Microtransactions: The Inherent Failure Of Natal and Move, and More
April 6th, 2010
Why Natal and Playstation Move will Likely Fail?
I really ought to dedicate more writing space to this topic, but it’s actually a very simple argument.
The reason why the Wii and DS are so successful and why Natal and the Playstation Move will likely fail is entirely software related. Let’s use the Wii and DS as a case study. Technology alone does not sell hardware, software does, software which works in unity with hardware. If there is no good software to give meaning to the hardware, then people will think that the hardware is useless. If there was no Brain Age, Nintendogs, Elite Beat Agents or Zelda: Phantom Hourglass then people would still think that the DS is useless, as they originally did before software proved them wrong. The same is true of the Wii. (Although the Wii is still somewhat draped in cynicism because 3rd parties haven’t stepped up to the plate as they have with the DS).
If it all comes down to the software then what really matters is who is developing games for these things. 1st party-wise Sony’s Eyetoy studio and Microsoft’s weak internal studios (Rare, most likely will constitute the majority of 1st party Natal games for Microsoft) can’t compare to Nintendo’s internal divisions. None of the software demonstrated so far has captured the press in the same way Wii Sports or Brain Training.
On the 3rd party front, if the Wii has had this technology for some years and has a 60+ million install base and is still lacking quality 3rd party games, then I doubt that many 3rd party developers will jump to the technoligcally-similar Playstation Move or the unestablished interface of Natal with an initial install base of zero. The logic behind developing softwae for these system is absent. Furthermore, with a far smaller market to attack, the developers that do succeed will initially struggle to make significant gains. It will take several developers producing several killer applications for these accessories to gain sufficient momentum and remain relevant. Keep in mind that several of the major publishers backing Natal-developed games are already claiming that they’ll only be developing smaller, mass market titles, hardly the type of product which will sell on a system with a shooter-centric image.
Software aside, how do we know that the hardware itself will work? There are still doubts over the lag in Natal and processing power required to handle Natal games. The Playstation Move only allows for 2 player games. Will these peripherals be bundled with game system or games? The systems themselves are already more expensive than the Wii, add in an accessory and pack-in game and that price naturally increases. Above all else, assuming that Microsoft, Sony or their 3rd parties produce fantastic games, the tech works fine and is affordable and retails support the devices, will they be able to market the peripherals effectively? This, is perhaps as challenging as the development of software. How to unlock an audience you’ve never been successful at capture?
It would be quite the monumental feat for either company to successfully meet these all these challenges, so I figure that their chances are pretty slim. The comparison to Nintendo’s phenomenal success is a bit harsh, true, yet similar levels of success, I’d wager, are needed to establish these devices in the market place and keep them going, particularly with competition from two other companies.
In the end I’m just explicating on what everyone already knows “these things will flop without software”.
Judging the Inherent Fun in Controllability
There’s a sort of mental litmus test which I use to evaluate the controllability in games. It’s very simple, and goes something like this: if all the player could do was control the protagonist in an empty space with no distractions, how long would they play for? That is, to what extent is controlling the character fun on its own?
It’s a bit tricky to judge ultimately, because some games feature much more complicated control systems than others, meaning that it’d take longer for someone to exploit one system to its fullest than others, which may in fact be more enjoyable.
For example, Metal Gear Solid 4 and Super Mario Bros. Super Mario Bros is obviously the superior title in terms of controllability, however, I could fiddle around with all of Solid Snake’s ability set for maybe up to a quarter of an hour.
In anycase, it’s worth considering this methodology, because I’ve personally found it quite useful.
Gamers Don’t Want Innovation
Gamers aren’t genuinely interested in innovation, I’d argue. Put simply, human nature says that we’re afraid/dismissive of truly new ideas. This is the reason why we all remain as slaves to capitalism whilst socialist ideology is cast-typed as extremist/fundamentalist. It’s the same reason why the Wii is still subordinated by the hardcore and the enthusiast, despite delivering innovation.
Innovation is only acceptable in small, familiar doses (subversion of the very definition of innovation), such as Borderlands, which recycles two very familiar forms of play. If games truly embraced innovation then the independent scene would reign over the mainstream.
GameFAQ Writers VS Bloggers: The Better Candidate for Criticism
This year I’ve found myself falling into this habit where on completing a game, I’ll snuff out a guide on GameFAQs to acquaint myself with the bonus material and unlocks that I’m probably missing out on. This habit has made me realise that FAQ writers, as expert players, are in the most advantageous position to effectively evaluate game design, leagues ahead of us bloggers.
