tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post4485126999542176758..comments2023-05-20T12:08:52.031+02:00Comments on In The Games Of Madness: The Player - the artist?Frictional Gameshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00278352641328669040noreply@blogger.comBlogger47125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-1791410103020279272011-06-30T21:17:32.514+02:002011-06-30T21:17:32.514+02:00Great discussion opener. I am currently writing my...Great discussion opener. I am currently writing my IRP on the same topic. The ludology vs narratology discussion is fascinating, and I do not believe we can accept some of the Extra Credits analysis of other mediums in opposition to videogames. Plainly speaking, a book, once created, has no need for a reader: the text cannot exist without a reader. Fine it can in its material form, but it needs the reader to be complete as much as the game needs the player. Both mediums (and this can incorporate cinema) are a form of controlled interactivity. The text I read will never change in its material, but what I take from it, how I interpret it, how I read it (do i skip, do i meticulously read every word, what I choose to assign meaning to, what I read between the lines, what allusions I pick out) will always be different from how others read it, different also in the sense that I may assign a message or meaning that the author never intended to be there. This interactivity passes over to videogames. My choice is an illusion, sure I can choose different approaches to how I play the game, but this is not inexhaustible. My choices are only such because the game allows me to do something, I am still controlled by the game, controlled by my avatar. Sonic needs me to complete the game, I am under his control, he desires to get to the end and I have to comply with his wishes and get him there...and if I idle, he will look at me and remind me that I need to play. We buy games to play them, but once we acknowledge the game when we press start, the game plays us (press start to play is a command, not a choice, if we wish to play the game).Dino Braticnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-39753672224250723632011-06-26T19:40:11.910+02:002011-06-26T19:40:11.910+02:00"then there are people like TLO and WhiteRa w...<i>"then there are people like TLO and WhiteRa who make an art of the game just as much as any martial artist makes an art of their pursuit of understanding and mastering conflict resolution."</i><br /><br />But this is a different kind of art - not the art of creating a story-rich, emotionally engaging game.<br />Their art takes the game as a tool, and does something new and compelling and unexpected with it. But, if an artist is inspired, you can get artworks made using the most mundane things - like, I don't know, just household items, or some junk. <br /><br />Is everyone who uses these things an artist? No. <br /><br />Are these things made with the intention of being a part of an art-piece? No.<br /><br />Are the artist that designed a poster, and the artist that decided to use that poster in his own artwork co-creators?<br />What about that vine bottle the other guy used? Or that picture frame he decided to put into his composition?<br />Does this makes them co-creators?<br />Not really - because their intentions were completely different and unrelated.<br /><br />Should games be made to require this kind of artistic approach in order to play? No - because then only, like, 2% of the world population could truly enjoy a game. <br /><br />Games aren't tools, they are virtual, interactive adventures.<br />I mean, you can take a book, and create performance of it, have an actor read it out loud, you can set up a big screen with inspiring animations and awesome atmospheric music, and enjoy it yourself along with other audience, but this is not that book anymore, this is something else. The book was not meant for this, you don't write a book so that it could be made into a movie or a theatrical performance - your primary intention is to tell a story. Otherwise, why choose a book as a medium in the first place.<br />Similarly, you don't make games so that someone could perfect their gameplay skills into a work of art - your primary goal is different. And if some player does that, nothing is changed, and this is no longer the same art.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-58924085541941040942011-06-26T18:27:40.819+02:002011-06-26T18:27:40.819+02:00I think you need to go more into what being an art...I think you need to go more into what being an artist is. Drawing a sword is not, inherently, a form of art. It is just pulling a piece of sharp steel out of a sheath - but put that same steel and sheath in the hands of an Iado master and you will see something beautiful and artistic to drawing a sword. <br />By the same token, you could take any action and say it is not artistic - but the way in which someone does the thing and the finely honed skill involved can make it a thing of artistic beauty. <br />In the StarCraft II example someone mentioned in the comments - there are people who play the game, then there are people like TLO and WhiteRa who make an art of the game just as much as any martial artist makes an art of their pursuit of understanding and mastering conflict resolution. <br />Not everyone who draws on paper or slaps paint on a canvas is creating art or is an artist - art requires a level of passion and mastery and a player who achieves both and who contributes to the whole of the experience (how many people tried mass raven build after seeing TLO do it, or started incorporating Warp Gates in every match having watch Husky's videos?) is, IMHO, most certainly an artist.The Editorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16819406304563395609noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-40059082812785127832011-06-25T19:52:47.350+02:002011-06-25T19:52:47.350+02:00" [...] for if a tree falls in a forest and n...