In which I list the games I’m playing or played recently, and give brief reviews on the same.
Archive for September, 2008
My friend sent me this link:
To which I simply say, it’s about time. I’m no fan of the vapid, immature garbage that our industry produces (GTA being the poster child, AoC being the MMO example), but Thompson is just a rabid nutjob that needs to be ignored. Of course, he won’t just fade away, but at least some people in authority are calling him on his shenanigans, and his credibility should take a (well-deserved) hit.
Instancing is one of the major tools in a designer’s hands to alter the dynamics of an MMO’s world. Guild Wars embraces instancing, while EverQuest 2 eschews it. There are those who passionately flame away about the inferiority of either approach. And then there’s this:
This is really just a snippet, but looking at some of the responses, I found something interesting. One poster, “tanek”, asserts that an instanced world is a more dynamic one. Not even two hours later, “Everrest” states that a non-instanced world is more dynamic. …in the inimitable words of Inigo Montoya: “I do not think that word means what you think it means.”
I’ve mused about the lifespan of MMOs before, asking “should we be trying to keep them alive for the long run, or just treat them like any other game”? In my mind, the subscription model is built around trying to keep people playing for as long as possible. I’ve suspected that the typical MMO lifespan is more like any other offline game, with many players playing early, and a gradual decline as time goes on.
So I found this little gem in Raph’s archives:
When I design games (or pontificate about other game design), I keep a few things in mind:
- Give players choices, and give those choices consequences
- Keep the core concept simple, but easy to expand
- Fun before finance
- Keep the brain engaged
- Don’t waste players’ time
- Aim high
Of course, there are genre-specific concerns, but I’ve found that these are the basic things that I try to incorporate into what designs I contemplate or create. A card game that I recently designed used these as much as the crazy convoluted concepts that I have rattling around for MMOs and RPGs.
Is any of that groundbreaking? Not likely. It’s just my little way of getting down some thoughts I’ve had, and perhaps putting some of my other writings into context. I see games as a unique and precious art form, and I’m always trying to raise the “state of the art”.
Games have given me a great deal over the years, and I’d like to return the favor by making any games that I work on something special. They keep my brain alive and learning, and I hope that my work can do the same for others.
Once again, I’m late to the party. I happened upon this multipage dissertation a few days ago:
…and found that much of what I see wrong with the state of the MMO genre has already been elaborated on. Sure, I might have a sibilant spin on the situation, or a particularly philosophical (or pedantic) phraseology, but in the end, I’m really just riding the tail end of the wave.
So why do I keep writing? Because I want to, because it gets it out of my system, and because looking at things through new eyes might just help someone think a bit more. It’s also good when I get feedback, which helps refine my thinking. It’s also nice to think that I’m coming to similar conclusions in a relative vacuum, just from a bit of play experience and extensive research on existing MMO game mechanics and game design. (more…)
I loved the Bill Murray movie Groundhog Day. Sure, it could have been better, but the core concept and Murray’s performance proved to be both entertaining and thought provoking. So… yeah… MMOs. In a world where nothing major really changes (at least, not because of player actions), and where completing a quest makes you the Hero of the Day!!! for all of ten minutes before the next schlub turns in the same quest, I think the “infinite loop day” is a relatively relevant concept.