Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Game Devs Burn Another House Down

Zonk posted more than 8 years ago | from the ranting-again dept.

47

Another year, and another session of the 'Game Developer's Rant'. Last year saw Warren Spector making some comments that were heavily talked about for months after the GDC had ended. This year, some more talented people got together to talk smack about the industry they work in. (Cussin' and afightin' behind the link, be warned.) From Alice's transcript: "The name of this conference is 'what's next'. This year they're gonna tell me, I'm going back to my desk, I'm going to know what to do, and it's going to be easy! Right? Iwata-san. Totally inspiring. Can't wait to see the Revolution happen. Went to see Will Wright. Love him! Love his process! So intimidated. But his stuff was so hard to think about. I lost some brain cells thinking about it, so I want to say thank you to ATI and the art institute for showing me what's next in games: hawt chix! ?"

cancel ×

47 comments

Review of the bold faced comments (5, Interesting)

dada21 (163177) | more than 8 years ago | (#14989073)

Compelling experiences are carved out, made of gaps. We have bathrooms in our environments because it's more realistic. One day someone will think eating and shitting should go into a game because there's a bathroom to use. This is not a good idea.

I agree. The game experience for me is about two things: suspending disbelief and living a fantasy experience. Games that try to mimic life, to me, create complete disbelief. I tried the Sims and all that, but I'm thankful that Civ4 doesn't have toilets. My favorite games still go back to text mode, though, because I prefer my imagination over the "one-size-fits-all" imagination of 3D designers. I'm amazed at the visual quality levels of games today, but they don't suspend disbelief just because they look real.

We don't have an Oscars. We don't have an academy.

Be thankful. The Oscars are a self-serving joke for a cartel-driven industry. The gaming industry does have their own oscars: it is called game sales, game profits, and happy consumers.

You guys are the future, and it's a beautiful future if you open your mind and actually think about business a bit more.

See my previous point. The idea of thinking about business more is of massive importance. Profit for a product you make means you have happy customers who want your product. They're exchanging their store-of-time ("money") for your time, and if they're happy, they'll happily pay. En masse.

We need to make games that people care about so much that people can't not play them.

Yes! We gamers want not just to play a game, we want to be able to have a desire to play it. Most games today look cool, sound cool and have all the jazz but I want to not play them because they don't offer me the experience I desire. Have you seen the drive to return to table-top D&D gaming? That is an RPG. A keyboard and a mouse are not RPG-efficient in my mind, because my mind is not part of the interface.

Maybe we need to become fossil fuel for the next generation to come along and show us how it's done.

They will, but I think it will be taking a step backwards. The more hardware that is needed to play a "coolness-factor" game, the more bugs I find, the more difficult it is to play and the more it works to create disbelief and take me out of the picture.

I have to tell ya, there's nothing better that can be done because the games industry is d.e.a.d.

GIGO - Garbage In, Garbage Out.

We put food in, shit comes out.

See previous 2 points.

The second I'll just mention that I'm going down the corridor to the maternity room where there's an infant that has a better future than the games business and it's called interactive storytelling.

For me a big part of interactivity is letting my brain create the image I believe I will soon see. That is part of fear, part of desire. If I am fed everything, I won't be hungry for what is ahead. Games have to create a hunger and a thirst every step of the way.

Your number one beef with the industry or your job. And tomorrow.. no,, Saturday.. hahah.. do something about it!

Actually, the market will cause you to do something about it. Your paycheck might be great, so that means there are customers. But the big part of a job is also being satisfied in your work, and that might mean taking a paycut in order to find new markets.

but I realise that the people in the audience are actually very intelligent here and only stupid people think that patents is a good idea, so that'd be a waste of time.

Whoa, did your friendly neighborhood anarcho-capitalist [unanimocracy.com] just say that? I don't think I did!

I didn't wanna rant, I wanted to rave. Games are really totally amazing.

Yet when I complete a game, I am only happy when I realize that my mind is truly amazing. It is what my mind creates through a game that really pulls me in and tells me that the game was successful because I successfully matched my fantasy with my skills and the gaming company helped me do that. How often did you geek-gamers dream of being truly in the game when you were younger? That's what I want, but my imagination is never met with today's games.

