Slashdot Mirror
Hands on with SiN Episodes
onethumb writes "The video game industry may be on the brink of a sea-change just like music has seen and movies are in the middle of now. Valve began it by selling millions of copies of Half-Life 2 online with Steam, and Ritual's about to really turn up the heat by proving that online episodic game development really works. We'll get better games, more frequently, and with new, innovative gameplay. I spent some quality time with SiN Episodes and it looks like everyone wins - Ritual, Valve, and you." From the article: "Everyone wants episodic games. Developers want it because they get to make better games (by listening to their fans suggestions every 6 months and incorporating it directly into the next chapter) and do it more cheaply (6 months of game development vs years. Do the math). Gamers want it because their favorite games will be more frequent, higher quality, and more innovative since developers can now take some risks with different & new gameplay. But figuring out if it's a money-maker is a big risk. Someone's gotta put their hard-earned dough on the line and try it out."
I think the real question here is how long it takes to play through an episode and if an every-6-months release schedule is going to be responsive enough.
If I can play through an episode in a week and then have to wait 25 weeks for the next episode...
Given, the marketing materials on the site state that the game is very replayable because it doesn't follow a set path, allowing for more variation in replays. But still, how much variation can you get to make the 25 week wait more bearable?
I think this is why MMORPGs do so well, because the constant interaction with other players helps fill in the gaps. If it's mostly interacting with NPCs or head-to-head frag wars, it can get old.
The 1998 version is based on Quake II. IIRC, the Id gaming engines allowed for user-created missions/levels. If this new version of SiN allows for player-created extensions/expansions, that might help bridge the gap between official episode releases. Still, I think that if they're going to sell it on an episodic basis, a quarterly release schedule (at minimum) is needed to keep people hooked.
- Greg
Start a happiness pandemic
I mean, aren't they? regular patches, feedback... some more than others, true, but they all add content and features as it goes on...
"Waste not one watt!" - CZ
So every 6 months you get another demo length bit of a game? Spiffy.. and by the time you get to part 4 the games two years out of date and looks vile. People stop buying each episodes, game fails, story ends up as a cliff hanger due to resources drying up.
This has "dumbass" idea written all over it. Take the two years and recent a decent game and I'll buy it, advice my friends to buy it and try and support it as best I can. Make a couple of demos and space them out over a year and I'll have forgotten by the end of episode two because I'll have found something else I wish to play/support.
I like muppets.
(rimshot)
Thank you!
"Everyone wants episodic games."
Everyone? I don't think that means what you thinks it means.
I cannot stress enough how much games need to keep gaining in artistic direction and accessibility. The biggest obstacles are new customers who like the game but find the time daunting and learning the control layout to do something as simple as shoot ridiculous (which Nintendo is of course changing), and the lack of originality.
When games can overcome these obstacles, they will do to movies what movies and television did to books and radio.
Ex nihilo nihil fit.
yes!
Everquest,
Guildwars,
Star Wars galaxies...
3 Games, very different in many ways, although all MMORPGS, but they all change, have eposodic content of a type...
Anything really new in this idea other than the idea of applying it to a different genre of game?
Star wars had the biggest change i think i've seen in any game, they completely overhauled part of the game, now if that isn't putting your money on the line then i dont know what is.
- http://www.milkme.co.uk
Developers want it because they get to make better games (by listening to their fans suggestions every 6 months and incorporating it directly into the next chapter)
Error. Administrators for online games (MMORPGS and FPSs) always degenerate to following their own desires for upcoming changes. They will, without fail, fall into one of the following categories.
-Small games: Personally invested with their own character
-Large games: Need to "protect and punish" the customers overrides reason
See also: Star Wars Galaxies
This actualy worries me. If listening to their fans suggestions turns out to be letting the game's forum drive development. It is my opinion that the forum is the single worst thing to happen to the MMO genrea, and I'd rather it not squeeze it's way into more traditional games.
