Slashdot Mirror
How Do Games Grow Up?
Gamasutra is running a piece by game designer Brice Morrison questioning the lack of games for grown-ups — or, more accurately, the lack of an intellectual progression in games like that which exists for books, movies, and other creative works.
"While my interests in other media grew substantially more adult — from Nickelodeon to CNN, from Dr. Seuss to George Orwell — games did not seem to have a more intelligent counterpart for me to move on to. As I entered college, I became less interested in mindless entertainment and more interested in encountering new ideas. I didn't want to kill time; I wanted to take advantage of it. I wanted to challenge myself with profound concepts, to learn of new paradigms, processes, and possibilities. ... So what exactly are the barriers of entry for great thinkers (or groups of thinkers) to leave their mark on games? What must happen for games — or interactive entertainment, if you will, to mature as a medium?"
I didn't want to kill time; I wanted to take advantage of it. I wanted to challenge myself with profound concepts, to learn of new paradigms, processes, and possibilities.
That's your problem right there. Games only kill time. The skills you acquire as you progress in a game, generally speaking, can only be used in progressing within the game's framework.
However, learning a slightly more challenging real-life task gives you more skills with long-term usefulness; My youngest daughter is learning piano, and we view each new challenging piece she has to learn as a 'boss level' - no matter how impossible it seems initially, we know from previous examples that eventually she'll conquer it and ultimately will be able to play it on demand without thinking.
So my advice is - don't look for more 'grown up' games - challenge yourself with something much more rewarding and useful in the long term.
Squirrel!
How's life up in the intellectual ivory tower again? Must be windy looking down on us.
Anyway, games are - here it comes - ENTERTAINMENT. Hence they're supposed to help you relax, have fun and ,amazingly enough, enjoy them.
If I wanted to pursue more 'intellectual pursuits', I would socialize and discuss issues with other people rather than play games.
The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess?
Squirrel!
Sometimes gamers don't *want* their games to become more complex as they mature.
Take for example the Caesar 3/Zeus/Cleopatra games of Impression Studio's. They decided it was time to go more mature and produced Children of the Nile', which was more complex in many ways, and altered the gameplay to make the game 'more challenging'. However the result was a game which differed so much from the core attraction of the previous titles that it bombed, going onto the bargain shelves really quickly. So then they took a step back and released Caesar 4. A bit too high on the system spec requirements, but nice looking, a decent evolution of their core game, and really good fun. In many respects its similar to games they were producing five years previously, and this was a good thing.
And what about that other great failure of progression when they decided Worms need to be 3D? Talk about New Coke...
I've been playing games for the last (counts on wrinkles and old person skin blemishes..) 24 years, so I'm well aware of the evolution of the industry. Some evolutions have been great, better AI, improvements in graphics, more depth in games, stuff like that, but others, like 'customer as potential criminal suspect', not so much.
New types of game have appeared which I really enjoy, though I have to say, very few groundbreaking games, which is surprising. Instead I've also noticed a tendency for games companies to pound a franchise to death with endless tiny iterations until it gets to the point that the only new thing in some new releases are new skins, a few extra effects and some more items.
A good game should evolve, true, but each iteration should be an obvious advance, enhancing the core elements that make that game fun to begin with. What it shouldn't do is catch 'New Coke' disease, or pretend to be a new version worth a whole new purchase when the content changes are less than some decent games companies (Id, Valve, Egosoft to name a few) release as free content updates.
A learning experience is one of those things that say, 'You know that thing you just did? Don't do that.' - D. Adams
Plenty of "games" for grown ups that are challenging...
- Programming
- 3D modelling
- Spreadsheets
- Online banking
- and so on...
My boss told me to treat work like a game, try to have fun moving the spreadsheets around to make things work. I began to sink into a mode where what ever I do at work, I just think I'm playing something like Chip's Challenge or something.
signature is pants
Usually the "adult" label is used not for actual weighty content geared for an adult audience with mature tastes, but just a repository for those things that traditionally children shouldn't be exposed to. Sorry, that doesn't make it adult-oriented, that just makes it non-kid-friendly, and typically can be best described as adolescent (boobs, explosions, gore, swearing, "gritty", "edgy", etc) content that would make Beavis and Butthead proud.
In my case, I've left all the AAA titles and tended towards puzzle games, where at least I'm challenged to expand my thought processes and puzzle solving abilities. There are some plot-heavy RPGs and FPSes nowadays with some challenging concepts or unexpected twists, but they still tend to be buried in adolescence to make them marketable, ignoring the amount of >30yo and female gamers who are no longer enticed by such or are even turned off by it.
I do commend Nintendo for putting a lot of focus on basic fun, party, family-enjoyable games which have been explosively popular without the adolescent slant, but they still do leave the adult-minded player wishing to be challenged at a more cerebral level.
Yeah but real life has a completely messed up difficultly curve.
The boss level of 'getting up in the morning' comes first, and then it's much easier after that.
The claims that games don't provide a challenge, no depth. The game he uses as an example, and the only example? Mario.
This is like saying TV provides no depth, after you spend all time studying the shopping channel.
There are other games. Games that have tried to go beyond a simple platformer. Wether they succeed is up for question but when I see someone talk about the lack of depth of games and his example if a simple platform console game I get visions of a large lumbering stone creature that lives under bridges.
So his mother was never intrested in playing Mario. So what? My mother was never intrested in reading the adventures of "Spot" either.
Somebody give this guy a PC and some decent games. Hell, even consoles have the occasional title that pushes the envelope a bit (so, I am PC snob, sue me) but if he never played more the mario then the problem is not the game industry but his own lousy taste.
Complaing that Mario not anything more then a mindless (if fun) time waster is like saying Popcorn doesn't have enough nutritional benefits, however true it is, it is retarded observation. Mario and Popcorn are light fluf, devoid of meaning or value except. That is their goal.
But we get the post true intentions. Apparently the future of gaming is weight loss gaming. WHEE! Because a program that tracks your weight becomes a game just because it is on a console? If this is the example of growing up, of challenging your mind, taking you new places, then I take Mario any time (and I hate Mario since I suck at platforms ergo platforms are stupid).
Perhaps this developer needs to grow up and realize that not everything has to be liked by everyone. I had a grandfather who never ever had a telephone. Never needed it, never wanted it. Does that mean telephones are without value to those who use them? That the telephone companies needed to worry about this "lost" customer?
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
From the first basic games like Pong and Pacman to platformers and finally the shift to full 3D, we've seen more of a maturity not just in the types of games but mostly the technological needs of the medium.
A book might be incredibly easy to pick up and read but to understand more complicated concepts requires a maturing mind to accompany it. This spectrum of the printed medium makes it popular across all demographics - not just the "geek" group. When it comes to games (or the tech, as stated above), the maturity is found in how easily it can be adopted by the masses. Ease-of-use advances such as Plug'n'Play devices for systems like computers/consoles and home entertainment will give gaming a wider-acceptance just as the progression and availability of printing facilites allowed more and more people to become writers eventually saturating our bookstores with wide ranges of subjects.
