It's not a lame excuse for anything, it's an observation. 10% of what is created is better than the other 90%. You can adapt according to your threshold, for some it's 20%, for others it's 5%, but for most it's 10%. It's simply a matter of where you draw the line.
If you don't fall into that 10% as a creator, "Well, my work just isn't good enough, I guess" isn't really a valid excuse that anyone would listen to...so yeah...I don't get where you see it as a "lame excuse"
...think "I wonder what liberties will be gone today?" when they first awake?
This doesn't really affect me - yet - but who knows how far this will go. Is this the beginning of a system where the would-be victim is punished for the would-be crime?
Besides, I don't need to buy my music to enjoy the latest tunes. I have a (now deafened) neighbor that makes sure I can hear all the new stuff playing on his stereo.
This marks the day Dvorak realized the same frustrations of myspace kids everywhere. Hell, he even wrote a blog complaining about it.
"Dear Diary, I don't understand why CSS won't work on my site! OMG, all I want to do is make every div tag on my page 50% transparent, why does it slow things down so much?? Sometimes I think everyone's out to get me. In the end I ended up using Tom's myspace editor, but now I have a link to his page on my page and I don't know how to get rid of it. I hate my life.
I administer multiple e-commerce sites, and the majority of our customers don't make a purchase until at least 30 days after first visiting our sites. Google should know this, and I have no idea why they're even considering CPA as an option.
Or if it's a scripted game, I want something more like the old adventures and american computer RPGs, where the story was revealed along the sides as a fun *game* progressed, and the reward for getting further was getting to a cool level, not getting some non-interactive cgi cartoon of 13-22 year old's idea of "hot."
Couldn't agree more. The reward for completing a gameplay portion of the game should be something to further enhance gameplay: an item, a challenging new level, a new skill, etc. The notion of CG being the reward is one I never understood...I can only describe it as some kind of A/B test run rampant.
I guess it depends on if you're talking from the perspective of a game producer or a game player, and the post he replied to said "Maybe some of them will even invest in these silly radical concepts called 'storyline' and 'plot.'" leading me to believe we're in the context of producers.
From the perspective of a player, yes there are better places to look. From the perspective of a producer, they better not be looking elsewhere.
Definately agree. Choose which segment you want to be heavy in and go for that audience. That doesn't mean if you're making story games, ditch gameplay and graphics, but rather find a good balance, and when necessary, go heavy where your demographic requires.
Games shouldn't compare themselves to the movie industry as they are two different forms of entertainment, I agree with you there. It may be possible to take some cues, but anything more doesn't work (lighting, camera angles that are absolutely beautiful on film tend to come off slow and boring in the interaction-based game medium). Nevertheless, if you're making a game with a good story, I don't feel that story should be compromised for "gameplay reasons" and in most cases it doesn't have to be. It's very possible to have both once a studio gets out of the we-must-be-like-hollywood mindset.
That is, if you're in the business of making plot-based games. If your market is Tetris 5,000 or Breakout: The Latest Iteration, then for the love of all that is holy keep that plot away from it, because it just comes off cheesy.
Parent post makes the assertion that storyline doesn't belong in games, and I was simply responding to that. I agree completely that the game has to be fun, but that's a bit broad of a goal, so a game producer must decide which type of fun they want their game to be. For example, I normally enjoy playing the role of a hero in a good plotline (and no, said plotline doesn't necessarily involve gathering my friends and saving the world;)) more than I enjoy contorting my fingers to hit crazy button combinations. Nevertheless, I enjoy the occassional game of Soul Calibur with my friends. Do you think I pay a lick of attention to the story? Hell no, and I think all but the biggest fans of the series don't either. Yet, it's still there, and I think that's what you mean about wasted resources. The amount of reading I have to do in that game (single player) directly translates more accurately into "the amount of times I have to push next" and does become like "playing a round of checkers at every chapter" on my DVD player (even with just pushing next), so I'm prone to agree with you.
However, this thread isn't the first time I've heard people say "if you want storyline, watch a movie" and this phrase has always grated me. Who's to say that a video game isn't ample enough medium for telling a quality story. A few games have been able to both tell a good story and create interesting gameplay, but they're rare. Either the storyline suffers, or the storyline detracts from the gameplay (through bad prioritization), so a sour taste is left in the mouths of gamers. But hey- if you want to make an omelette and all that jazz.
