PC Gamer's extremely enjoyable 150th issue recently dropped into Media Coverage's mailbox, and for this longtime gamer, the issue provided a nostalgic trip down memory boulevard. In fact, it even reminded me of one of one of my favorite annual blowouts: namely, the "Game Gods" super-features.

You have to wonder if an enthusiast press publication would publish the same kind of feature today, and if one did, would it include most of the same developers? (Scratch level designer Stevie Case of course.) Judging by the last few years, there simply doesn't seem to be that many new 'game gods' who have been given the same celebrity treatment by the enthusiast press.

Aside from a smattering of recognizable names like Naughty Dog's Jason Rubin and David Jaffe of God of War, renowned developers don't spring to mind like they once did. Even worse, Media Coverage would have trouble recognizing these two 'game celebs' if they showed up wearing matching shirts that said "I'm with Jason Rubin" and "I'm with David Jaffe".

The big developer names that most often appear in the enthusiast press are still the big names we knew in the nineties: Molyneux, Carmack, Meier, Miyamoto, Wright, Kojima, and Spector are all still more recognizable than almost all of the developers that got their start in the last ten years. Furthermore, there is a very good chance the situation will be the same five years from now.

There are at least seven reasons why a new generation of game gods haven't shown up yet.

Game development has evolved dramatically over the last decade. Perhaps the biggest change is that the top games are now multi-million dollar productions created by teams of dozens, if not hundreds of members. These changes may make it less likely for an individual to guide such massive productions with a singular, unique vision.

As the size of development teams mushroom, it also becomes more difficult for individuals to navigate the choppy waters of internal politics and public recognition. For instance, on a team of five, LeBron James can readily acknowledge his undeniable importance to the Cavaliers. However, if Pro Bowl reserve lineman Jeff Hartings tried to explain how he single handedly led the Pittsburg Steelers to an NFL championship, the locker room might not be a pleasant place.

Still, many of the game gods we've known have worked with large teams and were still able to stand out while publicizing their titles to the gaming public. There must be other developers who can do likewise. It's clear that at least some other obstacles must exist.

Because they are making such great investments in their games, publishers are likely highly responsible for the decline in celebrity developers. In terms of game promotion, publishers are concerned first with the brand. They can control a brand, they can publicize a brand and they can receive the present and future benefits from a brand.

Conversely, publishers have little incentive to publicize a celebrity developer. While names like Meier, Wright and Miyamoto can guarantee game sales, these developers are rare and even some of the big names don't carry the sales impact as they once did. (Even Molyneux wasn't able to push Black & White 2 and The Movies to Fable-level sales).

Further, publishers can't control developers as they can control a brand. Sony, for instance, could turn David Jaffe into a developer celebrity only to lose all their PR effort a few years later if, say, he leaves for an exclusive contract with Infinium Labs. There is an ever-present danger for publishers that they may create a developer "brand" that will someday benefit the competition.

This creates an odd situation that is unlike most other creative fields. In today's videogame world, many of today's most innovative creators are virtually anonymous. Take television broadcasting, for instance. Regular viewers usually know the creators like The Soprano's David Chase, Boston Legal's David Kelly and Lost's J.J. Abrams. The average gamer has little to no idea who has influenced his favorite games.

In many cases, this anonymity is exactly what the publishers want and some openly deny media access to developers for this very reason. It's good for publishers but bad for developers and all but certainly the creative side of the industry itself.

If publishers have little use for innovative celebrity developers, mass retailers such as Walmart have even less use for them. Although the big retailers don't have much say on the actual publicity level of game development, they have a massive effect on what kind of games get made. After all, a slot on Walmart shelves is one of the single most important keys to a modern game's success.

For Walmart, it's all about moving product. First, the retailer finds out what kind of games move the most units and then they push developers to fill those specific consumer needs. This is simple, straightforward business and there's little use ranting against it; however, it's not the best ground to develop new, creative game gods (or new genre markets for that matter). It's actually completely backwards for any kind of creative development.

Miyamoto, Meier, and Wright are mass retail darlings because they helped create their own particular genres. They enjoy open slots on Walmart shelves because they convinced gamers in a pre-Walmart world that their types of games were worth playing. New developers may never get a similar chance to carve out their own niche.

If you look for today's biggest game gods, you inevitably run across teams rather than individuals. Blizzard, Bungie, Rare, Bioware, RockStar and a few select development teams provide the same kind of impact as the original game gods. Regular gamers trust their product and know that it is going to provide a memorable experience.

It's still strange, however, that individuals from these teams don't make a bigger splash. For the most part, the average reader never really hears of the top creators from these studios until they branch off to create an ill-fated product of their own. This falls mostly on the enthusiast press.

It often takes something like reading The Escapist to remember what we're missing from most of today's enthusiast press print pubs. This website's regular forays into the process of making great games are refreshingly unique. In comparison, it seems as though the pressure to hit the widest possible audience has stunted the enthusiast press' ability to uncover and highlight game makers who champion innovation.

Much of this is because the enthusiast press is not often presented with developer-focused stories from publisher PR. However, as one who has worked many years in this industry, I know that a tendency towards seeking easy stories and time pressures have a hand in this too. Putting together an event like Gamer's original Game Gods pieces or Next Generation's legendary 100 Most Important People in the Videogame Industry articles was a massive undertaking. It was undoubtly expensive, time consuming and risky.

We also see fewer big previews written long before a game ships. These early previews generally are short on info and therefore long on developer insight. A decade ago, early previews were more common and through them many a superstar developer was born. (I still remember a brilliant but far too early PC Gamer cover feature on Bullfrog Studios. The story highlighted a number of games that shipped years late or not at all, but Molyneux still established himself as a creative genius in the article.)

Without the support, creative storytelling and the purposed efforts of the enthusiast press, there simply won't be another generation of game gods unless the mainstream press finally comes on board and christens game gods of its own.

What game gods like Peter Molyneux and Will Wright do best is paint beautiful visual images of their games inside gamers' head long before the titles are close to finished. On one hand, this builds excitement for their titles that often lead to big sales. On the other hand, there is always the Fable Factor.

Peter Molyneux did his magic with Fable years before the title ever came out. The only problem was that he discussed features that eventually had to be dropped. In a print-only world, these early claims would have likely been forgotten. However, in the day of websites, fan forums, and blogs the issue was never laid to rest. Words count for more on the internet, because they never die and they're always a google search away.

Despite the fact that these types of claims are what made Molyneux a game god in the first place, the press and many gamers couldn't let Molyneux's early comments go. Now, even though the comments probably didn't dent Fable's phenomenal sales, most developers will cautiously yield to the dangers of the Fable Factor before painting a beautiful visual image in the readers' heads and instead let some bland character art do the talking.

Character has never made anyone into a game god.

This has to be a possibility too. After all, most of the names mentioned in this column are still producing brilliant games. Maybe there can only be so many game gods.

Actually, that's completely wrong. Someone was responsible for the principles that made Blizzard games so consistently great, someone piloted the action adventure of Bungie's masterpieces, someone developed Bioware's brilliant RPG foundations, and wherever there are great games, there are certainly great creators.

A new generation of game gods is out there, and it's the enthusiast press' job to find them despite all obstacles and hindrances. This is crucial for our industry's creative growth because even the greatest and most creative developers need recognition and a serious push from the fans (driven by the enthusiast press) before they'll ever get a publisher's green light to produce the kind of innovative games we all want so badly.

Media Coverage is an opinion column. The opinions expressed in this column are solely the opinions of the columnist and are not necessarily the opinions of GameDaily.com.