Jashin on 21/1/2010 at 19:30
No, yours is the popular misconception. Your assumption that cus we can't truly know = author-intended, first of all that right there is wrong, 2ndly it undermines the very nature of the name "emergent gameplay."
Emergent may be comprised of a series of designs with properties, but its use, when to use, in combination with what other objects, situations, and locations is entirely up to the players. There isn't enough hours in a day to purposely design each option "to work" in each case, nor is it necessary. This is made doubly user-oriented by using narratively appropriate approach, whichever maybe your case, which is empowering to the player experience.
That's just the tip of the iceberg. I can go on but honestly I don't see the point. Most TTLGers know this intuitively from playing all the emergent classics, and if you hang around long enough you'll pick it up.
Your idea of having some kind of totally objective example (like some kind of weapon or ability or something) is a moot point to emergent gameplay which is at its core subjective.
Jashin on 21/1/2010 at 20:05
I mean, what's the difference b/w a knock out and a kill? Gameplay-wise they're the same thing, you get to loot their corpse. So why have it?
Why make a voiceover conversation for 2 enemies that plays when you get close enough? Aren't they enemies that makes your reticule red? Why humanize the enemies with details into their standpoint?
You see the genius of emergence, of LG's design? If we kept everything objective, none of these things are necessary and Deus Ex would just be an ordinary game that makes you kill stuff, cus that's the only "fun" designers undestand to fill the gaps in their "cinematic" storytelling. Emergent gameplay says screw that, I can have storytelling from minute to minute - from overhearing, to KO, to stashing it in a safe place.
And you're gonna tell me that that is the same as a pretend dinner, to sit at the table and do nothing?
Tenkahubu on 21/1/2010 at 20:05
I often roleplay (use imagination) when playing, but I think that it has become more dificult for me due to the advance of games technology. Perhaps it's because I have become jaded. However, I think that the more they fill up holes the less space there is for you to fill in. Perhaps games have become shitter also.
I actually think that I used imagination most in Daggerfall, less in Morrowind, and least of all in Oblivion.
I think that the problem with Oblivion was that it was impossible to roleplay during the quests, and there was very little opportunity to create your own story outside of them because it quickly became obvious that the whole game was cut&paste.
This kind of insight, knowing too much of the game (seeing its bones) ruins imagination for me. In Fable II, while I was able to use my imagination to some degree, I felt that a little too much was revealed to the player.
In morrowind I killed Helseth No one tries to assassinate me!
which essentially ended the whole tribunal story, but I didn't care because it kept the game consistent and therefore enjoyable.
Surprisingly, Mass Effect was one recent game where I found I could act the way I wanted and not have the game ruined. I think it's because the character's spectrum ran between kind person to bastard, whereas most games tend to go for a rather more childish - saintly good guy vs psychopathic bad guy.
Sulphur on 21/1/2010 at 20:27
IMO imagination is hella important cuz it's totally rad I mean where'd we be without the emergent possiblity of a Lara Croft nudie mod in Tomb Raider? I mean, Nude Raider... now that's like the best title ever. Things like that take imagination man.
Think about it, without NR we'd have possibly not had Trespasser, and that was like the ultimate untouchable tit sim but it paved the way for all 3D FP gaming mechanics post '98.
Like so:
Code:
Refrigerator-sized pixels<----->Trespasser<----->3D FPGamin as we know it
(1980s; pac-man) OMG TITSLSD fuel paves the way for all sortsa spangly gameness to chow down on for mainstream breakout potential also so I'd recommend that shit to everyone cuz we need more Katamaris and Pscyhinuts and Salomes man.
also for the tl;dr inclined, this thread doesn't seem to be so much about imagination as it is about freedom afforded to you by gameplay design and systems. misleading title much
Jashin on 21/1/2010 at 20:43
Don't make me sock those bitch tits of yours, smelly. And you're terrible at parody :laff:
Modern graphics take away from the need to imagine, so good games are aided by good narrative and design. Of course it's still about imagination.
Sulphur on 21/1/2010 at 20:50
Hey. I resent that. Smelly happens when you mix it up with stuff like Hydrogen and shit. Perfectly innocuous and waxy crystalline and the stuff of hell otherwise.
Also, that wasn't parody. I totally tried to touch my (her) tits when I booted up Trespasser for the first time in 9th grade. You know, using my imagination and all.
It was the first total fucking disappointment in my gaming life. :(
Jashin on 23/1/2010 at 05:14
Dude, they're just tits. :erg:
I'm talking about the real thing, much less cg ones.
gunsmoke on 23/1/2010 at 12:21
They are NEVER JUST TITS!!!:mad::mad::mad: Don't ever say that again. Blasphemy.
LOL @ Sulph trying to get her to feel her own boobs in the Hovertit simulator.
Papy on 23/1/2010 at 13:54
Quote Posted by gunsmoke
The problem is, a lot of games have such a fantastical, rich universe they have created, that it gets extremely tough to stay consistent through an 80 hour [...] there can be several writers involved and sometimes the different styles are noticeably different and can even be jarring.
And yet, even mediocre novelists seem to be able to create universes that are a lot more complex than the most complex video game.
Jashin on 23/1/2010 at 19:57
Quote Posted by gunsmoke
They are NEVER JUST TITS!!!:mad::mad::mad: Don't ever say that again. Blasphemy.
So what are they if not just tits?
They're so fcuking just tits.
