There's something about the position of claiming something is 'art' that has never sat easily with me. Perhaps it's the fact that the creative medium I feel most attached to (games) gets a fair amount of flak for being either dangerously violent drivel (Manhunt) at best, or self-consciously seeking that constant edge of 'new media' cool (Edge Magazine, The Escapist etc).
More specifically, I feel that attempting to portray games as art is just inviting our critics to laugh at us. Games are a medium. It is possible to create something considered to be 'art' in any medium, but that doesn't mean games are art. Television isn't art. Cinema isn't (usually) art. Newspapers are not art.
Moreover, I do not quite understand the need to be accepted as art. Who cares? For me, craft is important. Design is important, engineering is important. I'll look at a well engineered game and admire it in the same way I admire some feat of civil engineering - because I have some insight into the processes and work and effort that are required, I understand and appreciate the level of human ingenuity and thought that goes into making something that seems culturally vacuous to someone like my mother.
And games can exhibit great design, something that I appreciate when I look at an Ipod or a Dyson hoover or a Ferrari. There are other elements too - some games are well written, have exceptional storylines or feature incredibly artistic visual styles or worlds. I'm not desperate for everyone to recognise them as art, though.
I've been prompted into this, somewhat tangentially, by reading the latest and concluding novel in Terry Goodkind's Sword of Truth series, Confessor. I'll lay my cards on the table - I'm with a vocal minority on this one, in that I loved the series at the start, but increasingly grew tired of the incessant amateur philosophising of previously action-driven characters. It just gets worse and worse as the series goes on. And I think these two strands of thought (games as art / fantasy writing) are linked - I read fantasy novels not because the genre contains the cream of the world's writers - it doesn't. I read fantasy because I generally enjoy the settings, narrative and the action. There are exceptions - I can recognise Tolkien as art even if I never particularly warmed to LOTR.
Goodkind, I think, falls prey to the trap that some game commentators or developers do, namely that they feel they have to go out and prove the worth of the medium. They don't. Forget about proving your worth and remember there is as much to admire in a finely crafted and well honed story that brings enjoyment and escapism to millions as there is in writing something that gains recognition outside of your current fanbase.
In the end, I think Goodkind just doesn't want to be a fantasy writer, as his later novels just get further and further away from my definition of fantasy.
Sunday 30 December 2007
Monday 17 December 2007
Games I Need to Get Off My Arse And Finish
In no particular order:
On the other hand, although I do love RTS and strategy games, my attention tends to waver once the novelty wears off and the challenge begins. I love the thought of a good strategy game like Medieval: Total War 2, but I invariably lack the patience to really get the most out of games like these.
I'm trying to be a bit more careful these days about what I pick up - I've deliberately avoided buying great looking RTS games like World in Conflict or (criminally) Mario Galaxy purely because I tend to find the lack of coherent narrative off-putting.
- Twilight Princess
- Stalker
- The Witcher
- Rainbow Six: Vegas
- Hitman: BloodMoney
- Overlord
- Half a dozen other half-finished 360 offerings.
On the other hand, although I do love RTS and strategy games, my attention tends to waver once the novelty wears off and the challenge begins. I love the thought of a good strategy game like Medieval: Total War 2, but I invariably lack the patience to really get the most out of games like these.
I'm trying to be a bit more careful these days about what I pick up - I've deliberately avoided buying great looking RTS games like World in Conflict or (criminally) Mario Galaxy purely because I tend to find the lack of coherent narrative off-putting.
Sunday 16 December 2007
Mass Effect
Having finished Mass Effect, I don't know whether I loved it unreservedly, or was slightly disappointed. I suppose if I have to ask then it must be the latter.
Bioware are one of my favourite developers on the planet, mostly because I am an RPG nut. If it's got a kobold in it, I'm there. Bioware have such pedigree, but either Bioware have lost their way a bit or the market is changing and I'm not.
Since KOTOR (so I suppose we're only really talking about 2 games here, Mass Effect and Jade Empire), it does appear as though Bioware have increasingly attempted to make their RPGs more cinematic and real time. While I don't really have a problem with this per se, the effect is that there seems to be less time for the sort of meat and veg content that I really loved about their games. Obviously BGII was, for a kobold-lover like me, the pinnacle of the genre. KOTOR was a little short and a little shallow for my tastes, but the fact that it looked great and was a Star Wars RPG more than made up for it.
Jade Empire, however, was far too linear for my tastes, the combat lacked obvious depth and the universe, while interesting, lacked the psychological meat hooks that franchises like Star Wars and D&D have in geek men of my generation. Mass Effect is a bit of a return to form, but it really just doesn't stand up to the glory days.
I'm worried (and I suspect) that Bioware's deviation from the classic formula is more a reflection of where they think the most sales lie. While I really love the interactice cutscenes of Mass Effect, and quite enjoyed the comabt, when I think of the dev time that went into making these systems my fondest wish is that they immediately halt new engine features for Mass Effect 2 and 3, and concentrate 100% on story, content and interesting locations (of which there were far too few in ME).
I suppose I just fear that the glory days of RPGs (Fallout 1/2, BG 1/2 and Planescape: Torment) are behind us. Hopefully Bethesda can pull things out of the bag.
