Okay, also, another implicit message of any game is how the simulation is set up. Most games simulate some sort of reality. Built into that is the assumption that the world works the way the game designer thinks it works. Look at sim-city, or civilization, for example. There are tons of math formulas behind those games, and they are all built out of the political and sociological beliefs of the designers.

So one question is, can we remove that and make the game world operate the way the PLAYER thinks the world works instead of the designer?

Another question is, can we expose that implicit assumption that the designer's world-view is correct, and make the player question in an artistic way (rather than in a "this game sucks" way) that aspect of the medium? Many players claim to want realism, but what they often seem to want is a world that agrees with their desires of how the world should work, based heavily on war movies they've seen.

Looping back to the artistic intent of the director, I see the game mechanics and rules of the simulation as being in the same artist-controlled, audience-consumed, category as the script of a movie. If you think about it, a movie is just a game someone else is playing. And what happens to them doesn't just depend on the desires of the character, but also on the "rules of the game" defined by the writer and director. Imagine any Die Hard, True Lies, etc. movie if the characters in it had to follow the rules of OUR world instead of theirs -- they good guys probably wouldn't have survived very long. 

Good stuff metl. Current mode: digesting. 

I would be more than happy if games werent necessarily more than fun, but just removed everything int here aimed at pleasing 14 yr old teenage boys.

Like having the hero spout cheesy macho lines every now and then which kills the atmosphere, like having the 'dark' factor of a pg-m rated hollywood 'horror' flick.

I know why they're doing it, but removal of it would improve most games for me.

Also, fuck the story. Like any good popcorn flick, it's not about the story. And since games have some of the worst stories that even Uew Boll wouldnt adapt, why spend so much of the player's time on story ? 

Also, fuck the story. Like any good popcorn flick, it's not about the story. . And since games have some of the worst stories that even Uew Boll wouldnt adapt . . .

Nitin,

Any chance you'll be having an Andy Sidaris film festival weekend soon? Julie Strain, yummm . . . 

some of us here seem to think that a game is still a game without some mechanic that you enjoy playing in, and that having fun with said mechanic and unrolling a provocative deep emotional story in said game are mutually exclusive.

If you're not playing anything it's not a fucking game. It's a movie you have to click on occasionally. The very nature of requiring interaction implies that there needs to be some reason we're enjoying it, or we're not doing it. If you want to be emotionally provoked by a movie you just watch the damn thing; it's a story. If the deep meaningful ones weren't enjoyable for some reason, would you still be watching them? "Man, this movie bores the shit out of me and the editing makes me want to vomit, but golly is it ever a sad story I need to enrich myself by absorbing."

It's called entertainment for a reason. One way or another you're going to enjoy it. 

One way or another you're going to enjoy it.

Or else! 

Films and video-games are referred to as entertainment simply as a broad term because the vast majority of the output is fairly lightweight material designed simply to please and give enjoyment, rather than be provocative. That doesn't mean there aren't works where the terms 'entertaining', 'enjoyable' or 'fun' don't readily apply. There have been numerous examples given already to illustrate this point, one more would be something like Full Metal Jacket, which, by most people's definition of the word, wouldn't be classed as 'enjoyable', but it was certainly interesting, enlightening and thought-provoking, and for those reasons it was worth watching, even if it wasn't 'fun' to view. So with regards to cinema, I think people will be prepared to see works even if they aren't enjoyable. The viewer may not be having 'fun' throughout the 2 hours running time, but they receive other benefits that make the viewing of the film valuable.

Whether it's the same for video games is another matter. As you alluded to, an interactive medium requires more effort on the participant's part, so if that expenditure is no longer fun or rewarding, it's hard to continue the energy investment that would prolong the interaction. With passive activities like watching a film, the viewer doesn't really have to do anything, so continued viewing is that much easier if the material they're spectating isn't, or ceases to be, enjoyable.

After considering it briefly, I thought of one example of a game sequence which doesn't conform to my definition of fun, yet I still consider a worthwhile, even beneficial addition to the piece. The dream sequences in Max Payne 2 (I'll ignore those in the original game, since their design was so abysmal they clearly negatively impacted on the game), while containing only a modicum of player input that entitles them still to be considered interactive, managed to serve useful purposes such as establishing atmosphere, developing characters through exploring motivations and mental state, changing the game's pace by deviating from the often repetitive action of the game's standard gameplay mechanics, and furthering the plot. The obvious question is 'could they have been an even more positive element of the game had they been more "fun"?' For a sequence to be fun in an action game like MP2, I think there needs to be some mechanic which demands skill and has an element of challenge. However, such an approach means requiring the player to recognise, learn and master these skills, which obviously requires some mental investment and distracts from non-skill related aspects of the game, such as the more narrative-oriented elements mentioned above that the dream sequences focus on. This is one area where the goals of 'fun' and narrative development conflict, and an instance where I think the dream sequence's approach of very limited interaction (the task of merely running through corridors observing what's going on around you) works quite well at preserving the game elements in skeletal form while also bolstering more ambitious goals such as those that Spector is arguing for. 

