Magic Mushrooms #2: Priorities
Posted 31 Dec 2004 at 00:37 by guest
"Game developers aren't content with making games anymore. They're bored of it." |
The videogames industry is growing all the time. The high profile titles sometimes have millions of pounds spent on them to try and ensure that the graphics are top-notch, famous voices and even faces make an appearance, the musical score is outstanding, and all in all the production values are enormous. Games like Doom 3, Goldeneye: Rogue Agent (and for that matter, the other current generation Bond games), Driver 3 and Enter The Matrix are examples of these � the developers try and make the games as movie-like as possible. They create the realism, they create the atmosphere, and they create the music. Then all of a sudden the deadline has arrived, but all is fine � they've created a tense atmosphere with unparalleled visuals and an overwhelming musical score. They send the finished code away, but something is nagging in the back of their heads � they've forgotten something, and they know it.
It's only when it's too late do they realise they didn't remember to add the most crucial part. They've got the detail, the magnificent game world, the sounds � all their targets have been met. Except for one � they forgot to put the game in.
I think that part of the reasoning for this is because game developers aren't content with making games anymore. They're bored of it. Or maybe they wanted to work in the film industry but weren't good enough. Either way, they're sitting in front of a PC monitor creating your game, and at the front of their minds is not 'How can I make this game more fun?' Instead, they're asking 'How can I make the physics look real?' 'Are the textures too complex for this operating system?' 'How can I make the screen handle two million polygons and not suffer frame rate problems?' 'Insert geeky techno-babble here'.
Making an actual game, making the whole thing fun, seems to be way down the priorities list, underneath 'Is this something the whole family can enjoy?' You look at games like Doom 3 or Enter the Matrix, and you notice that there is more detail on the characters than there is depth in the gameplay � a growing trend nowadays, seeing as games have become a lot like members of the opposite sex � the better looking they are, the more people want them. Playing Doom 3 is nothing but a tired slog from A to B, with a little bit of 'Egad! Monster!' thrown in. Unless you're still of the kind of age where a floating head can give you nightmares, it really isn't all that spectacular.
Don't get me wrong, Doom 3 has its tense moments, but for the most part it's a little tiresome. Doom 3 is one of those shallow members of the opposite sex (note the lack of sexism from a male writer, all you criticising females!) who only thinks about their appearance and makes certain that they always look their best. But once you get to know Doom 3, you understand how shallow it is. All looks and no substance, that's the kind of partner Doom 3 would make. And to think that all the millions spent on the game didn't make it any better.
Now let's compare the vain Doom 3 with something less extravagantly good looking but with far more substance. Ah, why not go really retro � Pac Man. Certainly not a beautiful game. To watch someone play Pac Man is not impressive in any way whatsoever. It's an ugly game � and an old one - and probably cost peanuts to make. But to play the game is sublime. Spend quality time with Pac Man, and you'll grow to love it, as opposed to the quick fling you'll have with the likes of Doom 3. It hasn't had as much attention spent on it and hell, it isn't going to be picking up any special effects prizes, but it's infinitely more playable.
Maybe in this new world of hi-tech gadgets and gizmos and computers that can create amazingly realistic images and expressions and environments, the developers have forgotten what counts. Maybe they're so caught up in trying to make the game as movie-like as possible that the game suffers at the end. It's a little strange that games that have so much money spent on them become spoilt �literally � by the lack of decent game in there. It's like buying a DVD that only comes with the extras disc � all the little side bits are there, but not the main feature. Not what you spent ₤40 on. Or imagine watching an action film where all the characters have been edited out and all you see are the special effects. That's what playing these sorts of games is like.
Maybe one day developers will stop wishing they're the next Steven Spielberg and start focusing on the actual game next time. Couldn't hurt, could it?