Slashdot Mirror
Why Bother With Episodic Games?
Gamasutra is running a piece today entitled Why Bother With Episodic Games? Author Rick Sanchez ponders the rationale behind this business model, and offers up a few reasons why 'the next big thing' is actually a good idea for both gamers and game developers. From the article: "Traditional game development does have a feedback loop, but with years between results. Betting the studio that the design decisions made for a sequel were the right ones can be disastrous if you were wrong. With short iteration cycles, gameplay mechanics that an audience responds to can be used to turn a moderate performer into a hit. This model still needs to be vetted out in the video game world, but it works in every other form of media that we consume, so there's no reason to think it won't work for games."
We have "episodic nature of games" to thank for some of the most unfulfilling ending sequences ever. And to say it works everywhere so it should work in video games is rubbish, because it doesn't always work everywhere (I cite the ending of Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest, which IMO was reminiscent of Halo 2's ending in terms of closure and satisfaction).
I like basketball!!1!
This may be all well-and-good for a $5-$10 game. But if you're going to release a $50-$60 game, you'd better make DAMN sure it delivers more than just promises of FUTURE content and FUTURE fixes.
-Eric
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
"Episodic content" was already around for a long time in the form of expansion packs (and related tactics.) For example:
- Doom was released - shortly later, there was Doom II and Final Doom.
- Quake was released - it received two expansion packs. (As a side note, a bug involving firing the thunderbolt underwater regressed back into the expansions.)
- Quake 2 was released, and it also received two expansions.
- The Sims is known for a large set of expansion packs - while not technically episodic, it's the exact same system used in episodic development.
I'm a busy guy who likes to game. Specifically, I like to game for a weekend or two, then I might not have time to game for anyware from a couple of weeks to maybe a month. Episodes help me to "finish" a game so I don't have to worry about where I left off when I finally have a chance to get back to it. I don't have to worry about my skills getting stale right at the time the game is hitting me with the really hard stuff because I'm able to "finish" it in one go.
When I here about how long Final Fantasy 12 is or Zelda Twilight Princess, I involuntarily cringe. It's not that I don't think it would be fun, it's just that I don't have time for that much fun in my life.
TW
unlike movies, games have the unique ability to be expanded upon without creating an entirely new game/episode. Modding (even if commercially) is one of the greatest things to have ever happened to games. Just look at the successes of CounterStrike and Desert Combat. It seems the problem with episodic games is that their lifespan, or playability, shrinks down to that of movies. Modding can help keep the original game's work going for years, while at the same time introducing new material.
telling us why episodic content is great and start showing us. Yes, I know about all the advantages, but maybe we should start talking about overcoming the hefty drawbacks rather than pretending they don't exist.
I honestly do not see a future for episodic content. Like microtransactions, the thought of the idea becoming an industry standard makes me sick to my stomach. But hey, I'm waiting for someone to prove me wrong. That's the problem. For all the talk, no one has done it.
It seems to be working out pretty well with the new Sam & Max games. Aside from the terrible audio quality on the voice samples, the game is top-notch in every way, and does a great job of capturing the feel of the classic LucasArts adventure. Sure, not all games fit the episodic model, but it's just right for a hilarious adventure game.
LOAD "SIG",8,1
Sam and Max is why I bother with episodic gaming. The last episode was a joyous romp through the psychotic universe that only a dog detective and his lagomorphic sidekick could inhabit. Speaking of, I believe a new episode is coming out this week.... I can't wait.
This isn't the first time we've covered episodic gaming here, but I'll say what I've said before. Depending on what the game is, episodic gaming could be a really good move. Tell Tale Games seems to be taking the lead in episodic gaming with Bone and Sam and Max, and so far the feedback that I've read has been quite positive.
:)
Most of the costs for any episodic series would be for the first episode - 3D modeling, bitmapping, fine-tuning the graphics, developing the game engine, and so forth. After that, the rest if just using what tools have already been made available plus additional characters and graphics, possibly some engine tweaks as well. Plus is gives the company a bit of capital to work with to produce additional episodes.