While we're on bad analogies, my xbox doesn't make me watch bad movies to play games, though some games do. If I don't want to pay attention to plot to play the game, I simply don't buy a plot-based game. Likewise, (assuming you meant if the re-release of say, "Citizen Kane" rather than the DVD player itself like I meant the game and not the game system) if I had to play checkers to watch "Citizen Kane," I would simply not buy the movie, and rather buy a movie that focuses on telling a story. But that's all movies can really do, while games are pretty open. Many things work for many different market segments, companies just have to learn to know which demographic they're targetting instead of trying to please everyone with one release. Anyway, I feel my analogies hold, as I am making an apples-apples comparison among emerging technologies through history used to tell stories and the public's reactions to said mediums.
You're right, games aren't storytelling. That's what the poster above you said, that they should work on it.
By your same argument, graphics have nothing to do with games, and thus shouldn't be worked on either. Pong was 2 lines and a box. When books were first written, I wonder if anyone said "paper isn't for writing on, if you want a story, listen to your father's." When film first came out, I know many people said "it will never take off, no one wants to watch pictures on a screen," but here we are today, with people on the Internet telling others to turn to film for storyline because it doesn't belong anywhere else than the two established mediums.
It's more than possible for a game to have good graphics, good storyline and plot, and innovative gameplay. Unfortunately, the past few years have been fueled by video card manufacturer's pumping out graphics technology faster than most software producers have been able to keep up with, and so audiences became captivated with "oooh shiny water"...gameplay and storyline dropped by the wayside while pushing eye candy to the limit flourished. Like all things, though, people got tired of all glitz and no substance, and we're seeing that curve level out.
With mobile devices becoming more and more popular, we're beginning to see gameplay-based games gain some popularity again, and focus will probably shift there for the next few years as portable technology gets smaller and faster. At that point, computers will be what PCs are today, we'll see a shift back to storyline for a few years as RPGs gain popularity on the Nokia Futura in the Japanese market (and some may make it Westward), just in time for the next big graphics push, this time cell phones (if they're still called cell phones at this point) will be included.
Yes, I play the occassional game on my cell phone while waiting for class to start, or when the power goes out (as it tends to do often this time of year in Tampa, FL).
My point is, some people play games as digital puzzles, brain-teasers if you will. Some play them for the graphics. Some play them for story. Yeah, you can find brain-teasers in the back of the Sunday paper, you'll never beat the graphics of the real world, and story can be found in books and movies. That doesn't mean those are the only mediums "allowed" to do such things. Games, in the end, are about having fun, and what's fun to you isn't always going to be fun to me. Diversity is king. No, games are not storytelling, they are not graphics, and their not gameplay. They're any of them, and a smart publisher will offer all three, and then some.
Umm...they are doing precisely what you suggest. They're getting someone to remove the bits to fast forward through, so they can leave the DVD with their kids when they're not around. How churlish can you get?
And that's what I'm getting tired of...point?
How is the government even involved? RTFA.
Had this judge found in favor of the chains (as we all expected), it would have been government involvement.
You might wish to reconsider, especially with respect to making covers, mixes, parodies, spoofs, and so on. So long as I don't I don't attribute my modified message itself to you, why should *copyright* be involved?
No, I don't want to reconsider. Covers, mixes, parodies, spoofs, and so on are attributed to the creator of the cover, mix, parody, spoof, and so on. I don't recall seeing "digitally remastered by Sam Walton" on the cover of an edited copy of...well, anything sold at Wal-Mart. Come to think of it, the only names I ever see on these packages are those of the creators. So it would appear they are, indeed, attributing their modified message to the creator. And that's precisely why *copyright* should be involved.
How about because this is one of the few rare cases where the "copyright judges" are right?
Just because you reimburse the creator doesn't give you the right to change what he's saying.
If Wal-Mart sold Fahrenheit 911, but editted it to appear pro-Bush, would it still be alright as long as they reimbursed Michael Moore for each item sold? Sure, he might come off a little less grating, but his message would be changed. You can't just change the plot of a movie arbitrarily.
I'm really getting tired of all these fanatic church-types pretending they don't have a fast forward button on their remote control. Like seeing a nipple for 2 seconds while reaching for the remote control will send you straight to hell. It's not the government's job to hide you whenever "God issues a test."
