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.

Comments

Flaws in the Theory...

[FortKnox]

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...

--

Your perspective is different

[atrowe]

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.

Let's have good games - high-tech and low-tech

[toontalk]

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)