I think that as we see a wider acceptance of this pastime (much like TV) it will start to mature in the content that is consumed. We've started to see a change in these content-delivery systems already where we now have on-demand streaming pornography for TV, bloody and disturbing movies like SAW, and violent testosterone-fueled games like the multitudes of gorey shooters (really, too many to name).
In the end, it'll come down to what people want to consume via their entertainment system of choice. The classic laws of supply and demand will untimately be the victor. Though as the average age of your gaming population continues to increase (last I heard it was 28-ish) our minds may crave more intellectual stimulation and this will start to be reflected in the content that is produced.
That said, if you really want your games to challenge you then go find a good puzzle game or flash based sudoku... :)
There is no knowledge that is not power.
I do find that most commerical games are just repetition of previous games. Same game mechanics, adjusted story lines, with a few innovation here and there. The games that actually challenges me ? Free flash puzzle games, and there are plenty of them on the web.
Flight simulators.
Generally not held as 'games', referred to specifically as 'simulators'. Why? 'Games' refers explicitly to ones which are designed to entertain at least somewhat mindlessly. The 'more boring' variety of games the article asks for already exist, they are just referred to under other names.
See also: 'Documentary' Vs. 'TV Show'.
Which isn't to say there aren't any out there that require an adult mind to appreciate which are nonetheless referred to as games. See also: ICO.
You work for Mary Poppins ???
A spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go doooooown.....
Squirrel!
It really depends on the game. Action games do improve hand-eye coordination and reflexes. Strategy games improve planning and leadership abilities. RPGs are basically like long books and carry their own rewards in the form of their stories (unless you hate books also).
Playing piano is great and all for novelty, but it's not really a useful skill. It won't be needed often, if ever and it's not something that is noticeable unless you are one of the best. I don't mean to put down your daughter, but I doubt she will ever reach that "level".
I talked to someone in a research group working with optical tweezers on biological cells, and they asked potential PhD students if they played games since it actually gave them a head-start when operating these equipments. It was of course not the sole criteria for accepting a PhD student in their group, but they had empirical evidence gaming was a benifit. :)
--- guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people ---
"Don't look for 'grown up' games"? Um, what about guitar hero? You mentioned learning piano; surely learning guitar would also be an intellectual pursuit.
What piano-playing skills are useful in the world outside piano-playing? Are they ones which aren't possible to be gained playing videogames that also rely on rhythm, timing, hand-eye co-ordination and a swift interpretation of displayed information into the relevant key responses?
Being "able to play (a piece) on demand without thinking" certainly doesn't suggest it's an intellectual accomplishment.
"I Know You Are But What Am I?"
Games today IMHO can be compared to blockbuster movies: Lots of special effects and mass market. If you have a brand (GTA) or a star (Lara Croft, Mario) you repeat the concept - with better special effects and a larger budget - as long as you have a ROI, sometimes (always?) sacrificing artistic ambitions for the bottom line. But some Hollywood studios (and most publishers for that matter) use some of the blockbuster cash to subsidize experiments for smaller audiences and there also is a rather large independent scene with smaller budgets using festivals (e.g. Sundance in the US) that create visibility. Maybe the game industry - and the blockbuster publishers - should invest some money in more experimental concepts - kind of a Bell Labs for gaming - and provide visibility for these beyond the large trade shows.
Being good at Guitar Hero won't give you much benefit when you actually try to play a real guitar. In fact, the immediate good results you get from GH could actually discourage you from going through the basics of learning how to play the real thing properly.
Squirrel!
Many consider chess to be a very intellectual and sophisticated game.
Pure strategy, or whatever it is they say. Personally I'd rather just waste time blowing stuff up.
If you're bored of simply running about enjoying other people's content and not creating anything worthwhile, why don't you start making your own stuff? Become a programmer or a modder today!
The Victorians mailed in a letter. They want their parlor room piano back.
If I understand you properly, you are saying that the skill of "Piano" carries more value long term than any particular game which now has a short lifespan.
Thing is, "Piano" playing itself is already starting to be passed by, except for the modern ofshoot of playing Keyboard in a small band. Then the grownup game is arguing with band members with "creative differences".
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Just the way this is worded sounds awfully pedantic and is borderline shoddy intellectuliasm. Video games are meant to be played, yes, like children playing with their toys. I'm sorry if the analogy is unbearable for some adults who look back with contempt at their childhood's leisures but the aim of games is to provide fun, entertainment, so until this is redefined, whoever needs to have "deep" thinking trips would be best advise to discuss with academics or read books written by them on philosophy, metaphysics, or whatever rocks his vessel.
However, I would also have to disagree with the "mindless fun" designation. Like in every media/art, there are many different types of games that require various skills and inclinations. From strategy games to puzzle games, there are plenty of titles that test the sharpness of your mental faculties. And if it's not the treat humanists are looking for, there's still the option to analyze the current games offering rather than expecting them to offer you food for the brains in a conspicuous package. What I mean by that is that some games may already propose deeper themes and topics and material for debates and thinking, all you need is just to look for them, look beyond the gameplay, this is one way to explore games with a more adult view and it's certainly better than expecting them to serve pompous content with a Plato Seal of Quality.
Really now.
Anand just won the final step of the total unification of the world chess championship, and Slashdot couldn't be bothered to report it. I USED to think chess was at least slightly Stuff That Mattered.
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
Playing piano is great and all for novelty, but it's not really a useful skill. It won't be needed often, if ever and it's not something that is noticeable unless you are one of the best.
I take it you've never spent time in a pub band, or even writing songs with your mates in a garage band. Being able to play a musical instrument is very rewarding even without 'being noticed'.
I don't mean to put down your daughter, but I doubt she will ever reach that "level".
I'm pretty sure she'll never be a concert pianist, either, but claiming that the ability to play a musical instrument is something that will not be used often or ever just sounds ridiculous. Or maybe I've just been trolled...
Squirrel!
My first Journal Entry ever, in 8 years! http://slashdot.org/journal/365947/aphelion-scifi-fantasy-horror-poetry-webzine
If you like playing games, play games. If you don't like playing games, don't play games. If you like agonising over every aspect of your life, go right ahead. Some people may even find it interesting.
I hope you do realize that the same applies to most of the RL skills waved around as "yeah, but look what _my_ hobby teaches me" proof that someone's pet hobby is better than gaming.
E.g., yes, your daughter's piano skills. (God knows how many kids have been tortured with _that_.) Unless her goal in life is an underpaid job in an orchestra that skill is useful for exactly one thing: more playing the piano. Usefulness for any other RL activity: zero.