I don't have a recap of this comment today, like I usually do. The only recap I have is to re-read what I just said, and if you agree, let's figure out what we want. I'm considering donning my DM screen and returning to the true RPG -- but I still have hope in gaming. I absolutely loved Morrowind, but I think there is a huge deficit in gaming today that Morrowind sort of helped create -- knockoffs that didn't give us the underlying elements that funded my imagination.

Re:Review of the bold faced comments (2, Insightful)

east coast (590680) | more than 8 years ago | (#14989169)

Be thankful. The Oscars are a self-serving joke for a cartel-driven industry.

It may sound politically incorrect and a bit off topic but the Oscars aren't really a joke but rather the movie industries attempt to look open minded and accepting, for the most part. They'll take films with unpopular concepts and give them awards to prove to themselves that they're above the Joe Sixpack mentality. The terrible truth tho, is that the industry desires little more than sales.

In this way the can appear socially conscious and upwardly mobile while still ripping off the consumer.

Re:Review of the bold faced comments (1)

RexRhino (769423) | more than 8 years ago | (#14989915)

The terrible truth tho, is that the industry desires little more than sales.

The wonderful truth is that the movie industry desires little more than sales! I can't imagine anything worse than if Hollywood was a some god-aweful government subsidized closed world of "serious artists". There is a reason why people watch Hollywood movies, or Bollywood movies, or Hong Kong action flicks, or cheap Italian western or horror movies, and they don't watch say French art films.

In this way the can appear socially conscious and upwardly mobile while still ripping off the consumer.

Well, they are certainly upwardly mobile, because they are all millionares and are making even more millions, but it is interesting that you used a term that describes money and finance to describe art. That seems to really be the reason why people think that Hollywood movies are "crap" (or fast food, or whatever). Most Hollywood movies are for the masses... for the working class. They are a celebration of working class, common man, values. So, to the "cultured elite", or upper classes, they are not "good". By pretending to enjoy some unbearable art film, a person can show themselves as "superior" to the common man, and distingush themselves as being a "higher" social class.

Re:Review of the bold faced comments (1)

east coast (590680) | more than 8 years ago | (#14990261)

Well, they are certainly upwardly mobile, because they are all millionares and are making even more millions, but it is interesting that you used a term that describes money and finance to describe art.

Maybe it's a mincing of words but "upwardly mobile" means many things to me. Sure, it can mean cashflow but there are other forms of social mobility.

That seems to really be the reason why people think that Hollywood movies are "crap" (or fast food, or whatever). Most Hollywood movies are for the masses... for the working class.

You think this is an elitist point of view? If so then why is Hollywood supposedly failing at the box office when smaller indie films have had great success? I think it's more that Hollywood has lost touch with the masses. They continue the formula in the most basic of ways today by remaking films that did well in their time. But this formula is failing. Does this mean that the Joe Sixpacks have advanced? I would make this my guess as far as why the old formula is failing. IMHO, the "working class" isn't the same as it was 20+ years ago.

Re:Review of the bold faced comments (1)

RexRhino (769423) | more than 8 years ago | (#14990586)

If Hollywood is failing (they are making huge profits, just not as huge as they want to make), I think it is probably because they have lost touch with the common man... Like you said, the working class today isn't the working class of 20+ years ago.

But I don't think Hollywood is failing because they choose to entertain the masses instead of making "artistic" and "important" films.

Re:Review of the bold faced comments (1)

joshsisk (161347) | more than 8 years ago | (#14990388)

People think Hollywood movies are crap because they aren't "as good as they used to be". Part of this mentality is that when you think back 20 years, you remember the good movies, and not the bad ones.

Also, i really don't think people "pretend" to enjoy an "unbearable" film to seem to be superior... Perhaps they just don't share the same taste as you?

Re:Review of the bold faced comments (1)

RexRhino (769423) | more than 8 years ago | (#14990516)

Also, i really don't think people "pretend" to enjoy an "unbearable" film to seem to be superior... Perhaps they just don't share the same taste as you?

I am exasurating a bit, for effect. There are lots of art movies that I really enjoy and I am sure others enjoy too. But that being said, just go to a showing at your local "art cinema", and talk to some of the people there, and they will tell you that a film is "difficult" (i.e., not very enjoyable to watch), but it is an "important work" (i.e. they want to be able to tell their friends they have seen the film to seem smart or more cultured). The language I am using to describe things might be a little extreme or inflamitory, in order to be heard over the general noise level of Slashdot... but I think you know what I am talking about.