Not to get all tinfoil hat, but if it's okay for wal-mart to censor what we see, what next?
Yes, it is copyright infringement to change a work and resell it as the original. Wal-mart will just have to find another throat to force their neo-con "values" down. I hear those Chinese labor kids could use a little more to eat, they might want to start there.
"Now that the show is over, and we have jointly exercised our constitutional rights, we would like to leave you with one very important thought: Some time in the future, you may have the opportunity to serve as a juror in a censorship case, or a so-called obscenity case. It would be wise to remember that the same people who would stop you from listening to Boards of Canada may be back next year to complain about a book, or even a TV programme. If you can be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you can be told what to say or think. Defend your constitutionally-protected rights. No one else will do it for you. Thank you." -Boards of Canada: One Very Important Thought
2 friends of mine did that in high school with a fake 20. From far away it looked convincing enough, but once you picked it up you had to be stupid to think it was real.
Someone picked it up and tried to use it (knowing it was fake at this point) to buy food at the high school cafeteria. The cafeteria worker called the police, the kid got arrested, and my two friends were dealing with the Secret Service for months.
I wish I was joking.
There is a large difference between what you can do with/to a celebrity (agencies, politicians, and public companies fall under this category) and what you can do with/to a private citizen.
Even if that weren't the case, the RIAA makes their number public (because they're a public company). Private citizens tend not to (because they want to remain private). It's called a customer service option.
Having said that, I think this is the lamest protest ever. "What are you doing to protest?" "Calling customer service." Riiiiight.
1. Have Kids
2. Don't teach your kids about "the S word" because it's dirty
3. Don't notice your kid is going on myspace, dating older men
4. Profit!!!
1. Declare victory
2. Let the public assume you've stopped your ridiculous charges
3. The public begins P2P downloads again
4. Profit!!!...or begin arrests again.
Slashdot Mirror
Why, to read people bicker about which date format is the best, of course!
It's not a lame excuse for anything, it's an observation. 10% of what is created is better than the other 90%. You can adapt according to your threshold, for some it's 20%, for others it's 5%, but for most it's 10%. It's simply a matter of where you draw the line.
/tiredandgrumpy
If you don't fall into that 10% as a creator, "Well, my work just isn't good enough, I guess" isn't really a valid excuse that anyone would listen to...so yeah...I don't get where you see it as a "lame excuse"
...think "I wonder what liberties will be gone today?" when they first awake?
This doesn't really affect me - yet - but who knows how far this will go. Is this the beginning of a system where the would-be victim is punished for the would-be crime?
So, what's the running bet on how long before the US censors Internet content more than China?
I've had enough of these muthafuckin snakes on my muthafuckin plains!
This marks the day Dvorak realized the same frustrations of myspace kids everywhere. Hell, he even wrote a blog complaining about it.
"Dear Diary,
I don't understand why CSS won't work on my site! OMG, all I want to do is make every div tag on my page 50% transparent, why does it slow things down so much?? Sometimes I think everyone's out to get me. In the end I ended up using Tom's myspace editor, but now I have a link to his page on my page and I don't know how to get rid of it. I hate my life.
-J.D."
I administer multiple e-commerce sites, and the majority of our customers don't make a purchase until at least 30 days after first visiting our sites. Google should know this, and I have no idea why they're even considering CPA as an option.
Or if it's a scripted game, I want something more like the old adventures and american computer RPGs, where the story was revealed along the sides as a fun *game* progressed, and the reward for getting further was getting to a cool level, not getting some non-interactive cgi cartoon of 13-22 year old's idea of "hot."
Couldn't agree more. The reward for completing a gameplay portion of the game should be something to further enhance gameplay: an item, a challenging new level, a new skill, etc. The notion of CG being the reward is one I never understood...I can only describe it as some kind of A/B test run rampant.
I guess it depends on if you're talking from the perspective of a game producer or a game player, and the post he replied to said "Maybe some of them will even invest in these silly radical concepts called 'storyline' and 'plot.'" leading me to believe we're in the context of producers.
From the perspective of a player, yes there are better places to look. From the perspective of a producer, they better not be looking elsewhere.