It also gives the gamers the ability to say, "Hey, this is where we think you got it wrong" and let the company make the changes for the next episode - if they feel that the changes are apporpriate, of course. And since episodes are almost always cheaper than a full-blown game, more people would be willing to plunk own the dollars to see if they're interested enough to continue the season.
The only problem that I see with episodic games is the length of the game. It's a very delicate balance between providing enough material that the customer feels that he got his money's worth and not so much material that the release is not cost effective. It's a bit of a gamble, but the feedback for Bone, Sam and Max, and Half-Life 2: Episode One would seem to suggest that episodic gaming is being accepted as a viable alternative for certain genres. I'm sure that gamers would not appreciate an episodic Unreal Tournament 2007.
In fact, the second episode of Sam and Max is out on Friday. I've got to buy the season -- and this is coming from someone who originally was not in favor of episodic gaming but now supports it as long as the game is one that can benefit from it.
The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
If Wii Sports is a great game (I'm assuming it is, I still don't have my Wii), and if Nintendo offered to have me download more sports as part of this nontraditional "episodic" collection, I might be interested.
If it's more of the same with monotonous plot turns and poor storylines, I won't be.
Wii Curling for $5, anyone?
-Rob
Biblical fiscal responsibility
Don't.
Don't reward publishers for getting even lazier about creating games. Just sit on your cash while they realize there wasn't anything wrong with releasing a complete product in the first go around (Not that EA was doing this in the first place), and that paying $60 or more for the length of one $40 game you'll play through once before moving on the multiplayer aspects isn't going to fly.
Wii Curling for $5, anyone?
Well, making it episodic is fairly easy. You just have to add a story line based on great curling events, like the Olympics, but start people off at the home games, work up to the regional tryoffs, and then the nationals.
A friend of mine once did very well and got to the national tryoffs, but failed to get on the Olympic team. Back when I lived in Canada.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Episodic content is an excellent thing. It allows the game companies to develop less content at a faster pace, as well as test new ideas with less risk. Half Life 2 episodes are a great example of this; if you have episode 1, listen to the commentary track. I know that when I buy a full game like Half Life 2, I finish it in maybe a week tops and then I want more. With episodic games, you have episode 1 coming out with a small waiting time after that, and episode 2 will come out pretty soon now. I'd much rather have a new, shorter game coming out a couple times a year rather than a larger game coming out every few years. If you listen to Valve's commentary on Episode 1, they mention that another bonus of episodic content is that they can test new technologies. Portal is an example of this. If it's a big game, they're betting a lot on new technologies and it's mostly hit-or-miss. With episodes, it's much more low-risk and if people don't like it they can remove it for the next episode.
I foresee episodic content taking over the game industry in the near future, the same way movies are more frequently being made into a sequel or trilogy and being filmed all at once and released a year apart or so.
Emu Anyone?
You know, people have been complaining about game developers releasing buggy games figuring that "We can just patch them with the next update" since online game updates have been available. It has nothing to do with episodic games, so I hardly see how that is an argument either for or against episodic games. It's completely irrelevant. It's a problem, but not one that is particularly pertinent to this discussion. Shoddy studios will release buggy games figuring they will patch them later, higher quality studios will release games with fewer, less painful bugs, and patch them later, whether they are episodic or not.
As for the issue of content, that's a bit more relevant, but also a problem with non-episodic games. I've gotten games home before that were seemingly 'full' games, just to decide I was disappointed with the provided content, feeling there should have been more game for my $40 or whatever. Again, that has more to do with the studio than whether a game is episodic or not.
I want my fix! I want it now! I can't wait two years for the next game!
BTW, A six month wait is killing me.
First episode was great. Then, right as part 2 was to be released in the states on the DC, BAMM!!! It was delayed, and eventually released on the X-Box. The save file from part 1 was supposed to be used in part 2; but, alas, it was not to be. The franchise is now pretty much dead, although rumors persist that Shenmue 3 will be developed on yet another system.
Never . . . Again.