<i>" [...] for if a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it does it make a sound?"</i><br />Hell yeah! It does. :D<br />That's just the typical egocentric standpoint our species is so keen to take. We believe that the world begins and ends with us...<br />But, you're right: an <i>experience</i> is meant for an audience.<br />So in that context, I agree...<br /><br /><i>"If we are not to think of them as artists we must instead consider them the paint."</i><br /><br />That's actually pretty well put.<br />But a developer must not forget that this is the kind of paint that might misbehave, and add it's own touch to the painting. It is important to conceptualize the project with this in mind from the start - and I think that's the mid-line between the two opposing views; it's also worth noting that neither one of these views is too far from that line.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-52629011798077660032011-06-25T18:45:58.654+02:002011-06-25T18:45:58.654+02:00I Think I am partially with you.
Whereas they may ...I Think I am partially with you.<br />Whereas they may not be artists by experiencing a situation as in a game or a path through the forest they are still an integral part of the experience, for if a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it does it make a sound?<br /><br />If we are not to think of them as artists we must instead consider them the paint. The developer must manipulate the player to create the experience they want the audience to have.<br />A perfect example is in Half-life 2: episode one.<br />During the opening act of the game you step out onto a walkway. Subsequently you are shot by a combine soldier and you turn to face him. with expert timing a dropship lifts off in front of you and you watch it fly away as the combine soldier has now disappeared.<br />This manipulation of the player has led to the experience that the developer had hoped to achieve. And it is in this way that we think of the player as integral to the art as a storyteller and the paint on a canvas.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-55153147617764224742011-06-25T16:18:18.327+02:002011-06-25T16:18:18.327+02:00"When they went on to the Escapist they [Extr..."When they went on to the Escapist they [ExtraCredits] started getting gradually worse."<br /><br />I disagree. Maybe you are biased :P<br />In any case, their ideas may seem a bit abstract at times, but they present valid points, striving to get you to think about various game-dev topics. They never claim they are The All-knowing Gods of Game Development.<br />I think what they are doing is very valuable.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-20909666299666862562011-06-25T16:11:35.593+02:002011-06-25T16:11:35.593+02:00Other than the unnecessary, uncalled-for trolling,...Other than the unnecessary, uncalled-for trolling, what is the point of that last comment?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-72255474796615971982011-06-25T13:58:10.176+02:002011-06-25T13:58:10.176+02:00"...if we do not take care and use the words ..."...if we do not take care and use the words properly they will start to loose meaning"<br /><br />Oh the irony. So very much irony.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-21377149066006326902011-06-25T05:35:17.852+02:002011-06-25T05:35:17.852+02:00Your comments are 100% spot on. As for Extra Credi...Your comments are 100% spot on. As for Extra Credits, when they started on Youtube (kirithem) they were excellent. When they went on to the Escapist they started getting gradually worse. This video on "the player as artist" is (so far) the culminating example of how they follow whatever "new" theory is said at the GDC that has already been considered and debunked by videogame thinkers 5 or more years prior.<br />- QAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-51376359277575093662011-06-25T04:40:15.617+02:002011-06-25T04:40:15.617+02:00http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/edit...http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/editorials/misc/8976-Extra-Credits-Addendum-Discussing-the-Role-of-the-Player<br /><br />The article is up.<br /><br />James PortnowAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-27202236229902477582011-06-25T03:40:51.307+02:002011-06-25T03:40:51.307+02:00This was incredibly difficult to read due to a num...This was incredibly difficult to read due to a number of errors or wording that doesn't flow well. Specifically in the second paragraph of the conclusion.<br /><br /><br />"... shape the direction we choose we take the design of videogames."<br />"... we should not think of the activity of experiencing it..."<br />"If we want make games..."<br /><br />It really detracts from what you're saying when your audience needs to keep stopping to try figure out what you're saying.<br /><br />That being said, you have good points and it was interesting.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-38213431158600384442011-06-24T01:22:44.412+02:002011-06-24T01:22:44.412+02:00:D
Words are means to meaning.