Bioware are one of my favourite developers on the planet, mostly because I am an RPG nut. If it's got a kobold in it, I'm there. Bioware have such pedigree, but either Bioware have lost their way a bit or the market is changing and I'm not.
Since KOTOR (so I suppose we're only really talking about 2 games here, Mass Effect and Jade Empire), it does appear as though Bioware have increasingly attempted to make their RPGs more cinematic and real time. While I don't really have a problem with this per se, the effect is that there seems to be less time for the sort of meat and veg content that I really loved about their games. Obviously BGII was, for a kobold-lover like me, the pinnacle of the genre. KOTOR was a little short and a little shallow for my tastes, but the fact that it looked great and was a Star Wars RPG more than made up for it.
Jade Empire, however, was far too linear for my tastes, the combat lacked obvious depth and the universe, while interesting, lacked the psychological meat hooks that franchises like Star Wars and D&D have in geek men of my generation. Mass Effect is a bit of a return to form, but it really just doesn't stand up to the glory days.
I'm worried (and I suspect) that Bioware's deviation from the classic formula is more a reflection of where they think the most sales lie. While I really love the interactice cutscenes of Mass Effect, and quite enjoyed the comabt, when I think of the dev time that went into making these systems my fondest wish is that they immediately halt new engine features for Mass Effect 2 and 3, and concentrate 100% on story, content and interesting locations (of which there were far too few in ME).
I suppose I just fear that the glory days of RPGs (Fallout 1/2, BG 1/2 and Planescape: Torment) are behind us. Hopefully Bethesda can pull things out of the bag.
Assassin's Creed
My disappointment with Assassin's Creed is, if nothing else, a testament to the power of expectation. I wanted the freeform fun of Crackdown with the intricate planning and execution (pun intended) of Hitman: Blood Money.
I think AC delivers absolutely the environment I was expecting - it's an incredible looking game, and the free running is ace (I'm still scratching my head as to how this was accomplished, they must have some clever procedural geometry tagging to identify foot/handholds, you'd need a legion of artists/designers otherwise). Ubisoft have this sort of context sensitive movement/animation stuff honed to a fine art, it began in Prince of Persia and Splinter Cell, and the dividends are really arriving now. It will be interesting to see where it ends up.
It's clear though, that as clever and talented as the devs at Ubisoft are, they're still mortal like the rest of us when it comes to identifying that elusive 'fun' factor. My problems with the game are the same as those that have been widely noted - namely the shockingly poor side missions, and the lack of depth to the main assassinations.
Other disappointing points:
It's a bold game in many ways, but I do think this case the tech is really let down by poor design.
I think AC delivers absolutely the environment I was expecting - it's an incredible looking game, and the free running is ace (I'm still scratching my head as to how this was accomplished, they must have some clever procedural geometry tagging to identify foot/handholds, you'd need a legion of artists/designers otherwise). Ubisoft have this sort of context sensitive movement/animation stuff honed to a fine art, it began in Prince of Persia and Splinter Cell, and the dividends are really arriving now. It will be interesting to see where it ends up.
It's clear though, that as clever and talented as the devs at Ubisoft are, they're still mortal like the rest of us when it comes to identifying that elusive 'fun' factor. My problems with the game are the same as those that have been widely noted - namely the shockingly poor side missions, and the lack of depth to the main assassinations.
Other disappointing points:
- Cutscenes. Lots of them, most of them dull.
- Voice acting is ok, but the lead is very poor.
- The story line is Deus Ex with none of the bite, depth or immersion.
- Scholars mechanic is absolutely lame, really incredibly poor.
It's a bold game in many ways, but I do think this case the tech is really let down by poor design.
A long time coming...
Decided to try to update this thing a bit more often, I've really got into the habit of keeping a blog at work and I find it fairly satisfying, so I'll make a point of updating here, purely for my own amusement.
Things that have occurred since I last blogged:
Things that have occurred since I last blogged:
Tuesday 19 June 2007
Red and Dead
I'm noticing something of a crescendo building in the specialist press on the issue of Xbox 360 reliability. Pieces on Eurogamer as well as other industry sites are really starting to pick up on this issue. There was the lamentable interview which was frankly embarrasing for all concerned, this guy could clearly get a job as a Labour government minister. He's clearly in a difficult position in that he can't admit any liability lest the litigious hordes descend upon his Redmond masters, but really...MS need to get on top of this issue. Sony sooner or later are going to stop tripping up on their own shoelaces, and the 360 really needs to have an unassailable lead at that point.
I've heard all sorts of (anecdotal) stories about horrendous failure rates. I'm personally on my 3rd, so I need little convincing. But stories abound of game studios experiencing 50% failure rates on their internal kit, retailers dealing with huge numbers of returns.
I'm a big MS fan. I loved my Xbox, as a developer I'm a massive fan of their developer-orientated approach to gaming, and I love XNA, but one thing is for sure - the failure rate on these things is hugely over the industry average.
I've heard all sorts of (anecdotal) stories about horrendous failure rates. I'm personally on my 3rd, so I need little convincing. But stories abound of game studios experiencing 50% failure rates on their internal kit, retailers dealing with huge numbers of returns.
