tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5706222432360428997.post5631412904827147482..comments2024-03-18T05:11:23.190-04:00Comments on Game Design Aspect: Breaking the Vicious CycleSande Chenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04783798710597097506noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5706222432360428997.post-25246528340631902362009-08-20T23:13:21.839-04:002009-08-20T23:13:21.839-04:00More comments can be found here:
http://www.gamas...More comments can be found here:<br /><br />http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/ReidKimball/20090817/2756/Breaking_the_Vicious_Cycle.phpSande Chenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04783798710597097506noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5706222432360428997.post-30417461520689327522009-08-10T19:32:09.886-04:002009-08-10T19:32:09.886-04:00There are, however, several games in which replayi...There are, however, several games in which replaying the game is the whole point to see the different layers of and intricacies of plot because the developers don't feed players with all the details as if they are omniscient. I'm thinking specifically of Breath of Fire: Dragon Quarter for the PS2 and, more recently, Valkyrie Profile: Covenant of the Plume for the DS. Emily Short described these types of "accretive" narrative in a GameSetWatch post earlier this year. (http://www.gamesetwatch.com/2009/06/column_homer_in_silicon_the_ac.php)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5706222432360428997.post-73042826819527355512009-08-10T14:03:57.835-04:002009-08-10T14:03:57.835-04:00OK, I'm only three paragraphs in, but I disagr...OK, I'm only three paragraphs in, but I disagree with your notion that the music, film, and book industries (or at least part of those industries) do not work hard to create addictive media and then milk their audience. Most book publishers are not interested in one-off stories. They want series. Films, same thing. They want sequel potential. These two industries go out of there way to find properties they can exploit for as long as possible. Extended editions, special editions, bonus features, collected editions, newly illustrated, new introduction by the author, ultimate edition, and so on and so forth. These practices are not an attempt for the companies to capitalize on an audience that is hooked on the stories and characters?<br /><br />As for music, the whole point of creating singles was to release a song that is so catchy and addictive people would go out and buy the full album. Now that people can pretty much just buy one song at a time, it's even more important that the audience gets hooked. And like books and film, any music that has built an audience will get remixes, live recordings, bootleg concert releases, etc.<br /><br />All that said, I understand your point. A level of addiction or forced replayability should not by default be part of a game's design. I hate it when I am required to play a game more than once to get the full experience. I'm specifically referring to games with a story, so this doesn't really apply to games like Tetris or BrickOut. There are games that when you beat them on the default normal setting you don't get the "real" ending. Only once you've beaten it on normal does the hard setting unlock, then you have to play the entire game again to get the true ending to the story. This is just absurd.<br /><br />I should be able to choose to replay a game on my own terms, and if the experience was good enough the first time then I probably will voluntarily replay a game (I still go back and play the LucasArts adventures despite having completed them many times). But designing a game so that I only get what I paid for if I play it over and over again, instead of making that experience fulfilling the first time, is just plain cruel and if anything just makes me resent the game.JohnGreenArthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03178664235527041684noreply@blogger.com