|
EGDC Day Three
Now, Laura Fryer of the Xbox technology group’s talk, ‘It’s only a game?’ was interestingly one of the talks which has been most discussed on the web. Personally, I’m surprised. I remember what I watched of it, and thinking it was quite interesting, but presented in such a boring fashion it just seemed incredibly dull.
So I didn’t really take it in. More fool me, I guess, as the discussion of what she’s said has been the fodder for many arguments with people who’ve only heard what she said at best third hand. Can I comment on much of what she said? No. But I’m going to comment on the broader issue at stake here.
For one, this entire lecture was again about ‘Games vs. other media’. I’ve done this already in the EIGF, but all I’m going to do here is defend Laura Fryer’s position. There is no reason when someone presents an opinion as simple as ‘games need to change to appeal to a mass market’ that they should be subjected to such an amount of bile from gamers (everyone in the room was perfectly polite, even if they didn’t agree).
For one, there has literally been no research into exactly how much time Joe Public spends on the last game he bought before never playing it again. Think about your collection – if you’re like me, an avid games player, there are hundreds of games that you played and never completed. Maybe you always mean to get around to finishing them – but something made you stop.
What was it? In some cases it may have been the complexity stopping you from going back. Many people I know find themselves scuppered after 2 weeks away from a game (and that’s an acceptable gap in gaming, when you’ve a busy life) because they can’t remember what they were doing, or how to do it.
Or what about when you want to play a game for half an hour and you can’t, because the next task requires 2 hours or so? You might just stop, always thinking you'll go back to it, when you've got time.
I think this is a far bigger issue than it seems. I wouldn’t be surprised if 70% of content created in the games industry just isn’t seen. The biggest and best games (GTA springs to mind) the public can devour it whole and want more. But some things… I mean, I like Neverwinter Nights, for example. I like the game mechanics. But what with all the stuff about elves and orcs, it’s nothing I can relate to. And I’ve been playing it for hours on end and my reward is always yet another dungeon that feels… Like filler. I've stopped now, and I don't think I'll go back.
In all honesty, the games industry does not know its audience at all. The cinema industry knows before a movie is even released which parts people enjoyed, which they didn’t, and can edit it before general release. There is no such flexibility allowed in game creation. This is damaging the games industry. If there was one thing that was very visible at GDCE, it was that everyone there was very much in favour of more research. The only problem is, no one is willing to pay for it.
Seamus Blackley’s talk, ‘Business as usual’. Now, I like the guy. He’s a true showman. Unfortunately, it’s kind of like watching a stand up comedian more than once on the same tour – what you heard the first time as fascinating, amusing, and fresh the first time, is tarnished the second time because you find it hard to believe it’s all so… Rehearsed.
But I forgive him for it. The reason Seamus Blackley is repeating himself in every lecture he does is because he truly believes what he is saying, and that many people need to hear it. I agree. But even he admits that only really having conferences to make himself heard is a limiting audience. For example, one interesting thing he noted was that development is in no way the largest cost in game creation, which is surprising to me, and I'm sure could surprise many more. I kind of wish he’d put his Powerpoint slides on the CEG games website, or something. It’s all good stuff I can’t really repeat verbatim here.
The ‘Developer’s Death Match’, between Gary Penn and Peter Molyneux, while interesting, was somewhat a disappointment. For one, gaming has told us that the large Gary Penn would be strong but slow, while the small and thin Peter Molyneux would be weak but agile.
Sadly, we didn’t see them come to blows, so the classic videogame battle of the ages was not recreated in front of our eyes. They didn’t even really argue, or slag off each other’s games, or anything. In fact, they sat very close together and talked softly. (not, as I had hoped, on opposite podiums, yelling through loudspeakers at each other.)
What resulted was quite a pleasing discussion asking ‘what is gameplay?’. A question not often asked, as we’ve come to accept the term so easily as part of our culture. As Gary Penn put it –
“When I have a problem with my car, I don’t blame it on the ‘Cardrive’.”
You play games and you drive cars, but that doesn’t mean either term is an acceptable term for, as Molyneux put it, the ‘magic’ that makes you like a game. Along the lines of my complaint of a lack of research, the lack of a consistent language for game design is also damaging the games industry.
At least, however, these things are being brought up, and discussed at the GDCE. And I guess that’s why I feel the GDC is such a positive thing for the games industry. Many people (though, not enough) get to sit and listen to lectures and discuss many of the sticking points that make them hate the industry, in an attempt to make things better. Like anything else, however, they can’t be solved by just talking. More action needs to be taken by people like Seamus Blackley (attempting to change the way games are financed) or Staffan Bjork and Jussi Holopainen, who lectured ‘Game Design Patterns’ and are making an attempt at finding a consistent game design language.
Now, I don’t know if they will succeed at what they are trying, or if even what they are trying is really the best way. But at least they are trying. Observing ECTS so much of it was a pale copy of something on someone else’s stand or a stand from last year, presented with the same, boring, bombastic hype that everyone has come to expect. Gaming, it’s culture, and even it’s marketing, needs to change to appeal to a mass market. I don’t think it’s out of hand to say that.
But, much like the EIGF, the GDCE found it impossible to end the conference without a little light relief, which along with the free beer was gratefully accepted by the audience of ‘Are you Game?’. A (mostly) genius pub quiz with plenty of laughs, and also a fair few head scratchers (I should know what the name of the texture buffer in Direct X is, but, I’d forgot, okay?). One of the funniest moments is in video form here. I apologise if you can’t hear what he’s saying (you need pretty good speakers and zero ambient sound) but trust me – it was funny.
I kept Team Insert Credit’s head high by managing to score an almighty 73/100 (managing to match the first place score from the celebrity panel, the score of our good friend, Edge’s David McCarthy) however, some insane guy managed to get 80/100, and win the coveted prize – a Sony Eyetoy. I don’t know whether to be glad I did well but didn’t win, or not. There’s probably something wrong with you when you know that much about video games and their history…
--Mathew Kumar swears he’s just out of practice and a few years ago would have beat 80/100.
|
