Here at the Games-Learning-Society Conference in Madison, Wisconsin there has been a lot of discussion and presentations related to how games and education should mix. We’ve got your standard games and education evangelists (like Jim Gee, Katie Salen, Eric Zimmerman, etc…), a plethora of academics presenting research, and a few folks like me who mainly design games. The conference seems to be part pep rally, part best practices, part mingle fest, with not enough attention given to “how to talk to school administration about putting games into the classroom” and “when and when not games should be used in the classroom.” The conference center was designed by Frank Lloyd Wright (and it shows, truly special architecture) and so I’m worried he’s rolling in his grave as I never heard a single person mention form has to meet function in game design (especially for education). That’s really my only criticism at the moment, on the whole the conference was a joy to attend. I’ll post more in the coming days about specific lectures and the conference highlights.
Archive for the 'Opinion' Category
Live From Madison: A First Impression Response to the GLS Conference
Published by July 11th, 2008 in Current Events and Opinion. 0 CommentsThe new issue of the Escapist has an essay by Jason Rohrer in which he outlines his hopes and dreams for the future of games. Though the piece is wide-ranging, the core of his argument is that the problem with the industry is actually that most developers put gameplay first, trumping whatever artistic visions the creators might have had. According to Rohrer, in order to elevate games to a form of ‘high art’ it’s going to take putting the gameplay, as defined by the mechanics of a game, in service of the expressive potential of games, instead of rehashing old genres and slapping on any theme that comes to mind.
Greg Costikyan has compiled a list of who he believes to be the most influential game designers (across all mediums) over on Play This Thing.
Seems like he did it off the top of his head, and he admits that it’s North America-centric, but it’s already being extended in the comments. There’s one name that should be familiar to all of us, and a couple of omissions that I can think of. For instance, why have Hideki Kamiya but not Shinji Mikami? Where are all athletic designers, like Dr. James Naismith, who created Basketball?
Whatever it’s deficiencies, it’s a fun exercise and everyone should jump in with their own contributions!
How do games create meaning?
This is the question that is at the core of some the most prevalent, heated, and often exhausting debates in the game development community. Arguments over the place of storytelling in games, or whether or not games can be considered ‘art’. I believe that the search for an answer partly fuels the popularity of games from Metal Gear Solid to Passage and is the primary cause of what Eric Zimmerman calls our “cinema-envy”.
Now, no one is questioning that games can be meaningful. There are plenty of games that produce highly emotional states, in both players and spectators. It’s also commonsense that all games foster certain types of behavior, from Football’s reliance on the division of labor to Starcraft’s multi-tasking.
In this case though, the question is less about psychology and more about semiotics. We’re very familiar with how words and pictures create meaning, how they signify a thing. If I show you a picture of an orange or the word ‘orange’, a signifier, depending on your level of literacy you’ll be able to figure out what I’m trying to communicate, the signified fruit.
However, is there a way a game can signify something without the aid of pictures or words?
Not all that.
My best friend was visiting me for a few days last week and while he was here I did something that I haven’t done in a long time, and something that I’ve never really done right: I watched someone else play a video game.
A little advice for all the ITP students taking Frank Lantz’s into game design class: the easiest way to quickly design a game is to simply take an object, hold it in your hand, and then say the name of the object aloud. Finally — and this is key — add the letter “O” to the end of the name of the object (and possibly an exclamation mark!). Example: pick up a coin, say the name and then add an “O” to get: Coin-O! Viola… you have yourself a game. It’s that easy. Now just playtest it.
My Theory for a Formula for Writing Narrative for Electronic Games
Published by January 16th, 2008 in Opinion. 4 CommentsStart by preheating your preferred game console to cooking temperature. In a bowl, mix one part elements that cannot be controlled and are building towards plot points (the moments the story is hinged) and ultimately the climax; add another part simulation in an open world that incorporates elements that must be monitored and balanced by the player; add one cup of a singular, well-defined and unique character for the player to control; and finally mix in some originality. Avoid dialogue and cut scenes. When in doubt, add blood but strive to use healthier ingredients whenever possible. Bake without worrying as to quality of graphics, but do monitor playability through user testing. Makes multiple servings if done well and should leave player thinking about the game mechanics AND the story long after the console has been turned off.
Easier said than cooked.
David Jaffe joined many others recently in calling for a ‘one console’ world. In other words, a single system or standard which anyone could develop for and which many different manufacturers could produce, instead of the plethora of competing standards we have now, from the Playstation 2 to the XBox 360.
The analogy usually made is to home video, where there are quite few different companies that make DVD players but all of them play DVDs. The present format war between Blu-Ray and HD-DVD is an argument both for and against this possibility in the gaming industry. It points to the fact that format wars are inevitable in this day and age, even in a highly stable and established market. However it also shows that format wars are dumb.
Whenever anyone makes a case for the benefits of a one console industry, the counter-argument is almost always that it “simply isn’t going to happen”. The present situation is too entrenched to ever change. Occasionally someone will make a cogent rebuttal, perhaps citing the need for competition to drive innovation, but the truth of the matter is that it’s generally agreed that one set-top box to rule them all would be better for everyone. As Chris Kohler of Wired pointed out though, none of the industry heavyweights wants to be the first to blink.
There is a distinct possibility however that both sides are missing the point. There will never, even in the distant future, be only one console because in the not-to-distant future the idea of a ‘console’ may disappear entirely.
Stop talking about “value”. I don’t care if you paid $50 for the game or picked it up for $5 in the bargain bin. The idea that you are going to factor in some kind of “units of fun per dollar spent” ratio into your analysis of the game just makes you sound like an idiot.
Games are not pistachio nuts. Fun is not a commodity. The actual cost of a game is the time, attention, and effort necessary to learn it, become proficient at it, and navigate through it. This cost far outweighs any monetary consideration. If you haven’t noticed there is an infinite supply of free games. I’m not looking for inexpensive ways to keep myself occupied while waiting for death, I’m looking for games that don’t steal 50 hours of my life and then leave me feeling like I’ve just woken up from a shit sauna.
In general, games are too expensive. A few games are exorbitantly expensive and may not be worth the price. But no game is worth playing because it’s a bargain. I have heard several game-of-the-year wrap-ups in which the Orange Box, for example, has been praised for being a great value. Really? This information is relevant when considering which games were the best games of the year? What if you were deciding which games to send out into space as the ultimate example of human intelligence and creative expression? Would you give the nod to the game that left you with enough extra cash to buy a Big Mac and a pair of socks? No? Well then, please extend to me the same courtesy you would show to a fucking alien whose only interest in humanity is cheap labor and a delicious source of protein. Tell me which games are good, and why, I’ll decide whether or not to buy them. Thanks!
COMMENTS