everyone all the time :')

Unless they have some sort of "observer mode" only. But I guess that is called "video" and already exists!

@kyleforrester87 Ha ha yeah I'm not saying that it would be a good thing and that we should all be doing it, just saying that I'm sure if it was every invented that there's no way they could keep it secret from the world and eventually everyone would be doing it. That would indeed lead to some really crazy s*** happening like you say, but hey someone might end up erasing Trump, Johnson or Putin so it's not all bad 😂

@render Yeah then someone would go back and erase the person who erased Trump and he'd pop back into existence, then someone would go erase that guy and he'd vanish again, and so on and so on lol

@kyleforrester87 Sounds like a live service game 😬

Haha! It’s does, doesn’t it?

Now I have a thought — (and in response to @lolwhatno ) wouldn’t it be great to go back to the moment Fortnite was developed and upload a virus into the programming files and destroy the thing before it could be released…

But it would probably be like assassinating a dictator — some other horrible entity would just take its place. Perhaps instead of live service MTX ridden fluff we’d have Metal Gear Survive 2: The Rise of Paper Snake.

Subtitle it "Tactical Origami Action" and I'd definitely pre-order that.

@lolwhatno But can you have discipline without motivation?

I've noticed the uptick in comments saying "they'll wait for sales" and "won't pay the $70 price for some games". With that said, what will hurt game development and new ideas more, the lack of launch day sales or game pass?

@PhhhCough I’ve wondered this too. Of course, I think the two are related — GamePass and lower launch sales / lower tolerance for the $70 premium price tag.

But I’ve noticed from a distance that sales figures for the $70 games seem a little soft, but it’s hard to judge when we’ve got cross-gen releases going on. I’ve wondered if Sony will take a second look at the $70 price point if they don’t see strong enough launch sales.

They tend to put games on discount pretty quickly, so I’m one of those who has waited to buy HFW and GT7. Not saying I won’t eventually pay full price for them but since I have a backlog I’ve not rushed out to pay the full price yet. I’m not opposed to $70, but I also would like to pay the least I can. I paid full price for Returnal and Ratchet & Clank.

@PhhhCough All boycotting the £70 will do is cause publishers to stop being so greedy. If it hurts devs then that’s on publishers. Game budgets aren’t inherently higher, Modern Warfare 2 is over 10 years old and still is one of the most expensive games to produce ever.

I think it's really cool if I can transform into fictional heroes with Yokai Gakuen Y watch.

@nessisonett Modern Warfare 2 is not one of the most expensive games to be produced anymore. Cyberpunk was almost 30% more expensive to make in comparison.

There's a lot that is unknown about video game budgets (unfortunately), so we don't know the budgets of many games. What we do know is that the cost of a video game is a combination of a) marketing and b) hours of work by artists and programmers. I don't know a lot about marketing, but budgets will surely not have decreased. We know about the latter that studio sizes have grown in recent years and that there often is more time between game releases, so I cannot imagine that the average game budget hasn't increased by at least 10%. Obviously I don't have the numbers, so I will conclude it just isn't likely that game budgets "aren't inherently higher". 🌞