And yes, you could say that she's going to be a great pianist and earn teh big bucks by being some concert's super-star. Guess what? His chances are about as good to make money as a gaming superstar. Or rather, your daughter's chances are just as bad. Not everyone gets to be Fatal1ty and not everyone gets to be a superstar musician. There are 1000 times more people wanting such a job, than people who actually get one.
But at any rate, the same chances apply to making living out of gaming. He can theoretically end up making a living out of being a top gamer, same as your daughter can theoretically end up a legendary pianist. Your daughter can end up a composer instead, and he can end up a game programmer with that experience. Your daughter can end up scraping by on a minimum wage playing in some orchestra or some unknown band in a bar, he can end up a minimum-wage game tester.
More likely, for most children who went through that, the only result is, ta-da, that they killed some time with it.
So remind me, exactly what do you base that snottiness on, when you look down upon his hobby? No, seriously.
But let's move on, let's see more poster children for "look at what a cool RL hobby I have" idiocies that get waved around all the time:
- mountaineering, camping, and other excuses to go out in the wild. Exactly what skills do people learn there, and when will they apply them IRL? Because it seems to me that the only times when you'll apply any of them, is... next time you go do that hobby. That's it. E.g., exactly when will you have to find north by the moss on the trees... in a city? If you want the actual useful version of that, get a GPS navigation system. No, let's make no bullshit pretenses, it's just a way to kill time.
- fishing. The chances you'll ever feed and clothe your family with a fishing pole, are practically nil. You'll never catch enough fish to sell them and, say, pay for your kid's clothes and education with it, because fish are freaking cheap. You'll never get a job to sit near a lake with a fishing pole, either. The way it's done nowadays is with big boats and nets, not with a fishing rod. And even, let's say, in a post-apocalyptic Fallout-type scenario, where are you going to fish? There just aren't enough rivers around to support even the most minimum population that way. Most have been depleted already, and you may notice that the fishing hobbyists go to some fish farm actually, where fish are artifficially fed and raised for that. So again, chance to ever get any other use out of that skill: zero. It's just a way to kill some time, and any skill you get there will only ever be used when you next go fishing.
- messing with one's car. I hate to break it to some people, but _very_ few even save any money there. Yes, everyone has some anecdote of that time they fixed the car themselves and saved a fortune. But almost everyone forgets those other times when they just made it worse and had to pay more to get it fixed, or the money spent on all those extra bits and pieces and tools that never actually got used enough to pay for themselves. And usually what they save is not worth the time spent there. There are people who practically live in the garage. Even if you saved $100 once (and you won't save more, unless you also smelt and forge your components too), if you spent 20 hours in
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
when you mix in the actual gameplay. If I'm watching a movie or reading a book, other than "real life" interruptions, there is nothing to stop me from finishing the whole thing without pause. Games however have to break up the narrative to allow your character to do things.
For example, I'm sure the Tactics Ogre games had a great story, but I didn't really follow it after playing the games for a few hours. They would have cutscenes that introduce some characters, plot points etc. then you would have to battle for about 20 minutes, followed by another cutscene, followed by more battle etc. The battles were fun(or else I wouldn't have played the game), but it certainly was time consuming, so when you mix in the fact that I had other responsibilities, the whole thing became very hard to follow. Eventually I just skipped through the plot and went straight into the gameplay.
IMO the best game stories are the ones that give you a connection to your character and motivation for achieving the objectives. Thats it. If you want a book, read a book.....
Monstar L
this thing sucks because it is not some other thing.
You can have something which is completely utilitarian, which is not a game. These programs exist: Iraqi culture simulations, reflex training programs, etc.
You can also have something which has a sense of whimsy and fun. This is a game, and some of them have the potential to make you think or to awe you with their beauty.
I don't know what the author is bitching about. He wants games without the fun, it would seem; games which take themselves as seriously as he does. Those just aren't games.
He thinks games are a medium on the level of television. This is wrong. The computer is the medium. Games are merely a flavor of program, much as game-shows are flavor of television. Do you expect your game-shows to "progress intellectually" as you age?
Fucking games journalists. Enough pretentious, bullshit opinion pieces. Get back to your fucking jobs.
You've been trolled, musical talent is an awesome thing & it's own reward.
There is a war going on for your mind.
This is a grown up version of risk. The game was given away to free to some people who liked Dreamcatchers's adventure games.
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B00005YTYF/mimofficialbooks/
open source sub sim. I might start coding again for this. http://dangerdeep.sourceforge.net/contribute/
I disagree with this guy Brice Morrison.
Not only now, but since games have existed in mass there are examples of this mature growth. From Galaga to The Hobbit, Super Mario to Resident Evil and from Lego Batman to Dwarf Fortress.
Not only is there adult content, but also complex adult thinking games.
This article really just looks like a promo for them going for a new mature game soon.
Chris.
I know what you mean. There are books, music, movies, ... that range from "for three-year-olds" to conceptual challenges suitable for a mature adult (not dirty, but with a more depth and breadth) mind, but no games AFAIK.
The producers of Fable II have been touting that it allows you to explore as either a "good" or "bad" guy and shades between. I don't have a copy, but the reviews seem to bear this out. While you're still exploring someone else's idea of good/bad in how they plotted the game, even in books and movies you're really following the writer's exposition. The question, since it's supposed to entertainment, is how much you enjoy the ride.
One of the things I liked about "Alpha Centauri" was how you could choose a faction that suited various "ethic"s, from fundamentalist nut-case to capitalist pig, and the strengths/weaknesses of the ethic had some reflection in the play.
Are you married? There's your BOSS level. Then the kids... little mini bosses, all the damn time! :)
Leaving for work... those are the easy levels.
Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.
I bought that game new years & years ago. Never could get it to save on anything. Even while being emulated on my PC.
There is a war going on for your mind.
In any game which is both attempting to tell a story and be an 'adult' (as in intellectual/emotional maturity, not 18+ content) game, the gameplay should be *part* of the narrative.
Games which have to put the narrative on pause are really just short stories laid on top of game mechanics that, as you say, would do just as well without.
I know what you mean. It looks impossible to defeat the boss in this area.
What? Damn. So you mean I can't play guitar after all that guitar hero? Wow, next thing I'm going to find that Simmish isn't a real language! That's far scanning, man.
Sorry, it's hard to be sarcastic enough that people know you are not just one of the dumber denizens of slashdot.
Trolling aside, I do think that that edutainment, especially on innovative platforms like the Wii, has a big potential that will gradually come into play. But like video telephones and other things that computers should bloody well do, I expect it will take a while.
Games simply containing sex and violence doesn't really sound like what he's looking for. Instead, by the sounds of it, he's looking for depth and challenge. The top games in this field IMO are:
Interesting that they'll all PC games, but after browsing my console game collection I came up pretty close to blank. Mass Effect is great fun but isn't actually all that deep when you get down to it. The Fire Emblem series is mentally challenging but not as deeply as the broader strategy and tactics games available on PC. The various other genres that I may seem to be ignoring such as sport, fighting or racing aren't really designed to expand the mind like a good piece of literature can - which is no criticism of those genres, but merely pointing out that they exist for a different level of entertainment.