With things like Halo 2 and Half Life 2 both games felt too short and didn't feel satisfying, they certainly didn't resolve anything. I bet the people who bought Sin episodes are glad it was episodic with it now stuck in development hell.
If you can leverage the development cost over a couple of "episodes", it can help the bottom line and the game. If you do the engine right, most of the effort for the sequel is done by the content creators - modeling/animation guys, level design guys, music/sound guys, etc. Since you don't need to do as much development/debugging of the code, you can spend more time actually creating the game.
I think of the GTA3 series as episodic. The engine is basically the same, but the story changes. Much remains the same as far as play mechanics go in this case, but there's new stuff too. I like the GTA3 games. I have them all and I've played them all almost completely through. I think this is an excellent example of how to do episodic right.
There was a time when movies had plots. So you knew who's ass it was, and why it was farting.
-Not Sure
Just look at two episodic game franchises with enormous potential: the Xenosaga and the .hack// games. Admittedly, Xenosaga had enough game to it to warrant the 50$ you had to pay, but once you were done you kind of were done, 'nahmean? Shell out another hundred bucks for the other parts? or branch out of a bit, perhaps? As far as .hack// went, it was the cheapest of tricks, overpriced and cliffhangered to sucker you into another full-priced game. After playing the first one and not realizing there were three more to come, I felt gipped that I had even bothered to get involved in the first one when I had no intention of investing two hundred dollars into a single story that could (probably) have fit onto one or two discs.
I guess it comes down to pricing and actually doing this for the gamers' interests, not just using it to slowly squeeze money out of eager gamers. Hell, I actually know people who dial 4416JOKES into their cell phone; I don't want to see them further exploited.
About the "$40 game for $60" remark...
Sam and Max - Tall Tale Games
- $8.95 per episode when bought individually, totalling $53.70
- $5.83 per episode when bought as a 6-episode season with CD for cost of shipping after 6th episode is released, totalling $34.95
Granted, that's only one example and it's up to each developer to price as they feel appropriate, but the ones who overprice will quickly lose customers.
The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
Pirates of the Caribbean is a trilogy, and that's generally the way it works. You get one good movie, with a conclusion, and people like it enough that someone decides to make more, so they turn it into a trilogy. The second movie will expand on the first, opening up a larger universe, but leaves the story entirely unfinished -- in fact, it's often deliberately some sort of cliffhanger. Then you get the third movie, and a conclusion -- and if it's a good series, the conclusion is worth the wait.
After all, the ending of Star Wars: Empire Strikes Back was pretty unsatisfying, and deliberately so. Then we get Return of the Jedi, and a real ending.
Lord of the Rings. First movie was pretty good -- not much closure, but it was still pretty good. Second movie was lots of fighting, actually somewhat of a grind, but still some good elements. And the third movie made it all worthwhile.
The Matrix: Reloaded. Ends with the main character passed out, possibly dead, and a couple of other things. I'm not saying Revolutions answered everything I wanted it to, but again, it did provide closure.
I don't like episodes that run on forever, certainly not if I have to pay for them. But episodic doesn't mean never-ending. Consider: The first 50 episodes or so of Naruto were actually pretty decent, and closed some very good storylines. But, now they're up to some 220 episodes, and it's definitely getting old. Last I checked, they still really hadn't done much about Sasuke or Orochimaru.
And, compare that to, say, Fullmetal Alchemist. Ended after 50 episodes. Or Trigun, or Cowboy Bebop, or Outlaw Star, or Noir -- many good animes end after a season of 25 episodes or so.
By that token, I'm really appreciating the Half-Life 2 episodes, because I know there will be exactly three of them. It helps to know that there's an ending coming, but that we don't have to buy anymore episodes if the first one sucked. It also helps to be able to provide feedback -- and that, combined with the nature of game development, means subsequent episodes can keep getting better. Or Halo 2 -- we know Halo 3 will finish it.
If you don't like it, wait till the conclusion is made, then buy the whole thing -- earlier episodes (or games) will be cheaper by then.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
In the world of television, my favorite example of this is a show like "Malcolm in the Middle." I loved the early episodes, but my wife hated them. As the show evolved, the writers and actors developed a better sense of what the show was about, what jokes made sense and what you could do with the characters. That evolution won my wife over. Episodic games have this same opportunity.
