Slashdot Mirror
Sid Meier Responds
What is your opinion on open source clones such as FreeCiv? FreeLoaders, or flatterers? :)
Response:
It's tough to make a blanket statement about all open source clones, but since developers and publishers rely very heavily on
intellectual property rights, any infringement or dilution of those rights can be detrimental to companies, games, and consumers. In
the case of Civilization, Take Two Interactive now owns all rights to the game series and fortunately, the franchise is still a mainstay
at Firaxis...so we feel pretty protective of the IP.
2. By Surt (22457):
Keeping PC gaming alive:
What factors do you think help keep PC gaming alive when competing with consoles, and do you foresee that PC gaming will continue to
survive when confronted with the next generation of consoles? From the reverse perspective, what prevents consoles from finally killing
off PC gaming?
Response:
Believe it or not, I think the biggest thing PCs have going for them in the console war is the mouse/keyboard interface. So many game
types are nearly unplayable without this simple mechanism. Real-time strategies, first-person shooters, point and click adventures, are
all best suited to a mouse and keyboard. Another important factor is the innate upgradeability of PCs vs. consoles. The fact that you
can still have a viable machine two years after it has been on the market, by simply adding RAM or a new video card is priceless. PCs
also benefit from fairly cost effective high-resolution monitors. Finally, you can't ignore how easy it is to connect PCs to the
internet (another mouse/keyboard must by the way). Being able to quickly, easily, and cheaply connect is a major plus, as it allows all
sorts of flexibility - from finding opponents to downloading patches and content to browsing forums and FAQs.
On the reverse side, consoles offer many positives as well. They represent a known quantity so it is easy to take advantage of everything they have to offer without worrying about the least common denominator. They are inexpensive to buy and easy to operate. They work well with your home theater and your living room without requiring a lot of technical know-how. Even with all of that, they will never "kill-off" computers because they aren't competing for the same market in the same fashion. There will always be room for both and that's good for me.
3. By codergeek42 (792304):
I think the big question on a lot of our minds is: Why did you start doing game design and programming in the first place?
Response:
I caught the computer bug in college, but never imagined that one day I would have a career making games for the computer. As a kid I
really enjoyed playing board games and card games, and was interested in reading books about history, pirates, airplanes...all of which
have been the topics in the games I've created. Bill Stealey and I started Microprose on a dare really...we were at a business conference
together and were playing a flight-sim arcade game. Bill was really impressed that I kept winning and I told him that I could tell what
the AI was going to do each time, so it was easy to win...and I said that I could make a better game in two weeks. Bill challenged me to
do just that and so began our game development company.
4. By Avacar (911548):
Balance:
When building any strategy game, where do you start when you attempt to balance the game? Do you find that you personally need to
playtest and try new concepts to balance games, or do the inherent mechanisms of your games lead towards making balance easier for you
to achieve?
Response:
My whole approach to making games revolves around first creating a solid prototype and then playing and improving the game over the
course of the 2-3 year development cycle...until we think it's ready for prime time. My experience in this area helps me to know what to
do and where to start. I definitely spend a lot of time playing the game before I let anyone else look at it. I also have quite a code
base that I've been using for a long time, so I know how certain systems will work before I even throw them in. Once the basics are in
and I'm comfortable letting other people see it, I like to watch brand new players play it first. It's much harder to make a game
balanced for newbies than for hard core gamers. I like to see where they have trouble and I try to eliminate things that are too
troublesome or difficult to grasp... it's really important that players feel rewarded at all times, so this step is critical for that
reason. Of course, once I have a good grasp on the new player experience, it's time to throw the game to the seasoned testers. For
them, I just keep ramping up difficulty by factors of 2 until they beg for mercy - it seems to take longer than it used to for that to
happen. :)
5. By WhiteBandit (185659):
Future Directions in Gaming:
I admire many of the great game designers who have pushed the boundaries in gaming (yourself, Will Wright and Peter Molyneux to name a
few). However, I can't help but feel that many of today's genres are stale and a lot of new games are mostly repeating past formulas as
we see many sequels or derivatives of previous games being released. This appears to be a trend that will continue. Where do you think
the future of gaming is headed, and how hard is it to introduce radical new ideas into the industry?
