|
A recently closed topic just inspired me to write this. Like the OP of that thread, I had something I wanted to write. For awhile, but I never really knew how to write it. So I'm going to try.
The thread talked about entertainment and gaming not being the same. I assumed it was going to be a discussion of the game industry's lack of interest in creating strong games (games defined as a competitive activity with a set of rules that requires strategy and skill to win) and instead in creating strong experiences.
But competition is entertainment for many people, whether they play it or watch it. I think that comparing the two is wrong, because entertainment isn't really relevant, as that's more on the side of the consumer. Instead, I think companies are more willing to create experiences, but a good experience is not necessarily a good game.
A lot of this is based upon my recent studies of game design. No, I don't have much knowledge of game theory yet, but that doesn't matter, because game theory is about analyzing strategic behavior. Not about a good game.
I can't really call Portal a game. I call it a puzzle. It's not competitive really, and has solutions that require solving, and lacks strategy. Your goal is to assess the situation and solve the puzzle to go to the next room.
Now there's nothing wrong with this at all. Video games have had puzzles forever. Zelda is a larger scale adventure that has a lot of puzzles, but also features combat, so it is more of a game than Portal.
Strategy games tend to be the games that fit into the definition of gaming perfectly, because there is usually a competitive aspect, a set of rules, and the genre is based upon strategy, plus, as Brood War shows, skill is very important. But look at how unpopular they are. Aside from Starcraft, most strategy games are overlooked and more niche than the other genres. I agree in a sense with the OP of the other thread that people aren't looking for games, but they are looking for experiences. The whole new advent of HD, 3D gaming, and motion control is just paving the new path towards experiences over games.
But I won't lie, Call of Duty is one of my favorite game series, and it is guiltier than most of this. It features a completely linear path to the end, so it's just an endurance test. What I loved about it was the experience I got out of it. The sounds blasting through my subwoofer, the chaos of all my squad members screaming things out while bullets swish past my head. Infinity Ward were, in my opinion, the masters of a good experience. That's why I always loved the single player missions, no matter how ridiculous the story got.
I can accept video games as being something other than a game. What I'm worried about is that all video games are just becoming interactive entertainment software, instead of games. The balance is tipped in the favor of experiences above gaming. There's too much chrome going on, which in my book I recently bought, Game Architecture and Design by Andrew Rollings and Dave Morris, defines as just visual or audible polish in a game. They even use Starcraft as an example. You require some sort of interface to play a game, and that's always graphical in a video game. Starcraft has the bar at the bottom. It could just be boring buttons sitting there, but the chrome of it all was the visual designs they used, that changed based upon the race. The chrome affects the experience, but not the actual game.
But, I'm not here to complain or attack anyone. I'm actually just scared.
Scared that games are turning into something other than games. E3 only reinforced this fear. Now, I am excited for a few showings, but when I saw Killzone 3, I saw a game that was just like Call of Duty. Intense sounds, chaos, destruction. All of this chrome hiding the real texture of the game. And it made me sick. I wasn't hating, I was scared that that's all I would get. I love Ogre Battle 64 not only because it gives me a great story and experience, but it gives me a great game to play too, that's very strategic and diverse. I love Starcraft for the same reason, and my fears are not moving over to Starcraft 2; I think Blizzard is doing a good job on trying to keep it a game and great experience, but I feel it won't be as interesting because they got lucky with BW, now they are trying to force it and that does not seem easy.
My fear isn't that there are great experiences, my fear is that that these experiences are overshadowing games. Chrome, not chess, is what I'm starting to use as a catch phrase for it.
And when we do get games, they are horrible. Modern Warfare 2 lacks anything that I can consider a good game, and instead turns into a race for the highest ratio or 10th prestige. There is no good variety in the weapons, its all just chrome. Halo 3 seems okay in this regard, and I commend it for that. Then we have games like God of War. All you have to do is block, dodge, and attack. And then solve puzzles (which are great puzzles I must say). Most of the game rides on it's gore, story, and heavy action, not on a balanced game. It's why I prefer Devil May Cry, because I feel like it has more options and requires you to think a little bit about what you are going to do and actually needs skill to pull it off.
And don't mistake me for saying all video games are wasted money. I still enjoy Modern Warfare 2, I still enjoy God of War. But I enjoy them for more superficial reasons in the context of gaming, and it wasn't why I would play games before. Our industry just needs a balance. And that's why I want Starcraft 2 to succeed, because people will see the game as a game, and appreciate it for it's strategy and it's rules and it's competitors, not because it has shiny graphics and a great story. And hopefully, the game industry will find that balance eventually. Because the great thing about video gaming is that they provided players with many ways to appreciate them, as a story, as a competition, as an experience, or even as a toy (toys are like Little Big Planet or the Sims, there is no goal, just playing with what you are given for fun). But, I feel that if the industry starts focusing too hard on experiences, then I feel like the industry will become too shallow and people will either consume the experiences, or abandon them.
I will still enjoy all these video games I mentioned as more chrome than games, but I will miss gaming if it does go away. It's part of me.
|
![[image loading]](http://www.mouseoverstudio.com/blog/images/video_game_old.jpg)
IS THIS WHAT YOU WANT? Because that is one fun ass game.
|
nice to know the other thread got closed. i didnt read your blog though cause you start like the other guy... and you can have competition with ANY game.
|
On June 17 2010 07:01 green.at wrote:
nice to know the other thread got closed. i didnt read your blog though cause you start like the other guy... and you can have competition with ANY game.