This is a seriously bogus comparison. Apples and oranges. Broadcast TV shows are free to consumers. Maybe you pay a monthly fee for cable access, but at the end of the day nobody is paying $8.99 for an episode of Malcolm. If people don't like the first episode of a video game they had to pay for, are they really going to buy the next episode to "give it a chance"? Not for my dollar. Not the same thing, not the same opportunity.
For another example, check out the third page of his article where the author provides numbers to show that there are nearly twice as many PCs as there are consoles in american homes. He then states that "the PC is, bar none, the most pervasive system on which to play games." Then he goes on to say how "odd" it is that console revenues are more than four times that of PC game revenues. Does it not occur to the author that maybe a lot of these PCs are ancient and most people don't feel like paying Pong or Zork anymore? Or that a more fair comparison might be to compare the number of PCs and consoles sold to families only in the past year or three?
The author goes on to slam the Wii by claiming that "at the end of the day, Nintendo is still selling $40 dollar-plus software that requires a fairly expensive piece of consumer electronics to run it." Riiiight, like anyone is buying a Wii just to play Wii sports. The deeper implication being "why by an expensive Wii when you can already play games on your PC?" Like everyone already magically owns a PC at no cost. Yet if the author made even a little effort to be objective, he might notice that game consoles are a lot cheaper than most PCs. The Wii especially, retailing for only $250.
I hope Gamasutra felt they got their $5 worth (or whatever they paid) for that article.
The episodic release format has been around for over a century, and probably for as long as print media has been sufficiently inexpensive to produce. It's perhaps worth noting that many books we regard today as classics were originally published in an episodic style in the pulp rags of the time--Charles Dickens being one notable episodic author (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Dickens#Episo dic_writing). So as for whether the release style has merit--I think that's long since been proven. More important for games is getting the cost and development time to a point where the public is willing to pay for it and will not lose interest waiting for the next release.
I think a lot of this depends on the genre, how much "base" is required to make the game possible, and how much "new" (and different) environment is possible.
For example, with Half-Life 2, you needed the awesome base of HL1 (graphics/physics engine etc) to make it work. You couldn't have sold HL2 itself as an episode for $15, because the revenue needed to meet the initial cost of development. Also, I'm still in the middle of "Episode 1" (HL2ep1) but thus far it's not really anything new. Some new enemies (zombine soldiers) and a little more plot, but nothing substantial. For $15 it's not bad, but no new weapons (so far at least) and nothing really differentiates it from the base HL2. However, HL2 itself is a great improvement in terms of graphics/sound/physics from HL1, although the plot from HL1 was supposed to be better.
Next, take - for example - something that is entirely plot-based such as Sam and Max. This is more reminiscient of the old Sierra games. In particular, the concept reminds me of "Space Quest" series, wherein the same style of plot and base character(s) prevailed between games. There were definately some jumps in graphics between various time periods, but overall the best part was the plot/humour, which made the games more episode in the Roger Wilco universe. Others such as King's Quest varied in plot greatly, but Police Quest and some others were similarly episodic (new story, same general universe).
I think this is what makes games such as Sam 'n' Max such as treat for us long-time gamers, and what may lead to the episodic model being quite nice within them. There's no need to spend tons of money on new game engines, bigass meshes for alien baddies, or weird and wonderful weaponry... just keep cranking out quality, engaging plotlines.
What I think most companies are overlooking here when they ask if episodic content is going to work is that the episodes have to be released in intervals on time every time. Instead of relating episodic gaming to Malcom in the middle, you have to relate it to shows like Lost, and Prison Break. Prison Break lost me completely when they took a 3 month break because American Idol took over it's time slot.
Episodic gaming is no different. If you release a new episode on time every time you build anticipation for it, if you give the BS line that "It'll be done when it's done." People are going to forget about it and then it's not episodic, it's sporadic. Have them come out on the same day every year and keep to that schedule and you'll build anticipation for it, people will be able to play a game and then say, "I can't wait for next years episode."