The problem is that most forum-posters are not game designers, they don't really know what makes a game fun to play, they know what makes a game easy. This is why people make and use "trainers" and other cheat programs, even though they will almost certainly and instantly wreak gameplay. They know what they think they want, but they are rarely right, and even when they are, they generaly don't represent the greater community.
My fear is that too much user feedback will lead to stagnation. The people most vocal in feedback channels are generaly concerned with making a game more like their last favorite game. Developers should be concerned with making it more like your next favorite game. It's the difference between looking backward and looking forward.
If forums teach us anything, it is that logic and critical thinking should be required courses in the public schools.
Granted, the release cycle is longer, but aren't multi-game stories episodic?
Sly Cooper and the Thievius Raccoonus
Sly 2: Band of Thieves
Sly 3: Honor Among Thieves
Jak and Daxter: The Precursor Legacy
Jak II
Jak 3
Jak X: Combat Racing
Shadow Hearts
Shadow Hearts: Covenant
Shadow Hearts: The New World
This just feels like a cheap grab at gamer's money to me. "I know! We'll just re-release the same thing for 3 years straight! Add a new map and a voice clip, and you're done!" At least now, the story goes different places, and when I spend my money I know I'm getting a full game.
I don't buy books by the chapter, why would I buy my games this way?
e2 | LJ
I don't want to buy every little expansion and turn what SHOULD be a "pay once-play forever" game into a bastardized version of paying a monthly fee.
This is just them trying to get us another step closer to pay-to-play, they're just talking about the initial benefits from it.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
MMO players don't want the game to be easy... they want their characters to be better than others. This is more of an issue with that particular genre than in most other types of games, because MMOs are highly competetive and tie you into one particular character. Compare that to, say, a fighting or racing game, where if I think a character or car is unbalanced (ZOMG nerf Ivy!!!!1) I can just drop it and play another without much waste of invested time. Or any single-player game, where "exploits" and stuff don't really matter. If I want SiN to be easier, I'll turn down the difficulty setting.
The funny thing, IMO, is that the original "SiN" was pretty much universally panned as another faceless Quake2 clone (although I kind of enjoyed it). Now the sequels are part of some kind of industry-changing avant-garde thing... go figure.
Hmmm... replace "Episodic Game" with "Virtual Reality" and re-read the article
"... and Ritual's about to really turn up the heat by proving that VIRTUAL REALITY really works. We'll get better games, more frequently, and with new, innovative gameplay. I spent some quality time with RISE OF THE ROBOTS and it looks like everyone wins - developer, publisher and you." From the article: "Everyone wants VIRTUAL REALITY. Developers want it because they get to make better games (by listening to their fans suggestions every 6 months and incorporating it directly into the next chapter) and do it more cheaply (6 months of game development vs years. Do the math). Gamers want it because their favorite games will be more frequent, higher quality, and more innovative since developers can now take some risks with different & new gameplay. But figuring out if it's a money-maker is a big risk. Someone's gotta put their hard-earned dough on the line and try it out."
So let me see if I've got this straight. I'm a bit stupid, so please, bear with me...
The next big leap in games development will be releasing games that have spent 18 less months in development. This will make them better games?
Wow. I really don't believe it. I must be SOOOOOOOO fucking stupid.
Stupid, stupid me...
TV (series)is just episodic movies. It is a model that works. Each episode (regardless of time to release) contains more of some things, new other things, plenty of old stuff that works, etc.
Now put this in the context of a game. Sure it is a new model, but the idea is the same. Popularity in some aspects will drive further development of those elements that draw the most people in and keep them coming back. Less popular elements will fall out. You will 'watch' the next episode if you want to or you wont.
But two things stand out in my mind here
Do I smell a 'Sign this web petition to "save SiN episode 5" from being cancelled' in the air in the future?
what exactly does innovate gameplay even mean? When was the last time you played a game that was so new, different, and "innovative" that it really stuck with you. Half-life 2 is fun, no doubt, but I would not describe any part of it (including the gravity gun) as "innovative" Tetris was innovative, SimCity was innovative, Wolfenstein 3D was innovative. Most games released today would be considered evolutionary at best, not innovative. I will play SiN, and I will prolly enjoy it, but 2 months later I probably wont remember it.