I'm a big MS fan. I loved my Xbox, as a developer I'm a massive fan of their developer-orientated approach to gaming, and I love XNA, but one thing is for sure - the failure rate on these things is hugely over the industry average.
Wednesday 13 June 2007
The Magic of Zelda
Having lent my Wii to a friend for a while, I've recently just got it back and have begun to really get into Twilight Princess. As has been said by many, it's a fabulously designed game and a testament to the fact that Nintendo really do know how to 'play the ball' rather than the man. Their entire strategy of recent years has been a case of cutting the Gordian Knot - if you don't like the way the game is going, the best strategy is to change the rules of the game.
In a way, I'm a little disappointed that Microsoft haven't entirely dominated the market with the 360 (although it's certainly been successful), because as a lifelong gamer, the 360 ticks every one of my boxes. It's a console for gamers, with quality genre staples in abundant supply. With the success of the Wii, all the industry players have become acutely aware of the potential of the segments of the market that have before now been largely ignored, and as a red-blooded FPS-lovin', RPG-goblin-slayin' traditionalist just very occasionally wishes that the types of games I love (beardy RPGs and immersive Deus Ex/Looking Glass-style thrillers) were more prevalent. It's not unlike the arrogant film critic who laments the unwashed masses love of the latest Holywood blockbuster, but at least I know it's elitist bollocks.
But getting back to Zelda, it's amazing how a game that, on the surface, looks as though it shouldn't be played by anyone older than 12 years old can be so strongly engaging -especially when it lacks many of the things that we seem to think make a game thus. It has no orchestral soundtrack (being resolutely MIDI), there's no voice acting, the artistic style is still firmly Nintendo, and the plot is, well, exactly the same as every other Zelda game. But I still find myself drawn into this daft little world.
Part of, certainly, is how strongly TP resonates with my memories of Link to the Past and Ocarina of Time. At times, it practically seems like a remake of OoT - it was clearly an intention on the developers part. It could be something of a reactionary response to some of the criticism Windwaker faced, which I'm ill-placed to comment on having never played it. But still, TP is a brilliant game, and I really do admire Nintendo's approach to the current generation.
In a way, I'm a little disappointed that Microsoft haven't entirely dominated the market with the 360 (although it's certainly been successful), because as a lifelong gamer, the 360 ticks every one of my boxes. It's a console for gamers, with quality genre staples in abundant supply. With the success of the Wii, all the industry players have become acutely aware of the potential of the segments of the market that have before now been largely ignored, and as a red-blooded FPS-lovin', RPG-goblin-slayin' traditionalist just very occasionally wishes that the types of games I love (beardy RPGs and immersive Deus Ex/Looking Glass-style thrillers) were more prevalent. It's not unlike the arrogant film critic who laments the unwashed masses love of the latest Holywood blockbuster, but at least I know it's elitist bollocks.
But getting back to Zelda, it's amazing how a game that, on the surface, looks as though it shouldn't be played by anyone older than 12 years old can be so strongly engaging -especially when it lacks many of the things that we seem to think make a game thus. It has no orchestral soundtrack (being resolutely MIDI), there's no voice acting, the artistic style is still firmly Nintendo, and the plot is, well, exactly the same as every other Zelda game. But I still find myself drawn into this daft little world.
Part of, certainly, is how strongly TP resonates with my memories of Link to the Past and Ocarina of Time. At times, it practically seems like a remake of OoT - it was clearly an intention on the developers part. It could be something of a reactionary response to some of the criticism Windwaker faced, which I'm ill-placed to comment on having never played it. But still, TP is a brilliant game, and I really do admire Nintendo's approach to the current generation.
I am not prepared.
I have succumbed, I had wrenched myself free of it, but thanks to the wiles of still-addicted friends I have been summoned back to the world of Azeroth, in all its imperfect glory. After spending about 2 days downloading gigabytes of patches and the expansion, I'm finally in.
I plan things to be different, this time. I will never, ever join a guild, unless I have personally met each and every member in the flesh and verified them to be a non-chump. My last guild almost drove me out of the game, with their sheer mediocrity. There's something about group behaviour where, in the absence of half-decent leadership, people seem to boil down to this lowest-common-denominator, wishy washy semi-communist bullshit, where everybody seems to be permanently thinking about how to avoid getting fucked by the rest of the guild, and so starts the frenzy of pre-emptive fucking. Who can be arsed?
Not me, I've decided guilds are for chumps. Except in the following circumstances:
- small guilds made of real life friends, because you know where they live if a beating needs to be administered.
- Gnome-only guilds. I've yet to meet a bad gnome player. It's as though the sort of player who wants to play a gnome is by his very nature a good human being, and this goodness shines through to their style of play. Healing could be a problem, so one or two dwarves could be admitted, but no damn elves.
I realise, somewhat wistfully, that I'll never get to see most of the super-high end content. It's not that I begrudge people who like to eat, sleep and bathe WoW their fun, rather, I wish (selfishly) that Blizzard spent a little more of their time and considerable resources on small group or solo/couple content. It still remains the case that the most enjoyable times I've had playing WoW have been spent in a pair. Why are there no dungeons designed for a duo?