Definately agree. Choose which segment you want to be heavy in and go for that audience. That doesn't mean if you're making story games, ditch gameplay and graphics, but rather find a good balance, and when necessary, go heavy where your demographic requires.
Games shouldn't compare themselves to the movie industry as they are two different forms of entertainment, I agree with you there. It may be possible to take some cues, but anything more doesn't work (lighting, camera angles that are absolutely beautiful on film tend to come off slow and boring in the interaction-based game medium). Nevertheless, if you're making a game with a good story, I don't feel that story should be compromised for "gameplay reasons" and in most cases it doesn't have to be. It's very possible to have both once a studio gets out of the we-must-be-like-hollywood mindset.
That is, if you're in the business of making plot-based games. If your market is Tetris 5,000 or Breakout: The Latest Iteration, then for the love of all that is holy keep that plot away from it, because it just comes off cheesy.
Parent post makes the assertion that storyline doesn't belong in games, and I was simply responding to that. I agree completely that the game has to be fun, but that's a bit broad of a goal, so a game producer must decide which type of fun they want their game to be. For example, I normally enjoy playing the role of a hero in a good plotline (and no, said plotline doesn't necessarily involve gathering my friends and saving the world ;)) more than I enjoy contorting my fingers to hit crazy button combinations. Nevertheless, I enjoy the occassional game of Soul Calibur with my friends. Do you think I pay a lick of attention to the story? Hell no, and I think all but the biggest fans of the series don't either. Yet, it's still there, and I think that's what you mean about wasted resources. The amount of reading I have to do in that game (single player) directly translates more accurately into "the amount of times I have to push next" and does become like "playing a round of checkers at every chapter" on my DVD player (even with just pushing next), so I'm prone to agree with you.
However, this thread isn't the first time I've heard people say "if you want storyline, watch a movie" and this phrase has always grated me. Who's to say that a video game isn't ample enough medium for telling a quality story. A few games have been able to both tell a good story and create interesting gameplay, but they're rare. Either the storyline suffers, or the storyline detracts from the gameplay (through bad prioritization), so a sour taste is left in the mouths of gamers. But hey- if you want to make an omelette and all that jazz.
While we're on bad analogies, my xbox doesn't make me watch bad movies to play games, though some games do. If I don't want to pay attention to plot to play the game, I simply don't buy a plot-based game. Likewise, (assuming you meant if the re-release of say, "Citizen Kane" rather than the DVD player itself like I meant the game and not the game system) if I had to play checkers to watch "Citizen Kane," I would simply not buy the movie, and rather buy a movie that focuses on telling a story. But that's all movies can really do, while games are pretty open. Many things work for many different market segments, companies just have to learn to know which demographic they're targetting instead of trying to please everyone with one release. Anyway, I feel my analogies hold, as I am making an apples-apples comparison among emerging technologies through history used to tell stories and the public's reactions to said mediums.
You're right, games aren't storytelling. That's what the poster above you said, that they should work on it.
By your same argument, graphics have nothing to do with games, and thus shouldn't be worked on either. Pong was 2 lines and a box. When books were first written, I wonder if anyone said "paper isn't for writing on, if you want a story, listen to your father's." When film first came out, I know many people said "it will never take off, no one wants to watch pictures on a screen," but here we are today, with people on the Internet telling others to turn to film for storyline because it doesn't belong anywhere else than the two established mediums.
It's more than possible for a game to have good graphics, good storyline and plot, and innovative gameplay. Unfortunately, the past few years have been fueled by video card manufacturer's pumping out graphics technology faster than most software producers have been able to keep up with, and so audiences became captivated with "oooh shiny water"...gameplay and storyline dropped by the wayside while pushing eye candy to the limit flourished. Like all things, though, people got tired of all glitz and no substance, and we're seeing that curve level out.
With mobile devices becoming more and more popular, we're beginning to see gameplay-based games gain some popularity again, and focus will probably shift there for the next few years as portable technology gets smaller and faster. At that point, computers will be what PCs are today, we'll see a shift back to storyline for a few years as RPGs gain popularity on the Nokia Futura in the Japanese market (and some may make it Westward), just in time for the next big graphics push, this time cell phones (if they're still called cell phones at this point) will be included.
Yes, I play the occassional game on my cell phone while waiting for class to start, or when the power goes out (as it tends to do often this time of year in Tampa, FL).
