Tag: games

Wed, August
27th

DRM: The games industry *gets* it

Posted by clint
on August 27, 2008

Surprisingly, I somehow haven't yet discussed DRM on this blog at all just yet. This despite feeling rather strongly on the subject. I suppose this is largely due to the fact that there isn't much to be said about DRM that hasn't yet been said by others, and in a far more thoughtful fashion than I possibly could. However, there is one particular belief I hold that seems to be relatively rare, and which I think was validated recently.

As the title of this post suggests, I am of the opinion that the games industry gets it.

Of the various stolen goods you'll often find up for grabs on shady websites, the most prolific items are always music and movies, but close behind you'll always find pro software and PC games. Protecting content that is ultimately supposed to end up on a computer is inherently pretty difficult. SecuROM and SafeDisc are fairly well-known quantities to hackers at this point; they won't blink twice while breaking the CD/DVD protection of these games. StarForce baffled people for a good long while, but eventually the black hats broke it, and once word got out that it has the unpleasant side effect of bricking the optical drives of customers, legitimate and illicit alike, developers finally began to shy away from it.

The point is that piracy's a pretty big problem in the games industry.

The key, though, is how you deal with piracy. Crytek, the makers of the fairly extravagant Crysis, recently announced that they would no longer code PC-exclusive games, as they weren't making any money due to the piracy issue there. Incidentally, this move should as a side effect solve their real problem, which was that no one had a computer that could run Crysis.

Valve, on the other hand, created Steam, which deals with the problem in an entirely different way –– digital distribution. This is a forward-thinking approach not only technologically, but also socially. By creating a consistent platform for PC games that singularly encompasses all types of games and allows for a pervasive community, Valve has made an entire economic ecosystem for themselves –– and loyal fans. I, for one, refuse to buy any PC game that isn't on Steam now out of principle. Bionic Commando Rearmed and Sins of a Solar Empire, I'm looking at you.

But how does Steam address the piracy issue? First, its DRM approach is incredibly sensible. Once you buy a game, you own it. You can log into any computer on Earth with an Internet connection and kick off a download of any game you own. If you don't intend to play multiplayer online, you can even run your copy of any game on as many computers as you want at once. Second, it makes buying games legally even easier than it ever was to pirate them. Click on the game you want, type in a couple of digits, and you're done. No need to run to the store, no need to fuss about with physical media. It's just that easy.

Traditionally, this has been my argument for why the games industry gets it. But former Xbox head, current EA Sports president, and general practitioner of awesome Peter Moore recently said some excellent things on the subject, which made me rather happy to hear.

I'm not a huge fan of trying to punish your consumer. Albeit these people have clearly stolen intellectual property, I think there are better ways of resolving this within our power as developers and publishers. Yes, we've got to find solutions. We absolutely should crack down on piracy. People put a lot of blood, sweat and tears into their content and deserve to get paid for it. It's absolutely wrong, it is stealing. But at the same time I think there are better solutions than chasing people for money. I'm not sure what they are, other than to build game experiences that make it more difficult for there to be any value in pirating games. (eurogamer.net)

Exactly. Piracy is wrong, and piracy is a problem. But the industry needs to find compelling, reasonable ways to deal with the issue at its root cause, not sue its own customers to oblivion. Done, and done.

Now, Mr. Moore, get your company to publish its games on Steam and we'll call it good.


Thu, August
21st

The proper way to deal with bugs

Posted by clint
on August 21, 2008
Electronic Arts has taken a lot of flak in the past half decade or so for being the Huge Corporate Conglomerate of the gaming market: buying out countless licenses, releasing a torrential flood of games with questionable quality assurance standards, and just not caring in general.

Well, everyone else can eat their words today – EA wins.

This is the only proper way to deal with bugs.

Fri, February
8th

Will Wright's Spore a "creative risk"

Posted by clint
on February 8, 2008
EA CEO John Ricitiello commented in a keynote at DICE today that Spore is "probably the greatest creative risk maybe going on in the industry right now," going on to assert that he believes " it's going to be one of the greatest franchises in our industry and will rival World of Warcraft or The Sims or Rock Band. It's going to be right up there."

This is all well and fine for the CEO of the game's publisher to push, but is it believable? The biggest thing about Spore that I find risky is that the game has been in development for a full eight years now, a figure rivalling Duke Nukem Forever. Can Wright ever really get this game out the door? If so, we'll find out whether it's really a creative risk; from what I've seen demoed of the game, the lifecycle of each game is broken into several extremely disparate segments, such that it's really simply three or four games in one rather than the grandiose game-to-end-all-games that it has been hailed as. I think there are many games out there whose progressions are far more natural, and therefore much worthier of the praise currently being heaped upon Spore. Sim City is a great example: as your city grows, the problems you need to deal with change slightly and subtly until you're dealing with things on an entirely different scale, without breaking the essential core mechanic of the game.