Yeah because being able to play random song on the piano is so much more useful than most frags in quake or top ranking on the wc3 ladder?
"My interest is so much better than yours!"
I take it you've never spent time in a pub band, or even writing songs with your mates in a garage band. Being able to play a musical instrument is very rewarding even without 'being noticed'.
Probably not, this is news for nerds after all, not news for musicians ;D
You claim "Games only kill time. The skills you acquire as you progress in a game, generally speaking, can only be used in progressing within the game's framework."
That is clearly true of a musical instrument. Skills with a piano only progress you within a piano's framework. Perhaps Western music as a whole, but the same can be said of games.
Actually this is a perfect game for grown up. I started with ZX Spectrum platform shhoters, than was Doom and networked Quake, after that i found Warcraft, Starcraft and other RTS. Now Nethack is the only game i play. I'm interested in fancy graphics anymore, but deep gameplay is something i admire.
This Is Not a Sig
And you're CONSTANTLY worried about other players spawn-camping the boss and generally ganking you. . . . Unless, of course, you have a sugar-daddy to powerlevel you. . .
And all the strategy games and friends:
Europa Universalis III
X3: Terran Conflict
Heart of Iron II
Space Empires V
Railroad Tycoon III
There is one tangible benefit from GH tho, and all the other rhythm simulators. They teach rhythm. They accidentally teach how to keep time.
Coincidently, since I am pure white boy with no rhythm to speak of at all, I cannot possible play any rhythm simulators at all. Which is a sad reflection of the reality that I was not destined to ever play a musical instrument well, no matter how much I like practicing. /sigh
Modding Trolls +1 inciteful since 1999
Strategy games makes you better at evaluating choices, and helps you better understand / keep control of (your) economy.
FPS increase reaction times, timing and hand/eye coordination. You also learn to think quickly
RPG's you set a goal and keep working towards that. Some of them have a damn good story to tell, much like a good book.
It's The Golden Rule: "He who has the gold makes the rules."
Certain games in the Myst/Riven series, for example, have been challenging in an intellectually stimulating way, most notably Riven and Uru.
Many strategy games, particularly turn-based strategy games, also fit the bill.
I don't think games will ever become "educational" at the adult level, because in large part pedagogical concerns are part of the world of work for adults (stuff you have to learn for work, stuff you have to learn for this project or that one, etc.) and the point of gaming is to escape the world of work... unless we begin to transition to a society in which regular user interfaces for work-style tasks are constructed with game-like interfaces and metaphors, but I dont' see that happening.
The point for an "adult" game is to keep it from being utterly mindless and/or adolescent, to provide intellectual stimulation by requiring the juxtaposition and analytical processing of facts and information, even if these are fictional and appear in the context of a game.
To that end, my vote goes to the best of the puzzle/adventure games (the good ones with "puzzles" the scale of the entire game stretchign across contexts, not the shitty ones which have tended to be truly horrible an mind-numbing) and the turn-based strategy games.
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
My dad plays card games and tetris. I think as we get older, a) our imagination becomes stifled by greater experience of a world that is real and b) the time an average adult has and is willing to invest in games diminishes.
For these reasons I'd suggest as games mature they become less fantastical, and simpler in concept - or more or less the opposite of what you may imagine as a game maturing.
They said the same for Cinematography, Photography , Theater and even written books, starting from Plato.
This just in, apparently people have different opinions when it comes to games. Just like....everything else! Full story at 11.
I think the reason is partly technical. Games are by definition interactive. Interactivity requires logical rules that can be expressed in programming. But there aren't any good programming solutions for social or intellectual interaction. Gaming AI is still in its infancy, even if people are working to change that. Right now it's much easier to model objects colliding than people being social or intelligent.
Games' focus on guns, cars and jumping can surely be attributed to a range of reasons, including tradition and male domination, but I think it's primarily because there's no way of realizing anything else in code yet. We're still waiting for an AI revolution that can match the graphical revolution we've seen in the last decade.
At their purest form, games are a medium, a type of art, just as valid as every other form of expression. The layer of interactivity they possess lends them a uniqueness that isn't present in other mediums.
Unfortunately, that layer is too often used to own noobs and flex virtual reproductive organs.
What will it take for games to grow up? Designers that are interested in making games that are for their own sake, not games that are designed purely for the sake of becoming a cash cow.
I say, as colleges begin to churn out talents interested in making games as art instead of as money makers, we will begin to see a new age of intelligent computer games that appeal to certain niches. Kind of how there are novels that only appeal to a certain type, movies that only appeal to a certain type, etc. Games will get there too, it is but a matter of time.
The real question is: when games fulfill their potential, will they still be merely a game?
Load Failure. Possible corrupt record.
(R)etry, (P)anic, (E)migrate?
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Strategy games makes you better at evaluating choices, and helps you better understand / keep control of (your) economy.
Apparently, gaming at the stock exchange does not help that much as recent developments indicate. Now, how can you have a positive transfer from a strategy game if there is none in real life?
CC.
TaijiQuan (Huang, 5 loosenings)
That's your problem right there. Games only kill time.
I disagree. There is no reason that other media, such as books and movies, is somehow more capable of offering more productivity than games. The only real difference is games offer some sort of interaction.
Games can be used to discuss serious topics and conceptually challenge the player. Consider Deus Ex and it's discussion of the way information and technology is blending in with humanity - literally. It's discussion of government and freedoms (and terrorism).
The problem is that few games genuinely try to do more than deliver shallow entertainment, and of the few that do only a small chunk do it any what well. (I haven't met anyone who's had their views changed by Metal Gear Solid's anti-nuke stuff). This is largely because many people (such as yourself, it seems) can't get passed the idea that a game can have just as much - if not more - depth than other media. As a result there is no market.
However, learning a slightly more challenging real-life task gives you more skills with long-term usefulness; My youngest daughter is learning piano
What? I'm actually quite fond of the piano, but seriously now. With piano it'll be much easier to entertain others; beyond that I fail to see how it is any what more real-world beneficial than, say, the game of Go. Heck, the main reason piano would be better for entertainment is because of this mental stigmata against games - otherwise a discussion of Go could be quite entertaining in it's own right.
I don't mean any offense, but it's your mentality that has largely ensured the gap in games on par with, say, George Orwell's works. Try to open up a little - there is just so much potential there.
"A witty saying proves nothing." - Voltaire
Comment removed based on user account deletion
I'll throw a few suggestions in here. Flight sims are the best known examples - civilian and combat - but also consider naval sims, such as the Silent Hunter series, and Storm Eagle Studios's Distant Guns and the upcoming Jutland.
Alternatively, have a look at regatta simulators, such as the Virtual Skipper series.
