Hatred and you!
polycounter lvl 18
Update:
http://www.videogamewoes.com/articles/the_big_picture.htm
I totally chopped the introduction page, and added images with captions to the pages. Better, I hope?
for those interested, this article might help express what i'm trying to say a bit better:
http://www.videogamewoes.com/articles/story.htm
hey folks. After quite a while of being sick of most games being constructed around meaningless combat, stereotyped characters and having poor story structure, I've decided to start up a website with some ranting on it.
the truth is, i have a great deal of respect for everyone i work with, and more than anything else, I'd love to have a site that stands as a place for people to come and share ideas about what the industry needs and how we can take games to make them awesome. I'd love it if you guys took a look, and if any of you have any suggestions for the site, or content for that matter, do tell. I hope to update it frequently.. and hopefully have a section for articles written by viewers..
http://www.videogamewoes.com/articles/the_big_picture.htm
I totally chopped the introduction page, and added images with captions to the pages. Better, I hope?
for those interested, this article might help express what i'm trying to say a bit better:
http://www.videogamewoes.com/articles/story.htm
hey folks. After quite a while of being sick of most games being constructed around meaningless combat, stereotyped characters and having poor story structure, I've decided to start up a website with some ranting on it.
the truth is, i have a great deal of respect for everyone i work with, and more than anything else, I'd love to have a site that stands as a place for people to come and share ideas about what the industry needs and how we can take games to make them awesome. I'd love it if you guys took a look, and if any of you have any suggestions for the site, or content for that matter, do tell. I hope to update it frequently.. and hopefully have a section for articles written by viewers..
Replies
also consider refining the tone of your approach. is it earnest, cynical? coarse and irreverent, or something more genuine? "because I'm sick of shooting shit" has a nice ring to it, but make sure it's consistent with how you want to present the site. a header graphic more in-line with the message (and not just a seemingly random cop from game box art) would also help sell the site.
no joke it's going to be an uphill battle to establish the site as anything worth visiting. don't be a web 2.0 asshole, get some content up there (and not just opinion filled blog entries. barf.)
edit: i know this is a low key operation right now, but there are some no-brainers to laying out articles and such. throw some relevant images into them to break up the text, i clicked on the "big picture" story but i can't say that i'm jazzed to read it.
you're right about the articles. i'll throw some captioned images up there immediately and spice the site up a bit. hopefuly the site will get a little bit more colorful as time goes on.
as far as the pen name goes, i'm still in a toss up. truth be told i'm probably going to present it under hypnoslave where ever i go with it, so that i can be a lot more scathing with my writing. I enjoy being harsh and i think it would alow me to step back a bit.
i'm posting it here under my name because i know and respect most of the folks on this forum, so i might as well just be open with it.
as far as the direction of the site goes, i'd like to be as scathing as possible with the writing while still maintaining a happy, helpful presentation. I don't think that telling everyone how fucking stupid they are is always helpful, but it does make for more entertaining writing.
I will, however, argue about the header image. the character portrayed is so fucking stupid looking and ego-centric that I think he stands as an icon for for what i'm sick of. shooting shit. as this man.
i'll get some pics up there right away.
Edit- come to think of it, i'm going to hide that introduction out of the way a bit and open the site with a daily blog that has something a little bit more colorful.. like commentary on a video recently released or something.
A simple way of fixing the text block problem is by making the page more interesting visually. You currently have a header, links below it, and a bunch of text that's the same size and font. The only differentiating features are your name in italics and the grayed out 'Welcome'. Even though you don't really think about them much, the typesetting and formatting of your page can say as much as what you write, and are responsible for people's first impressions of the site. It'd be worth it to spend a few minutes looking at different kinds of web layouts and color schemes-- there's a ton of resources out there.
The header says that you're "sick of shooting shit" yet your header image to me reads that you're gonna shoot some more shit because you're pissed off about being sick of shooting shit
And what exactly is the kind of tone that you're trying to set? Because your first three paragraphs are pretty straight up, but then in the fourth you go on to say that you don't mean to be hateful tho you do enjoy expressing your rage. I think you're shooting yourself in the foot here because the disclaimer that you put up is for content that doesn't match with what I have just previously read on your site. If you want to be crass, then be crass and don't be apologetic about it. I'm not saying you should be like Maddox (lord knows one is enough), rather just pick a tone and commit to it.
Just make sure you don't sound like another bitchy emo kid
I hope some of this is helpful; I didn't quite mean to write that much, but oh well. On the whole tho, I agree with you. Most of the gaming trends are rather stale; as long as cheap knockoffs still manage to be profitable, that behavior will be encouraged, making it difficult for others to break the mold.
good luck with this stuff.
the more i think about it, the more i think that that whole introduction is a little bit.. well.. if not pointless, should be at least out of the way.
thanks a bunch wake.
It used to be people who liked video games designed games, free of any real intervention.
Now it seems it's all about churning out the next best looking shooter game with X amount more bloody guts spraying out of any given orifice, or SUPER AWESOME NEW MMO with OMG PANTS SHOPPING
Which isn't to say I don't enjoy either of those types of games every once and a while, but come on...
rube
Jimmies - yeah, i agree about the graphics and mmo thing. i think that we're bombarding the viewer with visual information that is often irrelevant and thus detracts from the experience.. personaly, realism fucking bores me.
Sec - i think ballance is important. I think being avant-garde to an exclusive extent is totally retarded, as it sounds like you're saying.. there's nothing wrong with doing what's been done well, but we definately need to re-adjust our focus.
deja - hehe i had a lot of fun with goldeneye.. i'm not sure that i agree with you though.. there's been some awesome shooters.. are you sure you're not just feelin nostalgic?
anyway.. that introduction isn't really the point of the page.. i posted the articles that have meaning up at the top..
thanks for the responces guys
on topic: i thought the odd swipe at the bible belt was out of place and antagonistically random.
I moved the introduction away from the first page as well. most people read it and figured that was the point of the site, as far as i could tell.
on a side note, I really hope I'm being relative, as I am a tad drunk, so I may have not grasped the whole point of this topic
Facade is a good example of a narrative based game that doesnt stick to a structure we are used to, an interesting experiment anyway. Hopefully in years to come games will have just as much variety and emotional meaning as the best books do now.
Thats my stance at least. Perhaps I've misconstrued what you were getting at.
When thats the case the story is more or less irrelivant (most dont even bother read it), and it becomes regular grinding with and xp bonus (quest).
IMO quests should represent the exact opposite of grinding, namely a way to aquire xp w/o repetitive killing. Such quest do exist in WoW, theres just too much "fill" inbetween.
what i got from your article was a strong urge control the experiences of people who play WOW, which to me goes against why i think it, and its ilk are popular (coming from someone who dosnt play). It thrives upon giving people another arena for their ego, oh and secondarily for social interaction. I understand why you'd want to make people question themselves and their motives within the game world, but making them look at themselves would not sell copy, unless the reflection they see is an 8ft purple skinned three titted amazon
its really interesting to see some more indepth disscusion of our occupation as its so often dissmissed, yet revilled at in the wrong context
Neo - yeah, I agree. there's nothing wrong with brainless activity, but it has it's place. I don't think there's anything wrong with simplistic game play, but I'm getting sick of seing nothing but that.
Ged - thanks! i'm sorry, what? the theory is that there are violent video games because computers are good at violence? i don't follow. I'll take a look at facade soon.
Jackablade - that's great feedback, thanks. quite frankly, i haven't gotten to level 20 yet.. i found the experience too painful. there's a chance i'm missing out on something. what i was referring to is a series of events that have some sort of progression and lead to some sort of meaning, usually expressed through some sort of change. i'd like to know more about anything i'm missing, for sure... but it doesn't seem like there's any events in warcraft that add up to any meaning
scrumworks - (nice name btw) yeah, exactly. story events are metaphoric. so far, world of warcraft only has like.. 3 simple fucking metaphors. you can't derive meaning from that shit.
JKMakowka - i think that's obvious. however, i think the question "what's the point" is grossly over simplistic. if a game is pointless, it's only because it's a stupid fucking game (*caugh*, ALL OF THEM *caugh*). movies aren't pointless because they tell great stories that change our lives.
one of the biggest problems i'm running into with this is the idea that games are some certain "thing".. that simplistic violent gameplay is what games actually ARE. of course, this is like people in the late 1800's saying that movies are about visual trickery, like a guy shooting a gun at a screen to scare an audience. if we didn't think past that, we wouldn't be where we are today. There's NO reason why games need to be so shitty.
leilei - you're speakin' my language
arrangemonk - haha that's a good point. it's funny how there's this huge drive for realism to heighten this "immersion" factor. quite frankly, i think it's like a heroin addict, always needing more heroin to get high. the truth of the matter is that a world feels real when you chose to go into a trance and identify with it. needing more and more things to make you feel like it's real will just skyrocket production costs. of course, I'm all in favor of better technology.. i love it, but this is an important point. we shouldn't be placating to stupid psychology.