If Spore ever comes out, we shall finally see whether it is truly worth a franchise. If it is, even, it's going to be an insanely sporadic franchise indeed.

Thu, November
15th

Super Mario Galaxy Impressions

Posted by clint
on November 15, 2007
Wow. Now I need a Wii.

Fri, October
12th

Review: Portal

Posted by clint
on October 12, 2007
I saw the trailer for Portal last summer and was instantly in love -- this game blew my mind. I've always been a big fan of puzzle games of various types, spending an inordinate amount of time on download.com's puzzle section in my youth (Lasertank, I'm looking at you). In fact, most of my largest programming projects have been various puzzle games of my design.

After so many years, though, it's hard to find fresh and innovative puzzle games, and I'd pretty much stopped trying until I saw the aforementioned Portal trailer. The entire premise of the game (which really is far better explained by watching the, again, aforementioned trailer) is that you are a test subject armed with an awesome device that can instantly create a blue and an orange portal on any flat concrete surface you can point and shoot at. The moment you walk out one, you walk out the other. Momentum is conserved in the transfer, so if you fall into a portal in the floor fast, you can come flying horizontally out a portal in the wall, a maneuver they call the "fling," though I prefer the much more kinetic "catapult." The goal is very simply to proceed to the exit.

Insofar as I've explained to this point, the game is identical to a DigiPen student project called Narbacular Drop. The game is incredibly short, and pretty buggy at points, but it is still great fun, and was clearly good enough to be picked up by Valve to be developed into Portal. However, crazy physics with yourself will only get you so far in creating puzzle games, so there are a couple of new mechanics, such as moving platforms and a neat energy ball launcher/reciever combination, which require you to redirect the energy ball to its reciever to activate various mechanisms in a level. In addition, there are single-direction turrets, which themselves are very amusing because they each have their own unique personality, and say the darndest things when you do things such as pick them up from behind.

Also, there is cake when you get to the end of the game.

Thus ends the description of Portal and begins the review. Portal's strongest points are in its innovative gameplay and its incredibly dry humor. Each level has had immense care put into it, which you can determine for yourself by listening to the excellent developer's commentary, and most feature fresh and interesting takes on the limits of Portal physics with each turn. While playing the game, there wasn't a single person who dropped by my room who wasn't completely mesmerized and amazed by what was going on. By the time I beat the game, I had a semi-substantial audience of onlookers cheering me on, set against the incredibly hilarious GLaDOS, whose dry humor carries all the way through to the amazing credits song (which alone is worth the price of admission). However, therein lies the rub.

At first glance, portal is incredibly short. An average player can probably bust through the game in about 3 to 3.5 hours. As a seasoned Narbacular Drop player, I finished the game in just about 2 hours of play. Part of this is due to the fact that a large majority of the levels are of trivial difficulty. However, this short length is a complete lie; the true game exists in the bonus maps. Not only is Valve releasing a new version of Hammer that will be able to create Portal maps soon, there is a collection of built-in bonus levels: these consist of six modified versions of the built-in levels which range from slightly to insanely harder, as well as a series of "challenges" which require you to finish six levels with either the lowest number of portals used, steps taken, or time elapsed. Of these, the least portal challenge is the most interesting to play through.

All in all the only thing that strongly detracts from Portal is the lack of challenge, which in turn leads to a pretty short gameplay run. However, you'll be having such a blast playing it for that short run that you won't even mind. Go buy it now.

Mon, October
8th

The Church of England is at it again

Posted by clint
on October 8, 2007
They're up in arms again over the presence of Manchester Cathedral in the game Resistance: Fall of Man. Last time they did this, Sony apologized but said it was going nowhere.

Well, now Resistance has been nominated for a BAFTA award (British Academy of Film and Television Arts), and the Church is once again angry, claiming that it's like "salt in [their] wounds" and that the only reason Resistance was nominated was because of its fairly solid sales numbers, which were in turn substantially increased by the controversy.

Dear Church of England:
  1. Resistance's sales numbers are high because it was the only half-decent game out for the PS3 at launch.
  2. If you knew that controversy would increase sales, why touch it at all?
  3. Most importantly, no one EVER bought a game because there was a controversial cathedral in it!

Sincerely,
Clint Tseng