Almost any videogame can be neatly divided into three discrete sections or domains. The first and probably the most understood from a computing perspective is the technology that underpins it. This includes components such as the graphics and physics engines, networking facilities and so on. Some developers tend to construct the technology themselves, while others use middleware and toolsets available from various third parties. The second component is the set of rules, mechanics and principles that make up the game, such as lining up blocks to make complete rows in Tetris or traversing a series of obstacles and enemies in Super Mario Bros. Rules and mechanics can govern how a player can interact with various aspects of the game, but crucially also involve how elements may behave reactively to player behaviour. Finally, videogames have a story, plot or setting that surrounds the game and provides meaning for why the game mechanics exist. Some game aspects, such as art, model work, music and so on may straddle more than one area, as they may have an impact on the technologies employed or the way the story is revealed to the player. It’s also fair to say that different games will have different weightings on one of the three aspects, with a first person shooter being more reliant on a strong game engine, while an RPG would be more focused on providing a strong game world and a cohesive set of quests for the player to work through.

While this is all well and good, what relevance does it have? Well, as is traditional at this time of the year, the great and good of videogaming journalism have been providing their feedback on the greatest games of 2008. But while the similarity between the titles is interesting in it’s own way, even more so are the reasons why the particular videogames have been chosen. Titles like Fallout 3, Fable II, LittleBigPlanet and World of Warcraft: Wrath of the Lich King seem to be continually cited in “best of 2008″ lists not because they introduced new technologies but because of the stories they told (or in the case of LBP the stories it allows the players to tell). One quote I heard from the Custom PC Podcast was that 2008 was “the year of the story”, and while I’m not sure I feel as strongly about last year’s selection of releases, I can see where the quote was coming from. Technical aspects of a game can be rapidly developed through the use of off-the-shelf middleware and toolsets such as the Havok physics engine and the modeller/animator 3ds Max. Even entire game engines are available, with Valve offering Source, Crytek offering the CryEngine and id Software developing id Tech 5. Such an abundance of options available allow a developer to free up more resources developing and refining the game itself.

It’s difficult to say though if videogames are developing richer stories because they are able to spend more time on it, or if the industry as a whole is generally becoming more mature. Nowadays it’s not unusual to find a member of the development team responsible for the storyline or background of a new title. Professional writers are frequently consulted during development, from generating rough ideas or concepts through to penning the plot single-handed. As Clive Barker’s Jericho demonstrates, having a strong plotline and setting doesn’t guarantee an excellent game, just as Mirror’s Edge demonstrates a game where exposing more of Rhianna Pratchett’s story may have enhanced the game further. That said, there does feel to be a strong trend from technologically groundbreaking games such as Quake to more generally inspiring titles such as Grand Theft Auto 4 and Left 4 Dead.

There is one other striking feeling about the “Best of 2008″ lists – the domination of consoles as opposed to PC versions. Admittedly there’s the almost perennial argument about the death of PC gaming and the general failure of Microsoft’s “Games for Windows” initiative, or how Spore being the most pirated game of 2008 either demonstrates the folly of DRM protection or the folly of developing for the PC. That aside, the PC has traditionally been the traditional technology showcase for videogaming, being the platform where the newest concepts from industry stalwarts would be demonstrated. With consumers becoming less and less interested in the cutting edge of videogaming tech (as record sales of the Wii have shown), will the PC’s standing diminish? It almost feels as if the Xbox has done too well in encouraging PC developers to port to the console, as for me at least almost all the titles I’m getting excited about for 2009 are being launched either simultaneously or exclusively on the consoles. Could it be that providing the hardcore gaming community with a continually refreshed visual extravaganza is becoming less of a priority, and that instead developers are focusing on games that cater more for the middle road of gaming while letting the middleware developers provide the technological upgrades on a slower path?

For me, the videogaming industry will trend in similar ways to the cinematic one. By pulling away from being a direct innovator of technology but instead influencing technological development and direction and instead focusing on delivering a rich and entertaining product that many more of us can enjoy. Just like the minstrels from days gone by, who would seek to entertain us with the skills they had and the instruments available, so do I think today’s developers will share new tales with us with an altogether more modern ensemble.