quote: Original post by bishop_pass
Do all of you only watch fantasy movies? Do all of you only read fantasy books? If so, then the current crop of games are just for you, and you''re what one would qualify as a certain type. The rest of the world''d population probably will take a pass on the offerings of the game industry because of that.

Sorry, bishop, but your point doesn''t hold much water, for several reasons.

1) The world ain''t playing anything, because the US and Europe owns most of the relevant tech and infrastructure. (A nitpick, perhaps, but it sounds like you''re trying to argue that there are hordes of would-be video game players yearning to be free if only the orcs and Tie Fighters would get out of the way).

2) Games can''t yet compete with movies and books because they''re about spatial reasoning, logic, managing number systems or hand-eye coordination feedback loops; worse, they require participation, which means we make people work for their entertainment-- as almost no other genre does!

3) The Sims. This is your game. It''s about the mundane. It''s hugely popular, but it hasn''t taken over the game industry despite its average joe target audience.

4) Last I remember, you said you don''t play games. Consider:
Counterstrike, Rainbow Six, Splinter Cell, Project IGI, Sum of All Fears, SWAT 3, GoldenEye, Revoution, Sniper: Path of Vengeance, Hitman, Soldier of Fortune, Cold Zero, Delta Force, Jagged Alliance (modern / military or paramilitary)
Mercedes Benz World Racing, Midnight Club, Rebel Trucker, 18 Wheeler, Testdrive: Offroad, Smuggler''s Run, Bloodwake, Spyhunter (modern / vehicles)
Medal of Honor, WWII Online (1940s / military)
Crimson Skies, Gangsters: Organized Crime (1920s)
Noone Lives Forever (1960s / espionage)
American McGee''s Alice, Voodoo Vince (surreal)
Max Payne, True Crime, Dead To Rights, Jet Grind Radio, The Italian Job, Kingpin: Life of Crime, State of Emergency, Grand Theft Auto (modern / underculture)
Tropico, Republic: The Revolution (modern / nationbuilding)
Parasite Eve, Resident Evil, Hunter: The Reckoning (modern / horror)
Deer Hunter, Tony Hawk Pro Skater, PGA Tour (modern / sports)
Pirates of the Carribean, Sea Dogs (age of sail / swashbuckling)
Army Men (childhood fantasy)

Most of these games also have several spinoffs.

In order to make (and back up) your argument that

quote:
There''s a lot of people out there in the World who aren''t particularly fascinated by elves and goblins or other such creatures. But game developers sure are. And as long as that remains the case, so will the audience be limited to such.

you''d have to break down acceptable activities that constitute a challenge. I think the fact that games require participation, however, sharply limits what is possible to portray.

Fact is, researched or not, setting is nothing more than a thin veneer. You want a game that''s about the Old West but is just another shooter with some simulated horse riding? That''s fine. But please don''t assume you''re doing much above and beyond Halo with vehicles, nor that a herd of people will beat a path to your door just and only because it''s starship and goblin free. The audience to games is limited reasons have less to do with content and far more to do with technology.

--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

quote: Original post by bishop_pass
...please inform all authors of Westerns, mysteries, thrillers, maritime novels, aviation novels, romances, and any other novels that are not about elves and robots that their novels are only repeating the 14 stories present already present in the fantasy and science fiction novels, thus rendering their books unimportant and redundant.

Well, they are essentially repeating those stories, but that does not make anything redundant. I said what I did in order to illustrate that by simply writing a story in a new setting, you are not necesarily adding to that pool of 14 archetypal stories. In other words, if none of those 14 stories do anything for you, then simply changing the setting probably won''t help.
So the question is, what is it about current games that leaves you unsatisfied? Is it really the lack of diversity in setting? I suspect that if you were to honestly examine your thoughts on the subject, you would find that it is not so simple. Try to imagine your perfect game. Is it just like an existing game but in a different setting? Or is it something completely new, with elements of gameplay that have never been seen before? Speaking for myself, it is definatly the later, and I suspect that is the case for you too.
I believe that the world of game development is still too young to have properly developed and matured an equivalent to those 14 stories that fiction is built on, and it is that which leads to the feeling that games are lacking in depth. We are still groping in the dark, inventing new gameplay elements and experimenting with different ways of putting them together. Until we have become more adept at that, the art will always seem a little flat. The same "problem" affected cinema in its early days, and will almost certainly affect all new art forms in the future. Game development is a young art. Give it time to mature.

Could someone point me to those 14 archetypal stories? Yes, I googled.

quote: Original post by Turt99
Whoa, a Mod just stated that everyone that didn''t agreee with them was using Stupid and Retard logic.. Good Moderating!

I didn''t realize anyone was moderating anything. Were you under that mistaken assumption? If so, be advised that moderators have just as many rights as otherss - which means they can tell someone else that they believe another''s opinion stinks.

quote: Original post by ryoushi
For example, a cowboy setting would fit an RPG better if the fighting was done with ranged weapons, and a fantasy setting would fit if it was done with swords. Neither setting is really suited to a flight simulator, but kryat is welcome to try . In these cases it would be foolish of me to change the setting just because everyone else does it, as it can only hurt the game.