Still, Outlands looks very nice and my gear is so shit that every piece of tin falling off a ragged orc is a huge upgrade, so it ain't all bad. I plan to amble my way up to 70, do very little group content and then park the character until Blizzard release the next expansion, which I calculate to have a 0.5% chance of being solo/casual focused. I'll take those odds.
I plan things to be different, this time. I will never, ever join a guild, unless I have personally met each and every member in the flesh and verified them to be a non-chump. My last guild almost drove me out of the game, with their sheer mediocrity. There's something about group behaviour where, in the absence of half-decent leadership, people seem to boil down to this lowest-common-denominator, wishy washy semi-communist bullshit, where everybody seems to be permanently thinking about how to avoid getting fucked by the rest of the guild, and so starts the frenzy of pre-emptive fucking. Who can be arsed?
Not me, I've decided guilds are for chumps. Except in the following circumstances:
- small guilds made of real life friends, because you know where they live if a beating needs to be administered.
- Gnome-only guilds. I've yet to meet a bad gnome player. It's as though the sort of player who wants to play a gnome is by his very nature a good human being, and this goodness shines through to their style of play. Healing could be a problem, so one or two dwarves could be admitted, but no damn elves.
I realise, somewhat wistfully, that I'll never get to see most of the super-high end content. It's not that I begrudge people who like to eat, sleep and bathe WoW their fun, rather, I wish (selfishly) that Blizzard spent a little more of their time and considerable resources on small group or solo/couple content. It still remains the case that the most enjoyable times I've had playing WoW have been spent in a pair. Why are there no dungeons designed for a duo?
Still, Outlands looks very nice and my gear is so shit that every piece of tin falling off a ragged orc is a huge upgrade, so it ain't all bad. I plan to amble my way up to 70, do very little group content and then park the character until Blizzard release the next expansion, which I calculate to have a 0.5% chance of being solo/casual focused. I'll take those odds.
Thursday 17 May 2007
Titanomachy!
I've just finished playing through God of War 2 on the PS2, which exceeds even its illustrious predecessor in quality. I've been thinking what makes this series special - there are a number of features that mark it out from the crowd, but the single overriding impulse I get from playing the game is an overwhelming sense of the development team's ambition - it literally pulls out all the stops to amaze the player.
Those of us who are lifelong gamers recognize that as we age and mature the sense of wonder that accompanies a great game becomes rarer - not because great games are less common but because age seems to raise the benchmark for what constitutes an outstanding experience. While the median quality of games has risen out of all recognition when compared to my childhood, it seems that the dizzy heights of gaming nirvana arrive less often. God of War 2 is one of those rare peaks that makes me remember what I really love about gaming. The technical feats are obvious to anyone that plays the game, particularly when mindful of the PS2s limitations. But it's far more than that.
Firstly, I'm an absolute sucker for a revenge tale, and Kratos's journey is the very epitome of vengeance. Secondly, the mythological setting hits all the right notes from my childhood - Jason and the Argonauts, Clash of the Titans and all that good stuff. The base mythology is tremendously close to everyone in the West even if our direct knowledge of it is limited. The artists and level designers working on this series are incredibly gifted at evoking a sense of grandeur - there are few games that manage to top the sense of sheer magnitude of the world, even thought the game itself is not a free form explorable world and is very narrowly defined. Yet the game never misses an opportunity to inspire awe - the level set in and around Atlas the Titan, the opening battle against the Colossus of Rhodes (has there ever been a more action packed opening level in a game?).
The game mechanics almost become secondary to the story and the world, but they are no less polished. While not quite as hardcore as Ninja Gaiden, the gameplay is in the same mould. And the non-controlled camera must be one of the most successfully implemented in the history of 3D gaming, it literally never gets it wrong despite being entirely out of the player's control.
With the third game in the series a no brainer (and quite clearly set up from the ending of GoW2), I think any sequel would be the game that forces me to break the bank for a PS3.
Those of us who are lifelong gamers recognize that as we age and mature the sense of wonder that accompanies a great game becomes rarer - not because great games are less common but because age seems to raise the benchmark for what constitutes an outstanding experience. While the median quality of games has risen out of all recognition when compared to my childhood, it seems that the dizzy heights of gaming nirvana arrive less often. God of War 2 is one of those rare peaks that makes me remember what I really love about gaming. The technical feats are obvious to anyone that plays the game, particularly when mindful of the PS2s limitations. But it's far more than that.
Firstly, I'm an absolute sucker for a revenge tale, and Kratos's journey is the very epitome of vengeance. Secondly, the mythological setting hits all the right notes from my childhood - Jason and the Argonauts, Clash of the Titans and all that good stuff. The base mythology is tremendously close to everyone in the West even if our direct knowledge of it is limited. The artists and level designers working on this series are incredibly gifted at evoking a sense of grandeur - there are few games that manage to top the sense of sheer magnitude of the world, even thought the game itself is not a free form explorable world and is very narrowly defined. Yet the game never misses an opportunity to inspire awe - the level set in and around Atlas the Titan, the opening battle against the Colossus of Rhodes (has there ever been a more action packed opening level in a game?).
