Intelligent Design
March 7, 2006 5:41 PM Subscribe
Will Wright demonstrates "spore". Almost unquestionably the most ambitious game ever, being demonstrated by designer Will Wright, of SimCity and Sims fame.
The only game I am looking forward to more than Oblivion.
If you want to see the whole 61 minute speech, including a 12 minute introduction to his 'awakening' to the need for shared and procedural content, it's available here.
posted by WinnipegDragon at 5:48 PM on March 7, 2006
If you want to see the whole 61 minute speech, including a 12 minute introduction to his 'awakening' to the need for shared and procedural content, it's available here.
posted by WinnipegDragon at 5:48 PM on March 7, 2006
Thanks WinnipegDragon. Your link is better. I would have posted that instead had I known it existed. Oh well.
posted by thanatogenous at 5:52 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by thanatogenous at 5:52 PM on March 7, 2006
Hmm... looks like it would be a lot of fun to develop, but not to play :P
posted by delmoi at 5:53 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by delmoi at 5:53 PM on March 7, 2006
Am I the only one counting the days until this year's conference, waiting for a release date? I signed up for the newsletter 11 months ago, but so far no word
posted by cali at 5:54 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by cali at 5:54 PM on March 7, 2006
yes, but this is the hot new footage of spore. the other fpps didn't have this. and yes, I'm wet in my panties for this thing. or I would be if I were a girl and wore panties.
posted by shmegegge at 5:59 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by shmegegge at 5:59 PM on March 7, 2006
Hmm. I am just about to get a new machine, and I think now I will wait and see what the requirements are for "Spore." Otherwise I'm likely to go cheap and get something juuuust powerful enough to play it at a frustratingly sluggish speed. And I do believe I will want to play this puppy.
posted by Banky_Edwards at 6:03 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by Banky_Edwards at 6:03 PM on March 7, 2006
Is this the beginning of a new arms race in the game industry? A departure from graphics engines as king, to content generation. The burden of content would shift from the designers to the players, and development would focus on the structure instead of the pretty pictures. Will this lead to a day when we turn over the box to read the blurbs, only to find not "cutting edge graphics", "intense scripted battles", nor "more monsters than leading brand", but find "most intuitive tools", "award winning and vibrant community" and a proud label reading, "Game 2.0"
posted by TwelveTwo at 6:08 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by TwelveTwo at 6:08 PM on March 7, 2006
Incredible. But to pull it off as a massively-mulitplayer game seems insanely if not impossibly difficult. It would represent an incredible leap forward in the complexity of MMOGs.
Is this the first fractal game?
posted by MetaMonkey at 6:09 PM on March 7, 2006
Is this the first fractal game?
posted by MetaMonkey at 6:09 PM on March 7, 2006
But to pull it off as a massively-mulitplayer game seems insanely if not impossibly difficult. It would represent an incredible leap forward in the complexity of MMOGs.
My understanding of the game is that it's massively multiplayer, but asynchronous. There's a point in the demonstration where Wright discusses going to a planet which could belong to another player. The planet's info would be loaded by your game, but the actions of its inhabitants would be run based on their own characteristics entirely on your end.
Regardless, still seems kinda tough. But that's the beauty of procedural coding!
posted by herrdoktor at 6:17 PM on March 7, 2006
My understanding of the game is that it's massively multiplayer, but asynchronous. There's a point in the demonstration where Wright discusses going to a planet which could belong to another player. The planet's info would be loaded by your game, but the actions of its inhabitants would be run based on their own characteristics entirely on your end.
Regardless, still seems kinda tough. But that's the beauty of procedural coding!
posted by herrdoktor at 6:17 PM on March 7, 2006
It's not a MMOG, you just have other intresting beasts sent to you from other player's systems.
posted by delmoi at 6:19 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by delmoi at 6:19 PM on March 7, 2006
Additionally, I think demo programmers and artists will be coming into play in the game industry in a big way, if this becomes a movement. You heard it here first, TwelveTwo's predictions!
posted by TwelveTwo at 6:20 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by TwelveTwo at 6:20 PM on March 7, 2006
Is it not kind of MMOG? He talks about diplomacy and suchlike. My impression was the MM element is at the space scale, with the lower levels of scale being essentially autonomous.
posted by MetaMonkey at 6:26 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by MetaMonkey at 6:26 PM on March 7, 2006
twelvetwo, that's a question people tend to ask every time wright unleashes his latest genius awesomeness. if history is any indication, the answer is "no" BUT there will be enough people inspired by this that you'll be able to find those remarkable content driven games stashed in among the pretty flash fests, and chances are they'll cost half the typical price of a game.
posted by shmegegge at 6:29 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by shmegegge at 6:29 PM on March 7, 2006
No problem thanatogenous. I just discovered that other video today via Gaming Steve.
The extra bits are pretty interesting.
posted by WinnipegDragon at 6:30 PM on March 7, 2006
The extra bits are pretty interesting.
posted by WinnipegDragon at 6:30 PM on March 7, 2006
It's definitely not an MMO. The engine harvests content from other players in an asynchronous manner, but the game's AI is always controlling all the behaviors of the beasties in the game.
posted by heresiarch at 6:31 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by heresiarch at 6:31 PM on March 7, 2006
One of the most mindbending experiences of my life was watching this presentation (bug me not for registration if you have to). He basically covers the entire evolution of man kind through the perspective of games and simulations. It's what I imagine Hofstadter doing a powerpoint presentation of Godel Escher and Bach would be like.
This is the powerpoint that goes along with it. It's interesting on its own, but greatly benefits from will wright's explaining it, obviously.
Gamespy did a really half-assed job of attempting to summarize it, but I highly recommend everyone actually view it if you have some time.
I really hope he makes that presentation into a book someday.
posted by empath at 6:32 PM on March 7, 2006
This is the powerpoint that goes along with it. It's interesting on its own, but greatly benefits from will wright's explaining it, obviously.
Gamespy did a really half-assed job of attempting to summarize it, but I highly recommend everyone actually view it if you have some time.
I really hope he makes that presentation into a book someday.
posted by empath at 6:32 PM on March 7, 2006
Is it not kind of MMOG? He talks about diplomacy and suchlike. My impression was the MM element is at the space scale, with the lower levels of scale being essentially autonomous.
Yeah, I'm not sure. I'd only seen half the video when I made that comment. I'm not sure if the diplomacy is direct between players, or if their cities and stuff just populate your planet.
posted by delmoi at 6:32 PM on March 7, 2006
Yeah, I'm not sure. I'd only seen half the video when I made that comment. I'm not sure if the diplomacy is direct between players, or if their cities and stuff just populate your planet.
posted by delmoi at 6:32 PM on March 7, 2006
I understood that the MMOG element is essentially confined to the intersellar/galatic scale, you can interact in what he calls the 'meta-games'.