I think the perfect example of a proven track record for this is in an episodic release of a non-episodic game. How many of you know someone that owns gets excited over the next edition of Madden 2kx. It's already working wonders for games that produce ABSOLUTELY NO ADDITIONAL CONTENT IN EVERY EPISODE. If you keep every game to a complete experience with a start and good ending, I can't see how the addition of a plot would ruin what is already a tried and true formula.
Lets look at Final Fantasy VIII. It had 4 CDs of story, each disk ending an act (of sorts). It was a huge game.
Now imagine paying full game price for each disk separately. THAT is what episodic content is. It's breaking up a whole game into parts to charge 3-4 times for it.
"there's no reason to think it won't work for games."
Games are more expensive (on both the developing and consuming ends), take longer to produce, and last for longer than TV episodes. There is also less commitment overtly inherent in producing an episodic game than in producing a season of a TV show - with the latter, episodes are closely spaced in set blocks of several months, and any cancellations come between seasons; with the former, the company may go out of business, forget about the series, start having longer and longer gaps between episodes, or take advantage of much of the assets being already prepared to create lackluster cookie-cutter episodes. TV networks cancel failing TV shows, while game companies may continue to pump out bad series or suddenly stop with good ones. Sure, shorter episodic games may be better for casual gamers, but not only are episodic games less reliable than episodic TV shows, but there exist many other ways of extending a game concept's life - customization, mods, online play. Episodic games have been tried, but have not been proven.
If you think about it, it's World of Warcraft is episodic. But instead of the episodes coming to you, you have to go to them (and find them and hunt them down). Also think of the expansions that come out for MMOs, the new quests, the new items and so on - like episodes you can choose to watch if you decide you're interested in something new.
Actually the whole way WoW unveils new quests to you as you level up is almost episodic from the players point of view. They play, they experience content, then with a certain frequency (if they keep leveling up) new content shows up that is fresh, new and challenging.
Episode 2 has been out on GameTap since December 22nd.
Sometimes my arms bend back.
"why by an expensive Wii when you can already play games on your PC?"
Has never played Wii. Or is one of the few who have and don't like it. I am a hardcore PC gamer but I will completely admit that the Wii offers a different style of play than is available on any other system. You can call it gimmicky if you like, but I think the Wii controller is way more intuitive than any other console controller and is perfect for multiplayer games in front of one TV set. This is an area that PCs do not excel at. I'll keep playing my PC for the majority my single player gaming experiences and I have the Wii for when friends come over. Friends + booze + Wii = much amusement (and some minor injuries).
Sometimes my arms bend back.
In all of these movies -- Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest, Back to the Future II, Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back, The Matrix Reloaded, etc. -- the cliffhanger is always the second movie. Why? Because when they made the first one, they weren't sure if it would make enough money to justify a sequel, so they had to wrap up the story. With these second movies, they already know they're going to make a third, so they let it be a cliffhanger.
Incidentally, the "to be continued..." at the end of Back to the Future was rather gutsy, since it was the first movie -- they must have had unusually high expectations for it. Also, note that Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan had a rather weak cliffhanger (just the hint of the last bit of Genesis effect, and the fact that the coffin soft-landed); I would guess that poor reviews of The Motion Picture (and maybe poor sales -- I wasn't born yet, so I don't remember how well it did at the box office) reduced the confidence in a third movie. The cliffhanger at the end of The Search for Spock was much stronger (destruction of the Enterprise), due to the corresponding strength of The Wrath of Khan.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
... was because there was a huge modding community that got to muck about and create their own content which was mostly shared for FREE!
That is the sort of episodic content that I like. Okay, there maybe quality control issues but until you've tasted sour, you won't know how sweet the good stuff is.
See my art -> http://herbevore.deviantart.com
Additional small game "episodes" would not be such a bad idea IF they did not charge such a significant amount of cash. I'm not paying $20 a pop each time an addon comes out that will occupy me for maybe 6 hours of gameplay. Make it more attractive on the pricing end and I might not be so zealously opposed to the idea.
