|
| T O P I C | |
|
What's the Franko, Botcho?
January 19th 2003, 14:19 CET by deadlock I have been a regular at PlanetCrap for a number of years now. In that time, we have discussed many many many wonderful things. Again and again, over and over, ad nauseum. However, one of the more interesting subjects that we touch on is the capacity of modern computer games for telling a compelling, interesting tale. With, like, proper character development and shit. I think we can all agree that games up until now have been largely devoid of any real depth. Storylines tend to be simplistic, characters one-dimensional and thematic variation very thin on the ground, the latter generally revolving around some kind of future dystopia. Or Nazi monster chicks in leather. I think we can also agree that games have a capacity to be so much more. What I would like for us to do in this thread is explore videogames as a medium for story-telling. Here are a few questions to kick things off... What are designers doing right? In this category, you've got Deus Ex, Anachronox, the Metal Gear Solid games, any number of RPGs etc. None of these games are perfect examples - Deus Ex, for example is set in a pretty much cookie-cutter future dystopia, albeit a very well realised one, thanks to the huge amount of background story that was added. The Denton brothers aren't the most multi-dimensional characters either; though you could argue that, in the case of JC, that's a good thing since it lets the player impose more of their own personality on the game. What are they doing wrong? Do I really need to expand on this? Duke Nukem? Quake? Almost every game ever created? Finally, Do we even want games with deep, meaningful plots? The aforementioned Duke Nukem and Quake didn't exactly suffer, gameplay-wise, because of a lack of meaningful plot or deep characters. People remember Half-Life's plot as being a lot better than it was, thanks to the fact that it didn't give you a lot of time to actually think about it. Ico, my current obsession, is beautiful in it's simplicity, both aesthetically and plotwise. So, over to you - agree with what I've said here? Disagree? How much importance do you attribute to a game's plot? |
| C O M M E N T S |
|
Home »
Topic: What's the Franko, Botcho?
|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»| |
|
One thing to remember is that if you're 30 or older, you're not the primary gaming market anymore. There's a whole generation below you who haven't saved the universe, closed the demon portals or won the secret fighting tournaments. For them, that's all fresh stuff. I'm just saying. Put on your two step shoes, lose the blues and dance like it's year zero.
|
|
Fuck that. There aren't enough demon portals for me to close. |
|
Oh, and about "Documentary" games. Right now, a kid could learn a great deal about the small arms and military vehicles of the world by playing various games. I don't see why other games can't teach other things. Not "Timmy Bumblebee teaches Math!" But, if players are willing (and it's clear they are) to play relatively complex city/nation/resource management games, why can't there be a game that deliberately does this using a simplified but accurate economic model? Eventually the layers of complexity build up, as they do in these games, and by the end you know a great deal about the way markets and central banks and such work. I'd love to take a class in school where the midterm exam was to achieve certain economic conditions or goals in Maxis SimEconomy..or whatever. Astronomy, biology, history...real scientist use very expensive sim programs to model various things, I dont' see why game versions can't work, just the same way there are professional plane flying sims (air force, airline training, etc), but also enjoyable (yet very detailed and realistic) flight sims. |
|
I'm 19 years (20 next month... w00t w00t) and it's old hat to me too. I think romantic comedies as games would be going too far, simply because getting into one of the roles would be more creepy, and, frankly, more sad than wish-fulfillment in terms of heroism. However, games can definitely branch out and investigate other genres. |
|
Yeah Marshall, but game companies are, at some level, trying to make money (and as a side thing, trying to get respect for the industry, and impress love interestes that they're in a respectable industry, and getting lawmakers off the industry's back, etc). I don't buy the "Well, we don't make games for you because you're old, and games are for kids." is exactly the cul de sac I'm talking about. There are kids movies and adult movies. There's kids music and adult music. There's kids books and adult books. There's no reason why there can't be adult games, and for god's sake 'adult' doesn't mean more blood and swearing. |
|
warren: One thing to remember is that if you're 30 or older, you're not the primary gaming market anymore. to be fair though, some time ago, neither were little kids and/or women. The current market may be focussed on 13-year olds, but there's no reason why game companies wouldn't try to tap the 30+ market. A lot of those people also grow up with games and thus make a viable target audience, unlike their parents who most likely never played computer games. "Since most elephants don't comply with the AGP 2.0 specification, we recommend that God does a product recall on all elephants"
|
|
Hentai games. Zing! |
|
I'm 19 years (20 next month... w00t w00t) and it's old hat to me too. How long have you been gaming? Take what I said and apply it to kids that age. Not that I wouldn't like to see games expand into other areas but the reality is, they don't need to. Put on your two step shoes, lose the blues and dance like it's year zero.