Either way it is beyond remarkable. I've been dreaming of something like this for years. By far the most awesome game ever concieved.
posted by MetaMonkey at 6:33 PM on March 7, 2006
Either way it is beyond remarkable. I've been dreaming of something like this for years. By far the most awesome game ever concieved.
posted by MetaMonkey at 6:33 PM on March 7, 2006
Apparently, that link didn't work.
Try this one for the video. (you still have to bugmenot for registration, though.
posted by empath at 6:36 PM on March 7, 2006
Try this one for the video. (you still have to bugmenot for registration, though.
posted by empath at 6:36 PM on March 7, 2006
"At this point, I'm overtly browsing other players worlds. I want to emphasize that this is all asynchronous, there is no simultanious game play".
posted by delmoi at 6:37 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by delmoi at 6:37 PM on March 7, 2006
Aww, man. Spore makes me want a new computer after I exhiled myself to the Land of Consolia.
Oblivion for the 360 made it easy to move. Spore makes me want to come back!
posted by robocop is bleeding at 6:39 PM on March 7, 2006
Oblivion for the 360 made it easy to move. Spore makes me want to come back!
posted by robocop is bleeding at 6:39 PM on March 7, 2006
Oh, I see, from the 1Up preview,
'The game's community will be an essential element of the overall experience; although the networked aspect of the title is asynchronous -- that is, no simultaneous multiplayer -- other gamers will influence each player's experience in many ways. Each person's game environment will feature creatures, structures, vehicles and ultimately entire worlds created by their peers and exchanged seamlessly over the Internet.'
Shame. A massively-mulitplay element would make it more than special.
As an aside, I have an idea for a MMO fractal-like game along these lines, does anyone know of a good place place to post it so that it might be disucssed/critiqued?
posted by MetaMonkey at 6:41 PM on March 7, 2006
'The game's community will be an essential element of the overall experience; although the networked aspect of the title is asynchronous -- that is, no simultaneous multiplayer -- other gamers will influence each player's experience in many ways. Each person's game environment will feature creatures, structures, vehicles and ultimately entire worlds created by their peers and exchanged seamlessly over the Internet.'
Shame. A massively-mulitplay element would make it more than special.
As an aside, I have an idea for a MMO fractal-like game along these lines, does anyone know of a good place place to post it so that it might be disucssed/critiqued?
posted by MetaMonkey at 6:41 PM on March 7, 2006
As an aside, I have an idea for a MMO fractal-like game along these lines, does anyone know of a good place place to post it so that it might be disucssed/critiqued?
You mean, Other then the obvious one?
posted by delmoi at 6:43 PM on March 7, 2006
You mean, Other then the obvious one?
posted by delmoi at 6:43 PM on March 7, 2006
This is very cool; I knew Wright had been working on a project that was going to be open source content in nature, but hadn't realized the extent of the project. The video does a better job of showing the complexity of the game than the flash thingy at the Spore website does, although that's kinda funny.
I hope it has some of the same kind of touches as Sims2 does. I'm playing Open for Business at the moment and enjoying it a lot.
posted by Zinger at 6:43 PM on March 7, 2006
I hope it has some of the same kind of touches as Sims2 does. I'm playing Open for Business at the moment and enjoying it a lot.
posted by Zinger at 6:43 PM on March 7, 2006
The obvious one?
posted by MetaMonkey at 6:44 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by MetaMonkey at 6:44 PM on March 7, 2006
And you decide what you want to do with the pee. We're not telling you how to enjoy it. I leave that up to you guys. You're going to create your own unique experiences with my pee.
posted by patgas at 6:51 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by patgas at 6:51 PM on March 7, 2006
D'oh. I thought delmoi was referring to the idea as being obvious. I even had a link ready. Does a simple idea write-up count as a project?
posted by MetaMonkey at 6:58 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by MetaMonkey at 6:58 PM on March 7, 2006
patgas, while I've come to appreciate Penny Arcade, that's the most glaring example I can think of them being off the mark.
posted by JHarris at 6:58 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by JHarris at 6:58 PM on March 7, 2006
The obvious one?
Yeah, which would be this thing but all synchronous online, so that rather then importing other people's worlds, you all exist in the same world and interact with players controlling their little region.
The big problem with that would be, how do you keep players playing with people with whom they are competitive with? If one player gets up to the tribal level more quickly, it'll be curtains for their opponents.
Then, one way around that would be that, if you get wiped out, you start again on another 'slower' world. :P
posted by delmoi at 7:02 PM on March 7, 2006
Yeah, which would be this thing but all synchronous online, so that rather then importing other people's worlds, you all exist in the same world and interact with players controlling their little region.
The big problem with that would be, how do you keep players playing with people with whom they are competitive with? If one player gets up to the tribal level more quickly, it'll be curtains for their opponents.
Then, one way around that would be that, if you get wiped out, you start again on another 'slower' world. :P
posted by delmoi at 7:02 PM on March 7, 2006
that's the most glaring example I can think of them being off the mark
I think the game looks great, but after sitting through an hour of syncopantic laughter this was very funny. I laughed, and then I laughed some more.
posted by MetaMonkey at 7:03 PM on March 7, 2006
I think the game looks great, but after sitting through an hour of syncopantic laughter this was very funny. I laughed, and then I laughed some more.
posted by MetaMonkey at 7:03 PM on March 7, 2006
MetaMonkey, the reason it doesn't google up is that you're using the word "fractal" in a non-standard way.
posted by delmoi at 7:06 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by delmoi at 7:06 PM on March 7, 2006
Something like this, in some sense. I mean there's only one universe to attempt to reflect, so it would have to be something like this. In a nutshell the idea is Elite + Civ + C&C + Quake + Second Life. No, I haven't worked out all the details. I'll try to write it up if you are interested.
On the google: yeah I got bored doing permutations.
posted by MetaMonkey at 7:09 PM on March 7, 2006
On the google: yeah I got bored doing permutations.
posted by MetaMonkey at 7:09 PM on March 7, 2006
Hmm, it would be interesting to have an RTS where rather then computer controlled players, you had control of individual players in a hirarchy.
posted by delmoi at 7:12 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by delmoi at 7:12 PM on March 7, 2006
I'm confused. I thought about posting this the other week, when I saw this video, but decided against it...but here I am, posting about it. Oh, wait, that's not me, that's thanatogenous.
posted by thanotopsis at 7:15 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by thanotopsis at 7:15 PM on March 7, 2006
Hmm, it would be interesting to have an RTS where rather then computer controlled players, you had control of individual players in a hirarchy.