Until then I'll hold onto my cash.
No words of wisedom here.
I think I'll appreciate episodic games more after they've been around for a while and I can either pick up an episode that was originally $20 for $5 or I can buy an entire 'season' with an entire story arc in one bundle for a reasonable price (e.g. less than it would have been to buy them each individually when they were brand new).
I'd also look forward to initial episodes being released for free or bundled with magazines or other kinds of promotions. Longer, semi-self-contained demos in other words, like Doom and Quake I shareware episodes.
The whole cliff-hanger ending concept is pretty stupid unless the likelihood of a future episode is also gauranteed. If the buyer knows there will be a cliff-hanger ending, and thinks it's possible the game won't sell well enough to gaurantee the next episode (because it's not called 'Half-Life), they will know not to bother with the first episode- this sort of counteracts the entire principle of episodic games where the publisher thinks it is easier to take risks when in fact games may be more conservative and punish risk-taking.
Episodic gaming is just not the sort of thing I want in a game. What I really like is to have a game that is one complete experience. I want the whole enchilada, so that I can savor it from start to finish. Then I want to put the game away and move on to something different, not play reiterations of it over and over again.
Granted, my description of the way I feel seems pretty lame, so I'll throw in an analogy about literature. Episodic gaming is like reading a magazine. I don't subscribe to any magazines, but I would if I wanted to repeatedly pay money for writing that came in a stream of small packages. The advantages are there... I could subscribe long enough to get my fill, and I can always stick around to consistently receive fresh, renewed content, but that's just not my dig.
What do I like? I like novels. A novel is a piece of literature that really stands on its own as an enclosed piece of art. It's the alpha and omega of what it is, and that allows it to really capture and express things that you wouldn't otherwise get from episodic content. A novel you read from front to back, evaluate it for what it is, and maybe read it again sometime if you liked it (or hated it enough). Novels usually contain a level of depth that periodic publishing doesn't... you can really dig in and immerse yourself. Also, not having the ability to pull in new episodes really causes the writer/creator to get right down to the heart of what they're writing about. Sometimes they even become timeless (which is a word adults use to mean "meaningful for a very long time"). How often do you read timeless newspaper and magazines? They really don't retain their relevence for very long.
Of course, some novels are episodic. Just look at the wheel of time. You read that because you want more Wheel of Time. It's not that you are interested in the true meaning of the works, but you just want to revel in the fantasy genre. Some people like that. I read the first couple books, but dropped it when I realized it was going to drag me through "episodic content."
It's kind of like the difference between movies and TV series'. The author mentions TV shows in the article. Sure, TV shows are fun... I watch a few good ones myself, but when it comes to that kind of entertainment, I value movies more. That's just my personal preference, but I like that format for the same reason I prefer to read novels and play standalone games. Movies often feature better writing and higher production quality. Some TV shows are just as good as some of the best movies, but there is a pull on TV series' toward becoming bland crap mills. If someone asked you to list some timeless movies--real classics from antiquity--you could probably think of a number of classic films that are just as much worth watching today as they were back then. Now do the same with TV shows. Not only are they harder to access now, but they're also less valuable.
I can run up to any person today and grab them and say, "Play Quest for Glory I--you will love it." They probably will love it, and find the game relevent and meaningful. That game is over 20 years old. 20 years from now, I could still expose people to this classic. Now in 20 years, what episodic games do you really think are going to make that grade? If I were to go back and play games again the way I remembered them from this day in age, I'd probably be picking up titles like Morrowind and Baldur's Gate (granted, they've already started aging, but they're not THAT old).
Well, sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't...
:)
My guess is that there are plenty of Just-Sometimes-Players who will appreciate paying quite a bit less for a game, and who don't mind receiving less play-time in the process.
Personally, I don't think I'll be interested in episodic gaming; but I bet that it'll create a niche of its own.
I also bet that there are going to be some very massive failures
Free PC version of ChipWits at http://www.breueronline.de/klaus/chipwits/
Besides all the technical/content details discussed already, my main concern about episodic games would be that the publisher or studio goes out of business "in the middle" of the story, leaving me with an unfinished game.