Response:
The cost of making games has gone through the roof, so understandably, publishers want to invest in games that are sure to sell...and
sequels for successful franchises are safe bets. It's very difficult to convince publishers to invest millions of dollars in a new game
idea...it's too risky. And, fans certainly seem to want more of what they love...Civilization, AoE, Sims...we keep making those games because
people keep asking for more.
The game industry will continue to grow and become a bigger part of main stream entertainment...and eventually take over the world J The constant advances in gaming systems will drive new ideas. I think we're just at the tip of the iceberg in gaming...there's so much more to come.
6. By Amoeba (55277):
Playability vs Graphics:
In any Slashdot gaming discussion, invariably the debate between playability vs. graphics comes up. "This game is pretty but the game
sucks!" vs. "Nethack is all I need man." The games you've had a hand in seem to emphasize intricate strategy, with graphics taking a
backseat for the most part. Some of the most successful games in the past have been very simple on the surface but can have amazing
depth, all without gee-whiz factor of purty lights and bleeding-edge graphics engines. How much focus do you place on the graphical
aspects of gaming, and do you think there is a way to achieve a balance without sacrifices on either end? How do you tackle that
problem? When I got started, there was only so much you could do with graphics so we had to leave a lot up to the player's imagination.
That was the beauty of those old games; the player filled in the gaps for you. If you put a green blob on the screen and called it a
dragon, it had the tendency of becoming a dragon so long as you were engaging the player's mind. Times change, though, and technology
marches on. People expect a lot more out of a computer or video game these days and we have to adjust. I still like to engage the
player's imagination, but they don't have to fill in so many gaps themselves.
Response:
This is very cool because I don't have to use so many info screens to show players what they need to know - which is a dream come true
for me. When we were remaking Pirates, it was very important to us that players be able to see the towns, discern their nationality,
and see how large and wealthy they were all by looking at the screen. In Civ IV, the guys have taken that concept even farther and you
can see at a glance everything you really need to know about a city.
On the other hand, it seems there are many times when graphics get the better of good judgment. I must say that I am a big fan of racing games like Gran Turismo, but sometimes it seems they are more focused on the replay than the race, which feels a little backwards to me. In fact, lately I've been let down by a bunch of racing games that looked amazing but were tragically flawed in some way. So, I'll stick with Gran Turismo 3.
One final note on this... Recently, I've been working on several prototypes and was surprised to find that I reached a point fairly early on when I just couldn't find any more fun in the concept - until I had some professionally created art. In the past, I was content to create my own art and never had any trouble envisioning gameplay, so this represents a fundamental change for me.
7. By truthsearch (249536):
AI:
I've been a huge fan of Civilization since it first came out. I've always thought the AI of the computer player is relatively good,
especially how each has certain characteristics which differentiate them. But AI in strategy games doesn't seemed to have advanced
drastically in the last 15 years. What do you imagine the next big advance in game AI will be? When will games really learn how you
play? Will we not be able to tell the difference between a human and computer competitor? I probably shouldn't be telling you this, but
in my opinion, the goal of AI is not necessarily to simulate a human response. The goal is to generate interest for the player by
providing the illusion of a human-like response - or not at all human-like, if that's what it takes to engage the player. I'm not
entirely sure that complex games like Civ could ever have true human responses because there is so much complexity that the AI would
bring almost any machine to its knees.
Response:
Consider this: we have only recently been able to truly simulate intelligence that can compete with a human in chess. Chess is
obviously a complex intellectual game, but it is ultimately fairly easy to define because there are only 64 squares and 6 types of
movement. Plus, the rules of engagement are simple - attack and win. Add to that the huge amount of known strategy that has been
collected and studied throughout the years and it is even more definable. In a game like Civ, we have over 80 units, all with
different movement rates, strengths, special abilities, experience levels, etc. We also have to decide where to place cities, what to
build, who to be nice to and who to make war with. We also have to decide what to research, what religion to spread, what Civics to
adopt, etc. All in all, I don't expect to see anything close to true human intelligence any time soon, as long as games continue to get
more complex.