Games like Natural Selection and Battlefield sort of do it already - I also remember some MS Games project that was combination space shooter/RTS. It'd be fun to have a full RTS/action game, but it'd be enormously hard to set up full games.
posted by Tikirific at 7:22 PM on March 7, 2006
Games like Natural Selection and Battlefield sort of do it already - I also remember some MS Games project that was combination space shooter/RTS. It'd be fun to have a full RTS/action game, but it'd be enormously hard to set up full games.
posted by Tikirific at 7:22 PM on March 7, 2006
If you posted it last week, we wouldn't have needed to replace you, thanotopsis.
posted by TwelveTwo at 7:24 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by TwelveTwo at 7:24 PM on March 7, 2006
Holy shit. I haven't played a computer game in almost ten years, but I will be buying this the very second it is released. Will Wright is an absolute genius.
posted by Falconetti at 7:24 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by Falconetti at 7:24 PM on March 7, 2006
This is the first time I've seen what this "Spore" is all about.
Holyfuckingchrist.
Everything is wonderful. The contruction of new "verbs" off of simple core verbs. The automatic motion dynamics of animals based on their composition. The absolutely ingenius and well thought-out UI. Procedural mating! The game-within-a-game-within-a (to several orders of magnitude).
This is brilliance.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 7:32 PM on March 7, 2006
Holyfuckingchrist.
Everything is wonderful. The contruction of new "verbs" off of simple core verbs. The automatic motion dynamics of animals based on their composition. The absolutely ingenius and well thought-out UI. Procedural mating! The game-within-a-game-within-a (to several orders of magnitude).
This is brilliance.
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 7:32 PM on March 7, 2006
I was going to post this last week, but saw it was already posted here.
posted by Robot Johnny at 7:37 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by Robot Johnny at 7:37 PM on March 7, 2006
This game promises to be incredible, but loses half its potential by not being a simultaneous multiplayer game.
Another problem I see is that some of levels may be more fun then others.
posted by Afroblanco at 7:37 PM on March 7, 2006
Another problem I see is that some of levels may be more fun then others.
posted by Afroblanco at 7:37 PM on March 7, 2006
to be 100% honest, i don't see a lot of fun in any of the levels. But it does look like cool technolgy
posted by empath at 7:39 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by empath at 7:39 PM on March 7, 2006
I'm confused. I thought about posting this the other week, when I saw this video, but decided against it...but here I am, posting about it. Oh, wait, that's not me, that's thanatogenous.
I'm your long lost twin cell.
posted by thanatogenous at 7:44 PM on March 7, 2006
I'm your long lost twin cell.
posted by thanatogenous at 7:44 PM on March 7, 2006
Another problem I see is that some of levels may be more fun then others.
Yeah, the first level looks so dull. And the other "unrealistic" thing I see about it is that you can change your creature so much during the first stages, just go from one thing to something totally different, rather then trying to evolve your creature over time. I think that would be more fun.
The other problem, IMO, was that it looked sort of ugly, like a barren landscape strewn with garbage... Not fun to look at.
Finally, while you can make things look like whatever you want them too, you're still playing with a hard-coded, complicated set of rules, there just happen to be a huge number of them. You never break out of the "world" you just play around in a world someone else made, just a very expansive one with multiple levels of detail.
Really, what he has done is create several games and mixed them together with some clever (very, very clever) programming.
posted by delmoi at 7:46 PM on March 7, 2006
Yeah, the first level looks so dull. And the other "unrealistic" thing I see about it is that you can change your creature so much during the first stages, just go from one thing to something totally different, rather then trying to evolve your creature over time. I think that would be more fun.
The other problem, IMO, was that it looked sort of ugly, like a barren landscape strewn with garbage... Not fun to look at.
Finally, while you can make things look like whatever you want them too, you're still playing with a hard-coded, complicated set of rules, there just happen to be a huge number of them. You never break out of the "world" you just play around in a world someone else made, just a very expansive one with multiple levels of detail.
Really, what he has done is create several games and mixed them together with some clever (very, very clever) programming.
posted by delmoi at 7:46 PM on March 7, 2006
"... loses half its potential by not being a simultaneous multiplayer game."
I see that as a plus in a lot of respects, actually.
posted by notmydesk at 7:47 PM on March 7, 2006
I see that as a plus in a lot of respects, actually.
posted by notmydesk at 7:47 PM on March 7, 2006
This game really needs an additional level, where you zoom out to view multiple universes and edit the laws of physics in each one. Without that, it's sure to get boring after only three or four lifetimes.
posted by scottreynen at 7:50 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by scottreynen at 7:50 PM on March 7, 2006
This game promises to be incredible, but loses half its potential by not being a simultaneous multiplayer game.
I dunno... I've shied away from getting into MMPOGs because I just don't have the time to play games in anything but a casual basis. I figure I'd be up against a legion of teens and 20somethings who devote most of their waking hours to playing, gaining expertise and so on. I'd be so much toast within about an hour of logging on.
posted by Zinger at 8:01 PM on March 7, 2006
I dunno... I've shied away from getting into MMPOGs because I just don't have the time to play games in anything but a casual basis. I figure I'd be up against a legion of teens and 20somethings who devote most of their waking hours to playing, gaining expertise and so on. I'd be so much toast within about an hour of logging on.
posted by Zinger at 8:01 PM on March 7, 2006
How many more directions can SimCity go before it becomes unplayable...?
posted by Tikirific at 8:01 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by Tikirific at 8:01 PM on March 7, 2006
... loses half its potential by not being a simultaneous multiplayer game.
-----------------------
Yeah, I see it as a plus too, I'm tired of building some really great city or population of people in a game only to have some hyper-agressive 'tard come bumbling along and tear it all down. I see it much more interesting to interact in a positive way, exchanging culture, art, music, etc.
In other words, advancing civilization, not destroying it.
In other words, 'stay outta my sanbox, I'm playin' !
posted by mk1gti at 8:07 PM on March 7, 2006
-----------------------
Yeah, I see it as a plus too, I'm tired of building some really great city or population of people in a game only to have some hyper-agressive 'tard come bumbling along and tear it all down. I see it much more interesting to interact in a positive way, exchanging culture, art, music, etc.
In other words, advancing civilization, not destroying it.
In other words, 'stay outta my sanbox, I'm playin' !
posted by mk1gti at 8:07 PM on March 7, 2006
Finally, while you can make things look like whatever you want them too, you're still playing with a hard-coded, complicated set of rules, there just happen to be a huge number of them.
As long as the rules are related and not arbitrary, there should be a feeling of tremendous openness. At least, that's what I'm hoping for -- the feeling of total freedom was what made the computer game in the Ender's Game series (insert obligatory note on Card's bigotry) so awesome, for example; in real life, whenever you play a game you immediately bump up against the metaphorical walls of the simulation and a lot of the fun evaporates.
(A lot of the demonstration was aimed at demonstrating this freedom to fellow designers -- he started with a triped, for example.)
posted by Tlogmer at 8:21 PM on March 7, 2006
As long as the rules are related and not arbitrary, there should be a feeling of tremendous openness. At least, that's what I'm hoping for -- the feeling of total freedom was what made the computer game in the Ender's Game series (insert obligatory note on Card's bigotry) so awesome, for example; in real life, whenever you play a game you immediately bump up against the metaphorical walls of the simulation and a lot of the fun evaporates.