I remember playing mario 3 with a buddy seeing who could clear the hardest level, or just making stupid things like "I'll beat this who level while small and getting no power ups" .
The thing I am most sad of is that in general gamers don't sit in the same room together anymore. That's where the real gaming comes in.
The only game I play anymore is SC:BW, for whatever that's worth.
edit: You are romanticizing a bit I think. There never was a golden age of just "games" and there never will be, but this definition will always be represented. Most people do come for the experience, it's just a small percentage of the "hardcore" who want to hone their skills.
I mean, I ride a bike a lot. I'm not overly great at bike riding , but I can navigate the city and get to where I'm going with a moderate speed. I'm sure bike couriers and other people who ride bikes for a living think I'm a fucking twat for not modding out my gearshift and stuff to get the most out of my wheels. I don't blame them really, but not everyone can be die hard about everything, basically.
tl;dr
Let people have fun without it getting to you
enjoy games yourself!
|
Man you said it. Recently I've truly been questioning whether or not I really like video games anymore excluding starcraft of course.
I've been having similar thoughts, looking at life like games and thinking they seem less like games and more like some sort of movie that you can alter the path of. I'm not a fan of it but i guess a lot of people are.
All i can hope for is some gaming renaissance once this pattern gets more stale.
|
On June 17 2010 07:03 ella_guru wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2010 07:01 green.at wrote:
nice to know the other thread got closed. i didnt read your blog though cause you start like the other guy... and you can have competition with ANY game. I remember playing mario 3 with a buddy seeing who could clear the hardest level, or just making stupid things like "I'll beat this who level while small and getting no power ups" . The thing I am most sad of is that in general gamers don't sit in the same room together anymore. That's where the real gaming comes in.
Man, we played sooo much smash brothers on the N64 :D
It really is the most fun to sit next to your opponent.
|
On June 17 2010 07:01 green.at wrote:
nice to know the other thread got closed. i didnt read your blog though cause you start like the other guy... and you can have competition with ANY game.
Well, then you'd realize that's not what I'm saying at all.
In fact, I never even question that, and I'm not worried about competition solely.
I'm worried about challenging games that give me something to think about or get better at. But at the same time, I don't mind other games like Killzone, God of War, Call of Duty, or any other big FPS now that is more about the experience than the game itself. In fact, I love those too. I love video games in general. The issue is I feel that games are just becoming more like those examples, experience over gameplay, and I don't want that to happen. It's a fear I have of trends in our current industry. Even video games that aren't inherently about competition, like Portal or Zelda, are few and far between anymore. It's just a bunch of chrome.
Or I'm just really bad at finding things other than that.
|
On June 17 2010 07:04 meteorskunk wrote:
Man you said it. Recently I've truly been questioning whether or not I really like video games anymore excluding starcraft of course.
I've been having similar thoughts, looking at life like games and thinking they seem less like games and more like some sort of movie that you can alter the path of. I'm not a fan of it but i guess a lot of people are.
All i can hope for is some gaming renaissance once this pattern gets more stale.
Same for me, but I'm trying to quit SC ^^
My friend is a huge gaming nerd and watched E3 on tv and told me all about it, linked me to trailers of different games, etc. I dunno if I am just growing out of games, or if games are really just going stale, maybe a combination of both. Companies seem to just try creating their own version of another company's successful formula, and from what I see, they are now trying to draw people in with more motion-sensor and 3d stuff, which I don't really care about.
|
On June 17 2010 07:19 RageOverdose wrote:
1.I'm worried about challenging games that give me something to think about or get better at.
2. The issue is I feel that games are just becoming more like those examples, experience over gameplay, and I don't want that to happen.
3. Or I'm just really bad at finding things other than that.
1. You can get as good at a game as you want. For example, on Tony Hawk 3 I could do combos over a million points . I just made it my nerdy goal and could do it and my friends thought I was awesome for a while. Try playing Goldeneye 64 and unlocking all the cheats. Friends of mine that had done that , we cherished their cartridges, because god forbid the planets align again and you can get invincibility from the Facility level.
Very few games give you something to get better at unless you want to. People do speed runs of games, or try and beat all the pac man levels without losing a life. Maybe it's you, and not the games.
2. You say 'becoming' . What sort of golden era of gaming are you talking about ? It's not like mario 64 was overly hard, by your definition it was just an "endurance" test, but that shit was really really fun with so much to do in the game!! I could go on with examples. I dont really understand what you are pining for, or why you suggest games from the past have what you are looking for in abundance.
3. If you post a thread asking for examples of games that are increasingly challenging or endlessly creative, TL will supply you with way more awesome games than you can think of.
(you are kind of bad at finding things  )
Edit : I would agree with Anderoo in that when one gets nostalgic about the way things were, it typically means you are outgrowing the thing in question.
|
I used to think this was the case, and that I was unable to enjoy newer games just because despite awesome graphics they were all bad quality. Then I sat down, downloaded a N64 emulator and tried playing some old gems like super mario 64, golden eye and ocarina of time.
Turns out, I had just grown away from gaming. The occasional sc:bw is my only exception. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