The game mechanics almost become secondary to the story and the world, but they are no less polished. While not quite as hardcore as Ninja Gaiden, the gameplay is in the same mould. And the non-controlled camera must be one of the most successfully implemented in the history of 3D gaming, it literally never gets it wrong despite being entirely out of the player's control.
With the third game in the series a no brainer (and quite clearly set up from the ending of GoW2), I think any sequel would be the game that forces me to break the bank for a PS3.
Sunday 6 May 2007
"Gaming corrupts our disposition and teaches us a habit of hostility against all mankind"
I'm feeling quotatious today, what can I say?
There's been disgracefully little time for gaming, recently. It's a poor show, frankly. Her Majesty would not approve, if she knew what gaming was. Which raises the question, if Her Majesty was a gamer, what sort of games would she indulge in? A recent visit to the former Royal Yacht Britannia revealed a love of card games, so there's a hint - I think the Queen would be partial to all sorts of casual games. She's probably got a DS, come to think of it.
One important reason for a lack of gaming recently is the untimely demise of my second Xbox 360 - this one was a replacement for my launch day purchase which shuffled off its mortal coil within one solitary week of the day I excitedly brought it home. I've owned four Microsoft consoles - two original Xboxes, and two 360s. 3 out of 4 have died unnatural deaths. Now, that's as anecdotal as evidence can get, but still. Bill G, if you chance across this post, please go to Peter Moore's office and give him a clunk over the head from me.
All this would make the most recent games I've spent any time on the following:
There's been disgracefully little time for gaming, recently. It's a poor show, frankly. Her Majesty would not approve, if she knew what gaming was. Which raises the question, if Her Majesty was a gamer, what sort of games would she indulge in? A recent visit to the former Royal Yacht Britannia revealed a love of card games, so there's a hint - I think the Queen would be partial to all sorts of casual games. She's probably got a DS, come to think of it.
One important reason for a lack of gaming recently is the untimely demise of my second Xbox 360 - this one was a replacement for my launch day purchase which shuffled off its mortal coil within one solitary week of the day I excitedly brought it home. I've owned four Microsoft consoles - two original Xboxes, and two 360s. 3 out of 4 have died unnatural deaths. Now, that's as anecdotal as evidence can get, but still. Bill G, if you chance across this post, please go to Peter Moore's office and give him a clunk over the head from me.
All this would make the most recent games I've spent any time on the following:
- C&C3. Great, vintage, micromanagers-not-welcome-here RTS goodness. For the love of God, bring back faux-Holywood cutscenes. There's tons of cool actors out there looking for work, and I want to see them in my games. EA is on the case, but what about the rest of you? Money, schmoney, get on it!
- LOTRO. WoW in Tolkien clothing, and I mean that as a compliment. In Turbine's position, I'd have done the exact same thing.
- Crackdown. Crackdown is an absolutely fabulous game - I'm a total sucker for anything remotely resembling 'freeform' gameplay. My gamer tag carries a dark secret - I actually purchased Superman Returns on the 360 - but this is as nothing compared to the lamentable fact that I actually enjoyed it.
I have no idea what design principles they were aiming for in the making of crackdown, but two things stand out for me. The most immediately obvious is the progression of the character, which adds a Diablo-esque pavlovian reward feel to the whole thing. But more importantly, as far as I'm concerned, is the fact that the core mechanics are absolutely razor sharp. The acid test as far as this genre is concerned is this - if you shrunk the game world to the size of a city block, would it still offer much fun? I can't think of a game in the 'free-form' genre that GTA3 reinvigorated (what was the first, I wonder - what came before 'Midwinter'?) that does this quite as well as Crackdown. You could play in a very small area in Crackdown, and still have masses of fun, and that's indicative of the quality of the core mechanics - the combat, the physics and the general 'feel' of the game. GTA3 or it's sequels cannot boast the same thing.
Compare and contrast Crackdown with Superman Returns. Now, granted, the developers are tremendously constrained by the license. Superman is a little bit like the Genie from Aladdin - 'infinite cosmic power' but absolutely sod all freedom to use it. If Molyneux got the Supes license, he'd soon have him sprouting horns and surrounded with flies, levelling buildings and vapourising the good citizens of Metropolis with his laser vision. Which makes for a better sounding game, frankly.
But licence restrictions aside, Superman Returns is cursed by plain old poor design. The usual litany of complaints are there if you're being fussy - the combat is pretty ropey, the graphics, while impressive enough, don't quite stack up with most other next-gen titles (although there are, I'm sure, compelling technical reasons for this in terms of what's being shown on screen). But the number one complaint has to be the complete undercutting of the entire point of a free-roaming action game by compelling the player to partake in constant 'city-saving' activity, othwise it's game over. That is one of the worst design decisions I've seen, frankly, and whoever thought it was a good idea was clearly not thinking straight at the time.