(A lot of the demonstration was aimed at demonstrating this freedom to fellow designers -- he started with a triped, for example.)
posted by Tlogmer at 8:21 PM on March 7, 2006
I'll be playing it. Obsessively. I'm sure. And, as a result, I expect to lose all my friends and loved ones, my job, and, eventually, my mind.
posted by Astro Zombie at 8:29 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by Astro Zombie at 8:29 PM on March 7, 2006
It's interesting that when this was posted before, it didn't get nearly as much of a response. Almost surely because Google Video and YouTube have lowered the barriers on video content -- the other post required registration just to download the video (which was probably a WMV at that.)
posted by smackfu at 8:57 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by smackfu at 8:57 PM on March 7, 2006
This is the only game I will buy in the next age. I'm willing - nay, happy - to be addicted to this.
posted by metaculpa at 9:16 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by metaculpa at 9:16 PM on March 7, 2006
.....it's like a creationist game for evolutionists.....
posted by TechnoLustLuddite at 10:29 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by TechnoLustLuddite at 10:29 PM on March 7, 2006
Now I have to add "a computer fast enough to play Spore" to my list of things to save money for.
posted by jiawen at 10:55 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by jiawen at 10:55 PM on March 7, 2006
it's main market will be ID'ers in denial...
posted by sourwookie at 11:01 PM on March 7, 2006
posted by sourwookie at 11:01 PM on March 7, 2006
yes, but this is the hot new footage of spore.
There is no new game footage in this thread.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 11:18 PM on March 7, 2006
There is no new game footage in this thread.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 11:18 PM on March 7, 2006
Spore still looks fascinating, and I'm still breathing a huge sigh of relief that Wright saw reason and kept direct, competitive multiplayer out of the equation. I think there's a dangerous line of thinking amongst a lot of developers these days, that if their game idea sounds good with AI units/opponents/enemies then it logically must be better with real players involved.
Thing is, involving real people instantly destroys any sense of immersion (unless there's no communication involved, which rather defeats the object of multiplayer games), forces the player to conform to someone else's schedule rather than their own, leaves the quality and success of play in the hands of random people (look at WoW - however competent a player you are, if the other four people you run a dungeon with are rubbish you won't get anywhere) and often spoils any sense of the epic or fantastical in a game (I actually see games criticised for their 'dumb AI' when the design - Half-Life 2, for instance - calls for the player to battle hordes of foes at once and be able to win. If they were as intelligent as real players, AI geeks, they would win every time because there are fifty of them! It wouldn't be fun!). Imagine a human face screaming 'OMG N00B' in every game forever.
Spore looks to be keeping the only wholly positive element of multiplayer games - other players' creativity (and I say this with full awareness that 90% of player-created planets are going to be inhabited by the Cock People from the Penis Nebula) and dumping all the bad stuff, like the constant risk of invasion by the Hormonally Aggressive Teenager Empire. Sounds good to me.
posted by terpsichoria at 12:02 AM on March 8, 2006
Thing is, involving real people instantly destroys any sense of immersion (unless there's no communication involved, which rather defeats the object of multiplayer games), forces the player to conform to someone else's schedule rather than their own, leaves the quality and success of play in the hands of random people (look at WoW - however competent a player you are, if the other four people you run a dungeon with are rubbish you won't get anywhere) and often spoils any sense of the epic or fantastical in a game (I actually see games criticised for their 'dumb AI' when the design - Half-Life 2, for instance - calls for the player to battle hordes of foes at once and be able to win. If they were as intelligent as real players, AI geeks, they would win every time because there are fifty of them! It wouldn't be fun!). Imagine a human face screaming 'OMG N00B' in every game forever.
Spore looks to be keeping the only wholly positive element of multiplayer games - other players' creativity (and I say this with full awareness that 90% of player-created planets are going to be inhabited by the Cock People from the Penis Nebula) and dumping all the bad stuff, like the constant risk of invasion by the Hormonally Aggressive Teenager Empire. Sounds good to me.
posted by terpsichoria at 12:02 AM on March 8, 2006
Just pretend I'm saying all the stuff everyone else already said.
posted by BlackLeotardFront at 12:08 AM on March 8, 2006
posted by BlackLeotardFront at 12:08 AM on March 8, 2006
I disagree with the oft-repeated suggestion that massively-multiplayer necessarily = wanton destruction. That aspect is simply a symptom of the generally limited imagination in design concept of traditional massively mulitplayer games (e.g. World of Warcraft).
There is no underlying systemic reason a game like spore couldn't be successfully and enjoyably massively multiplayer for all (other than the insane amount of coding, hardware and bandwidth involved). Some kind of god-like entity could simply throw a veil of protection amongst certain solar-systems/galaxies, so that if you chose to live in that area destruction would be impossible.
Recent, more innovative games, like EVE Online and Second Life (if I understand correctly) are far more open-ended than your typical skill-up and kill stuff MMORPGS like WOW. If you choose to you may remain in safe areas, engaging exclusively in safe activities such as trading, building and socialising, or simply explore and enjoy the universe/sand-box on your own.
What I'm trying to say is that competition is not and will not be the defining principle of modern and future MMOG's, just one facet among many. I've basically lost interest in single player games beyond RPGs and simple Puzzles, the real action is interaction. No Articial Intelligence can come close to matching the fun of reacting to/strategising against or with Real Intelligence, for me.
posted by MetaMonkey at 12:26 AM on March 8, 2006
There is no underlying systemic reason a game like spore couldn't be successfully and enjoyably massively multiplayer for all (other than the insane amount of coding, hardware and bandwidth involved). Some kind of god-like entity could simply throw a veil of protection amongst certain solar-systems/galaxies, so that if you chose to live in that area destruction would be impossible.
Recent, more innovative games, like EVE Online and Second Life (if I understand correctly) are far more open-ended than your typical skill-up and kill stuff MMORPGS like WOW. If you choose to you may remain in safe areas, engaging exclusively in safe activities such as trading, building and socialising, or simply explore and enjoy the universe/sand-box on your own.
What I'm trying to say is that competition is not and will not be the defining principle of modern and future MMOG's, just one facet among many. I've basically lost interest in single player games beyond RPGs and simple Puzzles, the real action is interaction. No Articial Intelligence can come close to matching the fun of reacting to/strategising against or with Real Intelligence, for me.
posted by MetaMonkey at 12:26 AM on March 8, 2006
MetaMonkey, I'm intrigued - do you think a narrative-led game like Shadow of the Colossus or Half-Life 2 would be improved by the presence of other players? If so, how?
posted by terpsichoria at 12:44 AM on March 8, 2006
posted by terpsichoria at 12:44 AM on March 8, 2006
I was lucky enough to be in the audience when Will gave this talk, nearly a year ago. I'm hoping he'll start this years talk with either "Sorry it's not out yet.", or "So I discovered the drawback of working with demo coders."