Can you give examples of recent games that merge the narritive with gameplay?
How come nobody has yet mentioned IF Archive? The most innovative, thought provoking and literary games are not on your regular console.
Text adventures come in several flavours, many are typically puzzle-based, while others are just a sequential narrative. These have all the advantages of a novel in terms of profound concepts, possibilities and adult themes. But the active involvement that they require to keep the action going makes them a different experience compared to passive uncovering of the plot: they make you think about the storyline, step by step, and get involved in it in first person.
Also there are an annual competition that regularly provides new material, free to play. Some of these beasts provide the most original and interesting gameplays I've seen in a long while; see Galatea as an example (you can play it online).
Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
Are you married? There's your BOSS level. Then the kids... little mini bosses, all the damn time! :)
You can prevent those from spawning, but it takes a lot of fun out of the game.
Leaving for work... those are the easy levels.
Yeah, but the traffic jam level is a drag. I wish they'd replace it with some sort of mini-game.
My youngest daughter is learning piano, and we view each new challenging piece she has to learn as a 'boss level'
Mozart is easy, just circle-strafe for victory. ;)
So my advice is - don't look for more 'grown up' games - challenge yourself with something much more rewarding and useful in the long term.
As much as I agree with this, everyone needs to unwind every now and then. I can really enjoy gaming, even really stupid games, and I prefer it a lot more than watching most movies or tv-series since it keeps me busy instead of pondering about some problem that needs solving. Having said that, I recently picked up playing the guitar (yes, the instrument, not the plastic guitar hero controller) because I wanted something fulfilling to do with my spare time.
Poor child of Yours. Parents who DEMAND their children to learn something (like in Your case) are like slaveowners and should be punished. Children have to learn things by playing not by force of their parents. Your children gonna hate You or be like You.
While in many ways I agree with this poster about the situation in games, I must point out to him that every once in a while, a game is released that is an absolute gem in terms of story, art direction, and thematic elements.
Some of these games have been mentioned previously, but I confess these are the games that affected me as much or more than many books I've read. (It's not as thought I'm illiterate either. I also appreciate the likes of Orwell, but am more a Camus man myself.)
I must make the concession that if these games affected me, they may not be for the same reasons books or films or other more traditional pieces of artwork have. They may not be as precise or concisely created as a book or painting, but that is the product of a programming team working together as opposed to a singular artist.
To start with, I have to say the original Fallout was a masterpiece of adult fiction. It was less intrusive with gimmicky adult concepts like sex and violence than the sequel, Fallout 2. Also, it has the only ending cinematic that still gives me chills to this day. There is nothing quite like leaving your comforting home in the vault, to find out you must save the world, to saving the world, and then returning home, only to be told that, in saving the world, you have become a danger, and you have to leave. The Vault Dweller walking all alone back into the Wasteland. Honestly, the only game ending that's ever made me cry. (I would suggest Fallout 3, but while I definitely enjoy it, it does not live up to my memory of Fallout.)
Secondly, there is Portal, an overall masterpiece in story and scope. The story developed only from this confusing meta-narrative of an artificial intelligence obviously gone mad, while simultaneously giving you a deep sense of your relationship with this machine. Some have theorized Portal as a feminist masterpiece, turning the classic ideals of "big man with a big gun" video games on their heads.
I felt similarly the first time I played the original Half Life. The story was strange, confusing, and intriguing. The ending only left you with more questions.
While Half Life and Fallout are less philosophically deep than Portal, they both obviously aspired to similar ends. Fallout came much closer with its insanely intricate non-linear story and the ability to play in a multitude of ways, never allowing you to play it the same way twice.
I don't know, its 5:30am and I'm rambling. All I know is that there are definitely games that affected me in big ways, and to me they definitely feel like they were created by thoughtful adults for thoughtful adults, not by teenagers who just wanted blood and boobs.
I agree with your point. Not only that, but to learning how to fix cars can actually foster some understanding, however limited, of basic to intermediate level mechanics and electronics, depending on the vehicle. Sure, you probably won't understand engine harmonics and such, but that's what engineering classes are for.
"Little is much when little you need."
FOAD, troll. SHE asked to take up piano and guitar. The minute she finds either a chore, she can give up.
Squirrel!
You know, to get out of the traffic jam level, there's a telecommute mod. That makes the 'wife' boss appear in every level! Now, if your playing a quake style game, that's bad. If it's more like leisuresuit larry... That's good.
Do not meddle in the affairs of sysadmins, for they are subtle, and quick to anger.
I have a career as a game system designer thanks to playing (and analyzing) diablo 2 and pokemon, plus a lucky break. So the skills I acquired from playing those games (metagaming and analyzing synergy) translated into an actual real-world career. Also: -English (I'm a non-native speaker) -learn to type -organizational methods, interviews, and economics (eg. EVE Online) Games also stimulated interest in certain areas far more than school-education did, eg.: -history stuff (from Civilization) -periodic table (from looting the filing cabinet in Deja Vu) -music (Loom) -deep sea biology (XCOM 2)
However, learning a slightly more challenging real-life task gives you more skills with long-term usefulness; My youngest daughter is learning piano, and we view each new challenging piece she has to learn as a 'boss level' - no matter how impossible it seems initially, we know from previous examples that eventually she'll conquer it and ultimately will be able to play it on demand without thinking.
Piano isn't that difficult, all you have to do is press the right key at the right time. It's like that console guitar game.
*ducks*
May contain traces of nut.
Made from the freshest electrons.
Succubi is plural
"Little is much when little you need."
I think the problem is not just a question of content, but also one of time. Most of the requests I've seen from people looking for serious and deep gameplay are also coming from people who simply do not have the same amount of time to invest into video games. Deep content almost always requires deep immersion. Its the difference between reading your favorite novel in 15 minute snippets or 3-4 hour chunks. Because many of the people who would enjoy this type of game are unwilling or unable to invest that amount of time into playing it, it becomes a niche market. And a rather small one at that. As long as the market is seen as that small, the major publishers will not focus their attention on it.
-=Bang Bang=-
That wouldn't be so bad if it weren't for the main problem.
The main problem with real life, is it appears you can't restore from a save game and the respawning lag really sucks.
Many of the manuals seem to hint that by the time you respawn the game is practically over.
.
The_Prisoner_(computer_game)
A Mind Forever Voyaging
Bureaucracy
Trinity
Also, the System Shock series, Vampire: The Masquerade: Bloodlines, Bioshock, Fallout series....
Oh, and a lot more.... Of course, if you are looking for CNN the game, I can't help you...
"MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
If you're bored of simply running about enjoying other people's content and not creating anything worthwhile, why don't you start making your own stuff?
Because of a market failure. As of the 2000s, computing devices that
require all games to have been published by an established company, and use digital signatures to enforce this requirement. Home theater PCs and gaming PDAs, which are capable of running amateur games, haven't become widespread enough.