Re:Review of the bold faced comments (1)

macshit (157376) | more than 8 years ago | (#14993201)

Well it's true that there are lots of posers around, and they'll say silly things to impress chicks or whatever.

But I don't think those phrases you mocked are quite as obviously stupid as you imply. There are lots of things that are difficult, and not satisfying in straight-forward ways, but which are nonetheless rewarding.

I've done quite a bit of hiking/hillwalking. It's never easy to drag myself out of bed very early, and such activities involve not just a lot of exertion, but often a fair amount of plain discomfort (e.g., spending all day slogging up a steep slope in fog and driving rain). But I continue to do it. Even if it may rain. Why? Because I get something from it, which while kind of hard to express, is very real to me. A walk in the park on a sunny day is much easier and less taxing, and I do that more often as result (and enjoy it), but that doesn't make those other activities fake.

There are many films like that as well, which I have to sort of psych myself up to see, and don't provide easy laughs or exciting action (and are maybe even plain "difficult"), but ... can often reach somewhere inside me that mainstream films simply can't even approach. It's usually hard to get my butt in gear and see such films, because my lazy self is thinking "it's gonna be annoying, there isn't going to be easy laughs or exciting action!" -- but once I've actually in there watching, I'm glad.

Re:Review of the bold faced comments (1)

7Prime (871679) | more than 8 years ago | (#14996176)

Exactly, you hit the nail right on the head.

I think the amount of enjoyment one can get from a certain medium is directly proportional to the amount of "work" it takes to come to terms with it. For example, I love long, complex, epic things: movies, music, video games, etc., because it will take a long time for me to unravel and digest what I've seen/heard. This way, it takes litterally days, and multipul viewings/listenings before I can see the work as a whole. In this way, it's not 4 minutes (for a song) or 2 hours (for a movie) of enjoyement, but an ongoing, rewarding process that gives hours and days of enjoyment, even when I'm not actually watching/listening to the work in question, I'm turning it over in my head and enjoying just chewing on it for a while.

After I saw Capote, I was unable to speak for a good hour because I was in sort of a daze from having to think about so many intense things. And for days afterwards, I found myself seeing scenes of the movie in my head, playing with alternate dialog, putting myself in the shoes of characters in the situations, and trying to understand the characters' motivations. Fast Food movies just don't give me that long term enjoyment that I can get from a more sophisticated work. I think that people who blow of sophistication as just an attempt for a group of people to establish themselves as an elite have really missed the point. Obviously, there is some of that, but there is truly something to be said for more involved work that may take time to digest.

Re:Review of the bold faced comments (3, Insightful)

bigman2003 (671309) | more than 8 years ago | (#14990137)

Can anyone name a private industry that is NOT driven by the desire for sales?

Religion? Nope...all about the sales.
Entertainment? Sex? Automobiles? Healthcare?

Nope...they all want sales too. In fact, as far as I can tell, that is pretty much the definition of 'an industry' a group of organizations that all sell similar stuff.

Of course Hollywood, and Bollywood, and Silicon Valley and every other place wants to sell crap. That is why they are in business.

Re:Review of the bold faced comments (4, Insightful)

Pxtl (151020) | more than 8 years ago | (#14989248)

What you missed is _why_ he said it was important to have an oscars - to encourage games that break new ground, that aren't just "the last best thing redone". The fact is that the Oscars serve the movie industry in an important way - they generate buzz for movies that people may not have been interested in, because they don't have wow-bang promos and stuff.

That's the point. If you want games that take the industry in new directions, rather than playing it safe, you need a forum that will generate public interest in those games. He's not saying he wants an Oscars for the sake of fellating the artists, he wants one so that new, challenging game concepts can get the same buzz that new, challenging movies get. So that it's profitable to make the game.

Before you say "but profit is all-important" consider the long view - in the long run, opening new horizons is important to profit - it opens up new markets. The first explorations into the new horizons may not get the attention they deserve without somebody to draw it.

Re:blah blah blah (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14989350)

All of this is dumb.

Good games only need one thing. Just one thing. They need to be fun.

If its fun, everything else will follow.

Im getting tired of these overcomplex rants about videogames, when at the core they are simply fun toys to pass time. Developers, authors, the entire industry really only need to focus on games staying fun. If people say "hey, this is fun!" everything else should follow.