|
|
why can't there be a game that deliberately does this using a simplified but accurate economic model? The same reason there aren't many games for the women-folk to play. Games are largely created by young males, ages 20-30. How many of them would be interested in creating an economy simulator? The game industry is like a big dorky version of an immature frat-boy club. Go to any industry show and take a look at the booths/booth babes for easy verification. 2000/XP is better than Win9x in every way.
|
|
But Marsh, keep in mind about, oh..50 percent or so of the population is well known for appreciating a little romantic wish fulfillment in a story, as opposed to the heroic wish fulfillment that the other 50 percent of the population is already getting a shitload of in the games that are being made. |
|
Hugin True. However, I imagine the market for adult games is a lot smaller than the one for "kids" games. If a company has to weigh both types of games against trying to make money, adult games doesn't look like a great avenue to pursue. Smaller market, much more demanding, etc. True, Rock Star did it with GTA3 but how many will be able to follow in their foot steps? Put on your two step shoes, lose the blues and dance like it's year zero.
|
|
marsh: I think romantic comedies as games would be going too far, simply because getting into one of the roles would be more creepy, and, frankly, more sad than wish-fulfillment in terms of heroism. However, games can definitely branch out and investigate other genres. I remember some FMV game from like 1993 or 1994, that was something like a psychological thriller or something. I don't remember it exactly, but it was about a husband and wife having relationship problems, and calling in some psychiatrist (female) because the guy also suffered from psychotic attacks or something. IIRC you played the role of the wife and found out such things as your husband cheating on you with the psychiatrist. didn't work out back then, but maybe it would now? with updated graphics, of course. "Since most elephants don't comply with the AGP 2.0 specification, we recommend that God does a product recall on all elephants"
|
|
Keep in mind, I'm not saying the industry SHOULDN'T make games that appeal to a wide variety of people. I've been arguing here that they should in various threads for a while now. It blows my mind that EA has made so much off The Sims and the majority of publishers/developers just sort of yawn, talk smack about how The Sims is pretty ghey and then get to work on the next niche FPS game. 2000/XP is better than Win9x in every way.
|
|
YF So your belief is that making a competing product against The Sims is a sound business decision? Put on your two step shoes, lose the blues and dance like it's year zero.
|
|
Point taken. But take and compare the stigmas associated about each of the following statements: "I sit at home and pretend to gun down Nazi-zombies." "I sit at home and pretend that someone loves me." Clearly the former is born of no real-world need to gun down Nazi-zombies. The latter... hm... I'm not arguing about their potential for success - I really have no idea. I just think that it might be inviting the kind of virtual hibernation from the big horrible scary Real World that you occasionally see in certain freakish MMORG players. |
|
There's plenty of marketspace to go around in any genre as long as the titles are quality. I'm not sure how you can even seriously ask that question... Did Epic belive making a competing product against Quake was a sound business decision? 2000/XP is better than Win9x in every way.
|
|
Remember Warren, in the market, there is a Number 1, and a number 2. Number 2 is also a good place to be, so yeah, go after the Sims, you fucking pussies! I believe I can fly......urk.
