Gamers have had a fruitful offering so far this year, and there are still a few unreleased games that will top the year off nicely. Chart-toppers such as Gears of War 2, GTA IV, and Crysis: Warhead are just a few of the many popular titles from this year, with much advancement made in many video game standards. However, when we consider how much the bar has risen in terms of standards, what can we expect to see in the future of gaming?
Assassin's Creed: The game was praised for large, open scenes such that the player could almost completely interact with.
The visual quality of a game is often the most discussed aspect of a game, and if there's one thing we've learnt from the past two years, it's that we can be sure that as long as computing power can increase, so too will the graphical quality of games. You only need to look at Crysis or Assassin's Creed (as shown above) to see how far we've come in that department. With the arrival of DirectX 11 only a version of Windows away, and the new hardware as a result of it, in the next few years, we can expect the quality of graphics to press on upwards, with higher resolution textures, more detail in models, and undoubtedly new, unpredictable technological discoveries.
Some would argue that there's only so far graphics can go, stating that there's a huge gap between video game visual looks, and, for example, a CGI film's visual looks. But while they would argue that to show how little progress has been made, I would use it to argue how much progress has been made. Now, I'm not claiming that pixel pretty games such as Crysis are up to the standards of the CGI film Beowulf, or any other film using CGI for that matter, but looking back, we've come a long way since the days of Doom (shown below).

It's outdated alright, however Doom was a large step forwards for video games.
Virtual reality is likely to play a big part in the future of how games look and feel. Now, while you might be thinking it will be years before we have anything close to true virtual reality, it's easy to forget that we've already seen some steps taken that bring us one step closer to this. Take, for example, the Nintendo Wii. By using a motion sensitive controller as an input, it brought the player a whole lot closer to the game.
We can't raise our hopes unrealistically high, in terms of what we can expect from the next few years, but it will certainly prove interesting to discover what path we'll be taken down in order to get more absorbing, realistic games.
Following along with the current trend, it would also be fair to say that the freedom players can have should also increase. We've already seen Stalker: Clear Sky, Fallout 3, and The Witcher, all of which have many different paths a character can take, all with several endings. Games such as Spore allow the player to start their life as a cell, and steadily move on up, right through to a civilization, and at every stage, the player has options to change and manipulate the game to their liking.

Spore's Creature Creator provides players with almost limitless design choices, when creating a new creature.
The gaming industry is growing at an increasing rate, with research companies predicting that the games industry will overtake the music and film industries combined before the end of this year. So it's interesting to consider where we will be at in only a few years time, with better graphics, as well as more interesting game play. But, despite all previous evidence, all reports and claims, we can only predict the future of gaming, which leads me on to finally ask: where do you think video games will be in two, three, four years time, and what would you like to see in the games of the future?
















