Our Properties: Gamasutra GameCareerGuide IndieGames Indie Royale GDC IGF Game Developer Magazine GAO
My Message close
Latest News
spacer View All spacer
 
February 9, 2012
 
Road to the IGF: Alexander Bruce's Antichamber
 
What Nintendo's 2011 sales mean for Wii U, third parties [7]
 
Zynga's sales boosted to $335M during holiday quarter, says analyst
spacer
Latest Features
spacer View All spacer
 
February 9, 2012
 
arrow Principles of an Indie Game Bottom Feeder [7]
 
arrow Postmortem: CyberConnect 2's Solatorobo: Red the Hunter [1]
 
arrow Jerked Around by the Magic Circle - Clearing the Air Ten Years Later [34]
spacer
Latest Jobs
spacer View All     Post a Job     RSS spacer
 
February 9, 2012
 
Spooky Cool Labs
Marketing Director
 
Spooky Cool Labs
Software Developer - Games - Front End (Unity 3D)
 
High 5 Games
Mathematician
 
High 5 Games
Senior Mathematician
 
Toys for Bob / Activision
QA Tester - Temporary
 
Sony Computer Entertainment America LLC
Senior On-line Programmer
spacer
Blogs

  This Developer's Life: The Universal Game, Part 2
by James Portnow on 07/28/09 01:36:00 am   Expert Blogs   Featured Blogs
2 comments Share on Twitter Share on Facebook RSS
 
 
  Posted 07/28/09 01:36:00 am
 

Dear Reader:

Last week we discussed the “Universal Game”, the game aimed at everyone.  Many fascinating insights came out of this discussion.  We talked about how such a game couldn’t just be a lowest common denominator game; how it would have to cross language barriers and cultural differences…  in short we talked about how many different ways one could view the meaning of the words “Universal Game”. 

What made this particularly interesting to me was that it made me realize that even in a hypothetical discussion, the universal game wasn’t the place to start… 

The multi-layered game

One of the most interesting things that came up as the discussion about the universal game raged on was why we have so few games that work on multiple independent levels.  Consider a movie like Wall-e, everyone from very young children to jaded adults can enjoy that film and get something from it. 

Viewers often (I speak from experience, seeing that film with my youngest niece) walked away from that film with completely different but equally satisfying experiences.  This rarely happens in games.

I’ve been speaking with other designers about this topic over the weekend and a few interesting points have come up.  First was that the genre’s we address don’t lend themselves to this type of multi-level presentation; this I believe to be patently false as things like Star Wars, Dune and Lord of the Rings, all exist in that sci-fi/fantasy realm we so often occupy, and all of them feature multifaceted and interpretable tales. 

The second, perhaps more profound question was, “What does it mean to work on multiple independent levels in an interactive medium?”  Does Bioshock fit this criterion since it works for shooter fans as well as those looking for an engaging story?

This second question is actually too broad; it raises too many other questions, some of which have no good answer.  One common point of contention was whether an interactive environment makes this sort of multi-level experience harder or easier to deliver. 

On the one hand it makes it more difficult as the “author” has less direct control of the experience that their audience will have, but on the other hand this interactivity lets us literally tell multiple stories and explore multiple paths within a single title. 

Conclusion

Again, I appeal to you for your thoughts.  

In my opinion this is a problem worth solving, but it’s one we’ll only solve as a community, so feel free to post here or email me at jportnow@gmail.com or hit me up on twitter (JamesPortnow) with your thoughts. 

Also, if anyone can think of any games that really work well on multiple independent levels, send them my way: nothing’s better to learn from than examples!

 
 
Comments

John Petersen
profile image
Jimbo loves to fish, hunt, race, fly and farm. The environment is "poo"luted. Jimbo can do all or nothing.

Ted Brown
profile image
In the book 21st Century Game Design, Chris Bateman and Richard Boon discuss how personality type can affect the experience someone wants from a game. The starkest difference, in my mind, was "playing a role" versus "overcoming challenge". The first internalizes presentation, while the second internalizes rules and goals. If you imagine a game like Tony Hawk, people can play that for entirely different reasons. My kids like to see the skater do fun things and look cool, while I am focused on finding skate lines and extending my combos.

This seems to match the movie experience with your niece. Younger viewers may focus on the presentation, while years of movie watching make it hard to ignore the meaning and subtext of the same sequence.

Boon and Bateman say this helps explain why developers who "make games they've always wanted to play" tend to fail in the marketplace: they are so focused on the metagame that the literal experience is diminished, leading to less interest from mainstream gamers.

In short, it is certainly possible to work on multiple levels. I believe the answer lies in understanding the audience you are trying to capture. Do they play for the experience as presented? Do they seek to conquer a challenge? Or is something deeper at stake, like learning or therapy?


none
 
Comment:
 




 
UBM Techweb
Game Network
Game Developers Conference | GDC Europe | GDC Online | GDC China | Gamasutra | Game Developer Magazine | Game Advertising Online
Game Career Guide | Independent Games Festival | Indie Royale | IndieGames

Other UBM TechWeb Networks
Business Technology | Business Technology Events | Telecommunications & Communications Providers

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Contact Us | Copyright © UBM TechWeb, All Rights Reserved.