Take Neverwinter Nights 1 for example. You could have split it up in three parts. Let's say the first part ends after you accumulated all incredients for the curing potion, Desther steal the potion and disappears...(to be continued)
Now you eagerly wait for part two to chase down Desther ... and then Bioware or Atari/Infogrames goes out of business. And no other company picks up that title and continues it. We would have lost one of the best RPGs around.
Guild Wars is exploring the "Episodic Content" method. Instead of creating one vast expanse of world over the course of a few years, ArenaNet has chosen to release a new "Chapter" every six months, each with new content of all kinds (and each enjoying a year of dev time, thanks to two overlapped development teams). This model has worked pretty well so far, imo, as people keep buying and playing. I think a year from now we'll see if this kind of development can keep up very long, but so far, ArenaNet has yet to really falter in this strategy. (In before "zomg guild wars", etc.)
Commodore64_love: I don't comprehend people who're so frightened of death that they'll bankrupt themselves to stay alive
If I bought the first one and liked it, could I buy the 'season pack' and have the $8.95 deducted from the $34.95? Just wondering.
I believe you misspelled "Roger" and "Shrubber".
The future isn't here until I can type "car keys" into Google and have it say "You left them in your pants last night."
He complains about the cover charge for current generation console gaming (and targets the cheapest solution!) and praises episodic PC content partly for the fact that around 80% of US homes have PCs. I think this is remarkably myopic considering the heterogeneity of home PCs. What percentage of all those PCs are capable of playing the shiniest new episode of [insert game here]? What percentage of those PC owners with PCs NOT capable of playing the shiniest new episodes are willing to buy new hardware to play new episodes? One of the driving forces in the computer hardware industry is the demand for bigger, better, smarter games. Innovation has its place, but humans tend to favor shiny new things. So, quite naturally, developers produce bigger, better, smarter games, and vendors release faster, more powerful hardware to run it on. Console gaming is attractive to the developer because they have a standard platform to develop for. No matter how crappy the hardware, atleast they know that everyone who buys a Wii will have the *same* hardware. Thus, they may develop bigger, better, and smarter games by pushing that hardware to its limits. Similarly, consoles are attractive to the consumer because its new, its shiny, and it just works. There is no anxiety about whether or not your system will handle it, or whether you'll get the best experience from it. So, in order for this 80% argument to work, game developers would have to be targeting much less powerful machines. Intel has the largest segment of the PC graphics market, by far. Yet, you never see favorable benchmarks for it with the latest titles. Many games are "playable" on lower hardware, but that simply isn't the focus of the industry. PC gaming pushes boundaries. It enjoys the latest and greatest capabilities well before the console market gets them. This is a strength. The appparent ubiquity of the PC has nothing to do with the future of PC gaming as long as the push is toward more demanding games and more capable hardware. We may one day digest all our gaming in more bite-sized morsels, but they will still be just as demanding. I dare say no large publisher is targeting the X3000 as the ideal GPU for their next great title.
In all of these movies -- Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest, Back to the Future II, Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back, The Matrix Reloaded, etc.
The common aspect I see is all of those movies were lackluster sequels to solid 'First efforts'.
I am one of those rare people who believe that episodic gaming can work. But I don't believe that the current spate of "episodic" games are really doing it right (although I'll recuse myself in the case of Sam and Max, which I have not played). Episodic video games need to take a page from episodic TV shows and comic books. The current approach to "episodic" games seems to be:
1) Write an insanely long, obscure and incomprehensible plot
2) Chop it up into x sections
3) Serve chilled.
Any first year film major can tell you that this is NOT an episodic model. Each game should be complete, its own storylines resolved, with the events in its story affecting the episodes that come after it. By definition, episodes cannot simply be parts of a bigger story cut up for time's sake. Each game needs to be its own story. Halo 2 was NOT its own story. It was a bridge between Halo 1 and Halo 3.
I imagine video games serialized at retail like comic books, all under the same title, with different art featuring a different character on each cover, and a discreet volume number tucked away in a corner. When the game is finished, you release a "compilation" of all the episodes with yet another cover. TV show DVDs are already done this way.