I'm joking. My good friend, lead, and boss is talking this year, he's ex-demo scene.
posted by inpHilltr8r at 12:45 AM on March 8, 2006
I'm joking. My good friend, lead, and boss is talking this year, he's ex-demo scene.
posted by inpHilltr8r at 12:45 AM on March 8, 2006
I think I kind-of covered Half Life 2 when I mentioned RPGs as one of the two types of SP game I now enjoy (taking the term RPG very broadly).
I wasn't really saying that existing single player games should be transformed into multiplayer games, but that multiplayer games offer opportunities to get similar experiences, but that are dynamic and human, rather than pre-programmed and algorithimic.
Some modern generation MMOGs, like EVE Online, now have successful pseudo-economies, which means complex systems of demand and supply, politics, alliances and war. By following the consequences and the context of the game-world actions the player becomes immersed in a dynamic user-created narrative, rather than a pre-concieved largely static narrative.
Combine this notion with the content-creation ability of a game like Second Life, and you have a dynamic user created storyline, within a world populated by real people, in an environment shaped by it's inhabitants. Therefore, MM = fun.
posted by MetaMonkey at 1:09 AM on March 8, 2006
I wasn't really saying that existing single player games should be transformed into multiplayer games, but that multiplayer games offer opportunities to get similar experiences, but that are dynamic and human, rather than pre-programmed and algorithimic.
Some modern generation MMOGs, like EVE Online, now have successful pseudo-economies, which means complex systems of demand and supply, politics, alliances and war. By following the consequences and the context of the game-world actions the player becomes immersed in a dynamic user-created narrative, rather than a pre-concieved largely static narrative.
Combine this notion with the content-creation ability of a game like Second Life, and you have a dynamic user created storyline, within a world populated by real people, in an environment shaped by it's inhabitants. Therefore, MM = fun.
posted by MetaMonkey at 1:09 AM on March 8, 2006
And the other "unrealistic" thing I see about it is that you can change your creature so much during the first stages, just go from one thing to something totally different, rather then trying to evolve your creature over time. I think that would be more fun
Well Will did mention that there would be some sort of resource aspect of the game, which would suggest that deviating too much from your orignal design would be more expensive, slowing down that brain expansion.
He probably only made those big changes quickly because it was a demonstration.
That said, I noticed the old 'simoleons' symbol in the game. Will sure loves his stock form of currency.
posted by Serial Killer Slumber Party at 1:24 AM on March 8, 2006
Well Will did mention that there would be some sort of resource aspect of the game, which would suggest that deviating too much from your orignal design would be more expensive, slowing down that brain expansion.
He probably only made those big changes quickly because it was a demonstration.
That said, I noticed the old 'simoleons' symbol in the game. Will sure loves his stock form of currency.
posted by Serial Killer Slumber Party at 1:24 AM on March 8, 2006
That was the impression I got as well. Will was clearly "cheating" at several points to be able to show off various aspects of the game.
> Imagine a human face screaming 'OMG N00B' in every game forever.
Brilliant.
posted by neckro23 at 2:31 AM on March 8, 2006
> Imagine a human face screaming 'OMG N00B' in every game forever.
Brilliant.
posted by neckro23 at 2:31 AM on March 8, 2006
stavros, you sure this isn't new? I've been seeing it linked all over the game pages recently, saying it was from a recent conference and the google video link is for feb 21.
posted by shmegegge at 4:48 AM on March 8, 2006
posted by shmegegge at 4:48 AM on March 8, 2006
the constant risk of invasion by the Hormonally Aggressive Teenager Empire.
Sounds like just another day on Metafilter.
posted by crunchland at 5:03 AM on March 8, 2006
Sounds like just another day on Metafilter.
posted by crunchland at 5:03 AM on March 8, 2006
I *did* post this last week, then it was pointed out that a good portion of the video was in a longer talk by Wright, previously posted, so I flagged it and the post was deleted. Whatevs.
posted by beerbajay at 5:30 AM on March 8, 2006
posted by beerbajay at 5:30 AM on March 8, 2006
Oh beerbajay. Not everyone can be a winner. Maybe you're just good at other things?
posted by thirteenkiller at 5:34 AM on March 8, 2006
posted by thirteenkiller at 5:34 AM on March 8, 2006
"Hey, you sound really good at not being good at things. Say... I need a guy like that"
- the next multi-national VP beerbajay talks to
posted by NinjaPirate at 6:09 AM on March 8, 2006
- the next multi-national VP beerbajay talks to
posted by NinjaPirate at 6:09 AM on March 8, 2006
Yes. I agree with those who say the MMOG aspects of this game should be greatly limited.
Unfortunately, the majority of my experience with MMORPGS has convinced me that most of the humans on this planet are fucking dumb as dirt, and I don't want them messing around with my stuff in my video game.
:D
posted by Baby_Balrog at 7:18 AM on March 8, 2006
Unfortunately, the majority of my experience with MMORPGS has convinced me that most of the humans on this planet are fucking dumb as dirt, and I don't want them messing around with my stuff in my video game.
:D
posted by Baby_Balrog at 7:18 AM on March 8, 2006
Will Wright has always had great, all-encompassing ideas that look great in development but fall flat in execution. I predict this game to be yet another example of this. It's not that I'm overly pessimistic, it's just that I have several ambitious Wright products gathering dust on my shelves.
posted by NationalKato at 7:32 AM on March 8, 2006
posted by NationalKato at 7:32 AM on March 8, 2006
MetaFilter: Just pretend I'm saying all the stuff everyone else already said.
And also, if I had any free time at all, I'd be playing this with at least some of it.
posted by bwerdmuller at 7:50 AM on March 8, 2006
And also, if I had any free time at all, I'd be playing this with at least some of it.
posted by bwerdmuller at 7:50 AM on March 8, 2006
The thing is, I agree with MetaMonkey that user-driven worlds with player-created content are the way forward for massively-multiplayer experiences - it's just that they really aren't videogames anymore, they're something else entirely. At best, true massively-multiuser worlds have the potential to be true virtual second lives, and at worst (and if I'm feeling uncharitable, I'd be inclined to lump Second Life and EVE into this category) they can be work masquerading as recreation. The point is, though, that while you can create a videogame within a world like this, they can't fulfil their potential as truly social, truly co-operative experiences while they're still trying to be games in themselves.
Where the problems lie are games that stick fairly firmly to existing 'videogamey' structures, like WoW, but try to reconcile that with an attempt at massive-multiplayerness. The relatively linear, developer-driven content can't be significantly altered based on player actions (simply because there isn't content to replace it, and because it wouldn't be fair for only one person to be able to enjoy the content the devs have created before it was changed), so you get a game which is effectively small-scale multiplayer or single-player, but where a lot of people are doing the same 5-person or solo content concurrently, and you get situations like having killed Ragnaros, herald of the fire god and horrendous threat to the world, and still being expected to gather insect giblets before the Cenarion Circle will respect you enough to sell you a recipe.
