From Whom Much Is Given, Much Is Demanded

Posted by Rampant Coyote on April 11, 2013

The ideas people have come up with for completely useless psychic powers yesterday was a source of amusement all day long. Thank you! Three winners have been emailed with instructions for claiming their prizes. Thank you to everybody who has participated so far.  And a big thank-you to the game developers who have contributed copies of their games! I hope you guys will continue to support them with current and future projects, as well.

The sale on Frayed Knights: The Skull of S’makh-Daon ends Monday – ish, depending on your time zone, so be sure and check out the game.  It’s available at that link (sales handled via BMT Micro), and through Desura, if you prefer. Don’t miss out!

I was reading this editorial about Original Sin and the current state of RPGs, and it coincided with some experiences I’ve been having at The Day Job. As some of you know, my day job is making simulators. Crane simulators.  Back when I first started my career at SingleTrac, making games for the not-yet-released Sony Playstation, most of the guys there had come over from the simulator industry (Evans & Sutherland). They told me about their experience making simulators, and noted that as the graphics improved, their customers became more demanding. When everything seemed more cartoony and “plastic,” nobody complained about the runway lights being the wrong shade of a color. But as things started getting closer to photorealistic, things that had been more than adequate with their more abstract representation were suddenly deficient  when they’d been improved!

We’re experiencing a bit of that at the day job too, although not with the graphics so much as the overall fidelity of the simulators. As we’ve increased the realism, our customers have stepped up their expectations. Models and behaviors that have been fine for years are suddenly inadequate because they stand in contrast to other systems that are more realistically modeled.

We see this in games, too, and it goes beyond the “uncanny valley” problem (though it is related). Actually, one of the best explanations of this for me came from the book “Understanding Comics: The Invisible Art” by Scott McCloud. I highly recommend the book for *ANYONE* doing game development. What really happens is this: As art (or the game) becomes more abstract, we tend to project our own details into it. It can stand in better for whatever the viewer (or player) wants or expects it to be. It’s more of an empty vessel. As it becomes more realistic and detailed, it becomes more literal. It begins to come with its own baggage, and is no longer as suited for projection.

In a sense – and this is my interpretation – as it leaves less to the imagination, we are no longer encouraged to invest our own imagination into it. And thus the more abstract work can meet our expectations better because we literally fill in those expectations ourselves.

Which is more satisfying? More engaging? More compelling? And which offers the better gameplay experience?

It really depends. The screenshot to the left  can represent a pretty thrilling and enjoyable fight scene, especially when the player is fully focused and “into” the game. The graphics are largely representational, and the “real” action is probably taking place inside the player’s mind.

Compare that to… well… this:

As a gamer, which one would you rather play? Lacking any other data, my first instinct would be to go with the latter. That’s what I’d think that first screen was “supposed” to look like. But in the second screen, any failures to represent things perfectly is going to detract substantially from the experience. If the guy’s weapon animates through his body, or the collision gets a little wonky in the environment, or the bad guys don’t respond in what I think is “properly” from my hits, it’s going to pull me out of the experience. Will my imagination “fill in” for the insufficient or “wrong” details? Probably not. It’s not been engaged to that level. I guess the game is mostly being played on the screen, not in my head.

Consequently, as a developer, most of your time has to be spent preventing those distractions rather than implementing really cool new systems. Because a new system is going to usually come at an enormous cost to make sure it keeps the overall experience seamless. It’s not just graphics. Voice-overs are another sore point for many games (ESPECIALLY RPGs). They impose quite stringent limitations on dialog, story flexibility, and design flexibility during development.

This isn’t all “bad.” I gotta admit – fighting a dragon in Skyrim was one of those high points in gaming for me. And yeah, exploring the ruins of Washington DC (where I used to live) in full 3D glory in Fallout 3 was extremely cool. But I can also go back and have a blast playing Might & Magic I (once I figured out my way through the 1980s interface) or the original 2D Fallout. It’s tough to say which is “better.” But I think one of the side-effects of the indie revolution is that gamers are re-discovering some of the joys and advantages that can come from simpler representations of game worlds. A lot of that detail and effort can go to make more interesting things happen.  Like FTL – which would have been very difficult to make as a realistic space combat ‘simulator’.

I think the gaming world is big enough now that we can enjoy the wider scope of both approaches.

GIVE-AWAY TIME!

Okay, guys. Today’s game is an obscure recent title by Califer games, called March to the Moon.  As we were talking hybrid games the other day, this one came up – a top-down shooter blended with RPG concepts. Curtis, the guy behind this, is a friend, former coworker in the scary mainstream games industry, and a local here in Utah. March to the Moon is a simple, fun concept with full-on embrace of “programmer graphics” for maximum cheese factor.  You start out by clearing out a bar’s basement of rats – something that should make Matt Barton very happy – and progress onwards to a full scale invasion. By… uh… just about everything.

What, you ask, must you do to obtain this rare gem?

Why, leave a comment! If perchance you already own the game, or don’t want it (why not?!?!?!), you can add “N/G” (No Game) to your comment.

If you need something more specific to comment on, how’s this?

I frequently maintain that we have hit the “law of diminishing returns” on graphics a few years ago. This means that the amount of effort needed to provide a marginal increase in graphics quality exceeds its utility or value. The efforts to provide new control experiences (Kinect, the Wii’s controller, etc.) suggests the mainstream game companies sense this to.  So – if graphics are no longer the big mountain to climb anymore, what’s the next great frontier that should be or will be pushed in gaming? Audio? More work on controls? “True” 3D, Occulus Rift style? Direct neural interfaces? Smell-o-vision? AI-generated narrative? Greater frontiers in dynamic content (a good way to take advantage of all that 3D power of today’s machines)?

See ya in the comments section. And have fun!

Filed Under: Art, Deals, Rampant Games - Comments: 13 Comments to Read



top