Alright, I decided I should post something that actually required a little bit of thought for a change...on everyone else's part, of course =). So, I just saw a commercial for Ratchet and Clank: Going Commando (or w/e it's called), and it brought to mind something I had read in a review of Jak II: what defines a platformer? I can't quote it specifically, but it had read something along the lines of "...platformer, which is a loosely defined term that may/will include any type of other game-type, including action, adventure, FPS, or classic platformer." That made me think...how would we define the modern platformer? While I'm sure many people immediately think of Mario at the mention of the word platformer, we've definitely advanced beyond 2d side-scrolling jumping games with subtle undertones hinting at an actual story. (Oh wait...South Park...) Ok, so, from reading what I posted above, I was going somewhere with the Gamedev.net community creating a concrete definition of a platformer, because it is, indeed, made up (almost) entirely of people who...work on game development. I lost my train of thought when South Park came on, so...go with it. South Park time. EDIT: Also, sorry if this is in the wrong forum...I wasn't exactly sure where definitions went when they weren't in the dictionary. "TV IS bad Meatwad...but we f***in need it" If you're a girl under the age of 12, and you're high on marijuana...don't ride your bike. -TRUTH [edited by - Boku San on March 14, 2004 11:09:43 PM]

I don''t really think there is much difference from the classic platformers such as Mario or Sonic, and the more modern ones like Ratchet and Clank. At the most basic level, they are still just jumping from platform to platform to get to the end of the level.

quote: Original post by Vangelis
I don''t really think there is much difference from the classic platformers such as Mario or Sonic, and the more modern ones like Ratchet and Clank. At the most basic level, they are still just jumping from platform to platform to get to the end of the level.

Except that Ratchet and Clank has gravity bombs...and a space shooter sequence, if I''m not mistaken (which I probably am). I don''t mean just the basic gameplay mechanics, I mean the advancement of the technologies used with those mechanics. For instance, the Half-Life mod Ricochet...I''d call that an arena-based platformer/FPS...but I don''t like that definition. Which is why I kinda made this topic.


"TV IS bad Meatwad...but we f***in need it"

If you''re a girl under the age of 12, and you''re high on marijuana...don''t ride your bike. -TRUTH

Platformer. Does it have platforms? Are they central to level design/gameplay?

Check.

To be a little less lazy, games in which vertical motion - usually in the form of jumping - is a critical component, comprising a large portion of overall movement, are likely candidates for being called platformers.

quote: Original post by Oluseyi
Platformer. Does it have platforms? Are they central to level design/gameplay?

Check.

To be a little less lazy, games in which vertical motion - usually in the form of jumping - is a critical component, comprising a large portion of overall movement, are likely candidates for being called platformers.

What about Star Wars: Bounty Hunter? I think I used the jetpack (vertical movement) quite a bit in that game, but I would NOT call it a platformer. I want to say that Jak II didn't REQUIRE that much, but I haven't played it that much, so...

Also, what about the Half-Life mod The Specialists (which I advocate for at every opportunity)? I'll be damned if everybody is diving here, superjumping there, and then busting a cap in somebody's ass somewhere else. In my mind, I don't even START to associate that with a platformer because, while jumping (read: not running/walking/rolling) is an essential part of the game. Try it out if you have the game...

I generally would associate most platformers with being bright, cartoony, and easy to pick-up-and-play...which The Specialists is none of (well...it is easy to pick up when you start, but not something you can play before school...yeah).

See what I meant by the first post? Neither of your definitions were specific enough.


"TV IS bad Meatwad...but we f***in need it"

If you're a girl under the age of 12, and you're high on marijuana...don't ride your bike. -TRUTH

[edited by - Boku San on March 14, 2004 11:51:42 PM]

quote: Original post by Boku San
What about Star Wars: Bounty Hunter?

Nope.

quote: I think I used the jetpack (vertical movement) quite a bit in that game, but I would NOT call it a platformer.

Does it have platforms? No? Then it can''t be a platformer.

quote: See what I meant by the first post? Neither of your definitions were specific enough.

That''s not the problem; the fact that genre classifications are (mostly) meaningless is. Ask what a role-playing game is and you''ll get a ton of definitions that have nothing to do wit role-playing. So either the definition is wrong, the nomenclature is inappropriate, or the label isn''t really worth shit.

I vote for the third.

Labels are worth shit...always a good way to get the last say...in anything.

"You''re stupid!"
"Labels are worth shit."

Come on man...I KNOW labels are meaningless, but something has to be said.

Actually, who cares...I''ll be Bach...tomorrow.


"TV IS bad Meatwad...but we f***in need it"

If you''re a girl under the age of 12, and you''re high on marijuana...don''t ride your bike. -TRUTH

quote: Original post by Boku San
Labels are worth shit...always a good way to get the last say...in anything.

That''s the laziest evaluation of what I said.

The transition from two dimensions to three has complicated many concepts. The traditional notion of the platformer was rigid because there were only two axes of motion; the introduction of the third axis has freed designers from these constraints, so modern games can incorporate elements of various archetypical genres. Consquently, locking down genre definitions is nearly impossible - and unprofitable for anything besides marketing purposes.

I''ve never actually associated anything *except* the old 2D platformers (Mario, Sonic, Earthworm Jim) with the term ''platformer''. Well, except maybe for Mario 64, but then that''s stretching it, although there were lots of platforms.

I''d say that a platformer is a 3rd person game with the emphasis mainly on navigating the level itself, rather than fighting your way through enemies or talking to NPCs or completing quests (although if the quests involve getting that gold star up at the top of that bunch of platforms, go for it! )

That is, of course, only my interpretation of a meaningless label.

quote: Original post by fractoid
I''ve never actually associated anything *except* the old 2D platformers (Mario, Sonic, Earthworm Jim) with the term ''platformer''. Well, except maybe for Mario 64, but then that''s stretching it, although there were lots of platforms.

I''d say that a platformer is a 3rd person game with the emphasis mainly on navigating the level itself, rather than fighting your way through enemies or talking to NPCs or completing quests (although if the quests involve getting that gold star up at the top of that bunch of platforms, go for it! )

That is, of course, only my interpretation of a meaningless label.

Ok...I can roll with that. But what is an adventure game? Are we finally getting to the point where we could re-establish the basic genres of video games? I think that platformers and adventure games should be combined and called...plaidventures. Or...black people. (...Ok, I tried)


"TV IS bad Meatwad...but we f***in need it"

If you''re a girl under the age of 12, and you''re high on marijuana...don''t ride your bike. -TRUTH