9. By Chickenofbristol55 (884806):
Question:
Since the first Civilization game in 1991, how do you think the gaming industry has changed? And, is the change for the better or for
the worse?
Response:
Obviously the gaming industry has grown exponentially since 1991. The cost of entry is much higher than it was when I started. The days
of guys building a game in their garage and then selling it to a publisher are behind us, I'm afraid. To make a game today it takes more
money, time, people, technology...which is why there are fewer independent developers and the big publishing houses run the show. Frankly,
I liked it better in the old days, when things were less complicated (I'm showing my age here). We were breaking new ground, and it was
really fun. Not to say that it's not fun now...I still love making games and have a bunch of new ideas for games I'd like to create.
The stakes are much higher now, but the quality of many of the games produced today is pretty impressive. The changes in the industry have definitely benefited the consumers - they have an array of game systems and games to choose from...and the competitive environment drives developers to strive to out-do each other...which pushes game design forward.
All things considered...there's nothing else I'd rather do for a living than make games. It's the best job in the world.
10. By TuringTest (533084):
What kind of game do you enjoy?:
Good games (and specially videogames) entail a great deal of simulation of reality; They are bits of everyday life simplified for casual
enjoyment. What do you feel is more important for a game to be great and/or successful: that the mechanics create an environment with
interesting and complex possibilities, or that they are fun and easy to grasp? Is balance required between these two design forces? And
which of the two do you enjoy most in your own experiences as game player?
Response:
I like to play all kinds of games...on a variety of systems. My son and I play games on the PC, PS2, Xbox, GameCube...and they range from
Warcraft, to Halo to Grand Turismo...to Civilization. :)
I definitely try to create, and most enjoy playing, games that strike a balance between depth/complexity and ease of use. My goal when making a game is to find the right mix of story and mechanics that will deliver many hours of fun to players. We try to put the player in a situation where they can be something great - King, Pirate Captain, Tycoon, Entrepreneur - and create an interesting world where they can have an adventure, build an empire, conquer the world etc. The game can be as deep as a player wants it to be. In Civ for example, a game can last from 1 hour to 40 hours, depending on what the player wants. I've watched kids play Civ on a very surface level and have a great time with it...and I've seen hard core gamers go as deeply into the game as possible...where things become pretty complex...and those folks have a fun experience too. We've tried to make Civ IV easy for anyone to pick up and play...and then created layers and layers of depth and complexity just waiting to be explored by those who dare to venture there. But...the interface remains familiar and easy-to-use throughout....and the visuals add a whole new dimension to the experience. Sorry for the shameless plug...but it's our baby. :)
It's tough to make a blanket statement about all open source clones, but since developers and publishers rely very heavily on intellectual property rights, any infringement or dilution of those rights can be detrimental to companies, games, and consumers. In the case of Civilization, Take Two Interactive now owns all rights to the game series and fortunately, the franchise is still a mainstay at Firaxis...so we feel pretty protective of the IP.
Apparently, Take Two also owns all rights to the Sid Meier's Personal Opinion franchise.
Still, the rest of the interview was very interesting.
The most popular questions from the slashdot comments don't get picked.
For the second game developer interview in a row +5 modded questions about linux ports of the games have been posted and ignored.
Come one, slashdot. Just ask the questions we've modded up.
"If they have both, tell them we use Linux. And if they have that, tell them the computers are down." -Dave Chapelle
What does "intellectual property" have to do with clones, unless they are using assets lifted or derivatived from the original work? You can't own ideas and if you could, there would be no games industry.
well i don't know about anybody else here, but i hate playing a fps on a console. i'll take my good ol' keytronic kb and intellimouse optical over a controller anyday.
Yes, frankly. Two-sticking ala Goldeneye is tolerable, at least for a fairly simple FPS, but having easy access to dozens of keys for things like weapon switching, and having a mouse which can aim far more accurately than a joystick, still makes for a far better experience.
Media that can be recorded and distributed can be recorded and distributed.
-kfg
The fact that you can still have a viable machine two years after it has been on the market, by simply adding RAM or a new video card is priceless.
Yea, but the thing is that these days you can buy a new console for LESS than a decent video card...
TODO: Something witty here...
"I also have quite a code base that I've been using for a long time, so I know how certain systems will work before I even throw them in."