I'm yet to be convinced that any current 'massively-multiplayer' RPG wouldn't be a much better game, and better use of the assets, as a primarily single-player game with story-specific, pre-defined NPC party members and an out-of-game lobby system with the ability to bring in a party of five people for the dungeons, but also with a world that reacted to your achieving of great feats without fear of aliening other players, simply because everyone would have their own version of the world. Similarly, it'd be a much better massively-multiplayer world if it stopped trying to be such a satisfying videogame and allowed player-driven storylines, player-constructed buildings and quests given from player to player. But it wouldn't be a videogame, and the videogame elements in it would have to be removed or severely reduced in order to bring it closer to something like Second Life. The massively-multiplayer world may have arisen from videogames, but I suspect its future lies far away from them once the current flood of 'MMO'RPGs dies down.
posted by terpsichoria at 9:10 AM on March 8, 2006
Where the problems lie are games that stick fairly firmly to existing 'videogamey' structures, like WoW, but try to reconcile that with an attempt at massive-multiplayerness. The relatively linear, developer-driven content can't be significantly altered based on player actions (simply because there isn't content to replace it, and because it wouldn't be fair for only one person to be able to enjoy the content the devs have created before it was changed), so you get a game which is effectively small-scale multiplayer or single-player, but where a lot of people are doing the same 5-person or solo content concurrently, and you get situations like having killed Ragnaros, herald of the fire god and horrendous threat to the world, and still being expected to gather insect giblets before the Cenarion Circle will respect you enough to sell you a recipe.
I'm yet to be convinced that any current 'massively-multiplayer' RPG wouldn't be a much better game, and better use of the assets, as a primarily single-player game with story-specific, pre-defined NPC party members and an out-of-game lobby system with the ability to bring in a party of five people for the dungeons, but also with a world that reacted to your achieving of great feats without fear of aliening other players, simply because everyone would have their own version of the world. Similarly, it'd be a much better massively-multiplayer world if it stopped trying to be such a satisfying videogame and allowed player-driven storylines, player-constructed buildings and quests given from player to player. But it wouldn't be a videogame, and the videogame elements in it would have to be removed or severely reduced in order to bring it closer to something like Second Life. The massively-multiplayer world may have arisen from videogames, but I suspect its future lies far away from them once the current flood of 'MMO'RPGs dies down.
posted by terpsichoria at 9:10 AM on March 8, 2006
I'm very excited about this game. It brings back fond memories of EVO, Cubivore, Seventh Cross, and Lack of Love.
posted by Dr-Baa at 9:30 AM on March 8, 2006
posted by Dr-Baa at 9:30 AM on March 8, 2006
Please tell me this will be available for the Mac.
Actually, I take that back, please tell me this will not be available for the Mac.
posted by crawl at 9:44 AM on March 8, 2006
Actually, I take that back, please tell me this will not be available for the Mac.
posted by crawl at 9:44 AM on March 8, 2006
I completely agree with terpsichoria, but that raises the question of why Spore couldn't be selectively multiplayer (a lobby where multiple people can make their own galaxy, creating a mini-persistent universe just for themselves). There'd be problems if one person dropped out of an ongoing five-man game, leaving a leaderless civilization behind, but the same can be said for any PnP RPG- people worked around it. Maybe it's just too much to plan in an already ambitious project. Or maybe that's their upcoming expansion pack (only $39.99!).
I'm more worried about the gameplay. The game has bits of SimCity, Civilization, Command & Conquer/Starcraft, and so on, but it also tries to maintain one or two interfaces throughout (build interface, UFO interface). Star Wars: Empire At War tried this with just space empires and RTS gameplay, and gamers complained that neither part was particularly deep. With Spore, I expect all the SimCity junkies will complain about the lack of options, as will everyone else about their little sphere of enjoyment. Of course, the game will not be marketed only to hardcore gamers, but will your average Joe be interested in a game of this magnitude? I've lost faith in the casual gamer market wanting anything more than sports and "I'm so badass" masturbation. Wright's name will help, but I feel the casual market will pass- calling it "too weird"- and the hardcore market will pass- calling it "too little of too much".
I still want to play it very much.
posted by Maxson at 10:04 AM on March 8, 2006
I'm more worried about the gameplay. The game has bits of SimCity, Civilization, Command & Conquer/Starcraft, and so on, but it also tries to maintain one or two interfaces throughout (build interface, UFO interface). Star Wars: Empire At War tried this with just space empires and RTS gameplay, and gamers complained that neither part was particularly deep. With Spore, I expect all the SimCity junkies will complain about the lack of options, as will everyone else about their little sphere of enjoyment. Of course, the game will not be marketed only to hardcore gamers, but will your average Joe be interested in a game of this magnitude? I've lost faith in the casual gamer market wanting anything more than sports and "I'm so badass" masturbation. Wright's name will help, but I feel the casual market will pass- calling it "too weird"- and the hardcore market will pass- calling it "too little of too much".
I still want to play it very much.
posted by Maxson at 10:04 AM on March 8, 2006
I wonder when the first outcry from parents/media will be when they walk in on their kid, whose little creature is running around a world populated with hundreds of walking penises and breasts?
This is a great looking game, and I'm sure that I'll buy and play it. I hope that there's a way to control what content from other users goes into your game, as the majority of gamers on the internet have the maturity level of an 8 year old. I don't want their 'content' ruining my game experience. I guess the 'nuclear option' in the game will give you a way out, as you near the end of the progression.
I predict that there will be a large backlash against this game, similar to the one against Black & White- the reviewers won't play it all the way through, so we won't have a big-scale picture. Many gamers will hate it after they're done with the first play though, as they'll play it like a single-player campaign of a RTS, trying to just power through it. Once they're done and there's no more goals, they'll bore quickly.
I still think I'll enjoy it greatly.
posted by Four Flavors at 11:28 AM on March 8, 2006
This is a great looking game, and I'm sure that I'll buy and play it. I hope that there's a way to control what content from other users goes into your game, as the majority of gamers on the internet have the maturity level of an 8 year old. I don't want their 'content' ruining my game experience. I guess the 'nuclear option' in the game will give you a way out, as you near the end of the progression.
I predict that there will be a large backlash against this game, similar to the one against Black & White- the reviewers won't play it all the way through, so we won't have a big-scale picture. Many gamers will hate it after they're done with the first play though, as they'll play it like a single-player campaign of a RTS, trying to just power through it. Once they're done and there's no more goals, they'll bore quickly.
I still think I'll enjoy it greatly.
posted by Four Flavors at 11:28 AM on March 8, 2006
Many gamers will hate it after they're done with the first play though, as they'll play it like a single-player campaign of a RTS, trying to just power through it. Once they're done and there's no more goals, they'll bore quickly.
sounds like when I first played simant and simlife back in the day.
posted by shmegegge at 11:36 AM on March 8, 2006
sounds like when I first played simant and simlife back in the day.
posted by shmegegge at 11:36 AM on March 8, 2006
Simant. Now that game was fucking awesome.
