It goes a little bit like this: I'm playing the sort of game in which you shoot a lot of people through someone else's eyes and it's all very exciting and then I see a building off in the distance and know I can't go there; it's just the background.
This was posted on my other blog, but I think that it's relevant enough for Gamasutra. I get a lot of great feedback on my columns here, so I'm interested in getting the same on my less formal work. Oh yeah, the topic today is Half-Life and aging gamers.
Though I sincerely apologize if any of the jokes on twitter dot com made by me or my colleagues have inadvertently caused the fine employees of Bungie to spiral into a sinking depression that will then threaten to consume the entire games industry, I can only express my disappointment at ...
I follow the argument about preferences invalidating art, but Schopenhauer's patronizing response to the games as art debate could only occur if he, like Ebert, was under the impression that games allowed for choice or preference. Ebert is under the common misunderstanding that people who play games are changing the ...
A painful, damning critique of the industry, and impossible to disagree with. I firmly believe that a culturally relevant game will garner more and more positive attention from press and gamers alike the films cited in this article are part of film's canon because they took risks. Dated jingoism like ...
Very interesting, and it makes sense. Did they study if this has diminishing returns, though Because if every single quest in the game started out partially completed, players would probably put two and two together and stop feeling so impressed with themselves.
I find these accusations too funny to take seriously, because it's strictly the opposite. Video games, AAA in particular, have tried so hard for so long to do nothing but imitate the Hollywood blockbuster that even people in the that industry have forgotten that it was Hollywood that invented this ...