Become a programmer or a modder today!
So who will be the businessman to pitch the product to the console makers once the programmer/modder has completed the PC-based prototype?
[1] I discuss North America because both I and Slashdot's parent company are located in North America.
I'll give you that games aren't particularly useful, but they're entertainment they don't have to be useful. But why do you assume they're not rewarding? The challenge and enjoyment I get out of playing and beating an immensely difficult game, like Radiant Silvergun or Nethack, I can't find in any other type of entertainment.
I object to this portrayal of games as not-adult too. Why is it that only children are supposed to have fun? If I want to do something useful, I'll go to work. But I want to enjoy my free time, and games do that for me better than anything else. What exactly is not "grown up" about that?
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
Halflife 2
The best example I can think of is a game I mentioned elsewhere: Ico. The focus of the story is the bond forged by the two main characters due to their shared 'journey'. The is done entirely through gameplay, with steps taken to remove the possibility of more meaningful interaction and development of their relationship in the cutscenes. The gameplay is the narrative, while the cutscenes merely hold you still at times when the story dictates the character is not supposed to be running around.
I think a good example for the PC is Half-Life and its successors. It is well known for blending the 'cutscenes' in with normal gameplay. Unlike Ico, the gameplay and the story are not one, but they are combined seamlessly and sometimes even overlap, with cutscenes/set pieces which allow you free movement.
These are both examples which are light on narrative. There are other games which attempt to break the barrier between narrative and gameplay while maintaining a more significant narrative, but these are limited is how seamless they are. An example which comes to mind are RPGs such as Morrowind/Oblivion. There is no cutting to cutscenes, no hard separation between narrative and gamplay, but at the same time you basically read the story off the screen in the form of dialogue, so I don't really think that counts for much. It's more a different kind of separation than a reduction of it.
However, there are types of games which don't even try. For instance, JRPGs. They really do take a story and just dump game mechanics on top, usually with a separate battle engine. Two games in one, or a game and a visual/text story. Compared to games like these, most genres are making at least some effort.
I think it is a balancing act. To combine the narrative with the gameplay using current technology requires compromises in both narrative and gameplay. This doesn't have to limit the quality of the game (again, see Ico), but it does limit the scope both of the individual story and of the potential stories which can be told.
I find this interesting however, because while I am quite happy with games which are essentially a story which could be a book/movie put in game form instead with gameplay plonked on top, the games I find most interesting are the ones which tell stories which wouldn't work in any other medium, wouldn't work because what they are trying to express is best conveyed as gameplay of some kind, with interactivity of some kind. Since, after all, interactivity is the one thing games have to offer storytelling that is lacking in other media.
I could go on, but this had become a tangential ramble already.
I don't mean any offense, but it's your mentality that has largely ensured the gap in games on par with, say, George Orwell's works. Try to open up a little - there is just so much potential there.
None taken. I was one of the programmers on the original Grand Theft Auto, so I hope I've made my own little contribution to realizing some of the potential of video games.
Squirrel!
In my mind, the most "adult" games have always been RPGs. The cornerstone of an RPG is the story. It is essentially an interactive novel, complete with excellent graphics, music, and complex plot lines. The goal is not to mindlessly button mash, but to soak in the story. My love for reading was fostered by playing RPGs, and my need to get lost in more stories.
How about just a list: Civilization, Fallout, Myst, Baldur's Gate, Tetris, Chess, Video Poker, Scene It, most racing games, Wii Sports, etc...
Well... it used to be that I had plenty of time for games. I loved the really complex ones, especially strategy, with me sitting 12h in front of the PC.
These days - well, I come home from work and want something fast and brainless, where half an hour is okay. Something like the "Painkiller" FPS, for example. While I do have Civ, GalCiv and the like, I really hardly play them anymore. ...besides, programming your own games is actually more fun, even if you do need some brain time for it ;)
Free PC version of ChipWits at http://www.breueronline.de/klaus/chipwits/
What's with the insults?
All this individual did was request information on mentally challenging games. The individual needs more mental stimulation than the average bear to achieve the goal of participating in a recreational activity... finding a way to be mentally stimulated by the activity instead of being quickly bored.
How many of you still spend hours with friends playing tic-tac-toe with your friends?
Ah... none of you. Why... are all of you "ivory tower intellectuals?"
No. Nobody plays tic-tac-toe after their childhood years because it because it becomes repetitious, pointless, and boring... ...kinda like the way "low information" individuals often defensively react in the presence of any form of intellectual expression above the level of Fantasy Football team lineups.
Know much about type of board games that have become popular in Europe in the last 10-15 years.
Games like Settlers of Cataan, Agricola, Puerto Rico, etc.?
If not, that's a good website to start.
playing guitar hero is almost nothing like playing an actual guitar.
It is NOTHING like playing an actual guitar. I keep looking for the little hand crank on the side of it.
Some people are only alive because it's against the law for me to hunt them down and kill them.
RPGs are books for the A.D.D. in all of us. You get tired of the main quest, go work on a side quest or go level up. If the side quest are designed correctly they can be just as fun as the main quest.
The same could be said for pilots. I'v heard many stories of people playing Microsoft Flight Sim for hours and then when they actually go to flight school they have a really good head start.
Wow... a future welder on Slashdot?
Hey, my education is going nowhere (B.Sc in psychology and a graduate diploma in education to teach psychology in order to have a ton of vacation time during summer to travel the world). But I'd need a master degree in psychology too it seems.
I was thinking about returning to university in computer sciences... especially to dabble in network security since I'm not that excited about programming. On the other hand, I'm also thinking about becoming a welder since they seem do make MUCH more money than computer scientists.
I wonder what's your story.
Hmmm, sometimes you are learning in a game and you don't even know it...
I was playing Civ IV a lot, and they had some world leaders of some of the civilizations I had not heard of, as well as some world wonders and buildings.
There was some information in the civilpedia, which isn't perfect, but it made me think.
And the next thing you know, I'm taking a history course at a local college just for the heck of it.
Play a few good adventure games, like The Longest Journey, Dreamfall, and many others. Here you can learn all about them, read reviews etc. Disclaimer: I am in no way connected to the AdventureGamers' staff. I just like the website a lot.
-- Cheers!
It was a terrific game! Some guys I know had been playing it for YEARS.
Recently, a whole bunch of AOL newbies have joined the gaming scene though and fucked it up for everybody.
Deus Ex. Might not be as recent as you want but it certainly had a great mix of narrative and gameplay.
Something more recent but not as good, Assassin's Creed and the Halo Saga.
Then how is it different than playing games?
Aren't most game developers people who surrounded themselves with games then evolved to developers? Maybe the process is to mature from gamer to game maker. Surely the math, sociology, psychology, and politics involved in the game creation world would be able to stimulate you.
Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
and most of the newer fighters coming along are video games in a sense anyway, because you no longer have direct control of the plane, and instead feed inputs to a computer which decides how best to interpret those inputs without letting the plane fall out of the sky.
Most of the time the value of the game is in the players' choice of games and purpose for playing them. Games are marketed primarily as entertainment, so most have an entertainment portion, but there are many games trying to teach people things, and many people repurpose games to learn from them (ie driving and flight simulators, the many games commissioned by the military for recruiting and training).
As many have already said, the question is not whether games can convey meaningful messages and expose people to new ideas, as they certainly can do so as much as any book, movie, or TV show. It's a question of what games you decide to play. Action games (whether FPS or otherwise) have started to bring in more story elements, but for the most part they still fall into the same realm as an action movie, and are mostly action-driven entertainment. An RPG, for the most part, is centered on story, it's simply a question of how far the developers were willing to go with a particular story.
Even a fairly light-hearted story like that in Disgaea (a console strategy-RPG) brings about some questions about good vs. evil, and how perspective can change what is good or evil (and for the most part, even though the game doesn't really take itself seriously, it's an idea to which a lot of people seem to need exposure). Even fairly open-ended RPGs like Fallout could have a lot to tell us, and more people are getting involved in writing for games every year that take their work more seriously than anyone involved in Super Mario Bros.
-PainKilleR-[CE]
Actually, because of the lax system in place in both Guitar Hero and Rock Band (though GH is the worse of the two), they don't do a very good job of teaching rhythm, either. You can be off-beat by quite a bit and still get a perfect score in GH, but you'll sound like crap on a real guitar if you can't at least stretch your rhythm errors out over a few bars.
I can get by in Guitar Hero and Rock Band with a little practice, but I find the songs I have the hardest time playing in those games are the ones I can actually play on a guitar or bass, and the lower you set the difficulty on the game the less likely it is to actually represent even the rhythm of the different instruments in the song accurately.
-PainKilleR-[CE]
and much like movies, there is debate over whether the plots of some Japanese games (including metal gear) are actually intellectual or simply the result of someone getting high or throwing crap at the screen until it sticks.
That being said, the Shin Megami Tensei series does tend to explore some interesting ideas (of course we've only seen Nocturne released in the US from the main series, but a lot of the spin-offs have been published in the PS2 generation).
Europe suffers a lot from publishers generally waiting for a US release and then picking through the wreckage. I've mostly moved towards buying games from NIS and Atlus over the last few years, but then I do tend towards RPGs and Strategy RPGs, as do they. Occasionally something peaks my interest from other developers/publishers, but it seems that as the plots in action games still seem fairly juvenile I've tended towards going with less plot in my action games (ie Geometry Wars and other non-FP shooters) and making up for it with more RPGs.
-PainKilleR-[CE]
DISCLAIMER: I believe video games as a hobby or habit to be a tragic waste of time for anyone over 15.
Games, those which are purely for amusement, belong to the children.
Exploring (safe) challenges and developing the mental capacity to overcome them is the net benefit from puzzles, games, and the like.
Once the neural pathways have been created, it's time to move from 'play' to 'life'.
Children who play at occupational games, work to solve mental and logic challenges, and experience success have something meaningful and real to take into adulthood.
As an adult, the challenge should not be to create more entertaining games for older children, but to create a new generation of "games" for a new generation of children.
The maturation of subject matter should perhaps be redirected to the idea of 'playing' versus 'doing'.
Play until you know what to do, then step up to "Do." Leave the toys behind, or make new ones for the up-and-coming crew.
Another nod to Deus Ex here. My favorite games provide "literary" qualities alongside good gameplay, and Deus Ex is a perfect example of that, exploring political and individual philosophy in surprisingly great depth.
Bits of Chesterton's The Man who was Thursday are scattered around the game. Moral choices are made. Free will and the nature of humanity is examined. The final decision in the game is essentially picking which of Aristotle's "good" governments you'd prefer (democratic city-states (Tong), aristocracy (Illuminati), or Philosopher-King (merge with AI)). Very deep, especially for a game that's primarily an FPS.
This is reminiscent of a short story by Timothy Zhan for the once great Space Gamer (I think it was called "The Challenge." In it, a adult gaming champion plays through the greatest new world, only to find it rehashed and tiresome, and in the end turns to a community of physics theorists for new challenges.
1. When I take my holy-spec raiding in WoW, I make 24 people very happy too. Used to be 39 >;)
2. Actually, the point was that we should stop measuring it all by utility, money, investment, etc. We do things because they're _fun_. And that goes for both my gaming and your playing an instrument.
You probably didn't put years into it, just so one day you can make those people happy at that wedding. You did it because you _liked_ doing it, right? The utility came incidentally, but what kept you doing it was that you _liked_ it. (If it was as a hobby, and not as a job, that is.) Let's not make further pretenses and accept it as just that.
3. What I'm trying to say is basically this: there was once a society and a culture, where once you've "grown up", you're supposed to no longer have any fun. You must think only of making/saving money for your family's survival, and spend every waking hour dedicating yourself to . Hence, that if you have any fun, and can't justify it as some kind of investment, you're irresponsible, immature, or a few other choice insults.
Some people IMHO seem still stuck in that mentality: that if they do anything, they must justify it as some kind of investment in the future. It must be "building character", or "learning RL skills" or whatever other excuse.
And I'd have nothing against it, if that was actually what they did. E.g., if they actually took a course or a certification or whatever actually qualifies as learning actual skills.
But most of the time it's flat out a lie. They just went and had fun, and any utility is at best incidental or non-existent. But they still have to pack it in that socially-acceptable lie. God forbid that they'd admit that they did something just because they liked doing it.
And I'm saying: let's stop that pretense already. We're already a few generations past the point where that bleak, no-fun-ever existence was necessary or even justified. We can afford to kill some time with the things we like. Be it a computer game, or playing an instrument, or tuning a car. Let's for once just admit, basically, "I did it because I liked it, and to kill some time."
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
Strategy games improve planning and leadership abilities.
I agree that video games can challenge your reflexes, spatial thinking, and short-term tactical planning, but you have to be kidding if you think strategy games improve leadership abilities. As for long-term planning, strategy games are pretty lightweight compared to, oh, planning your high school schedule, planning your college degree, planning your career, buying a house, having a kid, or retiring. Even commonplace stuff like planning a small product deployment or planning a dinner party for eight people dwarfs anything you'll experience in a video game.
If you're old enough to be buying your own games, real-life planning has already outstripped video games.
Playing piano is great and all for novelty, but it's not really a useful skill.
I know this is kind of lost knowledge in our day and age, and probably the shocking the first time you contemplate it, but a significant percentage of normal people, probably at least one in four, can actually learn an instrument well enough to provide pleasure to themselves and the people around them.
Well, you can get to a level in musical talent where it makes random women want to sleep with you.
With video games, not so much.