Remember the first time you got to the house?
Or killed the spider?
posted by Baby_Balrog at 1:49 PM on March 8, 2006
Remember the first time you got to the house?
Or killed the spider?
posted by Baby_Balrog at 1:49 PM on March 8, 2006
shmegegge: simant always gypped me, no matter how long I played, but I played the wonderfully pointless simearth for a billion hours each, at least.
posted by soma lkzx at 1:55 PM on March 8, 2006
posted by soma lkzx at 1:55 PM on March 8, 2006
that comment doesn't make sense because it's procedurally generated.
posted by soma lkzx at 1:56 PM on March 8, 2006
posted by soma lkzx at 1:56 PM on March 8, 2006
The backlash against Black & White was justifiable: Despite the hype, the game sucked horribly. The hobbled, gesture-based interface was only B&W's first salvo in the war against quality. The inability of the creature to learn was the next.
No, I take that back, the creature could learn: If even once you accidentally flung one of your citizens -- an easy thing to accomplish because the controls sucked so much -- the creature would take up this habit and be completely unbreakable of it no matter how badly you tried to discourage it.
B&W was a great idea, but really, Molyneaux should have just made Populous III and kept the crappy implementation of his great ideas out of it. He deserved every bit of backlash he got, and quite a bit more.
Spore looks like a bit of fun, but it's not really too inspiring as a game. The basic idea isn't new -- it was done (somewhat badly) in 1984 -- although the execution is clever. It looks like the kind of game that's intended to be played in an open-ended way, but will eventually succumb to the kind of min-max approach that ruins all such games.
I hope I'm wrong, because it sure would be nice to see a decent open-ended game on the market. The multiplayer aspects bode ill for it, since I'm absolutely not interested in playing with game elements designed by the vast horde of morons on the Internet.
Kind of like how WoW was going to be fun, but then they introduced a bunch of raid content that nobody can play effectively without jockeying for cookie cutter min-max equipment and specific, raid-optimal talent configurations. Hopefully Blizzard will address that, because there's lots of potential for fun in WoW once they stop paying such lavish attention to the tiny fraction of the population that participates in 40 man raids.
Lest everyone think I'm nothing but a complainer, I'll plug a recent game I actually like: Darwinia. A game that successfully combines Dune II, Lemmings, and Centipede into a coherent whole is worthy of respect, even if it's disappointingly short and a bit too easy.
Civ 4 is pretty good, too, although it still suffers from some (though slightly fewer) of the gameplay mechanic flaws that have plagued the series since inception.
posted by majick at 2:24 PM on March 8, 2006
No, I take that back, the creature could learn: If even once you accidentally flung one of your citizens -- an easy thing to accomplish because the controls sucked so much -- the creature would take up this habit and be completely unbreakable of it no matter how badly you tried to discourage it.
B&W was a great idea, but really, Molyneaux should have just made Populous III and kept the crappy implementation of his great ideas out of it. He deserved every bit of backlash he got, and quite a bit more.
Spore looks like a bit of fun, but it's not really too inspiring as a game. The basic idea isn't new -- it was done (somewhat badly) in 1984 -- although the execution is clever. It looks like the kind of game that's intended to be played in an open-ended way, but will eventually succumb to the kind of min-max approach that ruins all such games.
I hope I'm wrong, because it sure would be nice to see a decent open-ended game on the market. The multiplayer aspects bode ill for it, since I'm absolutely not interested in playing with game elements designed by the vast horde of morons on the Internet.
Kind of like how WoW was going to be fun, but then they introduced a bunch of raid content that nobody can play effectively without jockeying for cookie cutter min-max equipment and specific, raid-optimal talent configurations. Hopefully Blizzard will address that, because there's lots of potential for fun in WoW once they stop paying such lavish attention to the tiny fraction of the population that participates in 40 man raids.
Lest everyone think I'm nothing but a complainer, I'll plug a recent game I actually like: Darwinia. A game that successfully combines Dune II, Lemmings, and Centipede into a coherent whole is worthy of respect, even if it's disappointingly short and a bit too easy.
Civ 4 is pretty good, too, although it still suffers from some (though slightly fewer) of the gameplay mechanic flaws that have plagued the series since inception.
posted by majick at 2:24 PM on March 8, 2006
I love the idea of how this game could manifest itself into MMOG. Though I really doubt it will happen, some of the ideas are interesting. The demonstration of this game looks quite slick, but I'm very curious about the underlying aspects of your species. How much of the beginning stages effect the later stages, what sorts of culture can you infuse into your beings. It appears as if all the low level stages have all of the dynamic "verb" creation, where the later has static "Interstellar Drive", "Nuclear Missile" type abilities.
Using Wrights own theory of utility on content, the player is probably going to care very little about the cool dynamic way in which his creatures walk when he gets to the interplanetary stage of the game, and the individual creature becomes less important. A dynamic sense of culture is what would be needed at the later portion of the game (I think), otherwise all the details of this game will fall into the abstract concepts that are the basis for any RTS, conquer and multiply.
posted by thanatogenous at 2:31 PM on March 8, 2006
Using Wrights own theory of utility on content, the player is probably going to care very little about the cool dynamic way in which his creatures walk when he gets to the interplanetary stage of the game, and the individual creature becomes less important. A dynamic sense of culture is what would be needed at the later portion of the game (I think), otherwise all the details of this game will fall into the abstract concepts that are the basis for any RTS, conquer and multiply.
posted by thanatogenous at 2:31 PM on March 8, 2006
majick: oh god, my creature from Black & White! I'd completely forgotten the adorable little bag of dodgy programming and wool. He was a gigantic demon sheep, and he was the single most neurotic creature I've ever known anyone have. I don't know what I did to cause it, but whenever he'd enter a new level, he'd systematically walk around kicking the crap out of every tree on the island. He'd throw them out to sea, he'd set them on fire, he'd kick them off cliffs and laugh about it. Until total deforestation was achieved, he wouldn't obey a single command. It was amazing, and actually made it impossible for anyone to win, since building anything without wood was nigh-impossible. Mr Wooly was a rare ray of light in the miasma of Molyneux high-concept, awful-execution games.
posted by terpsichoria at 2:49 PM on March 8, 2006
posted by terpsichoria at 2:49 PM on March 8, 2006
stavros, you sure this isn't new?
It's not new. I saw this footage a year ago.
posted by Tlogmer at 8:18 PM on March 8, 2006
It's not new. I saw this footage a year ago.
posted by Tlogmer at 8:18 PM on March 8, 2006
"I *did* post this last week..!"
I will post this next week.