My first thought on this was, Wow, wouldn't it be great to Open Source this code base. My second thought was, isn't this a symptom of a larger problem? We want code to be modular and reusable so complex games can be developed quickly, yet we complain that games aren't original enough because people are reusing code. Seems like a fundamental problem to me.
Keeping PC gaming alive:
What factors do you think help keep PC gaming alive when competing with consoles, and do you foresee that PC gaming will continue to survive when confronted with the next generation of consoles? From the reverse perspective, what prevents consoles from finally killing off PC gaming?
I missed this question when the original article asking for questions was posted. But this is a silly waste. Sid's answer is spot on, and I wish I knocked this down a knotch with a mod point.
Lumping an entire market together and insisting they are direct competitors for the exact same dollar is stupid. Civ4 cannot be played well with a PS2 controller, and Grand Turismo plays crappy on a keyboard. You can find a way to make it work, but no one is going to spend the time to try to code it. It's a waste. The market will show you that there is room for both, and while there are lots of crossovers, you will also see that there are lots of areas where there is absolutely no crossover, simply because of interface issues.
Sid makes some other great points about graphics and upgrades you can do to a PC. This goes into the fact that a $100-$300 console can run a fast paced racing game with better performance than a $1500 computer. PC games are notorious for being slow and skipping frames. Some console games do this, but that's considered a bug in the console game and it doesn't do so well if it performs badly. However, in the PC world if a game has godly system requirements for any reason, the blame is more often put on the PC and not the person who coded it to require too much power. Sometimes that's deserving but having to spend hours just to fine tune your system to play Quake or Doom is nuts.
They are all gaming companies, but different games for different platforms will always be here, and I hope it gets even more diverse, because we need the diversity.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
Frankly, I was surprised at your nomination. Many of us would like to know: With your background as a game designer, what in particular do you feel makes you qualified to sit on the Supreme Court?
It's the fine detail aiming with the mouse, combined with the movement and weapon selection on the keyboard. It only works because you have both of them on a desk, so you don't have to have something light enough or wieldy enough to hold in your hands.
With consoles, you need a small controller you can hold in mid-air, so for example aiming and button use has to be done with your thumbs, rather than most of your fingers. I've played Halo on the PC and XBox, and the PC version is unquestionably better in my mind.
That said, the next generation nintendo with it's gyro controllers will actually use the mid-air movement of the controller(s), so FPS games on it may well end up equal or superior to the PC experience. We'll see.
Remember kids, it's all fun and games until someone commits wholesale galactic genocide.
Hmm...you must have accidentally researched political red tape.
When's Civ IV being released?
Bloggy Goodness
I've been playing Civ3 on a pentium M lately and it's still way too slow when the game gets into the modern age.
:)
As soon as your PC hits the modern age you'll be fine
How much RAM do you have?
I'm playing on an older P4 (2.something GHz I think) but I've got 1GB of RAM and I don't notice that much of a slow-down in the modern era. I usually play on huge worlds with lots of civs on them, too. I bought this machine about 3-4 years ago.
There is a slowdown in gameplay, but you don't seem to be discussing that kind of thing since you are mentioning processor and not things like the actual gameplay. I find that by the modern era, in those huge worlds, I have so many things to move and do that each turn can take me 10 minutes or so. I definitely hope that, in Civ4, I'll have even better automating options for city stuff. (Civ 3 really pisses me off that, despite orders to the governors to never build units or to always build any city improvement they can, it still sometimes builds units, or shifts to "wealth" instead of building improvements from the expansion packs. GRR! All the time I save with automation gets spent fighting back against the automation when it misbehaves. Bad expansion!)
Just recently, in honor of City of Villains, Civ4, Quake 4 and FEAR, I have bitten the bullet and upgraded to an AMD 64 system w/SLI and 2GB of RAM. What I spent in hardware costs, I'll save in heating expenses, for sure.
Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
Every time I see your username in the comment section it's next to a modded-up post "thanking" whatever the article is about.
A Firefox article is posted, and within 15 minutes there's you with a "Thanks, Firefox developers!" comment.
Google announces a new feature of their Print service and immediately it's "Thanks Google!!" in a comment of yours that shoots straight up to 4 or 5.