Fascism is the greatest political ideology ever conceived. Sorry.
The problem is that most forum-posters are not game designers, they don't really know what makes a game fun to play, they know what makes a game easy.
This is completely true. Plus...
The people who leave feedback for a game, especially in forums it seems, are the people who are dis-satisfied. The people who enjoy the game don't complain, suggest modifications, or even turn up just to say they're happy. What happens is the company who is 'listening to the fans' ends up listening to everybody *but* the fans, and the new game ends up alienating all the people who liked the original.
With the spelling "SiN", I first think of Nitrogen-doped Silicon.
Ritual Entertainment uses the lowercase, but many sites have it with the capital 'N'. What gives?
If I had any mod points, you'd defeniatly get a +1 insightful. Sadly I used them all up, so I'll just sign in agreement with you.
A perfect example of what you're talking about is present in two different forms right now.
1. The First Person Shooter
2. The MMORPG
First, the FPS. If you want an example of a deep FPS, the games you're looking for are Doom 2, QuakeWorld, Quake 2 and Quake 3's CPMA mod. There is a reason people are still playing all of those games today Unfortuniatly, CounterStrike came along and absolutely killed this genre. Why? It was more pubbie friendly. Complete newbies to the game could get a few kills on even the most experienced pros through dumb luck. Yet you'd be lucky to get a single frag on an experienced Doom or Quake pro. (Nightmares of losing 50-0 on Doom2 Map01...-_-) The skill curve for those two games are much higher, but unfortuniatly, because of this, newbies would rather go play a game they can occationally get a kill in then try and improve their skills.
Second, the MMORPG. Three words: World of Warcraft. Now, I'm a big fan of Total Annihilation, and while Blizzards's RTS's were very well produced and had great stories, their actual gameplay always felt a little limited compared to TA. However, apparently the huge crowd who adores Blizzard now loves their new MMORPG, World of Warcraft. Unfortuniatly, WoW has several gameplay problems.
1. There is no incentive to group. In 35 levels, I never once felt like I HAD to group with players. However, I was totally turned off when I found out that...
2. Once you reach Level 60, forget about grouping anywhere, except as prerequisites for raids. You're doing raids, my friend, until you bleed from every orface.
On one hand, soloing gets very boring. On the other, getting together a cohecive raid is very very time consuming and usually involves a guild or schedule of some sort. Where is the content for people who want to play in a group but don't have the time to set aside for 3+ hour raids? The problem with WoW is that PuG are absolutely terrible because it's rare that you find people who knows how to play their class, myself included. Why? Meaningless death penalty. Your items have to be repaired, but I guarentee you that if something like XP debt/loss and the possibility of losing hard earned items was implemented, you would be MUCH more careful about where you went instead of brute forcing your way through a mission. Strangely, I arrived at this conclusion before trying Everquest. Unfortuniatly, when I did try EQ on a freeshard, it was impossible to get a group anywhere, mainly because of population issues, and I also couldn't get past its clunky interface and very dated graphics. Thankfully, I doubt Vanguard will have that sort of problem.
What did I take away from those two examples? Essentially, gamers rarely think about the long term implications of implimenting certain things. All they want to do is feel like winners. The less of a skill curve your game has, the shorter span of time it will entertain people before they move on to the next "hot game".
Anyway, those are my two cents on the matter, my opinion based partly on observation, partly on experience, so take that as you will.
I'm the guy with the unpopular opinion
We'll get better games, more frequently, and with new, innovative gameplay.
I've been hearing that for 10 years.
Regarding the question, will episodic content sell. In the case of HL2 it would have worked. I got the game in January 2005. Six months later I would have glady bought another "episode" (provided the price is right). But here we are 1 year later and no "expansion pack".
Why am i citing HL2 as the example? Because I feel this episodic content will only work for certain games. HL2 would be a no-brainer. I ended the game and wanted MORE. But if SiN sucks, or isn't that great, no one will buy episodes.