The minimum ability to navigate a 3D world isn't playability!

If you haven't watched the Discovery Channel program on the XBox, Microsoft Gaming Studios, and the development of Crimson Skies and the next Oddworld, then you are a very lucky person. I can't quote the program, because I didn't bother taping it, but I can para-phrase some statements that are an utter travesty.

"You can't call them games anymore." Ed Fries... Yep, I think he is right. What I got from the program was that playability was being sacrificed to add plot-line features and CG videos that immerse the player in the story line. A story mode is useful the first time through a game and probably accounts for 10% of the game time spent, unless the entire purpose of the game is delivering the story (aka an RPG). In games like Crimson Skies I could care less about the stupid little video sequences and could care quite a bit more about how the plane flies, the different moves, the different game-play modes, and other PLAYABILITY features in place of ENTERTAINMENT features. If I wanted to be entertained I'd go spend $10 on a movie which is much cheaper than the $50 I spent on the damn video game.

"Unique games with unique playability." Ed Fries again... I could use all sorts of poor language here, but the recent trend in playability is the creation of an environment and then providing the player with the minimum amount of interaction required for them to complete that environment from start to finish. I feel more like I'm being DIRECTED in modern games than that I'm PLAYING them. When you only give me the minimum playable interface you are corraling me into solving problems a specific way. Play the old Gauntlet and the new Gauntlet's for a great examination of how playability has become pure trash. While the entertainment value of the games is definitely improving, graphics are getting better, I'd have to say there is a complete lack of unique playability. To the point that unique games fail, like Deathrow. Yeah, I know it sucked, because it tried something unique with playability, but failed to deliver the full experience of that playability.

Published Friday, August 27, 2004 2:19 PM by Justin Rogers
Filed under:

Comments

Friday, August 27, 2004 6:28 PM by Jeff

# re: The minimum ability to navigate a 3D world isn't playability!

I guess I have to see the show now. The first Xbox Oddworld was easily one of the best platformers ever. Yeah, it's the typical platform formula, but the details made it fun, right down to making Abe fart.

Heh heh. What were we talking about? Dick and fart jokes never stop being funny.
Friday, August 27, 2004 6:48 PM by Justin Rogers

# re: The minimum ability to navigate a 3D world isn't playability!

Hey, I won't take away from the original XBox Oddworld. I've always been an advocate of that particular series because they have traditionally had very unique playability. The program details the next version which gets away from the puzzle solving underpowered hero genre and adds some first person shooter features. They've changed the type of game they are delivering from their very unique and successful approach to that of the mainstream successful approach. We'll see how it turns out.

The program isolated three games, Halo 2, Crimson Skies and the next Oddworld. We can't even talk about two of the games because they aren't out. But we can safely assume they pulled out the heavy hitters here. The top 1% of the crop. With the top 1% we are guaranteed that they'll be good (for the most part).

Even with the prior success of Oddworld, if you start to supplant great gameplay with scripted sequences you are going to lose some of your player base. Tales of Symphonia, one of the greatest games I've played in a while, made about 80% of the dialogue completely optional, however, I still rue losing a battle that has a long introductory sequence. Boy, I haven't seen THAT 10 times already now (they have a Hard mode that more than doubles the challenge of an enemy and it tends to get you killed quite a bit if you leave it on).

Tuesday, August 31, 2004 7:34 PM by Scott Mitchell

# re: The minimum ability to navigate a 3D world isn't playability!

FPS games, like Halo, are low on my enjoyability level, since I usually only play them until I beat them. (Of course, with multiplayer, I'll keep playing that, but never the single player again.)

My favorite games are sports games or strategy games, because of the high replayability factor. The game that has probably gotten the most of my time has been Civ II. I play a game called C-Evo every now and then that mimics CivII, but with many improvements. It's free and open-source, if you're interested:
http://c-evo.org/
Tuesday, August 31, 2004 11:13 PM by Justin Rogers

# re: The minimum ability to navigate a 3D world isn't playability!

I'll definitely have a look at the source, thanks for pointing this game out.

The only thing I might point out is that while Halo does have a low replay factor in the presence of other games, there currently aren't any games that rival Halo to fill in the void. Oddly enough, every party I have, ends with me kicking everyone's ass at Halo. I'm also very surprised by the number of teenagers that are still playing the game.

Now, all of the replay value is in the multiplayer and fortunately for Halo there hasn't been any competition.

I'd say that strategy and sports games suffer the same downfall in that you need viable competition. Many players find that competition agianst the AI, but others aren't challenged at that level and lose interest in the game altogether. I would say that effort placed into the AI to make it complex is definitely a playability feature though, and since strategy and sports tend to spend the most time on AI they tend to have some of the highest playability factors. A game like Unreal Tournament, with it's bots could have trumped Halo, but of course, the bots turned out to be pushovers.

Leave a Comment

(required) 
(required) 
(optional)
(required)