Well, yeah, OK - b...:D <br />Words are means to meaning.<br />Well, yeah, OK - but people generally tend to throw that word around, twisting it as they please - so academic paper or not, when someone actually starts talking about science/research in terms of a well established theory, your average layman dismisses all of the profound implications of the study, just because of their (miss)interpretation that word. Or even worse, when politics/religion/pseudoscience/what-not starts to exploit this tendency - like when creationists say the evolution is "just a theory", hoping to portray something that has central role in many modern life sciences, and even in our lives (trust me, it does - if you ever got sick, for example), as something not even marginally well established.<br />Well, people - Newton's <i>theory</i> of gravitation, the one that makes your house/building stable, or that makes satellites possible, is "just a theory". It's a model of reality. As such, it applies only if certain conditions hold. It can't explain every gravitation-related phenomena. There's a beter, more recent, encompassing theory that does that - ask Einstein :D.<br />And even that theory blows up in certain places. Like in the center of a black hole... <br />We don't know everything, but theories - models of reality - that we make, have a <i>well defined domain</i>. These are constantly questioned and improved upon, and are asked to endure the test of time.<br /><br />P.S. Whatever they post at the Escapist, could you (or someone) post the link here?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-3908076610316658002011-06-23T21:39:58.340+02:002011-06-23T21:39:58.340+02:00Anonymous:
Ah yeah sorry :)
I actually DO use hypo...Anonymous:<br />Ah yeah sorry :)<br />I actually DO use hypothesis in pretty much all blog posts :)<br /><br />Although, one could also argue that we were just using it in the casual sense, in which I think it is fitting. Comments are not academic papers after all ;)Thomashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02945983378935089787noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-56185407914179338712011-06-23T18:24:24.452+02:002011-06-23T18:24:24.452+02:00A slight correction:
Quote: "As you said, rig...A slight correction:<br />Quote: <i>"As you said, right now all this is just theory."</i> (Thomas)<br /><br />If you wanna go down the scientific path - here meaning a methodical, exploration-based approach towards knowledge and deep understanding:<br />all is just a <i>hypothesis</i> - there's no such thing as "just a theory" in science. There is nothing above theory in science - it is the end goal. Scientific use of the word "theory" is not the same as in a colloquial setting.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-35216487635033127282011-06-23T14:46:26.778+02:002011-06-23T14:46:26.778+02:00"but rather about exploring a narrative with ..."but rather about exploring a narrative with a player. No matter how constricted, we are laying out a space of possibility rather than a conventional narrative, and no matter how linear we make our games there are details that the player must fill in."<br /><br />100% agree with this. Especially with the first sentence. A game is more of an exploration of a narrative space and the more we realize this the better narratives we can have in game. <br /><br />I think our biggest disagreement lies in how to approach this. I think that we can learn a lot from other media, not be replicating what they do, but by looking "under the hood" of the audience and see how that can be expanded. I argue that people watching movies, reading books are already doing substantial work and that we can simply take this to the level (again, not be the kind of "cinematic" games or whatnot that is common in the mainstream).<br /><br />You seem to think that approaching the process of an author is the way to go as the work the player is doing is essentially a distilled version of telling a story. This is something I still disagree with, but you have made me think a lot more about it. Also, I am might be terribly wrong about this, so I think it is very good that you explore another as path. As you said, right now all this is just theory.Thomashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02945983378935089787noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-24338269606960888532011-06-23T13:43:52.516+02:002011-06-23T13:43:52.516+02:00@Thomas
