Clint Hocking lead off the Game Designer Rants with a properly incediary statement early on: "I think, if you broke it down pound for pound we are the most creative fucking industry in the world." Of course usually such statements come with a caveat, and this one was no exception. Clint then went on to ask, - Why can't we make a game that means something? - Why don't we ever learn from smaller games? - Why isn't Call of Duty about Duty? - Why isn't Medal of Honor about Honor? - What if you could box honor? How cool would that be?
Hocking's main point was that the industry is not lacking in creativity. Rather, it's lacking in the courage to create emotionally compelling experiences. Hocking then proceeded to talk about how two indie games, "The Marriage" and "Passage" were able to create compelling emotions in players without any fancy technology or high budget gimickry.
He also took the industry to task for being able to model the mechanics of things like rope physics, but not being able to model the mechanics of things like trust.
Not to be outdone, Jonathon Mak confused the hell out of everyone by releasing a bunch of baloons into the audience, then running from stage and forcing Kim Swift to give an impromptu speech. If that sounds vague, that's because that's about the extent of what I understood happening. I'm pretty sure there was a clever point hidden in this part of the rant that went way over my head.
Jane McGonigal ranted next. Essentially, her point was that games are fine, the problem is that reality sucks. She then criticized game designers for not doing more to fix reality.
She pointed out that there were four keys to happiness: - Having satisfying work - The experience of being good at something - Being part of something greater - Spending time with people you like
She then pointed out that many games do all of these, whereas sometimes in life we only get a couple of these. She also pointed out that many people live depressing lives of terrible terrible sadness, and for them, games are the highest quality of life.
McGonigal suggested that games are the ultimate happiness engine, and that as game designers, we should be putting forward our knowledge to make the world a nicer place. For instance, what if you could make running as addictive as a MMORPG? Wouldn't that be positive?
Next up ranting was Chris Hecker, who was presented a "Duct tape award" for his famous (perhaps infamous?) rant last year. Hecker's rant can be pretty succintly summarized by one of the things he said:
If you dont have anything nice to say, dont say it at all = bullshit
Essentially, Hecker's point was that expressing (thoughtful) opionions forcefully is of paramount importance, and it's incredibly important to be truthful even if that does hurt some people's feelings. I got the impression that Hecker was a bit stung by the reception his last rant had, which is somewhat unfortunate because he's a fantastic ranter and I hope he doesn't water down his future rants.
Jenova Chen ranted about the need for games to be more mature ("mature" in the literature sense, not in the beach volleyball sense.) Chen suggested that while games are more engaging and satisfying, they are not particularly much better than toys at this point. But they could be.
Daniel James was the final ranter, and his rant was rather entertaining but for the most part very positive, which is why I forgot most of it. One example he talked about that seemed rather poignant was a story about a grandma playing puzzle pirates with her grandkids, instead of sitting alone watching TV as would've otherwise happened. As in, games can be a positive social influence.
Southwest Gaming Expo
