Ya Gotta Have a Gimmick
I found myself staring at an ad for a science fiction first-person shooter. In fact, that's all I'm gonna call it - a science fiction first-person shooter. The ad was colorful, with a cool battlefield scene. Explosions and machines of war from an obviously futuristic era. And I found myself thinking, "Wow, you know, in a world without Halo 1, 2, and 3, Unreal Tournaments, Gears of War, Battlefield 2, Battlefield 2142, Star Wars: Battlefront 1 and 2, F.E.A.R., Project Origin, and dozens of other science fiction first-person shooters, this might be really exciting to me."

I cast my mind back, and vaguely recalled the heyday of fantasy RPGs, and I remember feeling about the same way towards the RPG of the week. Ah, those youthful days of yesteryear, when RPGs were rolling out a-plenty, and we always thought we'd be swimming in abundance, and we got to pick and choose among a tremendous number of titles that would be released faster than anyone could possibly play them.

Mind you, many did suck back then, too. And as a poor, starving college student during that time period, my picking and choosing was more of necessity than out of snobbishness. But in a crowded field, in games as much as anything else, you gotta have something that makes you stand out. Or as the song from Gypsy goes - ya gotta have a gimmick.

Assuming 2007 was no fluke, the field is going to get a little crowded again for computer role-playing games. Maybe not late-80's, early-90's crowded, but it's still going to be interesting to say the least. While the titans of mainstream duke it out with dueling Diablo-clones, the indies are - thankfully - providing quite a bit more variety to the landscape. But indie games enjoy a longer shelf-life, too, which means last year's hits will still be competing head-to-head with this year's new offerings. You could spend a whole year just playing Spiderweb's Avernum and Geneforge series, and because they don't chase the mechanical technology rabbit, the difference in quality is more of that of the developer's improving skill.

While time may be a bit of a premium for me these days, I have no problem at least trying to play all of these awesome indie games! I just need a reason to believe that the game I'm going to play is in some way unique - that it's not something I've played before. Or, like the generic science-fiction first-person shooter, I may just kinda chalk it off to being something so similar to what I've already experienced that I can't even generate enough enthusiasm to download the demo.

So - how are these games going to distinguish themselves? What kind of gimmick will they adopt? Of the recent releases I've played, Eschalon: Book 1 suffers the most from feeling too generic. Fortunately, its strengths (so far) lie in being very polished, well-marketed, and an unapologetically turn-based western-style RPG. Fifteen years ago, that would have buried it in a sea of similar games, but today those are definitely stand-out qualities. It is the first game of a series. I expect that, over time, it will "find itself" and develop a stronger sense of style. After all, many of the "classic" RPGs of the golden era started the same way.

But as a player and fan of indie games, I'd strongly recommend that developers really focus in on what makes their games unique and stand-out. If you don't have one, come up with one! Give me a hook, a gimmick, something to help me notice you. Don't be like the aforementioned generic science fiction first-person shooter. YOU know your game is special. Tell me why!

Labels: Game Design, Roleplaying Games

- posted by The Rampant Coyote @ 6:04 AM (Permalink)