My fault entirely. I was trying to respon...@Thomas<br />My fault entirely. I was trying to respond on my phone while running between meetings ; )<br /><br />I totally missed a few posts scrolling up and down on my 3 inch display.<br /><br />Onto the heart of the matter!<br /><br />Well put! I'm willing to agree with the idea that the player is part of the narrative crafting but that they may not be replicating the exact experience of the storyteller. In fact I think you're right on, I think they're doing something unique for our medium, but I think the closest analog is the storyteller and that we, as game designers, are remiss if we concentrate only on our part of the narrative crafting without regards to this player act.<br /><br />Re Tetris:<br />Concession, the analogy is flawed, you're totally right. I wasn't really trying to draw the direct analogy, I was just saying that games are about distilling the most engaging parts of an experience and I feel as though they do that with narrative crafting as well.<br /><br />As to the last part:<br />Here I still have to disagree, but such is the great thing about theory...<br /><br />I don't think we can think any longer about presenting our narrative to an audience, but rather about exploring a narrative with a player. No matter how constricted, we are laying out a space of possibility rather than a conventional narrative, and no matter how linear we make our games there are details that the player must fill in. <br /><br />If we try to do otherwise, we simply draw closer and closer to emulating film. And the world does not need a lesser form of film (because we will always be worse at providing a filmlike experience than cinema).<br /><br />To me we must even rethink the word "audience" because it implies that one is merely audient rather than participatory - that one observes rather than interacts - and this is not the player at all.<br /><br />James Portnow<br /><br />P.S. This was a great. It was really interesting to me because in most cases when talking design with designers, we talk it through, hash it out and then come away with a revised and hopefully improved set of ideas, but since this was really a discussion about how to conceptualize the player I'm not sure there is as clear a line. I respect everything you said, and it certainly made me tighten my thinking/drill down on some of the ideas, but fundamentally I think they're just two fundamentally different, but perhaps equally valid ways to understand the player from the designer's perspective.<br /><br />I'm going to pass this to the escapist guys, but if there's anything you want to add, just throw it on or jump in the forums when it's up!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-14537282444763590242011-06-23T12:21:25.178+02:002011-06-23T12:21:25.178+02:00Video games are actually very similar to other for...Video games are actually very similar to other forms of media like music and books. For the designer to cater to the audience is no different than popular culture music catering to the mass. Rebecca Black and her Friday song was horrid, but believe it or not it made many sales through iTunes. Does that make it a good song? It was not good, but because it sold, others tried to follow the same example. That is the last thing I hope Frictional Games would do, cater to the masses and make generic games.<br /><br />Game studies and developers, should make games in what they are good at and explore new areas in their art. Similar to like writing a book, I find that good books are the ones that know when to end rather than making a sequel after a sequel. Harry Potter may cater to the audience and have many books, similar to your modern CoD4 rehash or Pirates of the Carribean, but many Stephen King books are short and provide a unique experience. I'd really like to see Frictional Games experiment with different forms of gameplay, graphics and storytelling. A game does not even need to have the best graphics to give the scare, I'm sure in some cases shoddier graphics (like the Legend of Zelda Shadow Temple) work quite well.<br /><br />Some of the best twists in stories include the Sixth Sense and especially Stephen King's "The Dead Zone." I'd really like to see these kinds of stories mixed into a horror game. There is always the psychological movies to study as mediums and implement into video games. I would recommend them to read and come up with newer ideas that have no been explored and see how far it could take them. Perhaps the audience may not enjoy it, but at least it will be fun and creative for the designer. If it's good, it will eventually be noticed.Ghosthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17073858318652676102noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-8425195205625024792011-06-22T09:09:35.302+02:002011-06-22T09:09:35.302+02:00James:
Yeah, you are correct about the roster thin...James:<br />Yeah, you are correct about the roster thingie and I was wrong. I actually said so in an earlier comment a few steps up too :) (yeah I know easy to miss, blogger comments are not best of discussions forums...)<br /><br />I also want to say that I do think that players are part in creating a story. So agree there. But I disagree that the process is just like an artistic storyteller, I argue instead that it is quite unlike that and more like the activity of experiencing other media, just that it is much more powerful, because of interactivity.