Games nowadays...

[Premezilla]

I think in many ways, console games are not being innovative but rather are merely catching up to PC game standards.  Goldeneye was a reinvention of Duke3D and even that was hardly revolutionary -- that honor goes to id for its masterful Doom and precursor Wolfenstein 3D.  Halo isn't anything special, just a fine polish on the same old formula, as was Half-life and a hundred other Quake-clones.  Even the weapon-limit has been done before, in Rise of the Triad.  Doom had co-operative play, as did Duke3D.  Half of the Halo weapons are the same old weapons, except for a handful that seem to come from an Unreal-style design, and the plethora of grenade types can be seen as far back as Team Fortress for Quakeworld.

I don't think the PC crowd is very innovative either, to tell you the truth.  Diablo is simply an Ultima interface laid on top of nethack.  Civ2 was polish on Civ1, and virtually every "nation builder" game has stolen elements from either Civ or Simcity or Populus.  Adventure games like Monkey Island * are simply the combination of the ever-forward march of computer technology with the old text adventure styles of Zork et al.  WoW looks to be your standard EQ/DAoC/etc, Starcraft:Ghost a blend between MGS and a first person sneaker - all tried and true paths, just not one taken by Blizzard before.

If anything, I think the industry is slowing down as it is rapidly maturing.  Gone are the heady days of 1999; now, people are trying to create stable businesses developing entertainment software rather than making games out of a garage.  This means inevitably less risks and more decidedly mediocre games.  I think part of the "less risks" implication

Salutations Aurikan,

I understand where you're coming from, however I named Goldeneye as "innovative" simply because it came out at a time when the new generation had not even heard of "Wolfenstein" or "Doom". I should know, for I myself am one of them. I mean, come on, I grew up on the Super Nintendo, Playstation, and N64, simply because I wasn't introduced to the computer world.

And I mention games like Civ2 and Monkey Island because those were the first computer games I played. (Aside from Wolfenstein, and a rather obscure title known as Marathon.) Besides, I don't care what anybody says, those two games always have, and always will be in my computer game collection.

I also agree with your perspective on the "mediocre, tried-and-true" approach many companies are now taking. With so many effective games set as shooters nowadays, companies like Blizzard would do well to toss their names into the hat, if just for cash's sake.

Also, I would have to argue "Mortal Kombat." (You misspelled it, by the way. ;)) If you are talking about the breakthrough fighting game, then it would be a close tie as to whether Mortal Kombat or Street Fighter II would take the honors. Both games utilized "combos" and "button-mashing", yet they were both subtly different as well.

My 2 cents have been collected. This has been a transmission of DPT. Over and out.