@manaknight: It's not just you. Leigh Alexander's writing is poor and her analysis of her topics is inane.

In case she's reading this, her biggest problem is thinking that she speaks for all gamers. She throws the word "we" around quite a lot when in reality the only person she is speaking for is herself. Were she to take the time to research the subjects of her essays and back up her opinions with examples rather than rhetoric her writing might actually become worth reading.

dren

Is it just me, or do other people have this problem I have where I cannot read Leigh's writing. No matter how many times I try all I get is some gist of argument through an incomprehensible cloud of words, and I'm an academic.

manaknight

Media sucks especially fox news and media sucks in games

balla4real

"to have that, you'd have to give the same right to every idiot, unimaginative automaton, disruptive teenage jerk and mouth-breathing drag"
This is why the democracy is bad.
Someone had to say that.

Mayu-mayu

@Allen750: HAHAHA... /deadpan-face

As for the article, it reminded me of a visit from the Tech Dir of Bungie at my game dev school stated concerning the media convergence of games and film. He shared his thoughts about how he feels too many developers in the game industry are trying too hard lately to be filmmakers with their games. He asked do gamers really want to pay $60 bucks for some contrived amateur B-movie? Then someone in class shouted, "..well yeah, millions plan on buying Halo 3 dude!" Touché.

TCampbell76

"Cum" is the word that just sticks out in the middle...

Allen750

If there was perhaps some system that could rate games that people make and determine an appropriate market for them, or some way that the game could be tested by a select few before its release to determine worthiness.

Oh, yeah. ESRB: Game raters extraordinaire.
Demo runs: Also highly appreciated.

Although I think that if the idea of user-made games becomes as popular as we keep imagining it, then we'll see a lot of modded versions of old games like Zelda 2 and Dr. Mario, except with a few subtle changes (for instance, penises instead of viruses or little ogre Britney Spears guards instead of Armos.)

Although that's a bit extreme of a scenario, I think; I still can't shake the thought that people would make it ridiculous. I mean, if you take the time to look, there are a LOT of utterly stupid Starcraft maps out there, such as Sexy Tank Defense (which has about a hundred versions by now) where sections of a pornagraphic picture made with a map hack are revealed depending on how many enemies you kill, and with a full house it's not even hard to beat the level.

Eienhander

That's the point of a rating system, you weed out the shit with user reviews.

RaepGoblin

my god, i love the interesting things maggie green posts.

i suppose the problem with user-created-content is certainly that the bar of quality isn't necessarily there.

but i think the plus side overwhelms that. there is WAY more content, and in games like littlebigplanet, instead of the publisher deciding what levels are good, they are letting people rate others levels, and decide for themselves what the best levels are.

sure, there is certainly a problem if any dimwit can create content, and have it be forced on everyone playing the game.. but thats why we still have game designers who figure out USEFUL ways to implement user-created content.

joelface

Hmm, makes a good point. What's one thing that pisses most people off about online connected, community driven consoles? The jerks.
Of course, I haven't read the article yet so maybe I'm missing the point.

Demaar

Wait, what's the relevance of the PS3 picture? Why not a picture of Leigh? or a picture of a game box with wheels crashing into a movie box? Anything, I just don't understand the ps3, guess I'll have to read the article.

RaepGoblin

Game Movies made mostly by people who don't have a strong understanding of both worlds are bad.

Content Created by users without a centralized voting system and the option to just share among friends and on forums and among those of like interests? Good. (no centralized voting because most people have bad taste, but voting among like-minded peers would work because you'd get people who better understood what you'd like rather than what the majority wants)

bobtheduck

I think media convergence has led to a really bad model for developing new IP. Everything has to be a franchise these days. It can't just be Halo or Final Fantasy, it has to be a trilogy or a whole network of spin-offs, tie-ins, and movie deals--all of which exhaust the creative energy of developers (and probably fans too).