<br /><br />And regarding Tetris & farm analogies:<br />Yeah are correct, Tetris is not at all like stacking boxes. And the reason for this is that it has not strives to be like a box stacking experience. Same with farming. You do not create a videogame about farming with the goal of making it as much as real farming as possible. And in the same way, you do not make the player emulate the work of a "normal" storyteller, but you strive for other goals instead. <br /><br />However, I think the analogy is flawed. Because creating a game about a story is not the same as creating a game about a story teller. If you were to create a game where the player had the role of, say screenwriter, then I have to agree that you can view the player as a kind of artist, and try to distill that experience. <br /><br />However, that is not what most videogames try to do. The goal is to put the player in a virtual world and make them have the most immersive and powerful experience in that world based on certain characteristics setup by the designer(s). I do not think it is helpful to think of the player as a storyteller in this kind of situation. Instead the player is very much an audience and given input from player, the video game's job is to create the most compelling narrative possible, within the preset framework of the of intended experience. Sure the player decides a lot of things during the journey through the game, but does so given his/her role inside the virtual world, not in the role of a co-storyteller.<br /><br />And again, I think this is important because it puts all the responsibility on the author (the game designer) to provide depth and meaning. Sure, the player also has responsibility, more than in most other media, to try and immerse him-/herself as much as possible in the experience. But doing so, they can only get as much out of the experience as put in by author.<br /><br />Yeah, very fun that decided to respond! I have gotten some more stuff to think about for sure. And no problem if you repost this at the escapist.Thomashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02945983378935089787noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-15955849481214998572011-06-22T01:38:41.482+02:002011-06-22T01:38:41.482+02:00@Thomas
I still have the same issues:
Creating a r...@Thomas<br />I still have the same issues:<br />Creating a roster of characters is like creating a roster of paints. The thing creating the constraints is not actually the generative force behind the art.<br /><br />We don't deny authors the title of artists simply because they work within defined rules of grammar and vocabulary, nor do we argue against western musicians being artists simply because they work in a scale with 12 semitones.<br /><br />In terms of pen and paper RP, no, I think the player should be the player, but if you think the Dungeon Master is the only one telling the story there I'd have to bitterly disagree.<br /><br />As far as the artistic experience goes, I think that you extrapolate too far in saying that because it can be boring it must be boring. Stacking blocks is boring. Tetris is not boring. Running a farm isn't always fun, but Harvest Moon is fun. Getting shot at I'd imagine is generally a bummer (though arguably more exciting than the other two) but Call of Duty is fun. Games are about taking experiences that aren't necessarily always engaging in real life and distilling the amazing bits.<br /><br />Best,<br />JP<br /><br />P.S. This discussion's been a blast. Would you mind if I asked the escapist if they wanted to post it (with a link to your blog)?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-74318855097321691002011-06-21T21:19:24.007+02:002011-06-21T21:19:24.007+02:00@Thomas:
I hope you read this - it's a bit off...@Thomas:<br />I hope you read this - it's a bit off topic, but I just think it's good to throw the idea out there.<br />I think it's a good idea to explore further what breaks immersion.<br />There are the obvious things - something that is inconsistent with the game world, or that doesn't make any sense, or that prevents fluent gameplay.<br />But get this - in Amnesia, while your regular player wont, for example, feel that the (unrealistic/unnatural) first person camera movement in the initial stumble through/wake-up sequence breaks the immersion (or at least, prevents the immersion to happen faster), a player with more developed observation skills will - although the game is likely to be forgiven for this.<br />Who are these "observant people"? Game devs, actors, painters, writers, scientists, or just regular people with this kind of talent.<br />The point is that for both (broad/blurry) categories, attention to this kind of detail will make the game that much better and more immersive, although some of them will not realize it.<br /><i>Especially</i> if this detail is somehow related to some aspect of human behavior, because we are all good at recognizing that, even if only at an subconscious level.<br />That's why these things are hard to fake (e.g. facial expressions - the most prominent example).<br /><br />Which brings me to my point:<br />Why not devise dev tools that help achieve realism? <br />Relatively simple tools with specialized tasks?<br /><br />Take the camera example: instead of scripting it with - look here for X ms -> then there for Y ms -> and then there for Z ms, why not load up the scene in a tool, maybe setup some initial overall motion, and then <i>record</i> camera rotation, while using the mouse to rotate it? Then maybe tweak things a bit, optimize and save to a file.