Jump to content
Posted 18 September 2000 - 10:29 AM
Posted 18 September 2000 - 11:12 AM
Posted 18 September 2000 - 02:50 PM
Original post by ahw
To camp or not to camp, that is the question.
Posted 21 September 2000 - 05:40 AM
How can you say this? This is completely illogical. Every choice you make in these story-less games changes the game. Therefore they are meaningful within the context of the game as a system.
Finally, I''ll charge you with answering the reverse of #2: Don''t rely on slippery, entirely subjective notions of what is and is not fun. What''s fun about taking away choice from the player in a game? (I suspect it''s more fun for the writer than it is for the player, btw.)
Here''s the crux of our difference: You seem to have no problem with a game that would play like a David Brin or Ian Banks novel but as a result give you little say in guiding your experience. This to me would be anathema. Without substantial choice, this would not be a game, and shouldn''t bother to call itself such. Electronic story with ocassional mouse clicking would be more appropriate.
Posted 21 September 2000 - 09:37 AM
Posted 21 September 2000 - 10:19 AM
Original post by Shinkage
Great, I''d be doing something meaningful in an abstract and meaningless system. Plus, it''s not even true that what you do in Quake and Tetris change the game. Kill some person in Quake and they respawn seconds later. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING has changed in any significant way. Score a couple rows in Tetris and what happens? The blocks just keep on falling EXACTLY like they did before. Wow, that''s meaningful for sure...
I''m going to make a wild guess here and say that you''re extremely intrigued with the upcoming game Black and White? It seems to be just along the lines of what you want. Perhaps The Sims as well?
Both these games exemplify what you seem to think is needed in games.
To be honest though, I find The Sims quite boring and I''m really not terribly interested in Black and White.
Fallout 3 though? Can''t wait.
In fact, I think games with stories are the only medium in which any choice can be given to the player at all. Like I pointed out above, how much choice does it take to mindlessly blast something in quake or score yet another row in Tetris?
With a story though it becomes an entirely different matter. You are presented with the choice between saving your wife or preventing the destruction of a city. What do you do? Now that has meaning.
I''d like to see a game that plays through like a David Brin or Ian Banks novel, but remains completely interactive and impacted by the actions of the player. This requires what seems to me to be a whole new form of writing--perhaps it could just be called non-linear writing--where the bulk of the narrative work lies on these nodal points where the story changes and the interaction between them.
Posted 26 September 2000 - 10:35 AM
Posted 26 September 2000 - 11:40 AM
Posted 26 September 2000 - 04:50 PM
Posted 27 September 2000 - 12:09 AM
Posted 27 September 2000 - 05:20 AM
Posted 27 September 2000 - 08:41 AM
Just noticed, my handle is S H I N K A G E not S H R I N K A G E. Please
First off, yes, I''m am aware that designing the kind of game I would most like to see is, for all intents and purposes, impossible. That doesn''t mean it can''t be my "ideal" game.
Ok, now, you say that games such as Quake and Tetris give you a plethora of choices, such as what move to use, or where to put a block. What I don''t understand, is why you think these choices can''t exist just as meaningfully within the context of a narrative?
There is no reason a game can not play through an epic story line and not provide the EXACT same gameplay mechanics you are evangelizing. Just think of the actual story as a sort of layer on top of the gameplay mechanics, and not something that is or should be manipulated by what you do in the game.
I concede that meaning in games is in terms of the gameplay system. I suppose getting a sniper rifle can constitute a "meaningful" action in the system of Unreal. The extent of that meaning, however, is very limited. What happens when you die?
You keep on referring me to those links like if I read them I would be speaking and thinking differently. I did not read completely through all of them, but the simple fact is that I simply did not agree with what what they said.
Posted 27 September 2000 - 08:52 AM
Original post by Landfish
There was a Tetris Plus released for the playstation, and though it sucked, it had a narrative worked in.
Posted 27 September 2000 - 12:32 PM
If you have story completely immutable and seperate, then why is it in the game? If you say to motivate the player, or to give context and importance to his actions, then we're back to square one: Making decisions which have no impact is pointless. You might as well be watching a movie and occassionally clicking your mouse.
This is some very sophistocated work, and I pointed to it because they're the writings of some pretty smart people in the field. We don't have authority figures (thank god!) but I think it would be foolish to ignore the expert work of people who have come before us.
Posted 27 September 2000 - 11:29 PM
Posted 28 September 2000 - 01:26 PM
Posted 28 September 2000 - 08:49 PM
Posted 29 September 2000 - 08:10 AM
Posted 29 September 2000 - 10:08 AM
Posted 29 September 2000 - 09:22 PM