I guess what I'm saying is... shut up.
If you "get" pointers add me as a friend (116)!
He doesn't own the IP anymore, Take2 does.
And Take2, like any big publisher, will move to quash clone developers when they become a threat.
It's a business. It's not there to promote independent developers, it's there to make money.
We should be happy that Sid & Take2 are continuing to develop games, to improve the Civ franchise, instead of sitting back and slapping lawsuits on anyone who tries to copy older games.
Disclaimer: I do not work for Take2, but I'm in the same building as them.
"Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
"Surely, after all the massive hits he's made and the piles of money he sleeps on, he can afford to be a little gracious towards an open source game project."
Ahh, spoken like a true Socialist!
'I say he's made enough money, and I think he should be compel^H^H^H^H^H^H happy to give back to the people who played his games!'
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
Given his comments on input devices on PCs being so far ahead of those on consoles, I wonder what Sid Meier thinks of the Nintendo Revolution controller. It seems to close some gaps while widening others. Then it also does things the PC hasn't yet dreamed of. IMO, it will be perfect for playing strategy games.
The global economy is a great thing until you feel it locally.
As a big fan of Civ1&2 and Alpha Centauri, I find Sid's answers to be very disappointing.
The silliest one is the answer to Question 7.
Sid makes the following argument : Chess, which has simple rules, is the current limit of what computer AI can do as well as a human. So Civilization 4, which has much more complex rules, is too difficult to allow computer AI to compete with humans.
This argument is false : for instance, look at the traditional Asian "Go" game. It has very simple rules, much simpler than Chess. If Sid's argument made sense, computer should be able to play Go very well. But the reality is that as of today, Computers cannot compete with a skilled human. Thus : there is no direct relationship between the complexity of the rules, and the difficulty to design a strong AI.
Not to mention Sid's answer to the question on Free clones... he has no interest in software freedom.
War doesn't prove who's right, just who's left.
And all of that legitimately tax deductible. Nevermind how much fun the guy has at work, that's the really cool part. Government subsidized computers, console, and games. I'm in the wrong industry.*
Cheers
-b
* (well, I do get to deduct pr0n, so I guess it's not all that bad)
If I wanted a sig I would have filled in that stupid box.
Violence in current videogames? A South Carolina man was able to foil an attempted carjacking using methods learned from Grand Theft Auto. I think both sides of the "violent games" story need to be told!
Number of hours I've spent on Civ, Sid needs to be putting at least an hour a month here for a few years. Factor in all the other /. readers, and Sid Meier games, that number should ramp up to about 8 hours/week, for the next coupla years. Get comfy Sid, it's payback time.
bkd
I found that Civ II was the best version of the game, having seen and played CIV I, II, III, and Alpha Centauri.
CIV II had really humerous videos of the advisory council, user customizable maps, continent sizes, climate choices, the ability to modify the landscape within the games via engineers, and if you chose to, beat the pants of the game by cheating inside of the game - not having to resort to hacking the game saves (making every hut a new city, unit, or most powerfully IMO a new discovery was amusing). Furthermore, the CIV II engine was a growth upon, not a near complete rebuilding of the original CIV I engine, like Civ II was to me. This obviously makes some people love or hate Civ III for that very reason (the power of culture in Civ III was a major change).
Civ III, while cute, was too different in terms of added complexity to interest me for long. For me, any good simulation game is one where after you understand the core concept well enough, you can, with a little luck and good planning, have a decent chance of winning most scenarios hands down vs the computer AI; PvP is another matter, but the core knowledge of the games dynamics still allows for you to be a very challenging opponent to other players most of the time... I also wish they had brought back the real actors doing Advisory Counil Videos; CIV III could have stood to have been a bit more humerous.
Anyway, I'm sure some may say Civ III's increase in complexity and depth are what made it great and that my dissatisfaction just shows I'm stupid/non adaptive or something like that - maybe so, but I have found that if a game is interesting enough for me I'll spend whatever time it takes to master the game. Few games do that for me any more and Civ II, Diablo II, and Alpha Centari were the last simulation games that really grabbed my attention for months on end (now I'm really showing my age).