Re:blah blah blah (1)

Braino420 (896819) | more than 8 years ago | (#14989948)

I can see why you would post that as an AC. Did you ever stop and think that maybe there is a reason they are fun? Well, this is what that's about. How the hell are they supposed to focus on keeping games fun if they don't discuss what makes games fun in the first place?

Silly AC trolls.

Re:Review of the bold faced comments (1)

Lobo42 (723131) | more than 8 years ago | (#14989366)

You know, your apparently eternal faith in "the market" to steer game development is all well and good, but what if your tastes lie somewhere on the fringes of said market? What if most people are content to play games based on the normal, everyday pop culture they're familiar with, but you originally turned to games specifically to avoid that?

Re:Review of the bold faced comments (1)

geminidomino (614729) | more than 8 years ago | (#14991761)

You know, your apparently eternal faith in "the market" to steer game development is all well and good, but what if your tastes lie somewhere on the fringes of said market? What if most people are content to play games based on the normal, everyday pop culture they're familiar with, but you originally turned to games specifically to avoid that?

Then you're pretty well boned. That's why it's the "fringe."

As far as dealing with it, sometimes we get lucky, and something comes out on our fringe that is enjoyable enough to carry us through long enough for the next bone to be tossed to us.

Re:Review of the bold faced comments (2, Interesting)

91degrees (207121) | more than 8 years ago | (#14989973)

but I'm thankful that Civ4 doesn't have toilets.

Me too. I was a little deterred by GTA:SA's concept of including food. By all accounts it's still a good game, but it seemed like they were struggling for new ideas. What would have been better would be better people interaction, different personalities to choose from at the start of the game (RPG style - pick the attributes you want). But these are hard. They make it a lot harder to balance the game. Gimmicks are easy.

The gaming industry does have their own oscars: it is called game sales, game profits, and happy consumers.

Sales are one thing, but the movie industry judges commercial success to a fair degree as well. Sales are not a true indicator of quality. Some genuinely innovative ideas that don't get the publicity they deserve. 25 to Life got large sales because of the publicity. And the movie industry isn't the only industry that gives awards to itself. Everything does. Did you know that electrical appliance salesmen have their own annual awards ceremony? A well publicised and well recognised awards ceremony would benefit innovative companies considerably.

I think a large part of what's missing is lack of decent story. Games need to borrow more story telling ideas. Too many games just have a very predictble run round a maze, shoot at things, with a gradual difficulty progression. The original Tomb Raider did things quite well. I was never expecting a Tyrannasaurs Rex after lots of big cats and wolves. Nor did I expect to be dumped in a level with no weapons at all. This was all good. It made the game less predictable. Too many games are simply too repetitive. (And it's always been the case. Side scrolling shoot-em-ups jsut gave way to first person shooters).

Re:Review of the bold faced comments (1)

MilenCent (219397) | more than 8 years ago | (#14992239)

One day someone will think eating and shitting should go into a game because there's a bathroom to use. This is not a good idea.

Like in that multi-million dollar blockbuster, The Sims?

I told you (0, Troll)

Eightyford (893696) | more than 8 years ago | (#14989079)

Went to see Will Wright. Love him! Love his process! So intimidated.

And I got modded into flamebait oblivion. [slashdot.org] (and I will again, I'm sure)
What's with all the people having man-crushes on Will Wright? Ugh, this starting to get worse than the Joss Whedon worshipping.

Re:I told you (3, Informative)

Xugumad (39311) | more than 8 years ago | (#14989236)

Feel that, if I had mod points, you'd be going up. I mean, I like Will Wright's work, but for goodness sake people, stop drooling over him like he's some demigod!

Re:I told you (1)

softspokenrevolution (644206) | more than 8 years ago | (#14989934)

Blasphemer!

Re:I told you (1)

MilenCent (219397) | more than 8 years ago | (#14992283)

Well... he *is* hot stuff, design-wise. His reputation is well-established from designing Raid on Bungling Bay, SimCity, and the The Sims. (He also designed The Sims Online, but three out of four ain't bad.) The only person I can think of who I'd rate more highly might be Miyamoto himself, and it might be a toss-up between the two.

Re:I told you (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14989278)

I was actually planning on attending GDC just to fellate his assistant in the hope that he would notice me in passing.

But then, I was (quite literally) raised on the early, FUN maxis games.

