Slashdot Mirror


A "Vow of Chastity" For Game Designers

Enoch Root writes: "Nowadays, it seems like the gaming industry is bogged down by an obsession for technological innovation at the price of true creativity in gaming. Ernest Adams of Gamasutra proposes game designers remedy this by pledging to a sort of designer's Vow of Chastity, in the spirit of Von Trier and Vinterberg's DOGME 95. Down with 3D acceleration, it's time for innovation!" I've seen a couple of the movies that the DOGME crowd produced -- both were really good. But the medium of movies is a little different than gaming, so I wonder how will this can carry over.

9 of 280 comments (clear)

  1. Finally, a great idea for gaming by Halcyon-X · · Score: 4
    I'm glad someone said it. I'm tired of being bogged down in a sea of FPS and RTS games on PC, and I've found myself ignoring them more and more until the only thing I can stand playing nowadays is games on an emulator. I don't like PC games anymore. I am sick of having to choose between 20 different FPS games when I want to play something, and not having any other options like a good snowboard game or beat-em-up a la Double Dragon (I screamed when I heard Metroid would be turned into an FPS)

    Funny things have been happening in the industry too, great games like Wipeout XL are getting no PC sequels. We're lacking in popular genres. Ever take a look at what fighting games have come out in the past five years?

    Whatever happened to the great innovation PCs had without 3D accelerators? Commander Keen, One Must Fall, Terminal Velocity, Jazz Jackrabbit, Day of the Tentacle, Sam and Max, Hero's Quest... We even had our own version of Contra called Duke Nukem II! Have you ever noticed that the same companies making these wonderful games only want to heavily market their FPS's, and RTS's (save LucasArts obsessed with racing games)?

    Other than RPGs which reel me in with their story, the last few games I found myself addicted to are Castlevania: Symphony of the Night (PSX), Ghost in the Shell (PSX), Soul Calibur (DC), Dracula X (PCE CD), and Ridge Racer V for lack of finding equivilants on PC. But why can't my ultimate gaming machine with a 900MHz CPU and 256MB of RAM and a GeForce 2 GTS provide me with ultimate games?

    Or even ultimate graphics? Lately the only game that has impressed me on PC since Unreal has been Serious Sam. I know the topic was complaining about advances in graphics, but on the PC I don't see it. I was more impressed by the stylistic and incredibly well modeled Sonic Adventure on Dreamcast than say, Quake 3 and Unreal Tournament. Despite people claiming those games have such excellent graphics, I just find them bland, and every effect is just a common staple these days.

    Oh well that's the end of that!

    --

    .sig: Open Source, Open Mind

  2. Re:Your perspective is different by donglekey · · Score: 4

    I agree that the standards are being continually raised, but the point is that game design is not progressing as fast as sound and graphics. Just like I feel that software (with the exception of middle/high end 3D software) is not progressing as fast as hardware. This is not any one group's fault, things like standards and monopolies are keeping progress back. That said ...

    If you've used MAME or NESTicle recently, I'm sure you realize how incredibly crappy and juvenile games like Metroid and Zelda really were

    This is borderline trollish. If this were true, do you think there would be a MAME and NESTICLE. Do you think there would be the big demand for games on ebay and roms off of websites?

    we've become so accustomed to 3D engines and photorealism

    Skillful crafting of buzzwords, but I don't think we're quite to the point of photorealism. I don't know about you but when I look at a photograph I don't see polygonal edges and harsh lighting transitions. I think that the Dreamcast was the first console to have enough power to make 3D viable. I hate the 3D graphics of the playstation. The N64 is ok, but not great. I think that with the gamecube and the Xbox 3D will really become something that can surpass good 2D as far as making an immersive world and a more profound experience. I still think that Super Metroid for Super Nintendo is the greasted game of all time by a wide margin. (if you haven't played it from start to finish, buy a SNES, buy the cartridge and hibernate, you ow it to yourself). Whenever I try to think about what makes a game great I go back to Super Metroid. Yes I have played it recently, and I still stand by my claim more than ever. It used everything to its advantage, from control, to graphics, to using music (and the music is incredible) to set the tone and mood. I have come up with the following list of things that I think all games should follow.