Expert players, or at least competitive players seek to win, and win effectively. In order to win they must first fully understand the conditions of the ‘win’ state, ie. the operations of play, and then devise the most efficient means to reach these conditions. Seeing past the glossy veneer and interpreting the game as a series of rules is pivotal to their success. The more familiar they are to these rules, the easier it will be for them to reach the ‘win’ state. While ordinary players also go through these processes as well, it’s almost entirely subconscious (this is why we have difficulty in understanding and talking about games). The mind of a competitive player is always working to sharpen their understanding of the rules.
As a result of all this, when it comes to critiquing games, generally speaking, I think hardened players will be at an advantage. Of course, this is all generalities and what I’m really saying is that being competitive spurs people on to think hard about the operations of a game. This doesn’t mean that non-competitive players are bad evaluators. No. These players don’t need to be competitive in order to think hard about games, but rather, being competitive often helps people to really focus in on game design and that when it comes to general conversation about games, competitive players are likely to be the more interesting conversationalists.
Chess or the Mona Lisa – Games as Art
April 3rd, 2010
[This is the first–and most likely last–time that I’ve weighed in on the games as art debate. As with the R 18+ classification issue, the conversation is largely uneventful and uninteresting, so please enjoy my attempt at a no-nonsense approach to this trivial argument.]
The games as art debate hinges on what we believe games should aspire to be: the Mona Lisa or Chess?
The point of contention is that, fundamentally, video games are chess, but with rich enough contexts to border the medium against others which classify as art. The problem is therefore one of definition. Do we grade art on the construction of rule systems or on the contextual and thematic elements?
The answer is obvious; we grade art on the contextual.
Art has always been graded on themes and emotion, which is why chess, even as a perfect piece of game design, doesn’t count as art. In this regard, Super Mario Bros, Doom II or Resident Evil 4 also cannot be considered as art. If chess can’t do it and, lest we forget, chess has been around for hundreds of years, then Super Mario Bros. has no chance either.
So then, under the traditional evaluation of art, any game which triggers an emotion or displays a sense of beauty is art, even if the “game” part (that is, rule system) itself is completely rubbish. The rules don’t really mean as much, so long as there is an expression of creative talent.
I know what you’re thinking “what a load of bullocks!”. Don’t blame me, blame the definition.
A Change in Definition
I believe that video games will spur a change in the definition of art. The “art” side of video games (the contextual; the side which will first be regarded as displaying “creativity” and emotion) will only continue to refine itself and so long as this art is tied to rules, which it will always be, a re-evaluation must occur. Games will become so artistic in the traditional sense, that someone will have to decide what to do about all those rules attached to the supposed art.
Right here is where I think games will be accepted as art. That is, the rule systems attached to the “art” part will be accepted as an important part of the art itself. I imagine that the acceptance of engineering into the art fold will slowly see the definition come to accept beautifully designed rule systems, such as our old friend Chess, as works of art too.
False Idols
As a rationalist interested in the pragmatic side of games (as opposed to the majority of “games criticism” which is mainly fluff), I think that there are huge problems with our current perception of games as art.
It’s all class-based semantics. Art, as with the word culture, has been misused as a denotation of high culture. Those of higher class observe art, while those of lower class play games. Even though Chess’ influence is far stronger and wide reaching than the Mona Lisa’s, Chess is still a game for commoners and is therefore not art. Video games, first typecasted for children and now a part of the low cultural ghetto (hello comics!), are destined to be marginalised because of this stupid word “art”. That is, unless we push for a change in meaning and a breakdown of traditional power structures.
Unfortunately, I don’t think this will ever happen, or at least it could happen, at a snails pace, as games such as Bioshock, Flower and Okami are waved around as the banner titles of video game art. These titles are given a high stature because they intend to construct experience which elicit an emotional response in the traditional sense. And there’s nothing wrong with that, particularly under this new-found interpretation of art which I’ve suggested, where contextually and mechanically beautiful media can co-exist. But it is equally important, if not more so, that we promote Super Mario Bros, Super Metroid, Doom II and Resident Evil 4 as works of art also. If we are to truly shift the perception of this medium we need to attack old perceptions tied to class, with new ideas based on design.
In concluding, I believe that we ought to focus on games as an emerging form of art and not games as conforming to the traditional sense of art. In which case we must crown our idols carefully and promote design as integral to our cause.
Link Out (19/3/10)
March 19th, 2010
There’s been a few articles circling around in regards to the hopelessness of earning money in the enthusiast press. It’s a pretty sad state of affairs. Information yearns to be free, painting a rather bleak outlook for those professionals. Although the topic has very little to do with me personally, it has made me consider why I put such an effort into a production which offers no monetary rewards.