<br />And then do something like: PlayCameraAnim("wakeUp.cam").<br /><br />This is an affordable approach that could give your game an increased level of realism, and better immersion. <br /><br />Or check this our: you know how people, when they feel scared and unprotected, tend to "keep their head low"? Or how they "walk toll" when they accomplish something? What if you incorporated this into Amnesia, making the camera only slightly lower when the player is supposed to feel danger (not talking about the crouch/crawl state here)? It's so subtle no one would notice, yet subconsciously it would make the player feel small, insignificant, weak, threatened.<br />Or if the camera got a bit higher when the player solved a puzzle - the feel-good/walk-tall moment? That would, for example, make it possible for you to make that puzzle-completed glow even more subtle. <br />Again, I hope you read this - it's an interesting thing to explore, and you're in position to do so.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-57640593443730188952011-06-21T19:09:55.266+02:002011-06-21T19:09:55.266+02:00Been thinking and me saying that a player needs to...Been thinking and me saying that a player needs to create the characters in order to be an artist is not correct. You can have a pre-made set characters, environment, etc and still be an artistic storyteller. <br /><br />The whole difference lies in how the story comes about. For the player there is a flow, gets event thrown at him/her and he/she acts as if inside the virtual world. The goal of the player is to become immersed. An artistic story teller does often not have a fluent experience when creating, makes up events and "acts" depending on what is best for the narrative.<br /><br />Not sure if anybody is still reading comments, but now I at least corrected myself :)Thomashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02945983378935089787noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-66965366555435835762011-06-21T14:08:01.142+02:002011-06-21T14:08:01.142+02:00(continued)
Consider when you yourself are playing...(continued)<br />Consider when you yourself are playing a game. Don't you catch yourself sometimes contemplating over some in-game detail, letting your imagination go wild, even though the developers didn't really thought much of that detail, it just happened to be there?<br />In SH4, there's a time when you end up on the lake-shore. They intended it to be creepy, and the aria was dark and gloomy, but otherwise nor very inspired. However, to me, the scene was somehow endlessly sad. To me, the lake was a symbol of life, of nature, of a world that is not concerned with our human mischiefs. Of a place that was once beautiful, but that is now corrupted with evil that probably human's caused in the first place. A symbol of innocent victims. I have similar feelings about war - in the sense similar to WarCraft 3 FMV: "Remnants of the war scar the land".<br />What if the developers had predicted that the image of a lake can produce such strong feelings? What if they decided to enrich that area with a bunch of subtle details that would contrast the lost beauty and peace with the horrors that are there now? What if they told Akira: "Hey, this is a perfect place for a troubled tune"?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-60011269014879867562011-06-21T14:07:32.724+02:002011-06-21T14:07:32.724+02:00RE: @Thomas:
"But I do think the example hold...RE: @Thomas:<br /><i>"But I do think the example holds in principle: what if we can have a videogame that was as open and interactive as football, yet carried more meaningful depth. This is actually one of the ways we are thinking about our upcoming game :)"</i><br /><br />Then it ceases to be a sport/sandbox/whatever game and becomes something more - but not necessarily a storytelling effort yet (although it can be that too). <br />And, though I don't think a classic football videogame is very open or interactive, but rather constrained, I get your point.<br />It is an interesting area to explore, but I think that one has to be very careful and meticulous. It's because then, instead of a few clear rules and goals, the player would be suddenly faced with a world of possibilities, and if the game doesn't provide adequate guidance, gameplay would suffer. Especially because this guidance should be so subtle the player wouldn't even know it's there. But if done right, this could really make the difference. It requires rich mechanics, far beyond anything we've seen before.<br /><br />I think the way to go to provide this richness is not by trying to simulate the world in all it's complexity, but to have a relatively small number of core mechanics that can somehow combine/interact in a multitude of ways, providing a wide variety of possibilities. And these should be made very game-specific, if they are to have meaning, instead of being just a generic way of doing something in a game.