    1. As little repetition as possible (think zelda, not mega man, not mario brother one).

    2. Use music to set the mood, not as something that needs to be filled in because you have to.

    3. Pit power against power, having a weak character and a weak bad guy is boring and stupid.

    4. Progression. Character gets more powerful, enemies get more powerful.

    5. Balance. Everything needs to be balanced, no temporary surges of power (heavy barrel), plot is neccesary but it shouldn't get in the way of game play in the slightest. I don't think that revealing the plot as the game goes along is a good idea.

  3. Flaws in the Theory... by FortKnox · · Score: 5

    Here's the opportunity "Garage" game developers have to get their games out on the shelf. Here's the problem:
    Why can't you have innovation AND creativity?
    Lets look at some games that showed some serious creativity (expect lotsa Spector):
    Thief. Sure the graphics weren't Q3, but it *was* 3D. It was a 3D shooter without the shooting.
    System Shock Series. Here's a real killer to the theory presented. It took a 2D RPG and made it a FPS. It took creativity and added innovation, which made it an absolutely excellent game.
    Deus Ex. Take an innovative game, with a creative plot, and make it open-ended. A success!

    You see, innovative games can (and are, for that matter) creative. The problem is that the kiddies just want their Quake fix and kill their buddies. This means low profits for the creative games. Which is another reason how this theory will fail (who's going to play them?).
    Sure PONG, breakout, and tetris are fun, but when you can have fun with innovation, its just more attractive...

    --

    --
    Good quote, too many chars. Seriously, the slashdot 120 char limit sucks!
    1. Re:Flaws in the Theory... by JoeWalsh · · Score: 4

      Here's the flaw I saw in their theory:

      Since it would not occur to a reasonable person that a medical kit could be found inside an oil tank, a reasonable person will not needlessly blow it up, and is therefore at a disadvantage when playing the game.

      Uh..a reasonable person wouldn't blow up an oil tank and expect to find *anything* useful left behind!

      These folks made a nice attempt at getting people out of the rut videogaming has created for itself, but the above quote shows they're still not quite on level ground yet.

  4. Your perspective is different by atrowe · · Score: 5
    I've been hearing people complaining about the decreasing playability of video games in recent years, and I must vehemently disagree. The video game industry is thriving now more than ever before, and I am continuously amazed at the ever increasing quality and professionalism of games.

    There are some who say that gameplay and content have been dwindling, to be replaced with flashy graphics and Full Motion Video, but In my experience, this is simply not true. Hardware acceleration, higher resolutions, and digital sounds have only brought computer gaming to a new level of detail and realism and in no way detract from the playability of a game.

    I would much rather play Final Fantasy VIII or Diablo II any day than games that were popular in the '80's. I believe the reson for this unfounded nostalgia for vintage video games can be traced back to an issue of perspective. Let's face it, most of you were a lot easier to impress when you were 12, than you are now (apologies to any 12-year-old readers). We viewed Atari and NES games with a sense of awe and newfound respect because the technology was so new and innovative. If you've used MAME or NESTicle recently, I'm sure you realize how incredibly crappy and juvenile games like Metroid and Zelda really were. Now, we've become so accustomed to 3D engines and photorealism, that we often take for granted how amazing computer gaming has become. It's not that the games are getting worse, it's just that our tastes are more refined.

    --

    -atrowe: Card-carrying Mensa member. I have no toleranse for stupidity.

  5. Let's have good games - high-tech and low-tech by toontalk · · Score: 5

    I think it was Alan Kay who defined technology as that stuff that wasn't invented when you were born. Good games can and should be made with 1980s technology like Adams advocates but they should be made with 2000s technology as well as 1900s (think board games). Consider the analogy with visual arts. Some use oil paints, some use charcoal, some user cameras, and some use computers. Within each there is plenty of room to be creative and inventive. Let good games flourish and use or avoid whatever technology the designer chooses. -ken kahn (www.toontalk.com)

  6. An absolute must by rgmoore · · Score: 4

    One of my favorites, and IMO deserving of a place higher on the list was this one:

    9. If a game is representational rather than abstract, it may contain no conceptual non sequiturs, e.g. medical kits may not be hidden inside oil tanks.

    Games would be far, far better if they just adhered to this simple rule. I've seen far too many games that are difficult or impossible without a cheat guide simply because the require an illogical action on the player's part to go on to the next stage. I remember particularly clearly one step of Half Life that I couldn't get through without the cheat guide simply because I considered the action required and then rejected it as so ridiculous that the author couldn't possibly require you to do something that stupid. Any game designer who does something like that deserves to be flogged.