I hope Civ IV is just as captivating for me as II was...
uR iGn0ranc3, Their Power
Yeah,right.....for gaming.
IANAL, but I did have to pass the stupid law exam to be licensed as a professional engineer in Ontario. One thing I remember is that, under Canadian law, you cannot sue unless damages are incurred. This makes sense, in that a case where no damages are alleged would be a waste of the court's time.
However, in IP cases, it seems like the damages can include loss of potential sales, or reduction of the value of a brand.
As one consequence, I have heard other people argue that the GPL might not withstand a legal challenge, because violating it cannot incur monetary damages. Again, IANAL, but I'm sure some clever lawyer could come up with a counter-argument.
Toronto-area transit rider? Rate your ride.
To each her own, but the cutesy videos of the council got very old very quickly. "Cute" isn't the goal at all in your typical world domination game, is it? Spaceward Ho, maybe...
For me, any good simulation game is one where after you understand the core concept well enough, you can, with a little luck and good planning, have a decent chance of winning most scenarios hands down vs the computer AI...
Perhaps you're unfamiliar with difficulty settings? The lowest setting in any Civ game would give you what you want.
For my money I could do without essentially all of the graphic engine changes from II to III. The addition of "culture" and the way the previous games' rules (about military units being "away from home," about moving through "enemy" territory) were worked into it made for a huge, huge improvement. That was an elegant way to fold in some previously awkward and conspicuously unrealistic mechanics.
In no game do I care a whit for repetitively "cute" video sequences that give me no useful information. Those things were painful after the first time through, and in a Civ game replay value is every-, every-, everything.
"Fundamentalism" isn't about divine morality. It's about human authority.
The game will be released on the 25th having entered final CD production on the 19th.
Source
-- Political fascism requires a Fuhrer.
CIV III could have stood to have been a bit more humerous.
I found the following amusing when trying to change governments:
You say you want a revolution?
Suck figs.
It's about wealth redistribution: the GGP poster apparently resents the fact that Meier is wealthy, and feels that he hasn't been generous enough.
When people dictate to others how generous they should be, it always reminds me of socialists who would compel Meier to fork over his fortune through taxation.
OK, so maybe calling him a socialist was a stretch, but I have a huge problem with people who want to dictate the generosity of others.
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
No, that has a very definite price. Consoles are still viable machines two years (and longer) after purchase without any upgrades. They generally have much better compatibility with new games than old computers do.
... and then they built the supercollider.
F*kn canadians. :P
I don't see where he asked for the government to enforce it. Many people disagree about choices to do with money. That doesn't mean they want to use force. For example - does disapproving that someone spends all their money on hookers and cocaine mean that one necessarily wants the government to outlaw hookers and cocaine? Of course not. it's just a personal judgement.
Meier has enough money to be comfortable, so suing people or being overly protective of his profits would seem greedy to many people. And greed is not usually considered a positive thing. Of course, he is free to be as greedy as he wants, but we don't have to respect him if he chooses to do so.
*Note: I am not trying to suggest Meier is greedy here. Just deconstructing the logic of your post.
... and then they built the supercollider.
The current boogeyman is "terrorist". Totalitarian socialistic regiments have either fallen (Soviet Union) or are converting themselves to totalitarian market economies (China), while the non-totalitarian mixed-economy commonwealths (most European countries, especially Nordic countries) have become corrupted by globalism for the benefit of large international corporations and to the detriment of their people.
Osama bin Laden, on the other hand, has kept frustrating all US efforts to find him, and is still a viable boogeyman. Please use current boogeyman termonology; otherwise, the younger people here won't get your attempt to make the parent look bad.
This message has been brought to you by Boomonology Inc - let us deliver your boogeyman !
The grandparent didn't say so. The grandparent said that Sid can afford to be tolerant of people who are making a new game based on Civilization as a non-monetary-profit project. These people don't want Sids money, they want nothing from him except to be left alone. So far they have gotten what they want.
However, I do find the very idea that you can get the government to stop someone from reimplementing your idea in the form of a new product deeply disturbing, and completely contrary to the idea of free market. Perhaps Wine should also be shut down, since they are reimplementing the Windows API, even if their product shares no code with Windows ?
Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.
What are these? Game clones? Clones of what? Google wasn't bringing anything up in its top results.
this is a great example of how peoples notion of *what culture is* is being hugely diluted by the massive corporate push for expanded intellectual property rights.
back in the Good Old Days, kids used to be able to draw inspiration from comic books, movies, games, art, books, and anything else to make their own. i'd wager that we've all done it at one point or another, because its not only a way of learning, its a way of consuming, interpreting, and reproducing culture. sure a lot of it was straight out copying. but no one mistook the original for the interpretation.
Now, the open-source movement is trying to make its own Civ tribute. There's no mistaking that their efforts are a pale imitation of the original, an interpretation of something that inspired them. Yet here we go with the corporatist bravado -- from an artist like Sid Meyer fer gawd sakes! Does Take Two really feel threatened by the equivalent of a childs interpretation? should they?
obviously, i'm not talking about propogating Madonnas latest MP3 across the net anymore than i'm saying people should indiscriminantly copy the retail version of Civ4. i'm talking about the right to take that MP3, rip sections from it, mix it in your own interpretation, and share it with the world. i'm talking about drawing inspiration from a great game, taking what you like from it, complimenting the author with your own efforts, and sharing that with who ever cares. that should be the right we all enjoy for all time, not the right for some abstract entity to keep making money off us long after death. or is that why you makes games Sid?
i don't think so. artists, programmers, designers, and all the other creative producers of intellectual property should remember what the production and reproduction of culture means: that their work will live beyond them and be enjjoyed by as many people as possible. nuts to Take Two and Sid Meyer for forgetting that people -- not dollars -- is what their efforts are all about.
Homepage
Obiter Ludens Game Blog
I find it really odd that people have been bitching about some of Sid's responses about clones of his games. The big argument I have seen here is the same old OSS stuff we hear trying to rationalize moral stances. I wonder how many people here read the interview with an open mind. Sid just gave all OSS gamers and would-be developers the idea of a lifetime and I haven't seen anyone actually mention it yet because they're all too busy complaining about the clone comment.
Sid mentioned in the interview:
It's very difficult to convince publishers to invest millions of dollars in a new game idea...it's too risky.
This is the golden apple here! To all OSS game developers, if you want to contribute to the open source communities AND to the game industry in a meaningful way, develop games based on new game ideas. Be radical. Be innovative. Be crazy. You are in a position to beta test ideas that the game industry can never possibly afford to put themselves in. If you are an OSS game developer, instead of trying to make clones of games and risk legal action, why not take the road less traveled and develop new games based on ideas we have never seen before. Try contacting people like Sid and volunteering to develop these new game ideas. The gaming companies can certainly use an infusion of new genres and ideas and OSS could be the best test-bed for these ideas. For all who take the stance that the whole world should be OSS, this is also the way to do that. Develop your new game ideas as OSS games and be the first, the original. One of the reasons clones like FreeCiv are seen as half-assed (as I saw someone mention earlier) is because it isn't the first. If it were the first, it might be looked at as a better game or at least not half-assed. The original is almost always more likeable than the clones.
I'm normally not the type of guy that tries to find the good in everything, but it seems a lot of the OSS people are always trying to find the bad in everything. Instead of trying to find ways of accusing people of being "the man" and trying to stomp you for participating in OSS, take a look at the whole picture and you just might find some good stuff in there like this.
And, on a subject slightly differnt than the subject of this post indicates: Sid, thank you very much for your responses. I enjoyed reading the interview and am extremely envious of you. Back on my C64, I always dreamed of putting out the next big game but never had the balls to see it through. And you're right. It is very difficult to get into the gaming business today. I wish it weren't so because I would love to join the ranks of game developers from my garage/basement.
> What I spent in hardware costs, I'll save in heating expenses, for sure.
:)
Get AMD's CPU drivers if your motherboard supports Cool-N-Quiet (tm). I've tested it out, and my brand new AMD 64 chip underclocks to about 1 Ghz when idle. That translates to less heat, which can in turn lead to a quieter system, as well. (Some mobos can dynamically undervolt the fan to slow it down when the chip is cool.)
What you save in electricity, you can use to heat your house more efficiently.