Another example that illustrates a potential conflict between developing enjoyable game mechanics and furthering goals such as plot, subtexts and thought-provoking concepts is Deus Ex, which I feel made some major strides in achieving the sort of things that Spector wants to see, but also occasionally allowed the pursuit of enjoyable gameplay to get in the way of the exposition of these arguably deeper elements. At the start of the game you are bombarded with information on the goals of the game, the different approaches you can take, and the tools which you can use to pursue them. You then have to grapple with the game's required skills (stealth, shooting, conversation trees, hacking etc) and try and learn them to a degree that permits further progress in the game. At the same time you are presented with a vast amount of data on the game's characters, their motivations, the game's locations, organisations, plot subtexts etc etc. If it was a film, handling this narrative related info would be straightforward enough, but tasked with learning the core game skills at the same time it becomes overwhelming, and neither side - the gameplay 'fun' or the plots/characters/subtexts/themes - gets appreciated fully.

This primarily applies to the start of the game, however, as I think overall the game does an excellent job of elevating the status of gaming in relation to its treatment of more sophisticated themes, while also providing fun gameplay mechanics. The pace of the title helps, as the exploratory nature of most levels allows you peaceful time to digest what's being presented to you and ponder it. I also think the fact that you're asked to think about your character's development (as it relates to game influencing skill attributes, rather than his emotional development as it pertains to the plot) encourages a more thoughtful demeanour in the player as well, which in turn encourages consideration of narrative elements. This is much like System Shock 2, in which I would often find myself stopping at those stations to upgrade my abilities, while at the same time reading email logs and thinking about the plot; ie the gameplay design and story ended up being almost symbiotic at times. Bioshock seems like it may be similar, in that you will be required to genetically alter your body to survive, thus dehumanising yourself and consequently being forced to consider the game's intended commentary on broader themes, such as the length's people go to in extremes, the role of technology in society and the points at which one's humanity begin and end. To sum up, while there are clear potential conflicts, particularly in the learning phase of a game, or inherent in faster paced action games, I think if you can achieve that kind of synchronicity between gameplay mechanics and these 'higher goals' that Spector speaks of you genuinely can achieve a satisfactory balance between fun and the more mature, demanding aspects of art that may be engaging but not necessarily enjoyable in the sense we commonly think of when considering video-games. 

[deleted spam from taiwan] 

Someone posted my email without asking my permission and now i'm getting spammed. Admins haven't gotten back to me yet. I need some admin to remove my posted email from the "jobs and mappers wanted" board asap. Also, i'v had to abandon 5 accounts already from spam contaminatation. If can't stop the spam, this one will have to abandoned too. Thanks ahead...

as 

If I knew you are so scarry about spams, I would have tried to help you to find mappers for your mod development.
I anyway, I'm very sorry for the conveniences you are facing today. 

And now to something completely different.
Earlier this year I posted some photos from the Zitadelle Spandau in Berlin, Germany. I watched Sin City yesterday and just had to edit one of the photos in that style. Thought I'd post it here too. :)
http://spirit.enjoys.it/photos/IMG_1849_sincity2.jpg 

I just realized the map I'm currently working on has topped 37000 brushes. 

is a Q1 map at least? Lunaram 

http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=164 

holy shit?

can't be q1 can it? i think i got up to about 12k and then qbsp refused to even look at it. 

some secret project at raven - like the new wolfenstein game or something.*

I'd love to work on a new wolfenstein game.

Git.

*honestly, I have no fucking idea. Just a guess. 

nt 

probably cleanup.
http://lunaran.com/pics/bigmap.gif 

if anybody want to contact with me in Quakenet please do this!

/whois Trinca

i�m sick of Scampies craps! already got a kid... dont have enought pacience to another...

hope u guys dont forget me :p 

Good job, Lun. But you should know better than to use carving. ;) 

wolfedit.

hmmm :)

git.

(repost from base pack ;) 

e;f,b but still, I'm surprised you guys are still using brushes as the predominant base for architecture - I guess traditional id-style mapping techniques will be sticking around for a bit... 

only as long as id franchises do.

and who says static models aren't counted as 'primitives'? 

Quake Map Sources released. :D

http://www.rome.ro/