Re:I told you (1)

Eightyford (893696) | more than 8 years ago | (#14989380)

I was actually planning on attending GDC just to fellate his assistant in the hope that he would notice me in passing. But then, I was (quite literally) raised on the early, FUN maxis games.

Haha, yeah I spent way too many hours of my childhood rebuilding my city after tornado damage and invading other ant colonies.

Re:I told you (1)

MrTester (860336) | more than 8 years ago | (#14990105)

Robosport Baby.
Its all about Robosport.

Re:I told you (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14989486)

Maybe it's more a problem of delivery than content...although I'm not sure what you expect after bashing a couple of the board's cult favorites.

Re:I told you (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14989750)

I love Will Wright's cawk! Its sooo big and he makes me stroke off to the Sims!

fp! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14989159)

and i dont even understand the article!

95% Rant; 5% Interesting Ideas (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14989167)

All I can say is I want the last 10 minutes of my life back that it took me to read that.

Re:95% Rant; 5% Interesting Ideas (1)

DennisInDallas (309656) | more than 8 years ago | (#14991196)

you'll read faster when you stop moving your lips

Doobie doobie doo (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14989183)

Well, I must be the fristy poster. Blooooooooorrrring. Fart. Oink. Meow. FP.

Suck my balls, mods. This is to waste karma. Give me a -1, Flamebait or -1, Troll, or if you are really cool, you'll just mod me insightful so that I can waste even more karma!!

Someone tell me... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14989270)

Why the FUCK would I read this shit? Yes sorry after seeing some of it, the obsenity within the article has come to my fingers.

Interactive Story telling - we're not ready yet. (4, Interesting)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 8 years ago | (#14989413)

The problem with interactive story telling is that to be broad, you need either a lot of well-thought voice recordings and renderings for each variation of the scene, or just strip the audio and keep text dialogs.

As I said before in another story, we need the technology to provide good voice synthesis, as to provide us with "virtual improvising actors" that will act differently depending on the circumstances.

An example I like to talk about is FF-X (not X-2, it sucked), a game I liked a lot. I loved the story, and the greatest motivation i had for going on with the game was wondering what happened next.

But in the end, it was just pre-recorded clips - inside a linear game. But what if we could have a non-linear game, with many different endings and different events happening? This would add a lot of replay value. I would like for example, to make the game change such that Tidus would fall in love with Rikku instead of Yuna, and Yuna would come to become a secondary character. What if Yuna and Rikku could chat about Tidus and what they think about him, or what about some emotional screw up that would split the party and open different possibilities in the game? (Like your quest is to travel thru the mountains so you could simply apologize to your loved one and go on with the quest - yeah, I know, it's crazy, but at least it'd be interesting to watch). Kinda like Silent Hill games where you can unlock different endings, but I want the character interactions and not mere key objects to do the unlocking.

I'm talking about AI. Not basic AI like intelligent enemies, but an "emotion" engine where characters could change their mood and give you different answers, or do different things.
The problem is that with voice actors and pre-recorded audio) this would be either impossible or beyond budget/time. We've reached the point where innovation is IMPOSSIBLE with the current technology.

Game programmers need to stop relying on old formulas and start developing more tools for better games:

* a good emotion engine for character AI
* efficient speech synthesis so that characters can express ideas and emotions without needing a voice actor to have every possibility recorded
* perhaps a better script (as in camera, action) engine for cutscenes

This would work at least with RPG's.

Re:more blah blah blah (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14989539)

Game programmers need to stop relying on old formulas and start developing more tools for better games:

LIST OF STUPID THINGS THAT DONT IMPACT GAMEPLAY


You need to shut the fuck up. Im getting tired of this crap. Game programmers need to focus on one thing, and one thing alone. Making a game fun.

You overanalytical fanboys need to just SHUT THE HELL UP. Its this overthinking and overanalyzing thats lead to the current crap the industry is in. (and OMG PROFIT PLZ) You are so wrong about what games are and you are distorting the point.

If a game is fun, its awesome. If a game isnt fun, it sucks. Thats it.

The ONLY question is "how can we make this more fun?"

Re:more blah blah blah (1)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 8 years ago | (#14989640)

I was only exploring the possibility of interactive storytelling. It is a VERY SPECIFIC kind of games. If you don't like it, well, you're welcome to contribute with your ideas.

Re:Interactive Story telling - we're not ready yet (5, Insightful)

Mr_eX9 (800448) | more than 8 years ago | (#14989831)

The linearity of the Final Fantasy series is what caused me to lose interest in it, aside from my dislike of the gameplay. I felt like I was watching an interactive movie rather than playing a game.