SHPEIRO- i don't like the idea of "control". an artist expresses himself to a greater or lesser degree of quality. your avatar there has specific colors, to express a specific feeling experience, as i'm sure you'd agree. poorly expressed experience is just bad art. If you're going to express the experience of one's ego feeling confident, we just need to understand that there's this level of abstraction where plot elements tie together, that's all i'm saying. so your ego feels nice. so what? can't we learn something on top of that? this abstract level will always be there, weather we chose to address it or not. it can unify everything, or it can be a confused mess.
it's also worth pointing out that getting your needs met in an imaginary world because the real one is too scary, or because your map of the world is impoverished, is psychologically UNHEALTHY. the fact that this exists and people love it isn't something that we're going to change, but I think that it shouldn't be valued because our culture is filled with unenlightened people. heroin adicts all do heroin. that doesn't make it a good thing.. as far as the sales issue goes, it's a tricky thing, isn't it
But, always, the true innovators will keep innovating.
Katamari Damacy.
Portal.
Shadow of the Colossus.
Netwars.
Spore.
The Sims.
Perimeter.
Eve Online.
Not all of these are great games, and that's not even close to a complete list. but it's a brief example of relatively recent games (netwars being the oldest by far) that have all forced gamers to think in new ways, as opposed to the slew of games where they essentially replace the art in another game of the same type.
Games have trouble affecting people emotionally because we still aren't used to them, and we don't fully know how to use the medium to really "get emotional" yet. Mostly it just comes off as cheesey. As the medium of games continues to mature and we learn how to do more with it, you'll start seeing games that more successfully immerse the player in a really emotional experience. I think ICO did a pretty good job of this, but I've never played it. It's still very difficult for us to truly suspend a player's disbelief, most of the time, people are still aware they are playing a game.
We probably have to give our society in general more time to adapt to gaming as an art form. It's still too easy to get hung up on technical things and bugs. Games still feel like a foreign experience to most people. When games have been around for longer, people will be more comfortable with them in general, and be more willing to let themselves get sucked into the experience.
It's probably a fairly natural and predictable path for any new art medium. We'll figure it out... but you would probably be better served spending your time trying to refine and solve the issues you see instead of ranting about them. I know you present some possible solutions in your articles... but they're all things any of us could crap out after 20 mins of pondering. Maybe sit down and spend a few weeks really pounding out a design document, maybe for a new puzzle game. Something that truly uses new gameplay mechanics. It'll feel a lot more productive than writing rants online.
Also, the fountain sucks. Being weird and psychedelic alone doesn't make something good.
This subject always needs more attention. The more people we have focussed on advancing the "art of gaming", the faster it will happen. Good post.
I remember spending 4 or 5 hours one day just wandering around and collecting lizard tails and fruit to make the next fight against a colossus that much simpler. Such a great game. Why not use it's engine to make a super huge mega game of awesome happy fun?
Thanks! and thanks for that great responce. I do think we may have a slight failure of communication however..
I agree with what you said about not us not quite knowing how to "get emotional" about games, but to a certain extent. it's extremely rare that i see content that's not stereotyped. After playing games my whole life, if I'm not moved by a character, it's because that character isn't moving.
as far as being hepful goes, This website started with plans to write up a few ideas in a document to submit it to relic's leads. i realized that it might be more helpful to put it on the internet instead. also, i AM actually working on a game doc at the moment.
i have absolute confidence that we'll figured this out eventually, i'm just trying to speed things along. quite frankly, i don't believe for a seccond that any one of us could crap out the ideas i put out there, because i'm not seeing it anywhere in this industry. yes, the content of my examples is simplistic and cheesy (and as i admitted, quick), but quite frankly, the content has absolutely nothing to do with the point i'm trying to make in that article:
what's lacking in games isn't fresh ideas -- it's structure. big picture thinking..... this leads us to the fountain, which is a beautiful example. the fountain deals with some very complex ideas about trancending one's ego, and it does so with incredible simplicity, and visual beauty. It deals with probably the most important subject facing humanity. i know this sounds dickish, but you probably didn't understand it, because you were probably focusing on it on a literal level.