MOARRR SEQUELS!
not always a bad thing if they're good sequels.
The James Bond - Quantum Of Solace game is such a game, they even left the buttons from the XBOX in the game...
The James Bond - Quantum Of Solace game is such a game, they even left the buttons from the XBOX in the game...
That's because it is a Games For Windows game which has built-in support for the Xbox 360 controller (for Windows/PC). Many GFW games have the buttons from the 360 version included if you have the 360 controller plugged into your PC. The Club is another example off the top of my head.
Freelancer was pretty cool, but nothing truly vast and with the right amount of straight forwardness and engagement. Maybe Star Trek Online will bridge that a bit furthur, since they have dynamically generated races and planets with an endless space system, but I doubt it.
I am looking forward to F.E.A.R. 2 for the PC. SlowMO in that game was pretty damn fun, and the gun feel was great. I am also hoping for another Quake Wars or Battlefield type game that really does something amazing.
Freelancer was pretty cool, but nothing truly vast and with the right amount of straight forwardness and engagement. Maybe Star Trek Online will bridge that a bit furthur, since they have dynamically generated races and planets with an endless space system, but I doubt it.
I am looking forward to F.E.A.R. 2 for the PC. SlowMO in that game was pretty damn fun, and the gun feel was great. I am also hoping for another Quake Wars or Battlefield type game that really does something amazing.
Ever heard of EVE? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EVE_Online
Non Subscription based games just make more sense for me.
Non Subscription based games just make more sense for me.
If your waiting for a Non Subscription MMO then your going to be waiting a long time. As soon as they factor in the cost of writing patches, marketing, media, staff, huge servers farms, database cost per user, bandwidth and lumped a bit on for profit your at oh wait!
The another altenative is paying $/£lolrofl for the actual game which is effecivly lumping your subscription into a pay up front model.
Storylines are getting too drawn out and boring. Developers need to step back and consider removing elements of story line that don't help the immersion factor of the game.
New technology will breed new gameplay, but I'm afraid we aren't going to see near the advancements that we saw over the course of the 90's. Some of the last few "good" ideas were launched in '98 and '99. Most games since have just been a refining of those ideas with better graphics, physics, and sound.
There are important improvements being made, though at nowhere near the pace I'd like. Graphics are still the primary focus of development too often. Sounds are still sampled instead of being physically modelled. AI is still heavily scripted. Interaction with the environment is still limited. Destructible environments are either specially created and over-the-top (like Crysis) or completely missing. There is little in the way of freedom in games. Character inventories are still the exception. Lip sync and facial animation are still poor (HL2 is currently the leader).
You know, it is such a subjective thing and everyone will have their own opinion. I guess I don't like complex story lines. I'm having a hard time coming up with good examples. I guess I would like to see more effort put into the gameplay mechanics than I would at a complex storyline with awesome graphics.
Not sure I agree with you on gaming heading towards a more open-ended experience. Gamers like the cinematic experience, and that's hard to replicate in a sandbox. The problem with multiple storylines (and I've raised this issue before) is that in reality there's always one single thread the developer wanted you to go down, there's always a right path and a wrong path. Reality isn't that black and white! I want morally ambiguous paths to follow! I want controversial paths to follow! I want a path to follow other than the main one that won't make me feel like I'm "missing out".
would pay for that anyday!
Games used to be about fun. Almost no story. No complex control scheme. It was the same 10 minutes of fun over and over and that's why a lot of people played Mario games for more than one weekend. Don't have enough fingers to count how many times i completed Super Mario Bros. 3. Doom 2 was a very good example of that too it was a simple straightfoward but very effective action game. Those games were not perfect. Games like the first Ninja Gaiden was a very short and used a difficulty and the lack of a save mechanic to last for more than one day. But god i liked this game even if it was frustrating.
I don't say that a story is not welcome. I enjoyed japanese rpg specially Final Fantasy serie and Secret of Mana 2. But there's time specially in lastest american fps games where the story looks like rushed and forced. Game developers should hire professional writers if they what games with a story to go forward. I must give props to Bioware most fo their games have an interesting story can't wait for Dragon Age.
Buzzwords like open ended, good/evil and online now seems more important than the gameplay itself. Assassin Creed was not a terribly bad game. But it suffered from honestly a bad and not really fun gameplay. It was fun to explore the city once but that's all. Open ended gameplay and good/evil behaviors are old like my mother. It's always fun to see kids think that it's a new thing. The first Metroid and Zelda was open ended games. But thay also had good and fun gameplay something that is often missing from open ended games lately. I liked Elder Scroll serie as much as any other guy. But god the world and NPCs was so generic and lifeless. Beeing a worm killer in a world filled with robots is not my definition of fun. Crackdown is the perfect example of open ended buzzword going bad. The only thing they had to sell this game was the buzzword open ended because everything else was half finished and rushed. What a missed opportunity because the soundtrack and graphics was awesome.
I don't say that games are not as fun as the used to be. I'm just not sure that they are going forward. Graphics are better of course. But that's all. Games often don't live up to idealistic ideas like open ended and good/evil. What's the point of beeing good or evil if it doesn't change the way NPC react? What's the point of open ended if the world is generic, NPC like robots and gameplay rushed? Todays systems gives almost infite possibilities to game developers. But sadly time and money don't let them truly achieve those possibilities. So maybe some of them should just go back to the basic formule of good and simple gameplay because not everyone can play games 40 hours a week. Some people just want to sit down for 1 hour and get some fun.
Sorry for the bad quality of my english i'm a french canadian.
I completely agree that, apart from one or two exceptions, in games your actions hardly make a difference on how people react. Even in Fallout 3, if you're a merciless killer who kills all, the only difference it will make is one or two people will not be able to assist you in the game.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.