    --

    There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.

  7. they have it all wrong... by ywwg · · Score: 4

    They missed the entire point. Though the stated point of the dogme '95 rules were to get the junk out of movies, the rules themselves are generic, sweeping. "handheld only." period. not "There shall be no knights, elves, dwarves or dragons. Nor shall there be any wizards, wenches, bards, bartenders, golems, giants, clerics, necromancers, thieves, gods, angels, demons, sorceresses, undead bodies or body parts (mummified or decaying), Nazis, Russians, spies, mercenaries, space marines, stormtroopers, star pilots, humanoid robots, evil geniuses, mad scientists, or carnivorous aliens. And no freakin' vampires." Why not say "the game may not take place in a fantasy universe" or something like that.

    This is of course avoiding the problem with every one of these rules. The dogma rules were trying to regain some mythical past when men were men, and movies were pure. (which is bullshit, but that's another rant). The rules for "dogma 2001" can be summed up thusly:

    1. expensive hardware break my piggy bank.
    2. hardware isn't getting cheaper
    3. my mom won't buy me new hardware.
    4. cliches are cheap and stupid
    5. cliches suck.
    6. superfluous stuff is superfluous
    7. violence is bad, congress says so. it's also cliche in games.
    8. cliches are still stupid
    9. I think games should be like real life.
    10.random pet peeve / cliche

    A true set of "pure" rules would be much simpler:

    1. The game should not require the user to buy new hardware to play it. an X year-old machine should be adequet.
    2. Cliches and genres are to be avoided. They are cheap and overwrought. Innovative uses and twists on cliches that confound the player's expectation are permissable.
    3. There should be no superfluous content. The game should contain no more than is necessary to play.

    that's it. I don't believe violence is to be avoided, mostly because it's damn exciting and makes for a fun game. It is, however, overused and thus falls in to the cliche category.

    Keep in mind I think the original dogma rules were totally off the mark. Cinema is an artificial construction no matter how wobbly the camera is. Games definately need a shot in the arm, and hopefully they'll get it.

    ps, Continuum is still the best Dogma Ywwg game ever made... it has been posted to freenet if you want to check it out.

    freenet:KSK@/software/abandonware/dos/games/Cont in uum.zip

  8. eww by Golias · · Score: 4
    First of all, all DOGME95 movies suck.

    Why? Because the art of film is not the drama. Take away the auteurist director, the interesting camera work, and the other "trappings" they are hoping to avoid, and you are left with a stage play, shot on location with a souped-up camcorder. No thanks!

    Likewise with gaming... The best 3D games are the ones that are emersive. I can lose myself in a low-G Quake deathmatch, and imagine myself drifting through the air in a wide, parabolic art, emptying my shotgun at my enemy. It's magical and dreamlike. Take away the "death animation" and replace it with something less real-looking, and your diminish the experience.

    That said, I applaud this guys effort to urge more creative genre choiced.

    The most fun solo FPS I ever played was Outlaws by LucasArts. Nobody makes westerns into computer games, but they did it, and did a great job at it. I felt just like John Wayne when I walked through the middle of town with a rifle in my hands, just like Clint Eastwood when I lit dynamite sticks with my cigar, just like Buster Keaton as I was leaping from one train car to the next, and just like Robert Redford every time I ducked behind the corner of some saloon to reload my revolver.

    While I don't know if anybody should bother to follow these guidelines too cloesely, every game designer should read this manefesto just for the ideas it might give you. Here's a few that came to mind for me:

    CHARIOTEER: horse racing in the Roman Colleseum.

    MED-EVAC: play an unarmed medic who must enter battlefilds to reach wounded soldiers to bandage their wounds and get them on a vehicle to the MASH unit.

    TIMBER TYCOON: Buy and manage forest land to produce wood for lumber yards and paper mills. Clear-cut enough to make a profit, but don't attract attention from the environmentalists, or they will spike trees and pull other stunts that could injure your logging crew and/or slow down production.

    MARS MISSION: You have the required propulsion and life-support technology for a manned mission to Mars. Using actual orbit maps, plan a mission for the next available launch window and fly it. (A later expansion pack could involve building a sim space station.)

    --

    Information wants to be anthropomorphized.