Personally, I hope once the technology that you've mentioned is conceived and matures that cutscenes won't be necessary at any point in a game. This is happening already--Half-Life 2 takes place entirely in first person, and it has some of the best storytelling I've ever seen in a video game, and it's a shooter. You really feel like you're a part of what's going on rather than watching the events go on from the omnipotent perspective commonly found in books and movies. I hope the entirely in-game method of storytelling is one that will spread throughout all story-based games--it's something that's unique to the medium, and should be embraced.

You should check out the Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic and Elder Scrolls series if you're interested in emotion and open-endedness in your story-based RPGs.

Re:Interactive Story telling - we're not ready yet (1)

Johnny Mnemonic (176043) | more than 8 years ago | (#14990331)


I'm talking about AI. Not basic AI like intelligent enemies, but an "emotion" engine where characters could change their mood and give you different answers, or do different things.

I would suggest human storytellers. The problem with this is scale--how to have so many DMs accessible to the currently logged in online players, but that could be mitigated by "out of the face" intereactions, like going to the vendor, healing downtime, etc. But what would happen if Blizz were to substitute live quest givers for some of their automated ones?

Until a plot line is so smart that it can pass a Turing test, you'll always know that your game environment has boundaries. But with the kind of money that games can make, couldn't they have live people that move the story along and interact with the players in human ways?

Re:Interactive Story telling - we're not ready yet (1)

Reapman (740286) | more than 8 years ago | (#14990473)

This is a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario... what's the biggest complaint about games with multiple endings? People feel cheated if they don't have the time to invest in seeing every ending or complain that a choice they made in hour 1 affects the outcome in hour 20. If you make it linear, you make THOSE people happy, but you also make the camp your sitting in unhappy because it's so linear. Who's right? Both are. The answer? There is none. There will always be games with multiple endings and there will always be games with single endings because both feed a specific group. Games industry will die as soon as the movie industry or music industry will die. Never. Change yes, shrink sure, die no.

Re:Interactive Story telling - we're not ready yet (1)

blincoln (592401) | more than 8 years ago | (#14990939)

What you're describing is essentially Morrowind. It uses text, but I didn't mind because the result was that sort of open-ended game world.

I think it will be a considerable amount of time before a speech synthesizer can convincingly stand in for a real voice actor. Even now in the 21st century, the best we have are the phoneme-clip based systems that still sound like robots. There isn't even a voice synthesizer equivalent of William Shatner, let alone Ian McKellan.

Re:Interactive Story telling - we're not ready yet (1)

Spy der Mann (805235) | more than 8 years ago | (#14991047)

What you're describing is essentially Morrowind. It uses text, but I didn't mind because the result was that sort of open-ended game world.

Exactly. This is something I've noticed in modern games. Before, all you required was a good imagination and programming knowledge. After all, we know how to draw a sad anime face, right? But now we need actors, a dedicated 3D team, and games are turned more into movies than games. There's little room left for the imagination. So, if we want to be able to do what we did with simplistic (even text) games, we need to update our tech.

Re:Interactive Story telling - we're not ready yet (3, Funny)

Lehk228 (705449) | more than 8 years ago | (#14991465)

if i can get Yuna to fall in love with Rikku i will buy it.

Re:Interactive Story telling - we're not ready yet (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14996683)

if i can get Yuna to fall in love with Rikku i will buy it.

Seriously, in NWN I'm playing a female character and none of the female hookers in the brothels will give me the time of day. No, there's one guy hooker that they try to pawn me off on. Look, I'm a bad ass halfling rogue with an attitude. I don't want some used up tired out old mangina.

Besides, what percentage of female characters are really female.

Re:Interactive Story telling - we're not ready yet (1)

some guy on slashdot (914343) | more than 8 years ago | (#15009394)

FF-X???? So in your opinion, quality stories:

- Spend countless hours "building tension" to a plot twist that was obvious in the first fifteen minutes.

- Only bother to give any sort of depth or development to the main character and his girl, and then, not too much, buddy. Don't want to make them sympathetic.

- Involve characters moving from point A to point B with no unexpected twists or setbacks.

- Incorporate pointless, repetitive collection tasks with no motivation behind them.

- Leave gaping plot holes.