DRAGON FLIGHT SIM 2004 .. BC!

But serious, perhaps I took it one step too far saying settings are incidental. Settings are important, but nearly not to the point that bishop is making them out to be. People will play games that are set in shitty settings, because they have really fun and exciting game play. We are playing games, first and foremost is game play and the ability of the player to affect and control the game world.

In a movie or a book, the characters and the settings are vitally important, because that’s all there is! You expect to you walk into a movie or crack open a book and have story dictated to you. There is no participation from you, you just sit back and enjoy. Obviously, since the entire nature of the medium is driven by a story, characters, and setting, those must be AMAZINGLY GOOD for the story to be worth reading.

BUT! In terms of games, interactive storytelling, the player wants anything BUT to have a story dictated to them, and the focus of the game is on the INTERACTIVE side, rather than the storytelling.

My point is this, the storytelling aspect of games all take a backseat to the interactive nature of the medium.

Shitty gameplay with shitty storytelling == Trash

Shitty gameplay with great storytelling = Shitty Game. Its like reading an annoying book where you have to gouge your eyeballs out with chop sticks before your mother will let you read the next chapter in it.

Great gameplay with shitty storytelling == Decent Game. People will usually ignore the story line and just sit back and enjoy the fun of the game.

Great gameplay with great storytelling == Excellent Game. The rare breed that gets everything right.

So I have to agree with ryoushi, the storytelling elements serve complement to complement the gameplay, but should never replace it.

And just so you know, I would love to see another western game, or any other setting for a game, hit the market. I enjoyed the hell out of Outlaws, but not because it was a western, but because it was damn fun. Will your western game be fun?

I don´t see much point in arguing here since he has apparently embarked on a trolling spree....

bish, far be it from me to question your qualifications, especially in the light of your all-encompassing nuggets of wisdom ... but what exactly *do* you know about storytelling and game design? as far as I recall you were one of the people on gamedev who don´t actually make games, nor have any ambition to do so, right?

quote: Original post by Hase
I don´t see much point in arguing here since he has apparently embarked on a trolling spree....

That's a troll remark.

quote: Original post by Hase
bish, far be it from me to question your qualifications, especially in the light of your all-encompassing nuggets of wisdom ... but what exactly *do* you know about storytelling and game design? as far as I recall you were one of the people on gamedev who don´t actually make games, nor have any ambition to do so, right?

If you bother to read some of the threads in his profile you'll find many of them far more intellectually engaging than half of the lets take a spin on <insert fps,rpg etc> and call it a revolutionary new idea.

Secondly, who the hell are you to judge what someone "knows" about storytelling and then ask about game experience. I think that, if anything, the two are polar opposites in most games, and even if not, your ability to weave a tale has nothing at all to do with working on games. Maybe we should be asking a similar question to all the wannabe designers out there; What do you know about storytelling? In any event if you don't agree then argue why, don't just call everything flaming and wrong.

[edited by - kordova on November 22, 2003 10:51:05 AM]

quote: Original post by iNfuSeD
Here in the game design forum however, there is lack of design ideas. Design should never be limited by whats popular. All we are seeing here in the forum is MMORPG fantasy / scifi. These two settings account for 90% of the ideas coming through this forum.

Yes.

quote: Original post by iNfuSeD
i think you just can't accept that good points are being made that are contrary to yours, and thus you're resorting to nothing but extreme sarcasm.

Or perhaps everyone here is overly sure of their standpoint.

quote: Original post by iNfuSeD
the theory about 14 stories isn't as concrete as it sounds. What it means is that all literary works are a variation of or a combination of those 14 base stories. with that in mind if you permitate those 14 stories into all their respective combinations, then you have quite a large number to chose from, then you can vary them, using different characters, different themes, different settings. But what all stories boil down to, are those base 14. Shouldn't be such a hard concept to grasp. I don't understand why you are being such an ass about it really.

Yes. But it's those little twists that mostly do have dependencies on the setting. The actions available to you, the items available to you and even how you interact with others all have to do ultimately with the setting. You don't really run into this concept in fps' or fantasy rpgs because they don't add those little mutations or twists except as are allowed by the overly simple engine, and usually its just a rehash of something done somewhere else.


[edited by - kordova on November 22, 2003 11:02:16 AM]

you probably don''t care about this, but in the warhammer and warhammer 40K worlds by Games Workshop, the Elder and Orks are the futuristic equivilent of the fantasy Elves and Orcs. Stunties (which they got rid off) were the futuristic dwarves... who happened to also shave.

quote: Original post by Dredge-Master
you probably don''t care about this, but in the warhammer and warhammer 40K worlds by Games Workshop, the Elder and Orks are the futuristic equivilent of the fantasy Elves and Orcs. Stunties (which they got rid off) were the futuristic dwarves... who happened to also shave.

(Eldar). And let''s not forget the Chaos Marines who are essentially futuristic demons and devils. No one actually cared for story so much as just showing off their armies in that game.