|
|
Dethstryk - I already gave my spin on the article. -chris |
|
I think there's a wee bit of room for more than one game in every genre. "I don't bemoan the great paste" - LPMiller
|
|
There's plenty of marketspace to go around in any genre as long as the titles are quality. That's cute. The Sims is a monster. I would love to be proven wrong, but I seriously doubt that any game that gets described as "Like The Sims, only not!" is going to get anywhere. I'm not sure how you can even seriously ask that question... Did Epic belive making a competing product against Quake was a sound business decision? Well, since I wasn't working here at the time, I can't really say what the thinking was at that point. Since Quake wasn't out when they started working on the original Unreal I imagine it seemed like a great idea. They were competing with Doom at that point. (waiting for MattG) Put on your two step shoes, lose the blues and dance like it's year zero.
|
|
Point taken. But take and compare the stigmas associated about each of the following statements: "I sit at home and pretend to gun down Nazi-zombies." "I sit at home and pretend that someone loves me." Both make you pretty dorky to the hip cynical jaded folk. But just think of all the women-folk who watch soap operas and read romance novels. There's a huge business there. In fact, I think a swell idea for a game (assuming it was done well) would be a Soap Opera simulator. Which in many ways already describes The Sims, but add over-the-top story arcs, cheesy dramatic music and a bit of a corny wink-wink isn't this all cute and silly comedic side.. Add a variety of sets including hospital, workplace, home and a motley cast of customizable characters. The wimmens would eat that up. Might seem stupid to you now, but I bet the idea of Deer Hunter seemed stupid too. (This is NOT what I am currently working on. Though I do think it does have promise and might in fact look into doing something like this in the future. Unless there are 5 Soap Opera simulators out by the time I get to it). 2000/XP is better than Win9x in every way.
|
|
I don't even watch soaps and I'd play a game like that, as long as I didn't have to do all the crappy Sims stuff like tell them when to go pee. It won't have any impact on DNF. Nothing really does.
|
|
The Japanese have been building the games YF describes, to great success, for years. -chris |
|
Yes, but they are also quite... Japanese. The culture would come on too strong for an American audience. Someone would have to produce one stateside. "Dream of me... and maybe, just maybe, this nightmare will end."
|
|
Yeah, but done for the American market (you know, take away all the sea monster tentacle rape stuff), I think they'd do well. 2000/XP is better than Win9x in every way.
|
|
Yeah, I'd love to see an American developer try thier hand at dating Sim. And Warren (and whoever else)..again, it's a circular argument. "The market for these games is too small, so we don't make games for this market." With soap operas so popular, and The Bachelor/Joe Millionaire, etc so popular, I think the potential market for a "Romance turned into a competive game" genre is..freaking huge. |
|
Too bad potential doesn't translate into interest, desire, or actually buying it. Have to wonder just how many folks would actually plunk down the money. I believe I can fly......urk.
|
|
I think the whole "I sit at home and pretend that someone loves me." is wrong. You wouldn't play a romance based game as yourself. You'd play to watch the story unfold between other characters. Like an adventure game. Like Guybrush and Elaine! "People who give John Edwards money are stupid, and you're stupid for defending them, stupid." -- Your Friend |
|
You buy this fuckin' game or I break your fuckin' head, sizzlechest. "Is the internet making people less intelligent?"
"You mean like how video cameras cause thrown objects to hit men in the crotch?" |
|
The powers that be felt it fit to re-release Mad Dog McCree. The game industry is scary. |
|
#69 Warren: In my mind, it turns you into Gordon Freeman. You can immerse yourself by pretending your name is Gordon Freeman and impose your own personality on him, but that's about it. You can't pretend to be yourself because, unless your name is Gordon Freeman, the people speaking to you and the spray painted signs don't make a lot of sense anymore. In the game industry, there are two fairly rigid sides on this subject, with one side thinking that playing a defined, named character lessens immersion, and the other side believing that it does not. 3DR, of course, is on the side that it doesn't hurt. In fact, we believe that if done well, it adds to the immersion, because it puts the player in a compelling fantasy role. The proof is also available that playing a faceless, no name character compared to a defined, named character doesn't increase sales, meaning that players don't necessarily think that a non-defined character adds to the experience: In GTA3 you played a non-talking, non-defined character, and in GTA:VC you play a named, talking character. And no one I've seen is complaining about the change, saying that GTA3 was more immersive. Also, there's no obvious difference is sales between FPS games with well-defined characters and those without. So, all things being equal, I'd give the gamer a well-defined character, because it's the better way to build a franchise. "One of the most difficult tasks people can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games..." -- C.G. Jung
|
|
I prefer the game to give me an idea as to who I am in the game. Being myself is cool, but it's nice to have a starting point. "People who give John Edwards money are stupid, and you're stupid for defending them, stupid." -- Your Friend |
|
I don't care either way, as long as the game is good. I believe I can fly......urk.