But that isn't to say media convergence is necessarily the wrong approach. There are plenty of great mods out there. Games like Portal are a good example of media convergence producing some really fantastic things.

Ultimately the choice to create a closed or open world is a creative decision. If you want to risk sullying a game cannon with bad movies, books, or sequels, keep your world closed. If you're willing to risk the danger in hopes of seeing some truly great games and ideas emerge alongside your IP, then leave it open.

SrslyGuise

@IRENICUS-Exactly.User content will have it's ups and downs,just like traditional "studio" content.If unimaginative automatons and mouth breathers didn't already make games,Seanbany and Ashens would need a new line of work.

coktoe

Either you like eccentric creative things just the way they are...or you don't and want to put your own spin on them.

Then that's when you go do it yourself. If a person really wanted to make their own offbeat version of a video game that badly...why not just go find a company that might agree with you...and actually make a future off it?

That's like when people make Forge maps on Halo 3. That's not special. You just tweaked it a bit. Any real genius would really make their own game if they really wanted to take credit for making something themselves.

Batousi

Meh, it works both ways. The argument that is.

Why can't we have both? Like we pretty much have now.

Irenicus-the one and only

You have the right to express yourself the way you want to!
That's art, bitch!!!

Garo

"open communities" are self regulating. The football jocks' table is "open" for any freshman nerd to sit there, but this doesn't happen for a variety of reasons.

The console model of friend codes and the 360-style multiplayer hosting leads to weird fake gatherings of people that wouldn't otherwise mix. Open gaming communities naturally weed out the misfits and end up feeling like a more natural group of players.

jarjarwang

@kidko: bionic commando book was also full of win... :)

cavingman

THis is too cerebral for a Saturday. I don't even do my daily brain training on Brain Age on a Saturday.

I miss Saturday Morning Cartoons.

Thank Pete for Hockey Day in Canada.

MrBionic

high school massacre mods and flying penises I can handle. But movies of games are trash and games of movies are cash-in junk (save one or two properties that translate well). So, user content is typically great (see the mod community for many shooters and PCRPGs) but games-Hollywood convergence blows. I do tend to like the novelized fiction-games convergence though. The Witcher and the Mass Effect novel are what bring that to mind though I'm sure I've seen more.

kidko

I think making an argument either way is to over generalize the medium as a whole.

Why does there ever need to be a defacto design paradigm for the entire industry to follow? Gamers, like most media consumers, are a fickle bunch. Certain people like certain things, and it's troubling to constantly read about marketing demographics being mis-interpereted for the purpose of arguing for or against a fundamental redesign of the creative process that drives the very act of creation.

You want all that user-generated hoo-haa? There's plenty of places to find it. Looking for a controlled narrative experience with a pre-defined aesthetic? I can name a thousand of them right now...

"Convervgence" is a buzzword that better serves corporate suits than it does gamers. Let the designers make the games they want to make; enable their creativity and self determination, they'll figure out what they want to offer their end user, and usually have a much better sense of what those users want.

The more a game tries to please everyone, the more likely it is to categorically fail in pleasing anyone. I don't think anyone really wants a single experience that satisfies every gamer's twitch and fancy, as some will tell you: variety is the spice of life.

I for one prefer that variety to be more fundamental to each experience, rather than have one singular experience try to offer too much variety for it's own good...

Besides, when has a dogmatic approach to creative design ever generated anything other than bland derivation?

stranger

I agree with her argument that the majority of the games made by users will be homogeneous and uninspired(how many times have we heard from people that "Halo" is somehow original?). It creeps me out to think that some high school jock's idea of a game can somehow be packaged and sold as something playable.

On the other hand, i doubt that literally EVERYONE will be able to put ANY idea up for grabs. I'm pretty sure they would incorporate some sort of quality control....hopefully.....*crosses fingers*

Namikus

I guess her arguement is why we have an electoral college. I know lets have an electoral media! they know better than we could ever figure out for ourselves!

Molbork