What drives me crazy is, there are TONS of low-cost writers coming fresh out of film school who know this stuff. Why can't the video game industry hire some of them?
Hmmm... Intersting idea. I don't know, but it's worth asking on TTG's forums. I'm sure you're not the first one to wonder about that.
The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
Really, because personally I like the second Pirates better, and the second original Star Wars movie is often regarded as the best star wars movie.
Interesting, I was tempted to walk out of Pirates 2 (really, I was bored), despite adoring the first one. I also felt Empire was unfullfilling and essentially 'Return of the Jedi Part 1' as it couldn't stand on its own merit. Try to imagine Jedi never happened, many people would have been pissed that's how Star Wars ended. To each their own, I suppose.
I think one of the core problem with episodic content today is that many games simply don't work for it. In many games it takes around an hour to get familiar with the controls and get the initial tutorials done. If the whole episode however is just three hours long that however will leave a rather disappointed feeling, I mean who wants to walk around a third of the game in a tutorial? And even worse, repeat that process with each and every episode? If I haven't played a game for a few month I have pretty much forgotten all the buttons and have to relearn from scratch, especially if its a game that relies on magic button combinations to get stuff done.
Todays games are often designed to be played in multiple long sittings, you can't just play for 20min and continue later, the game expects you to sit around for two hours to get stuff done. Combine that with episodic content you either end up with something that stays a tutorial forever or something that will get impossible to play once episode 2 comes out.
In the end episodic content only makes sense for those games where both gameplay and story work for it and neither require much relearing or reexplanation. It is of course also important that episodes get released at regular intervals and not just 'when they are done', since if it takes a year for a new release, why should I care? I could just as easily wait another year to get a full game then.
Adventure games are, due to their story driven nature, probably the best for episodic content. Many adventure games today could already be easily broken into episodes with no changes at all, imagine Grim Fandango where each year would get released as separate episode. However for many other genres episodic content could be pretty problematic and not beneficial at all.
Well obviously ESB is not a good standalone movie, nor is it a movie designed to close the series, but that's essentially what started the discussion - the concept of episodic media. It obviously worked for star wars, and whether you like it or not, it's probably the best rated star wars movie. They couldn't exactly make a ROTJ a 5 hour movie and combine it with ESB, could they? As for Pirates 2, I found the actual movie to be more coherent than the first, since it seems to have a real defined goal. The first time watching the first pirates it seemed a little lost and disjointed, but that never happened with the second one.
I don't think people who like curling are that interested in other sports, frankly. Maybe Canadian Football League (CFL) football or Canadian Hockey League (CHL) hockey - and there are two games for the latter, one of which rocks. Doing an online team play and championship episodic play, with the ability to play specific historic players and teams as your opponents (or team) is more likely to do well. And a lot easier to add in dribs and drabs, based on consumer response. You can also use it to test out new features to be in the next release.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
its ONLY a good idea if the developers doing it in advance has all the resources needed to FINISH the goddamn gameseries.. just like TV its beyond fucking annoying to start watching a good seires only to have it cancelled in ur face just cos they dont think enuff ppl like it.. and besides there have already been a few "episodic" gameseires out that have.. well ENDED mid-series.. .. well tho not OFFICIALLY ENDED.. I doubt http://www.agongame.com/ will ever resurface.. the 4th episode was put of for months and months and then a "cd" game consisting of the 3 first episodes came out..
so.. NO TO EPIFUCKINGSODIC GAMING unless they can GUARANTEE a complete series..
That is really excellently stated. I'll watch for your posts in the future.
Episodic gaming ruined Half-Life 2 and Sin Episodes for me. I'm not that great at keeping track of things to begin with, and after playing the first part of the story I quickly forgot to ever come back and pick up the rest of it, and this is the first time in months I've even remembered that I haven't yet seen the end. Cliffhangers and serials annoy me in general; it takes something I really, REALLY enjoy to make me not just wait for a bunch of episodes to collect and then catch up in a big chunk.