<br /><br />Wow. That is so abstract <i>I</i> don't even know what I'm talking about. But it's somewhere along these lines: Extra Credits has a video where they talk about including "the writer" from the very start of the development process - having the story in mind from the beginning. The key there is that the developers should investigate what are the key emotional aspects of the story, regardless whether it's a smallest detail or something of major significance, and then be ready to prepare very specific code that would support these. <br /><br /><br /><i>"And "artistic aspect" kind of implies artists? Is not "creative aspect" better? Or is it just me messing up terms again :) "</i><br /><br />You're probably right. "Creative" is more general, and probably more appropriate.<br /><br />I think you nailed it with this:<br /><i>"The experience of viewing art is not like this, and nor do I want it to be. I want it to be a fluent experience, not necessarily fun and exciting all the time, but it should not be grueling monotone work. "</i><br /><br />I'm just saying that those players who have an artistic streak should not be ignored. Why? Well, if you invest your time and money into enriching your game with elements that provide opportunities for "filling the gap", but that most of your players won't even notice or understand, may seem like a waste. Thus it seems reasonable to focus only on more general ways of communication. But, this "hidden" richness will mean a world to the minority that "has the eye" for it. It will make your game into something magnificent. <i>And</i> some of those who missed it for the first time will maybe come back to the game when they become more experienced or developed, and then they will find this hidden value. People will talk on forums/and blogs how great this game is because of these subtle statements it makes, and people will come back to it to see for themselves.<br />The game will have a lasting value.<br />At least, the way I see it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-59941003302555885052011-06-21T09:39:38.818+02:002011-06-21T09:39:38.818+02:00Anonymous:
Yeah, I agree. While football can be ex...Anonymous:<br />Yeah, I agree. While football can be exciting it not really meaningful in the way we want to progress the videogame medium. But I do think the example holds in principle: what if we can have a videogame that was as open and interactive as football, yet carried more meaningful depth. This is actually one of the ways we are thinking about our upcoming game :)<br /><br />And "artistic aspect" kind of implies artists? Is not "creative aspect" better? Or is it just me messing up terms again :)Thomashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02945983378935089787noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9193968969153274146.post-64352227219378209482011-06-21T09:35:24.929+02:002011-06-21T09:35:24.929+02:00Regarding characters:
Well, the designers do make ...Regarding characters:<br />Well, the designers do make a roster of characters and the same applies for an rpg. Even if the all characters were randomly generated, I would still say the designers are the ones creating the characters. <br />The way I see it, the only way the players can have be artist in this sense is if they have a character creation menu for all major characters of the game, or if they write the algorithms that control the random generation.<br /><br />Regarding player as story teller:<br />If I get you correctly, and speaking in p&p rpg terms, then your goal would be for the player to become the dungeon master? Instead, I think that the role of dungeon master should be the computer, that is what I consider the goal of the interactive storytelling.<br /><br />Examining the brain state would be really interesting, btw. I wonder if these kind of processes are not too complex for current tech though. But nonetheless, would be interesting to see what areas fire up. Might give some good hints.<br /><br />More on making art:<br />Another thing that I have against the player as artist thing, that I probably have not taken up, is that the state on is in when creating art is not something that I see as goal for how I want players to experience the game. <br /><br />Creating a piece of art is often struggle, and more often than not it is quite boring and monotone. It is means doing something that you are not quite sure is possible, whether it is due to your skills or just technical or physical limitations. It is quite common that your imagined goal is not possible to attain.<br /><br />The experience of viewing art is not like this, and nor do I want it to be. I want it to be a fluent experience, not necessarily fun and exciting all the time, but it should not be grueling monotone work. I also want to set up the experience in such away that I know it is possible, and know that most will, be able to receive its fullness.<br /><br />Striving for the player to be an artist seems to me like it goes against how I want games to be played.<br /><br />Sure, one can say that the player should be an artist BUT that it should still be a fluent, well-defined experienced. That I see as trying to have the cake and eating it.Thomashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02945983378935089787noreply@blogger.com