RSS Feeds
|
US Edition
Babblebaby
|
Defamer
|
Gizmodo
|
Kotaku
|
Lifehacker
A few weeks ago, designer Brice Morrison talked about how a game designer outgrew games; since kicking off a flurry of discussion, he's returned to GameSetWatch with some in-depth answers to common questions and a challenge.
Gamasutra has a fabulous postmortem up — easily one of the best I've read — on Tale of Tales' The Graveyard.
L.B. Jeffries has a nice essay up on the idea of 'games as languages' — a combination of coercing players to take certain actions and encouraging certain responses, creating a dialogue of sorts. As Jeffries says, "It's not exactly talking to another person...but it's not just rolling dice or pressing shoot either." As games get more complex, so does the 'language' aspect — choices are expressive elements, and the more choices one has, the more opportunities for unique combinations. Even the simplest of games involves communication — 'go here, do that.' With the influx of more diverse and user-created building blocks, it seems reasonable that the 'languages' would begin to emerge more clearly:
Well, militaries across the world may soon have a new war game to their arsenal, and it could have a trickle down effect to retail games — British researchers have come up with a game system that incorporates a 'smell box,' in an attempt to see if they can make training stick better. In what sounds like an unpleasant experience, various smells are triggered as users 'take an authentic walk' around hostile areas. If it's determined this is making training more useful, it could be rolled out next year and be used in training actual soldiers:
In an interesting opinion piece over at GameSetWatch, designer Brice Morrison expounds on why it is that he 'outgrew' games — even though he's a designer. It's not exactly treading any new ground (any 'why is gaming an immature medium?' essay traverses the same ground), but it's an interesting perspective from someone who has built a career on designing games — games that he says he's outgrown. What do we need more of? Boring games (sort of):
L.B. Jeffries has a nice piece up arguing for more relevant and provocative settings in games in order to raise awareness and perhaps do something a little greater for disastrous (real world) situations. He points out that violence isn't incompatible with this, thus many classic genres would probably be quite at home dealing with nasty current day situations (as he points out, film has already done this — though not always through violent means — though Jeffries uses Rambo 4 as a cinematic touchstone). Of course, this comes with some problems:
Kotakuite Daniel Novais sent me an email this past week, asking me to take a look at his "little short artsy game" called Estamos Pensando (Portuguese for 'We Are Thinking'). Inspired in part by Jason Rohrer's Passage, Estamos Pensando is a sweet, sad, and polished little game. Daniel said that he's now trying to work on something a little happier, since one comment on Rohrer's Gravitation noted that these 'artsy' games are usually depressing. There are Portuguese and English versions of the game, and gameplay is quite simple. The game has apparently gotten some nice initial reviews since its submission to the Brazilian symposium SBGames 2008 festival, and it's worth a little bit of your time.
Ian Bogost has a timely piece up on the issue of political-themed games, and their use — or lack thereof. Bogost draws a clear demarcation between politicking (which he feels most of these games do) versus politics — games have the potential to really speak towards politics, but wind up being more or less meaningless tools for politicking:
Ian Bogost has a short little note on a 'serious game' called Packaging Man, which was apparently intended 'to raise awareness about the destructive impact fast food paper packaging has on Southern forests.' Unfortunately for Dogwood Alliance, the creator, the game is a slightly retooled version of Pac-man, and the 'environmental message' seems confined to the (skippable) intro. Ian wasn't terribly impressed:
Ian Bogost has an interesting editorial over at Edge Online entitled 'The End of Gamers,' a title which he admits doesn't really capture the main argument: "["The End of Gamers"] is lurid but might not capture the main argument of the piece, which is more like "Things People Do with Games". Much of his point is that other media has a wide variety of applications, and isn't shoehorned into a few limited types of uses ('entertainment' vs. 'serious' and so on). Bogost isn't arguing for 'games as art' or 'games as useful' or anything else, just pointing out that some perceptions about the industry start to break down when one considers the wide range of applications current games can have:
