Slashdot Mirror
50 Landmark Game Design Innovations
Next Generation has put together a lengthy list of landmark game design innovations that many of your favorite games probably wouldn't exist without. They break them out into self-contained units, though it's sometimes ambiguous how they're demarcating game design elements. Just the same, it's an interesting look at where game industry trends have led us: "23. Gestural interfaces. Many cultures imbue gestures with supernatural or symbolic power, from Catholics crossing themselves to the mudras of Hindu and Buddhist iconography. Magic is often invoked with gestures, too--that's part of what magic wands are for. The problem with a lot of videogame magic is that clicking icons and pushing buttons feels more technical than magical. The gestural interface is a comparatively recent invention that gives us a non-verbal, non-technical way to express ourselves. Best-known example: Wii controller. Probable first use: Black & White, 2001."
Why the article focuses only on video games, I don't know. But it called itself "innovations in game design", and didn't have anything at all to say -- good, bad, whatever -- about anything non-computerized. Consider the evolution of the game of chess, for instance: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origins_of_chess The queen and the bishop both evolved from previously weak pieces. Why? What did the rule changes bring? Surely there is something to be learned here. Why is the Queen a rook and a bishop? Why not a rook and a knight? Why is there no uberqueen (can move like queen or knight)? All of these speak to a certain issue of balance of power -- offhand, I'd say that the rules changes were intended to speed the game up, without making first-mover advantage too powerful. What does that say about game design? Nothing that the authors mention.
;)
Or how about the introduction of playing cards. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playing_cards Why four suits? The Indian decks referenced can have many more. Why four suits, and why the specific ones we have? Standardization. Consider the vast variety of games played with a deck of cards; how many use nonstandard decks? Very few. But there are far more interesting things about card games -- as evidenced by the fact that poker bots suck.
Video games have been around for a few decades. Chess has been around for the better part of a millenium. Even though I may not be able to answer all the questions I just raised, I knew that they were there. To barely even mention games that are not electronic, in an article on 50 landmark game design innovations seems to me to be the height of folly, or perhaps hubris. (Anyone care to apply game theory to my managing the odds of getting modded troll for that last remark?