My point is, some people play games as digital puzzles, brain-teasers if you will. Some play them for the graphics. Some play them for story. Yeah, you can find brain-teasers in the back of the Sunday paper, you'll never beat the graphics of the real world, and story can be found in books and movies. That doesn't mean those are the only mediums "allowed" to do such things. Games, in the end, are about having fun, and what's fun to you isn't always going to be fun to me. Diversity is king. No, games are not storytelling, they are not graphics, and their not gameplay. They're any of them, and a smart publisher will offer all three, and then some.
Umm...they are doing precisely what you suggest. They're getting someone to remove the bits to fast forward through, so they can leave the DVD with their kids when they're not around. How churlish can you get?
And that's what I'm getting tired of...point?
How is the government even involved? RTFA.
Had this judge found in favor of the chains (as we all expected), it would have been government involvement.
You might wish to reconsider, especially with respect to making covers, mixes, parodies, spoofs, and so on. So long as I don't I don't attribute my modified message itself to you, why should *copyright* be involved?
No, I don't want to reconsider. Covers, mixes, parodies, spoofs, and so on are attributed to the creator of the cover, mix, parody, spoof, and so on. I don't recall seeing "digitally remastered by Sam Walton" on the cover of an edited copy of...well, anything sold at Wal-Mart. Come to think of it, the only names I ever see on these packages are those of the creators. So it would appear they are, indeed, attributing their modified message to the creator. And that's precisely why *copyright* should be involved.
How about because this is one of the few rare cases where the "copyright judges" are right?
Just because you reimburse the creator doesn't give you the right to change what he's saying.
If Wal-Mart sold Fahrenheit 911, but editted it to appear pro-Bush, would it still be alright as long as they reimbursed Michael Moore for each item sold? Sure, he might come off a little less grating, but his message would be changed. You can't just change the plot of a movie arbitrarily.
I'm really getting tired of all these fanatic church-types pretending they don't have a fast forward button on their remote control. Like seeing a nipple for 2 seconds while reaching for the remote control will send you straight to hell. It's not the government's job to hide you whenever "God issues a test."
Not to get all tinfoil hat, but if it's okay for wal-mart to censor what we see, what next?
Yes, it is copyright infringement to change a work and resell it as the original. Wal-mart will just have to find another throat to force their neo-con "values" down. I hear those Chinese labor kids could use a little more to eat, they might want to start there.
"Now that the show is over, and we have jointly exercised our constitutional rights, we would like to leave you with one very important thought: Some time in the future, you may have the opportunity to serve as a juror in a censorship case, or a so-called obscenity case. It would be wise to remember that the same people who would stop you from listening to Boards of Canada may be back next year to complain about a book, or even a TV programme. If you can be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you can be told what to say or think. Defend your constitutionally-protected rights. No one else will do it for you. Thank you." -Boards of Canada: One Very Important Thought
2 friends of mine did that in high school with a fake 20. From far away it looked convincing enough, but once you picked it up you had to be stupid to think it was real. Someone picked it up and tried to use it (knowing it was fake at this point) to buy food at the high school cafeteria. The cafeteria worker called the police, the kid got arrested, and my two friends were dealing with the Secret Service for months. I wish I was joking.
There is a large difference between what you can do with/to a celebrity (agencies, politicians, and public companies fall under this category) and what you can do with/to a private citizen.
Even if that weren't the case, the RIAA makes their number public (because they're a public company). Private citizens tend not to (because they want to remain private). It's called a customer service option.
Having said that, I think this is the lamest protest ever. "What are you doing to protest?" "Calling customer service." Riiiiight.
1. Have Kids 2. Don't teach your kids about "the S word" because it's dirty 3. Don't notice your kid is going on myspace, dating older men 4. Profit!!!
yes. let's kill the farmers, and the in-game tradeskill system. What good am I, as a non-raider, to my guild if I can't give them potions?
1. Declare victory 2. Let the public assume you've stopped your ridiculous charges 3. The public begins P2P downloads again 4. Profit!!! ...or begin arrests again.
Guess that's what happens when you follow Windows advice for your Linux system.
Wait- where does Google fit into all this? You know you can't mention "World Domination" without "Google" around here...
He most certainly does!