Letters To The Editor: Submit A Letter
View All Letters 
| 01.04.2007Episodic games: Games are not TV shows!
While Rick does a wonderful job of highlighting the benefits of episodic content for developers, I was disappointed to see no mention of the potential negative audience reactions.
In particular, games are an investment of both time and money. If you're already committing to a 40-hour gameplay experience (whether it be in a "season" or not), you would not want to buy the first two "episodes" or the "pilot" only to find that you really like it but that the game is being canceled because it didn't get good ratings. Who wants to play through just the first two levels of Quake, if there's no guarantee that the rest will ever get released?
With a TV show, there's less of a commitment by viewers; a viewer is passive so there's less emotional attachment... and a viewer isn't paying cash per-show (pay-per-view aside -- but note that episodic content on PPV is rare).
I'm also skeptical of the claim that episodic gameplay allows greater chance for innovation. On the micro-level within a series, sure... but not drastic gameplay innovation that would require extra programming. If you're on an episodic schedule, there's far less development time for implementing new features, especially if those features might just be used for a single episode.
As a developer, I really hope episodic content becomes viable for all the reasons Rick mentions. As a gamer, I hope it falls flat on its face, because I'd never want to buy a game as individual component parts.-Ian Schreiber
|
|
|
|
|
Letters to the Editor
