posted by ![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
benlehman at 11:09am on 26/02/2008
benlehman at 11:09am on 26/02/2008"There's no innovation in indie games."
"It's all just rewrites of PTA these days."
"We've had a drop in quality since the 'indie boom.'"
"Some of these games drop the ball in things as simple as conflict resolution."
Dear naysayers: Get your head out of the Story Games ghetto and take a look around. There's more to games than the hot new thing that there's 16 posts about on the front page. You know why there's 16 posts about it on the front page? Because it's non-innovative. People don't like innovation, as a general rule: they gravitate to the familiar. That's why In A Wicked Age is wildly popular and Sign in Stranger has generated one post ever.
Games already published:
How about a game with no conflict resolution system whatsoever, that plays smooth as butter, has a rotating cast of characters, and whose system is so simple it can be taught by children? Is that innovative?
How about a game where the unit of resolution length is a generation, which presents vast historical epic in the context of the deeply human characters at the center? Is that innovative?
How about a game where the process of play is exactly the process of assimilating into a new society, which starts with mad libs and becomes a matter of the fate of nations? Is that innovative?
How about a game which begins by players imagining their own deaths as a starting off point, and choreographs action around familiar environments, creating new special spaces in your day-to-day world? Is that innovative?
Games in public progress:
How about a game that uses as its base creative act your doubts about your capacity to love? Is that innovative?
How about a game where the basic reward mechanic is the players' (not the characters, the players) morality and the benefit of their community? Is that innovative?
How about a game which expansively occupies all available communication media, which is played on a global scale, and you never stop playing? Is that innovative?
How about a game which is played with one player, in an hour, and is consistently fun? Is that innovative?
I've got zero against Wicked, and zero against Shock: They're fun games to play and I love them and play them a lot. But they're not representative of the level of innovation presently going on in role-playing game design except as baselines.
"It's all just rewrites of PTA these days."
"We've had a drop in quality since the 'indie boom.'"
"Some of these games drop the ball in things as simple as conflict resolution."
Dear naysayers: Get your head out of the Story Games ghetto and take a look around. There's more to games than the hot new thing that there's 16 posts about on the front page. You know why there's 16 posts about it on the front page? Because it's non-innovative. People don't like innovation, as a general rule: they gravitate to the familiar. That's why In A Wicked Age is wildly popular and Sign in Stranger has generated one post ever.
Games already published:
How about a game with no conflict resolution system whatsoever, that plays smooth as butter, has a rotating cast of characters, and whose system is so simple it can be taught by children? Is that innovative?
How about a game where the unit of resolution length is a generation, which presents vast historical epic in the context of the deeply human characters at the center? Is that innovative?
How about a game where the process of play is exactly the process of assimilating into a new society, which starts with mad libs and becomes a matter of the fate of nations? Is that innovative?
How about a game which begins by players imagining their own deaths as a starting off point, and choreographs action around familiar environments, creating new special spaces in your day-to-day world? Is that innovative?
Games in public progress:
How about a game that uses as its base creative act your doubts about your capacity to love? Is that innovative?
How about a game where the basic reward mechanic is the players' (not the characters, the players) morality and the benefit of their community? Is that innovative?
How about a game which expansively occupies all available communication media, which is played on a global scale, and you never stop playing? Is that innovative?
How about a game which is played with one player, in an hour, and is consistently fun? Is that innovative?
I've got zero against Wicked, and zero against Shock: They're fun games to play and I love them and play them a lot. But they're not representative of the level of innovation presently going on in role-playing game design except as baselines.
There are 33 comments on this entry. (Reply.)