|
|
Scott I guess what I'm really arguing is ... pick one option and go with it. Half-Life seems like they changed their minds halfway through design. Gordon never speaks or gets in the way, so you're free to be whoever you want ... until you talk to someone and they call you Gordon. So which is it? Max Payne and Duke Nukem ... it's pretty clear who you're supposed to be. You're playing the role of those characters. Deus Ex is clear as well, on the other side of the fence. You're playing yourself. Put on your two step shoes, lose the blues and dance like it's year zero.
|
|
>>> I don't care either way, as long as the game is good. As a game player, that's really all I care about, too. As an owner of a company concerned about financial prosperity, it only makes sense to make games that create marketable characters. "One of the most difficult tasks people can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games..." -- C.G. Jung
|
|
I agree, Warren. In Half-Life's case it's as though the designers couldn't quite figure out which way to go with it. I've read several interviews by that game's designers and lead writer, and they make it clear that they are on the side of believing that it's more immersive to have the player play as an empty shell character, with the player him- or herself become the hero. If that was their goal, they failed, because they featured Freeman's face in ads and on the box, and they game him a name. They should have instead done more like Id does, not giving the character a name, or showing who he/she looks like. Still, the game was so good this blunder didn't matter -- as it really doesn't matter to players if they play an empty shell, a defined fantasy character, or some hybrid like Freeman. "One of the most difficult tasks people can perform, however much others may despise it, is the invention of good games..." -- C.G. Jung
|
|
Well yeah, marketable characters help, see Sonic, Mario. But marketable settings work too, see GTA. Yet I think having a character I can identify with works better - and it doesn't have to be me, so to speak. I mean, Wing commander had identifiable characters, and none of them were you. I believe I can fly......urk.
|
|
Warren I would love to be proven wrong, but I seriously doubt that any game that gets described as "Like The Sims, only not!" is going to get anywhere. Two different "Sims-Like" MMOGs have been linked in the past month or so on PC. They appear to involve horrible fashion, bad hair, and few to no orcs, with the unpredictable addition of dune buggies and hoverboards. Not a direct carbon copy, but more than a handwritten facsimile. YF Both make you pretty dorky to the hip cynical jaded folk. But just think of all the women-folk who watch soap operas and read romance novels. There's a huge business there. Sure, except they have other things to invest in than PCs. If you want to design a romance simulator for their cute little six-year old 200mhz systems with no 3D accelerator and sell that title at the check-out lane down at the supermarket for $34.95 USD, by all means, tap the goldmine. From a layman's perspective: When designing a computer game, do not ask yourself "is there a market?" Ask yourself "is there a market that owns the platform we're pitching the product on?" Foody and Hugin, while charming and openminded, are not the LCD. Cheap, but not as cheap as your girlfriend.
|
|
Bailey, That's why Michael Abrash went to RAD (makers of Bink) and developed a software 3D renderer. Why would someone develop a software renderer when 3D cards/APIs are all the rage? Because they aren't targetting typical gamers with it. BEWARE THE CTHULU MOLE!