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
As someone who has played a lot of piano in his life, I agree with you on some points but disagree with your notion of gaming. Music is very rewarding and fulfilling, that's true. However, you say that games are inherently just for "killing time" but I don't think it has to be that way. That would be like saying books are just for killing time. Some books are trashy and only provide value in entertainment during the time you read it. Others inspire deep thought and provide value throughout your life.
Without RTFA, it seems that the article is saying that those kinds of games are missing. I agree with him (disagree with you) that it's possible to create these kind of deeper games. Games are just another medium. However, I believe that their interactivity makes it much harder to achieve that same depth.
There's also the public transportation mod. But it's not available in all locations and is buggy to boot.
I learned a bit of logic, a bit of teamwork, a bit of leadership, and a few other skills starting from games too. My world grew a little.
Well, Fatal1ty became a professional gamer, and so did a few others. I could also point out that some of us got interested in what made those games tick, and became professional programmers.
Looking around, I'd say there's equally a point that more people should be exposed to formal logic. Not a jab at you, but rather at the world we live in. There are people who can't even follow an "A => B", nor understand why you can't follow it the other way around. There are people who think Newton's laws of mechanics would be different if a woman had written them, or who think that demanding evidence in science is some kind of fascist plan to oppress independent thinkers.
So while I'll agree with your general idea, I'd say there's an equal argument to be made for why more people should be encouraged to mod games, as for why more people should learn music.
Actually the point is that neither is more stupid than the other. I'm sick and tired of the "your hobby is more stupid than mine" willy waving around. They're all hobbies. They're all, in the end done because we find something fun or interesting.
And, see above, I can come up with just as good a reason for my hobby as you can find for music. I could do the same exercise for cars (e.g., I saved money by learning to tune my own system instead of taking it to the Geek Squad), but the post is already too long.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
I've been drawn so much into this game mode that I think my boss is actually Master Hand.
signature is pants
The op-ed piece on gamasutra reads like a nice puff piece you'd find in the front of (insert wholesome magazine here). The author grew up playing the Nintendo entertainment system. I have always whole-heartedly believed this system to be the "Barney the purple dinosaur" in a world of Sesame Streets, Electric Companies, and Bloodhound Gangs. The games were exceptionally babyish at a time when there were systems which already had grown up games, like the commodore 64/128, and the atari 2600. The NES may have been a favorite of children for a reason. The juvenile tradition continues at Nintendo. I can't say I share the author's beliefs about games still being childish. I grew up playing all types of games. Some of them childish, most were more mature. Some of you are thinking stuff like manhunt and resident evil. I was already an adult when those were released. I grew up playing a lot of flight simulators, classic D&D games, and adventure games. Below I will provide a list of mature games I grew up playing so the author can realize the error of his ways.
1984: Ancient Art of War, Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, Gauntlet, Sopwith, Zork 3
1985: 007 A View to a Kill, Adventure Contstruction Set, A Mind Forever Voyaging, Lords of Conquest, World Tour Golf
1986: Psi 5 Trading Company, Bard's Tale II The Destiny Knight, F-15 Strike Eagle, King's Quest III: To Heir is Human, Platoon, Beyond the Titanic, Chessmaster 2000, Ace Air Combat, Roadwar 2000
1987: Stock Market: The Game, Ancient Art of War at Sea, Wasteland, Destroyer, Sub Battle Simulator, Prohibition, F-19 Stealth Fighter, Leisure Suit Larry, Police Quest
1988: Shogun, MS flight Simulator, The Hunt for Red October, D&D: Pool of Radiance, 688 Attack Sub, Bard's Tale III, Neuromancer
1989: Risk, Sim City, MS Flight Simulator 4, D&D: Curse of the Azure Bonds, A10 Tank Killer, Populous
1990: The Incredible Machine, Ancient Art of War in the Skies, Railroad Tycoon, Silent Service II, King's Quest V, Police Quest 3, Wing Commander
1991: Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe, Wing Commander 2, Eye of the Beholder II, Death Knights of Krynn, Chuck Yeager's Air Combat, Castles, Sid Meier's Civilization
1992: Aces of the Pacific WWII, Beyond Zork, Lost Files of Sherlock Holmes, Star Trek 25th Anniversary, Castles II, Masters of Orion, Links, Elder Scrolls Arena, Ultima VII
1993: Syndicate, MS Flight Sim 5, Privateer, Wing Commander Academy, Settlers, Aces over Europe, Return to Zork, Bloodnet, Betrayal At Krondor
alright, I just got bored doing that. was going to go to this year, but meh. Also add every hex tile turn-based game. no kid wants to play those.
but you get the picture. all those games are more appealing to adults than kids.
They're using their grammar skills there.
well looks like some body needs a new hobby
Hmm, but do those random women want to sleep with you or just your wallet. So video games as in developing into a successful games developer, hmm, as far as I know that makes you desirable regardless of your sex and regardless of the pursuing sex, let's avoid red neck sexually based biases in all it's various combinations ;).
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
Well, the discussion was playing games, not making them.
But your point is true as well.
Mod me down, my New Earth Global Warmingist friends!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arcade_Volleyball
Serioulsy, I know some guys currently making 20% per month. Volatility is usable if you have good twitch reflexes :-)
But I find trading the markets as challenging as gaming (even more so) and I have been able to grow my capital, and use my knowledge to avoid the wipe outs of the last year (moved my retirement fund investments into cash last November).
There is a massive opportunity for good game players in the markets. It's all the same principles of looking for the best probabilities, and minimising risk. And what's more there are heaps of walkthroughs available, you just need to find one that suits your personailty as there are heaps of ways to play.
My reccomendation is look for books by Daryl Guppy (Aussie author), his Share Trading and Chart Trading books are essentials for beginners. After that go for it, read, read, read, then develop a plan and test it.
Try Incredible Charts for a resonable free charting program with data for a few exchanges. It's delayed so not usable for real trading unless you subscribe, but for testing it works fine.
How long do I have to grind "Piano" to level it, and will it earn me modifiers to DEX, INT, WIS or CON?
You've been trolled, musical talent is an awesome thing & it's own reward.
No kidding. Much like being able to draw, it can give your sense of self a bit more of crunchy center than if you didn't have it.
Feedback loops aren't "real".
"Practice" occurs until the arrow hits the target.
When "playing" the arrow never leaves the bowstring.
I'm saying "Do", by releasing the arrow, because now you know how.
It's all about the pathways. Once they're made, it's time to use them. Existence and development are linear.
Some people seem to be sensitive to the point where they think I am suggesting that we extinguish fancy. To the contrary, I am positing that we capitalize on our fully-developed sense of fancy, and make use of it in the world.
Let those in development keep it up. "You don't have to go home, but you can't stay here." You *could*, but it's akin to a septuagenarian remaining "in touch" with today's youth.
You aren't today's youth, unless you are, in which case you wouldn't be asking or answering this question.
I knew what I was getting into.