|
Did you play Crayon Physics before or after the concept came about?
JS: Oh, well after.
The grabbing of the shiny object as a
goal, using procedural things to do so, it's quite similar. "Well, what's
the most simple kind of goal?"
JS: Yeah. And that's how you make something really accessible to everybody.
That was the whole point. You have the hardcore gamers, you have the casual
gamers, and we wanted to make sure we could fit everybody because this is the
Nintendo DS.
When I
was actually looking at new ideas for us to do, I had to consider, "What's
the DS about? What's the platform about?" It's about everybody. It's the
most casual platform there is, but there are gamers on it, too.
It's a good point, because I feel like
people are really going 100 percent either/or. They may say, "Yes, I want
this appeal to everyone," but they're just saying it. They're not designing
something that has the ability to appeal to both.
You shouldn't just make a
first-person shooter, but you also don't have to necessarily make like a game
about puppies or something. You can still have weird humor and quirky stuff in
there, and make an interesting game. I feel like people get trapped.
JS: They do. They absolutely do. When we started 5th Cell, we wanted to make
games that are completely different from everybody else, and not just different
in a quirky weird way that's not going to sell and nobody likes it. We wanted
to make awesome games.
We almost
have that indie mentality, except for the fact that we understand that
demographics matter. We're not just like, "Oh, we're making games just for
us." We want to make them for everybody. I think that if you look at all
of our games, they definitely try to do that broad appeal. That's kind of what
we're about.
I guess I heard [5th Cell
co-founder] Joseph Tringali saying, basically, "We want to make games that
nobody else has made." I was like, "Whatever, guys. You guys just
made a couple cell phone games. You think you're hot shit now? Well,
okay."
JS: No, it's true. Actually, I was talking to Stephen Totilo at Kotaku, and he
asked me, "What's the hot games?" And I'm like, "Scribblenauts." And he's just like,
"Yeah, yeah, yeah, of course. A developer would say that about their own
game." And I'm like, "No, no, no. I'm serious. Everybody's exploding
at E3."
And
people, journalists, are so jaded to PR people just slamming "It's the
next best thing since sliced bread," that like when people are genuine
about it and say, "Look, no, we're trying to change the industry. We're
trying to do awesome things," they say, "Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Whatever."
It's
funny, I tell Stephen things now, and he says, "I tend to believe you when
you tell me these ridiculously amazing things that I don't believe." But
then I'm like, "Dude, have I lied to you yet?" He's like, "No,
you haven't. You have not lied to me." We're not about that. I just tell
the truth. We're gamers. We want to make awesome stuff.
The thing that to me is amazing about it
is that the simple behaviors that these objects and creatures have when they're
put in the world; they're simple, but they're logical. They're so logical that
they can surprise you, that these simple building blocks can tell a story, and
you can just extrapolate it.
JS: It's really cool. The stuff that you came up with -- I don't think people
have written "gallows" as their first word. That's from your brain.
That's where your creative process is going. That's what's so great about Scribblenauts. Like Mark [PR at Warner
Bros.] was saying today, he was just watching people play, "I haven't seen
some of these things ever been written or seen these things in the game
ever."
That's
what's sort of great, because you have no idea. We just give you a toolset and
say, "Do it." Other people say like, "Oh, open world! Sandbox!"
and all this stuff. But it's not really. You're in a giant square, and you can
drive a car anywhere... sort of. But that's not really emergent or anything,
you know what I mean?
|
But he's also pretty accurate at picking out a game's problems most of the time, and he doesn't base his views on the advertising inches the publisher has bought from him. It also doesn't take genius to spot obvious flaws, it has to be said. :)
My point was that Scribblenauts is flawed. Great idea. Badly implemented. I don't get any feeling that the guys behind Scribblenauts in any way get that the game has these glaring flaws, which is easy to miss / overlook when you sell bucket loads of a product. So I personally think Croshaw's comments are a fair rebuttal to what is also quite a "tiresome, repetitive, smug" interview above. :)
Trust me, we follow all reviews and understand the game wasn't perfect. As Jeremiah said in the interview, one of our biggest gripes is lack of development time to move our stuff from a 80s metacritic average into the 90's. That 10 points is all polish.
@Jeffrey : Oh, I actually agree with you. I hate the rinse - repeat - churn out format of the big publishers. And applaud anyone who tries something new, regardless of it's commercial success or not. And yes I guess it seems harsh that when someone does something original and then misses the mark a bit that we all jump on them. But I think developers would rather have honest feedback than fawning admiration. Well, I know I certainly would rather it that way.
My criticism was of the implementation, not the concept (which is awesome).
I certainly did not advise people not to buy it. I think anyone reading here is very likely to make their own mind up regardless of any comment made here. So comments I make are based on the premise that we're all professionals and as such don't need to embellish our words with twinkly bits to mind people's egos.
My only hope is that the concept gets refined and implemented better in a revision or new release, and my comments were because I feel the game is being sold on the concept whereas the implementation disappoints somewhat. I say these things because I care about the Art, not the publisher - to be perfectly frank.
If you take a look at the implementation that people behind PixelJunk put into their ideas I would say that is a good yard arm to measure your attempt to hit the concept / implementation sweet spot. :)