People can forgive a lack of content or ropey graphics, if you provide them the tools to make their own fun. If you give them Superman, a massive city to play in, and put some half decent game mechanics in there, you're not going to set the specialist press on fire, but by and large most people who buy the game are going to be reasonably happy. But by enforcing regular bouts of 'city saving', you are effectively turning what is already a marginal experience into a chore, and removing the one true redeeming aspect of the game - it's sense of freedom.
"We'd all like to vote for the best man, but he's never a candidate"
It's just passed election time here in Scotland, and it has been a pretty noteworthy affair all round. Confusing ballot papers, inefficient machine counting, disruption at a number of polling booths, and the end result of Scotland not electing a Labour government for the first time in half a century.
Scotland is a politically interesting country. Like many places, the great fault line of Scottish politics is nationalism, but we're at least fortunate in that our breed of nationalism is benign. But what really makes Scotland interesting, in my view, is that it's a country where the vast majority of people could in some measure be described as politically 'cautious' in a way that might lead you to expect large numbers of Conservative party votes. Where religion exists in Scotland (rapidly retreating under the relentless onward march of secularism - a religion in its own right), it's politically conservative - we're a nation of Calvinists. Scots would tend to hold views on immigration and criminal justice that would naturally place them to the right of the political spectrum.
And yet, Scotland is also the birthplace of the Labour party and the centre of lively left wing political radicalism, and for fifty years was the unassailable fortress from which Labour sought to rule the rest of the UK.
Part of the reason for this dichotomy is the position and perception of the Conservative party here in Scotland, as well as the composition of the nationalist movement itself. The Tories, of course, are strongly identified here in Scotland with 'Englishness', which places them at a distinct disadvantage. A Scottish Tory walks the ever difficult high-wire of attempting to maintain a 'Scottish' appearance while distancing themselves from the inevitably Eton/Oxbridge educated leader down south.
The second challenge a Tory faces is the almost fanatical levels of hatred levelled at Margaret Thatcher, which have been seared into the Scottish political conciousness. Because of the real or imagined (I make no attempt to judge either way) catastrophies Thatcher heaped upon Scotland, she is probably the most polarising figure in modern Scottish history. Imagine the hatred your liberal friends pretend to have for George W. Bush - now multiply that a hundred fold, and you can begin to imagine how hated Thatcher is in parts of Scotland, particularly the west coast and former industrial heartlands.
Thanks to Thatcher, there is effectively no party of the centre right in Scotland. The Conservatives are a spent force, and thus the electorate have two realistic choices for government in the devolved parliament - the SNP and Labour.
The SNP are an interesting bunch. Formed from the merger of a number of nationalist parties over the years, they are riven at their core by a left/right divide. The only thing that really glues them together is the prospect of an independent Scotland. Which is what makes these times so interesting. With the SNP now the largest party in Holyrood, they are going to be facing some real internal challenges. The fundamentalist wing of the party will not want to budge on a referendum for independence, but with only 47 seats, the SNP will have to negotiate with another major party to form a government. Alex Salmond will have to convince the die hards of his own party to be patient.
The way ahead is deliciously uncertain, for once, in Scottish politics. The SNP, although in the driving seat, would do well to remeber that support for independence in Scotland remains low (remember, we're cautious). The electorate will want to see proof of the SNPs ability to govern the devolved parliament before we countenance independence. But if Alex Salmond can inject some much needed charisma into the normally drab proceedings at Holyrood, and begin to earn the SNP a reputation for competence, then the prospects of an independent Scotland at some point in the future become much greater.
Scotland is a politically interesting country. Like many places, the great fault line of Scottish politics is nationalism, but we're at least fortunate in that our breed of nationalism is benign. But what really makes Scotland interesting, in my view, is that it's a country where the vast majority of people could in some measure be described as politically 'cautious' in a way that might lead you to expect large numbers of Conservative party votes. Where religion exists in Scotland (rapidly retreating under the relentless onward march of secularism - a religion in its own right), it's politically conservative - we're a nation of Calvinists. Scots would tend to hold views on immigration and criminal justice that would naturally place them to the right of the political spectrum.
And yet, Scotland is also the birthplace of the Labour party and the centre of lively left wing political radicalism, and for fifty years was the unassailable fortress from which Labour sought to rule the rest of the UK.
Part of the reason for this dichotomy is the position and perception of the Conservative party here in Scotland, as well as the composition of the nationalist movement itself. The Tories, of course, are strongly identified here in Scotland with 'Englishness', which places them at a distinct disadvantage. A Scottish Tory walks the ever difficult high-wire of attempting to maintain a 'Scottish' appearance while distancing themselves from the inevitably Eton/Oxbridge educated leader down south.
The second challenge a Tory faces is the almost fanatical levels of hatred levelled at Margaret Thatcher, which have been seared into the Scottish political conciousness. Because of the real or imagined (I make no attempt to judge either way) catastrophies Thatcher heaped upon Scotland, she is probably the most polarising figure in modern Scottish history. Imagine the hatred your liberal friends pretend to have for George W. Bush - now multiply that a hundred fold, and you can begin to imagine how hated Thatcher is in parts of Scotland, particularly the west coast and former industrial heartlands.