- Never contest or question anything, and expect you to simply accept anything they throw at you - except the undead, because the undead are pure evil, obviously.

- Star female characters that like to be pushed around.

You truly have your thumb on the pulse of great literature.

Seriously...Branching storylines wouldn't be enough to fix Final Fantasy Ten. It was a mockery of good storytelling. Almost every conversation boiled down to, "The plot is this way." It was like taking an overpriced bus tour through the abandoned streets of a good game.

Is it just me? (1)

slightlyspacey (799665) | more than 8 years ago | (#14989839)

Am I the only one who read the submission, RTFA, and read the submission again and said "huh"?

My humble opinions. (1)

xtieburn (906792) | more than 8 years ago | (#14990051)

Robin: YAAAAAaaaawwwwnnn!!! Games have sexy women in them, sex sells, its disgraceful, yadda yadda yadda.

Frank: I get the idea that people shouldnt be concentrating on realism over the gaming experience but he seems to be against getting to the point where we can simulate reality. In my opinion that will be a grand day indeed. I mean where do you go after that? You cant have better graphics, you cant supe up a computer to get more detail out or rely on some new fangel graphics engine. Its when weve perfected graphics that we will _have_ to start coming up with the truly unique and wonderful gameplay.

Seamus: Really good view and I have to say I havent really thought of it like that much at all. My only problem with it is that its a visous cycle. The developers need the millions to get business up and running with original ideas, the publishers have the millions but dont want to risk original ideas.

The only way the industry is breaking free is actually in a similar way to what Seamus mentions. The stars of the game industry have started to crack open original lines. Will Right Sid Meir Peter Moloneux recognised names that they know will sell and as a result they get away with a lot more experimental stuff. Best article of the lot.

Jonathon Blow: Has some good points games can be incredible without the innovation. However, he kind of ends up pointing out an innovation that would really help games... If its only been used once its still fairly innovative. (Though id say blood lines also managed to give a far more wide spectrum than just Good and Evil.)

Chris Crawford: My lecturers in AI (Marc Cavassa and Fred Charles) Have been doing some impressive work in to interactive story telling. However, I dont see it as this huge reviver of the games industry. Indeed I dont think the industry is as 'brain dead' as he makes out. (Especially in Nintendo's corner.) Its just another innovation that will make games popular again for a while.

Jane Pinkard: Decent common sense. Got a problem then fix it. Wont stop me slagging off shitty games though.

Chris Hecker: I am not in the games are art camp. I certainly dont agree that they can be compared to Movies and Comic Books. He himself points out some massive differences. Yes games are cool but I didnt see much of a point to his rave.
 

too little, too late (1)

Khyber (864651) | more than 8 years ago | (#14990724)

"Compelling experiences are carved out, made of gaps. We have bathrooms in our environments because it's more realistic. One day someone will think eating and shitting should go into a game because there's a bathroom to use. This is not a good idea."

Guess they never saw Duke Nukem before. That idea's sooo 1995.

Chris Crawford again? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14991202)

Why does this Crawford guy keep getting invited to these things? What has he actually accomplished lately? Or in the last 20 years for that matter? Geez. Enough with TALKING about interactive fiction. Show us the goods already! Otherwise shut up!

'Interactive Storytelling' (1)

mrobin604 (70201) | more than 8 years ago | (#14991440)

Oh please. So you change the name, and all of a sudden everything's different. What's wrong with "video games"?

We saw this kind of thinking before, in the early 90's. "New Media". "Interactive" (not interactive-something, just the one word. People would go around saying "I work in interactive.")

All changing the name does is attract a bunch of wannabe-"visionaries" who can talk a lot about how they're gonna innovate, break the mold, etc, but when the pedal hits the metal, all they end up doing is schlocky low-content low-production-quality derivative crap. Those are the people responsible for the FMV "revolution" in videogames circa 1994. Do we really need that again?

You want a revolution, come up with a new business model. Seamus is part right, I think, in that we need to recognize REAL innovation with awards. But really, the advent of XBox Live direct distribution and low-cost development models will go much further in spurring innovation than any new jargon will. The whole reason there's no innovation in games is that developing them costs a ton of money. Because the risk is already huge, publishers don't want to incur more risk by going out on a limb with content and game mechanics.

Make game creation cheap, open the distribution pipes so that smaller houses can get their games out, and I guarantee you will start seeing innovation.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...