As I listened to Wright's thoughts about the direction of content versus data, I couldn't help but mull over my recent obsession with City of Heroes. I say recent, but actually I've obsessed over it for two years and have only in the past few months had the resources to actually play it. I have one character almost up to fifty now, and am deciding if I want to start again or if I want to quit the game entirely, after having powered through it so to speak. The content is rich, and yet it's linear and repetitive. I keep wishing there were some way to take the multitude of villains now being made over at City of Villains and have them somehow carried over into City of Heroes and vice versa, because there's only so many times you can beat up on Freakshow or Crey Industries or Recluse's spidery baddies without wondering what's on cable.
The multiplayer aspect is messy, because while there are other intelligent players out there, there's equally just as many (arguably more some may say) who would ruin the fun for a person, because no two people are interested in multiplayer in exactly the same way. Having the AI simply generate baddies developed by other players doesn't solve the problem, because it's still an AI. In teaming for COH, it's difficult to find other players who you consistently gel with, and it's even harder to be online whenever they are. That's predominantly random. Some pick up teams are great and others are lousy, and people come and go more often than kids at a playground. MMORPGs are essentially playgrounds for adults, or for all ages for that matter.
Will Wright's work here seems to allow a person to play in a sandbox of his creation, and then choose to play with or destroy the sand castles that others have left behind in his sandbox, but essentially it's still a very lonely game concept. I used to be a fan of the first Sims game, but left it after awhile because even a hermit like myself couldn't get past the pathetic narcisism it takes to be truly addicted. I'd be sitting there trying to improve the lives of virtual people, while leaving my own life in stagnation. After awhile it was just time to turn off the computer and go back to work, so Wright's efforts always left me empty.
I get the "Will Wright's Pee" cartoon perfectly. Someone earlier in the thread said the cartoonist, but he's right on target. Wright talks about giving players the ability to build their own content, but he's mastering the method in which that content is distributed and even created, like a benevolent dictator. Who's Watching the Watchers? Who's Controlling the Controllers? Who's Slinging Whom's Pee?
But his concept that storytelling is essentially a byproduct, that the player develops their own story in their mind as they go along and the editors and the interface are simply tools for accomplishing that goal... I like that concept. There's potential here, but you're still only telling a story to yourself, whether you're doing Half Life 2, D&DO, Matrix, Eve, or the upcoming Spore. Either others are not able to tell you their stories because the devs haven't given that option (purporting their own linear content as paramount), or if players can share stories in some manner, they're not often the stories you want to experience. Not everybody can be Orson Scott Card. Thank God. I never could get into Ender's Game.
For all its grandiose efforts, I think Spore still just falls short of the mark. I was hoping when I first read about City of Heroes that it'd effectively be a way for players to share with one another elaborate storylines and interact with one another's storylines, like developing an entire comic book world akin to my childhood joys of DC and Marvel. Again it falls short, instead being just people on the 'Net connecting long enough to beat up on virtual badness and periodically crack jokes with one another and perform emotes while we wait for someone to zone in from Independence Port. Where's Jimmy Olsen when you need him?
So this prodecural stuff may be a step in the right direction, but it's yet one more step on a long and winding staircase, and none of us know where it's going to take us. I just hope if we get there it'll REALLY be fun!
posted by ZachsMind at 10:38 PM on March 8, 2006
I will post this next week.
As I listened to Wright's thoughts about the direction of content versus data, I couldn't help but mull over my recent obsession with City of Heroes. I say recent, but actually I've obsessed over it for two years and have only in the past few months had the resources to actually play it. I have one character almost up to fifty now, and am deciding if I want to start again or if I want to quit the game entirely, after having powered through it so to speak. The content is rich, and yet it's linear and repetitive. I keep wishing there were some way to take the multitude of villains now being made over at City of Villains and have them somehow carried over into City of Heroes and vice versa, because there's only so many times you can beat up on Freakshow or Crey Industries or Recluse's spidery baddies without wondering what's on cable.
The multiplayer aspect is messy, because while there are other intelligent players out there, there's equally just as many (arguably more some may say) who would ruin the fun for a person, because no two people are interested in multiplayer in exactly the same way. Having the AI simply generate baddies developed by other players doesn't solve the problem, because it's still an AI. In teaming for COH, it's difficult to find other players who you consistently gel with, and it's even harder to be online whenever they are. That's predominantly random. Some pick up teams are great and others are lousy, and people come and go more often than kids at a playground. MMORPGs are essentially playgrounds for adults, or for all ages for that matter.
Will Wright's work here seems to allow a person to play in a sandbox of his creation, and then choose to play with or destroy the sand castles that others have left behind in his sandbox, but essentially it's still a very lonely game concept. I used to be a fan of the first Sims game, but left it after awhile because even a hermit like myself couldn't get past the pathetic narcisism it takes to be truly addicted. I'd be sitting there trying to improve the lives of virtual people, while leaving my own life in stagnation. After awhile it was just time to turn off the computer and go back to work, so Wright's efforts always left me empty.
I get the "Will Wright's Pee" cartoon perfectly. Someone earlier in the thread said the cartoonist, but he's right on target. Wright talks about giving players the ability to build their own content, but he's mastering the method in which that content is distributed and even created, like a benevolent dictator. Who's Watching the Watchers? Who's Controlling the Controllers? Who's Slinging Whom's Pee?
But his concept that storytelling is essentially a byproduct, that the player develops their own story in their mind as they go along and the editors and the interface are simply tools for accomplishing that goal... I like that concept. There's potential here, but you're still only telling a story to yourself, whether you're doing Half Life 2, D&DO, Matrix, Eve, or the upcoming Spore. Either others are not able to tell you their stories because the devs haven't given that option (purporting their own linear content as paramount), or if players can share stories in some manner, they're not often the stories you want to experience. Not everybody can be Orson Scott Card. Thank God. I never could get into Ender's Game.
For all its grandiose efforts, I think Spore still just falls short of the mark. I was hoping when I first read about City of Heroes that it'd effectively be a way for players to share with one another elaborate storylines and interact with one another's storylines, like developing an entire comic book world akin to my childhood joys of DC and Marvel. Again it falls short, instead being just people on the 'Net connecting long enough to beat up on virtual badness and periodically crack jokes with one another and perform emotes while we wait for someone to zone in from Independence Port. Where's Jimmy Olsen when you need him?
So this prodecural stuff may be a step in the right direction, but it's yet one more step on a long and winding staircase, and none of us know where it's going to take us. I just hope if we get there it'll REALLY be fun!
posted by ZachsMind at 10:38 PM on March 8, 2006
Metafilter: I . . . couldn't get past the pathetic narcisism it takes to be truly addicted.
posted by craniac at 5:52 AM on March 9, 2006
posted by craniac at 5:52 AM on March 9, 2006
Will Wright explains how games are unleashing the human imagination.
posted by crunchland at 10:00 PM on March 20, 2006
posted by crunchland at 10:00 PM on March 20, 2006
« Older The Star Wars Holiday Special, my god is it awful. | His weapon was a camera.... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by thanatogenous at 5:42 PM on March 7, 2006 [1 favorite]