Thanks to Thatcher, there is effectively no party of the centre right in Scotland. The Conservatives are a spent force, and thus the electorate have two realistic choices for government in the devolved parliament - the SNP and Labour.
The SNP are an interesting bunch. Formed from the merger of a number of nationalist parties over the years, they are riven at their core by a left/right divide. The only thing that really glues them together is the prospect of an independent Scotland. Which is what makes these times so interesting. With the SNP now the largest party in Holyrood, they are going to be facing some real internal challenges. The fundamentalist wing of the party will not want to budge on a referendum for independence, but with only 47 seats, the SNP will have to negotiate with another major party to form a government. Alex Salmond will have to convince the die hards of his own party to be patient.
The way ahead is deliciously uncertain, for once, in Scottish politics. The SNP, although in the driving seat, would do well to remeber that support for independence in Scotland remains low (remember, we're cautious). The electorate will want to see proof of the SNPs ability to govern the devolved parliament before we countenance independence. But if Alex Salmond can inject some much needed charisma into the normally drab proceedings at Holyrood, and begin to earn the SNP a reputation for competence, then the prospects of an independent Scotland at some point in the future become much greater.
Sunday 8 April 2007
Trivia
As much as I loathe to bore potential readers with the daily inanities my mind conjures, today's random mind bullets are better than average, so I'll share. And this is my first attempt at a blog so I feel I've got a lot of catching up to do. They are also game related, so by sticking to my sworn theme I justify their telling.
Random Thought One: Funniest Gaming Experience
I was reminded recently of the funniest gaming experience I've ever had. I'm talking Grim-Fandago funny - that humerous. It was....(drum roll)....Chu-Chu Rocket on the Dreamcast, 4-player, with 3 colour blind participants plus normal-sighted me.
Now, I don't mean to make fun of the colour blind, my best friend is a ...etc. But as my gaming buddy Richard pointed out to me, almost 10% of the male population is colour blind to some degree. Which makes for some hilarious gaming-related hi-jinks. Chu Chu Rocket is the perfect game to play with colour blind people. 4 players, 4 different colours, and the ability to help as much as hinder your opponents (by accident, if not by design).
I can still feel my ribs aching from that day. I lack the vocabulary to accurately depict the chaos. If you ever played Chu Chu Rocket, I'm sure you can imagine.
Random Thought Two: Cutscene Vanity
One pet gaming peeve of mine is unskippable cutscenes. I always imagined (rightly or wrongly), that the decision was at least partly based on the fact that it was bloody difficult to get that cutscene working, so by Odin's Beard they were going to make you watch it. It has been suggested to me that the inability to skip the splash screen on Fish! is my own vanity playing up. I'll plead the fifth on that, and merely say that future versions will behave more in accordance with my own oft-stated gaming principles.
But I warn you, every time you skip that splash screen, a weighted-sum force flocking agent shaped like a fish dies.
Random Thought Three: Bring Back the Tank Rush
I love a good RTS. And by good RTS, I mean 'flashy, unstrategic RTS'. And by God and Sunny Jesus I hate micromanagement. Gaming buddy Richard and I speak of this regularly - he is the world's biggest fan of the unstrategic RTS. As he puts it - 'If I build 40 mammoth tanks, I sure as hell don't want them destroyed by 4 tiny crap 'counter units'. Screw that. The only thing that should beat 40 mammoth tanks is 41 mammoth tanks'.
Amen.
Random Thought One: Funniest Gaming Experience
I was reminded recently of the funniest gaming experience I've ever had. I'm talking Grim-Fandago funny - that humerous. It was....(drum roll)....Chu-Chu Rocket on the Dreamcast, 4-player, with 3 colour blind participants plus normal-sighted me.
Now, I don't mean to make fun of the colour blind, my best friend is a ...etc. But as my gaming buddy Richard pointed out to me, almost 10% of the male population is colour blind to some degree. Which makes for some hilarious gaming-related hi-jinks. Chu Chu Rocket is the perfect game to play with colour blind people. 4 players, 4 different colours, and the ability to help as much as hinder your opponents (by accident, if not by design).
I can still feel my ribs aching from that day. I lack the vocabulary to accurately depict the chaos. If you ever played Chu Chu Rocket, I'm sure you can imagine.
Random Thought Two: Cutscene Vanity
One pet gaming peeve of mine is unskippable cutscenes. I always imagined (rightly or wrongly), that the decision was at least partly based on the fact that it was bloody difficult to get that cutscene working, so by Odin's Beard they were going to make you watch it. It has been suggested to me that the inability to skip the splash screen on Fish! is my own vanity playing up. I'll plead the fifth on that, and merely say that future versions will behave more in accordance with my own oft-stated gaming principles.
But I warn you, every time you skip that splash screen, a weighted-sum force flocking agent shaped like a fish dies.
Random Thought Three: Bring Back the Tank Rush
I love a good RTS. And by good RTS, I mean 'flashy, unstrategic RTS'. And by God and Sunny Jesus I hate micromanagement. Gaming buddy Richard and I speak of this regularly - he is the world's biggest fan of the unstrategic RTS. As he puts it - 'If I build 40 mammoth tanks, I sure as hell don't want them destroyed by 4 tiny crap 'counter units'. Screw that. The only thing that should beat 40 mammoth tanks is 41 mammoth tanks'.