|
|
Foodbunny: Insert gripe about being unable to choose your gender in most games here. Raven's Star Trek: Voyager - Elite Force allowed you chose to be either male or female, coincidently enough named androgynously as "Alex." Warren: Now, you can argue Max Payne back to me at this point, but that game, IMO, is a different scenario. The game was created around the characters name and the character is integral to the story. Gordon Freeman in Half-Life, was not. The differences here is literally between the first and third person perspective, not just the camera angle but the immersion of the player. In first-person perspective games, the player views the world through the eyes of the player character -- he IS the character (ie. players are playing the role of Dr.Gordon Freeman, a scientist who works at the secret Black Mesa complex). In third-person perspective games, the player views the world often above and slightly behind the player character he's controller, thus the player is disassociated with the character (ie. players aren't Lara Croft but rather they just control her actions). |
|
Scott Miller: So, all things being equal, I'd give the gamer a well-defined character, because it's the better way to build a franchise. What about Bungie's Master Sergeant in Halo? He's nameless like the guy in Grand Theft Auto. Personally, I don't mind taking on the role of a named character, like Cate Archer, much like an actor takes on the role of Macbeth (although Macbeth didn't wear a skintight catsuit). I enjoyed No One Lives Forever a lot because as the game progressed the character of Cate Archer developed. When playing a faceless and nameless character like the space marine in Doom, Quake or Halo I feel disassociated with the character, as that character feels very empty. It's not there's no character interactive -- NPCs talk to the Master Sergeant often -- but a lack of a background of the character who already has a role (eg. space marine). Obviously the more faceless/nameless the player character is there's less personal character interaction and development than with a character "pre-built" with a name, face and personality. It's like the difference between a nameless extra in the background of a movie scene to that of the lead actor -- the former actor could portray his/her character in almost any way (as long as it doesn't piss off the director) whereas the latter albeit confined to a role already determined by the writers his/her character develops more by adding his/her acting talent to help in that character development. |
|
Master Chief. ATTENTION TO DETAIL MOTHERFUCKER. "People who give John Edwards money are stupid, and you're stupid for defending them, stupid." -- Your Friend |
|
My bad. I haven't played much of Halo since I don't have an Xbox (wow, he's even lower rank than I thought). |
|
Wait, Master Chief is a navy rank and Master Sergeant is an army/air force rank. Damn it I'm still tired... |
|
Master Chief is highest enlisted pay grade. "Is the internet making people less intelligent?"
"You mean like how video cameras cause thrown objects to hit men in the crotch?" |
|
For some reason, I read that as the "highest enlisted gay pride". Cheap, but not as cheap as your girlfriend.
|
|
Greg Why would someone develop a software renderer when 3D cards/APIs are all the rage? Because they aren't targetting typical gamers with it. More accurately, they aren't targetting gamers at all. They might be able to run the tight and concise code of Quake II on a Pentium III/733 mhz at 27 fps, but how well will they run a sloppy, shoddily put-together soap opera game from the folks who brought us Deer Hunter XXV on a Pentium II/333 mhz? Huh? HOW NOW, MOTHERBITCH?! Weren't 3D accelerators standard issue in any non-business PC by the point P3 700 mhz systems were coming out anyway? Cheap, but not as cheap as your girlfriend.
|
|
If by 3d Accelerator you mean Intel Xtreme Graphics. Open 'em wide
|
|
Sure, why not. Cheap, but not as cheap as your girlfriend.
|
|
The interesting part of RAD's software renderer is how feature filled it is. It's easily the best looking software renderer I've ever seen, and it supports some features that would need a GF3 if you were to hardware accelerate them. Also, the software renderer comes in handy when you realize that a lot of new purchased computers (Joe Compaq machines) have a decent processor, but practically nothing for a videocard. "People who give John Edwards money are stupid, and you're stupid for defending them, stupid." -- Your Friend |
| C O M M E N T S |
|
Home »
Topic: What's the Franko, Botcho?
|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»| |
| P O S T A C O M M E N T |
|
|
| C R A P T A G S | ||||||||
|
|
| There are currently 0 people browsing this site. [Details] |
Powered by blah 0.9.1-dev •
PlanetCrap is © 1997-2035 Hendrik "Morn" Mans
|