Rep. Lorie Fowlke (R-Orem) pointed out that HB 257 is the most narrowly defined legislation of these kinds of violent games bills. "I think it is worth a try," she said. "Otherwise we give up and say the court will always determine our values."
Um...it's *YOU* who's trying to determine our values!
Yes. Look at Palamedes, Puzzle Bobble, or Magical Drop. All those puzzle games have their "piles" at the top. Look at Zoop, which has piles on all four sides.
I don't think their existence negates the possibility that Tetris would not have "worked as well" had the blocks fell up. I looked at those games. Palamedes is a little dude that pushes the blocks into the air. Puzzle Bobble has a gun that shoots the balls up, and then when they match, they fall back down. There's still some grounding there. Yeah, they're all sort of abstract. But the point is, it may be more than just gameplay - there may need to be some analog to reality in the game to provide a chance for success. I'm just trying to fine-tune the point of the article I guess. I may be totally off base.
Now you're getting into rhythm games. What about games such as Dance Dance Revolution, where the object is to whack pieces as they rise past your crosshair? Is that abstract enough?
Well, yes, Freq/Amp are rhythm games, but they're also very abstract. Rez is another example of an abstract game that was critically acclaimed but did not do well at retail. As for DDR, I think that's pretty straightforward. You put your feet where the arrows say to put them to do the proper dance step. I dunno what this "whack pieces" thing is. Maybe if they didn't tie it in with dancing I'd agree, but they did. It's got that analog to the real world. I'm not picking on a specific genre, I'm just looking for examples of very abstract concepts that may have great gameplay but aren't successful because they have no grounding in reality.
No granted, abstractness isn't the same as logic. Just trying, as I said, to find tune it. And clearly failing.
Could this also be a discussion of the acceptable level of abstraction? Lots of the games mentioned still had relatively grounded concepts guiding them: Pac Man has eating and running away from things chasing you. All of the platformers mentioned involve some physics, like gravity for instance.
Puzzle games can be quite abstract, but many are still addictive and enjoyable. Tetris has "gravity" though. Would it have worked as well if the blocks fell up?
Could the reasons some critically acclaimed games, like Frequency/Amplitude did so poorly is because they were too abstract with too little grounding in reality?
Slashdot Mirror
If you paid $400 for a 360 to play Marble Blast on Live then you, sir, are the idiot.
Rep. Lorie Fowlke (R-Orem) pointed out that HB 257 is the most narrowly defined legislation of these kinds of violent games bills. "I think it is worth a try," she said. "Otherwise we give up and say the court will always determine our values." Um...it's *YOU* who's trying to determine our values!
Yes. Look at Palamedes, Puzzle Bobble, or Magical Drop. All those puzzle games have their "piles" at the top. Look at Zoop, which has piles on all four sides. I don't think their existence negates the possibility that Tetris would not have "worked as well" had the blocks fell up. I looked at those games. Palamedes is a little dude that pushes the blocks into the air. Puzzle Bobble has a gun that shoots the balls up, and then when they match, they fall back down. There's still some grounding there. Yeah, they're all sort of abstract. But the point is, it may be more than just gameplay - there may need to be some analog to reality in the game to provide a chance for success. I'm just trying to fine-tune the point of the article I guess. I may be totally off base. Now you're getting into rhythm games. What about games such as Dance Dance Revolution, where the object is to whack pieces as they rise past your crosshair? Is that abstract enough? Well, yes, Freq/Amp are rhythm games, but they're also very abstract. Rez is another example of an abstract game that was critically acclaimed but did not do well at retail. As for DDR, I think that's pretty straightforward. You put your feet where the arrows say to put them to do the proper dance step. I dunno what this "whack pieces" thing is. Maybe if they didn't tie it in with dancing I'd agree, but they did. It's got that analog to the real world. I'm not picking on a specific genre, I'm just looking for examples of very abstract concepts that may have great gameplay but aren't successful because they have no grounding in reality. No granted, abstractness isn't the same as logic. Just trying, as I said, to find tune it. And clearly failing.
Could this also be a discussion of the acceptable level of abstraction? Lots of the games mentioned still had relatively grounded concepts guiding them: Pac Man has eating and running away from things chasing you. All of the platformers mentioned involve some physics, like gravity for instance. Puzzle games can be quite abstract, but many are still addictive and enjoyable. Tetris has "gravity" though. Would it have worked as well if the blocks fell up? Could the reasons some critically acclaimed games, like Frequency/Amplitude did so poorly is because they were too abstract with too little grounding in reality?