Amen.
Friday 6 April 2007
Fish!
***Update 2*****
Thanks to Ziggy for spotting (and more importantly, solving!) the graphical artifact problem he was seeing. Source code and the installer has been updated with the new version, although it should be noted the changing renderstate (the solution involves turning the depthbuffer off during the water pass, then re-enabling it) within the draw loop may cause a minor performance hit, but not worth worrying about for now.
On a side note, I personally own 5 PC's of different ages/configurations. With close friends, I have easy access to maybe a dozen more.
And not one of them has an ATI graphics card. Could constitute a blind spot in my testing plan :)
*** Update ***
I've since wrapped all this up into an installer - FishInstaller.zip. It will install the .NET 2.0 Framework (if you don't already have it) and the XNA runtime, but you will still need a very recent version of directX 9.0c (December 2006 or later), as it has updated libraries that XNA requires. So if you can't get the demo to work, try updating your directX version - that's the likely problem. Apologies for that, no real way around it for now. Rumour has it that MS are currently working on a distribution technology to make this all a bit easier.
Here's the latest version of DirectX if required.
The latest DirectX 9.0c release. (45Mb)
***************
This is a little demo I wrote using Microsoft's recently release XNA framework. XNA is the spiritual successor to managed DirectX, essentially wrapping up directX and hiding some of the nastier elements from the novice coder, as well as providing a lot of useful functionality that's common to most games.
To run the demo, you'll need:
- A PC that meets the XNA framework requirements (the pertinent one being a graphics card that supports DirectX 9.0c and shader model 2.0 , which is pretty much everything from a Geforce 6 onwards).
Instructions
Thanks to Ziggy for spotting (and more importantly, solving!) the graphical artifact problem he was seeing. Source code and the installer has been updated with the new version, although it should be noted the changing renderstate (the solution involves turning the depthbuffer off during the water pass, then re-enabling it) within the draw loop may cause a minor performance hit, but not worth worrying about for now.
On a side note, I personally own 5 PC's of different ages/configurations. With close friends, I have easy access to maybe a dozen more.
And not one of them has an ATI graphics card. Could constitute a blind spot in my testing plan :)
*** Update ***
I've since wrapped all this up into an installer - FishInstaller.zip. It will install the .NET 2.0 Framework (if you don't already have it) and the XNA runtime, but you will still need a very recent version of directX 9.0c (December 2006 or later), as it has updated libraries that XNA requires. So if you can't get the demo to work, try updating your directX version - that's the likely problem. Apologies for that, no real way around it for now. Rumour has it that MS are currently working on a distribution technology to make this all a bit easier.
Here's the latest version of DirectX if required.
The latest DirectX 9.0c release. (45Mb)
***************
This is a little demo I wrote using Microsoft's recently release XNA framework. XNA is the spiritual successor to managed DirectX, essentially wrapping up directX and hiding some of the nastier elements from the novice coder, as well as providing a lot of useful functionality that's common to most games.
To run the demo, you'll need:
- A PC that meets the XNA framework requirements (the pertinent one being a graphics card that supports DirectX 9.0c and shader model 2.0 , which is pretty much everything from a Geforce 6 onwards).
Instructions
- The demo begins with a simple splash screen, after the fish have demonstrated their literary skills you can proceed by pressing the Space bar.
- The main demo is a simple enough sandbox, demonstrating real-time flocking behaviour based on Craig Reynold's classic flocking model. You have three constituent behaviours - cohesion (the force that attracts fish to each other), separation (the opposite), and alignment (the force that keeps them pointing in a similiar direction).
- All the behaviours begin toggled off. The water effect begins toggled on.
- Left mouse button spawns fish, right mouse button spawns obstacles (I know they're not particularly nautical, but I'm no artist as we can all see - pause it and zoom in on the fish if you don't believe me...)
- You can change the strength of the constituent behaviours and observe the effects.
- Arrow keys move the camera (top down, RTS-style), mouse scroll to zoom in and out.
Things to note
- Classic flocking is computationally expensive (On^2), but there's a few tricks to get that down. A cell-space partitioning system is used here, so each fish only flocks with the fish in the surrounding few grid cells. Without such optimisation, this algorithm brings even a very powerful CPU to its knees very quickly - at around 130 fish on a E6600 dual core. With cell-space partitioning we can raise that several fold (depending on your CPU speed).
- There's no actual collision penetration constraint here, only collision avoidance by the fish themselves. So you will see cornered fish clip through obstacles occasionally if the combined forces compel them to.
- The water refraction effect is achieved by drawing the scene to a render target, applying this to a texture, and then perturbing and displaying this texture on a disc model that is placed between the scene and the viewer. Based on the 'refraction' effect found in Rendermonkey, if you're interested.
Finally, if you want the full source and all the trimmings - RainbowFishSource. The whole thing is really an offshoot of a simple game engine a friend and I are writing together. Hopefully should have some more to show in the coming weeks and months. Oh, and thanks to Gary Kacmarcik for his XNAExtras bitmap font code, a big time saver.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)