What I realised after thinking through this question was that money is entirely irrelevant. I’ve become addicted to writing about games, because it’s a form of education. An education that if left absent I’d never feel satisfied with putting a completed game on the shelf. Understanding, or at least an attempt at understanding, has become a pivotal point of my game playing process, and considering that I don’t wish to give up my favourite hobby anytime soon, I feel that the writing will therefore continue.
I guess this is what they call “writing for the passion”. I don’t think of it as a passion though, I write for purely selfish reasons and the fact that you might consider reading this is uhh…cool, so thanks for that! Talking about people who write for the love of it and those who write to survive, I have a killer collection of links to share with you this time. And hey, if they have ads on their website, toss ’em a bone and click through, I’m sure that it’ll help.
The Death of JRPGs – But Not Really
Kurt makes a strong argument against a contentious Gamasutra post which discussed the now clichéd topic of the death of the JRPG. Kurt lays it straight which is bloody good to hear, considering the number of haters fueling the largely unfounded cynicism. Specifically, his point on the current state of transition in the genre (I would love to read some game-specific case studies explicating on examples of the transition) and the decline of anime in western countries are very interesting and well substantiated.
The first time I landed upon Racketboy’s blog I was awestruck at the material on display, loved it. However, this kinda died out in my mind as the articles became a little too formulaic. The 8 or so podcasts that have recently been produced have rekindled my enthusiasm for the website. I’m just so floored by not just the selection of guests, but their appropriacy and the thoughtfulness of the entire production. Some great grassroots retro coverage right here.
An Excitebike World Rally Developer Q&A – Retronauts
There’s been hardly any coverage on the new Excitebike: World Rally title for WiiWare which is quite sad. Thankfully, Jeremy Parish showed the initiative and interviewed some of the key members behind the production. Typically of Parish, there’s some thoughtful questions thrown in and the interview as a whole does a good job at introducing the title. Well worth a read.
The Peak of the ‘Mario’ Franchise – Popmatters
In this post, L.B. Jeffries discusses why Super Mario World is his favourite Mario platformer, referring to the game’s experimental nature, flexibility and devious exploration elements which individualise it from other Mario platformers. Quite a good read.
Bonus Round Episode 402 – The State of the Industry
Jason Rubin freaking gets it. I’ve always enjoyed what Jason has had to say about the games industry and was very pleased to see him back on Bonus Round. This time though there was a bit of confusion regarding his comments made in the second part of the show and he later elaborated on his thoughts via Geoff Keighly’s blog based on angry responses from commenters. I don’t think that Jason needed to supplement what he said on the show with an explanation, it’s quite clear that his comments were washed around with the generalities which the show sometimes takes as given fact (eg. hardcore/casual gaming dichotomy, Wii 3rd party games not selling). It’s not all bad though, as Jason has started his own blog which is awesome, check it out.
Iwata Asks – Zelda Handheld History
The Iwata Asks interviews is like being given a golden ticket into Willy Wonka’s chocolate factory. I’m really digging this stuff! You can find a directory of articles here and the initial Wii interviews here. The interviews have a Japanese feel in that there is an undercurrent emphasis on relationship-natured subjects and the unity of the group. The translation of the interviews are fantastic, accompanied by video and picture footnotes. I encourage that you read them all. The Zelda handheld interviews, which I’ve linked to, are quite interesting. I’m very happy that Iwata addressed the individualism of Zelda: Link’s Awakening and the relationship with Flagship and Capcom with the later titles. Above all else though are included images of design docs for the original Zelda and Super Mario Bros. I guess I’ll leave it at that!
Third Party Puzzle – Eurogamer
I’m just going to quote what I said about this article from Twitter:
Basically good games with strong marketing sell, Nintendo’s presence seems to be an excuse to pass blame for under performing in these areas. Even Nintendo have weak sellers like Battalion Wars 2, Walk with Me, Excitebots, Chibi Robo and Custom Robo – same reasons.
The Carrot On A Stick Approach To Game Design – Siliconera
I’ve been quite fortunate in being able to discuss Zelda and Okami with Ishaan from Siliconera. Ishaan is very astute and has a great knowledge about games. I’m pleased then that our discussion evolved into a post which he wrote for Siliconera. There are a few points that he didn’t mention which I might churn out into an article myself.
Welcome to Daniel Primed, my self-titled games analysis blog and the online supplement to Adventures in Games Analysis.
Reader Emails | RSS / Email Feed
Game Design Companion: A Critical Analysis of Wario Land 4 - $7.99
Level Design: Processes and Experiences
Speed Boost: The Hidden Secrets Behind Arcade Racing Design - $5.99
Adventures in Games Analysis: Volume I - $5.99