one of the things that i love about the fountain, especially in contrast with video games today is how abstract it is. it's not a movie about a dude floating through space, or a conquistador, or a doctor. these are just a series of metaphors for an abstract level of communication that is immaculately structured; One soul's struggle to deal with attachment. it's beautiful.
we don't need to make games like the fountain. the fountain has no literal level of continuity, which is why it confuses the fuck out of people. what games do need is a literal level and an abstract level; what they have now is a literal level that meanders in random directions.
also. the games you listed, as far as i can tell from which of them i've played, are lacking in the element i'm preaching. these are good games, but the elements are not structured in a story sense; the events are pointless. shadow of the colossus is GORGEOUS, and the game play is fun. the story, however, is poor. in fact, it's virtually non-existent. while meaning can be drawn from this game (which is rare among games at all), the statement could have been made in a fraction of the game. quite frankly, i got tired of killing one colossus after another.
I don't mean to take away from the wonderful qualities that all of the incredibly tallented people out there are putting into games. i'm just suggesting that they're lacking story structure, and until we include this, games aren't going to be nearly as good as they could be (by half)
for clarification, i should have posted this article on story as well (which takes another piss at W.O.W):
http://www.videogamewoes.com/articles/story.htm
Then again, I guess that depends on how you want to play the game. I play more for the pvp elements. So I guess both sides are valid.
an btw has anyone mentioned Bioshock? Really immersive atmosphere and story. Even though it is just one game I guess atleast one company is headed in the right driection.
I love the worlds of Dungeons and Dragons, and other pen and paper RPG's. I used to want to play with my friends, run campaigns even, or join someone else's.
The problem was "Ale and Whores Syndrome". All the players wanted was to beat some fictional monster senseless, get some loot, and spend it on (also fictional) ale and whores. The better game sessions had real ale, but still no whores in sight. I had an interesting campaign roughly fleshed out once, that took the players to a new world with some interesting dynamics, and history, etc. However I nearly had to force them into events, and wound up cutting the whole thing short because I was sick of dealing with my players. Two reasons for this: A: I wasn't that good a GM. B: Anytime they had a "you see a <blank>" they responded with "Kill it!"
The settings provided in the Dungeons and Dragons universe easily allow for deep, out of player context and in player context for that matter, soul searching, questioning, and philosophical debate in an abstract manner. (especially planescape) However It would be very hard to find players for something like that.
I don't play MMO's because I find a long drawn out game of statistics and virtual running to be extremely boring. I have little want for interpersonal interaction when its simply to kill a larger mob, who will respawn anyway in somewhere between 1 and 300 minutes. This is one thing I did like about tabletops. When the Great Red Dragon of Terror was slain. It was f'in slain. The next adventure group to penetrate its Mountain of Doom, didn't sit down in the depths for hours so they could kill it again and hopefully get a rare drop, no, there was no second group, BECAUSE THE THING WAS DEAD!
As for story and games, thats a whole other conversation.
The thing is innovation is great. Its wonderful. We SHOULD push our medium as far as we can, but if you're spending millions of dollars of someone else's money, they aren't going to care how sublime your game is unless a few hundred thousand or more drooling slobs can also appreciate the sublimity enough to shell out $50 each.
Remember, many great, and "innovative" artists died poor, and were virtually unknown in their own lifetime.
Ged - thanks! i'm sorry, what? the theory is that there are violent video games because computers are good at violence? i don't follow. I'll take a look at facade soon.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah we have alot of games that focus almost completely on action events, driving cars, planes, shooting things, hitting things, kicking things, building things. Do we have any games about that focus just as much on action as on aspects of human relations, imagine being able to talk to your team mates in call of duty and have them respond with reasonable well thought out answers...we are miles away from that kind of AI...but we can do explosions and guns and good looking humans even, wow and we can do them well! Its because computers are good at that stuff, computers simulate mathematical events like bullet trajectories or the shine on someones skin, they dont calculate things like friendship, social resoponsibility, even the consequences of your actions in games are often very very shallow...how many times have you shot a character in the head and nobody in the whole game cares? I think ferg is right, games are just beginning to grow as an art form.