kingdemise said:
Explain mate, it's intersting. |
From my point of view, it's like this: Controls got more streamlined and also standardized, meaning no more dozens of different control schemes to retain but one standard for most every genre which got constantly refined over the last years. For instance, all modern beat-em-up controls can be traced back to the one used in Street Fighter II on the SNES and just slightly variate from this
On the gameplay side however, this also led to become more bland. Many actions became context-sensitive or could not be used at will anymore even if they're mundane ones. This gives the illusion of much wider scope and range of actions as they actually have. Most of the time, you end up 1-2 buttons almost exclusivly and the others just in very rare occasions.
Also, the fact that you're doing less and less while gaming: Lentghy cutscenes, lots of QTE and gaming structures making you constantly walk from A to B where the next action sequence stars, ends, and then getting send to C, rinse, repeat.Lenghty Sidetracking, experimenting with things the devs didn't think about or playing at your own speed instead of the one dictated by the gamemakers is strongly discouraged in way too many modern games
And seeing how utterly hated control schemes other than the standard controller (Motion controls, Gamepad just to name some) seem to be by most "core" gamers, they just can't evolve any further anyway, at least not in the mainstream. Games like Affordable Space Adventures show what is possible if we can go beyond standard controller schemes, but that's nothing a big publisher will ever even consider to explore any deeply, at least not within the next 10 years. Which is also why motion controls and gamepad integration feels so tacked-on in practically all their games.
