Book Reviews
Recent reviews from Slashdot readers:
- Advanced Excel for Scientific Data Analysis Learn to turn Excel into something that rivals Mathematica using VBA, brains, and a heaping helping of fortitude.(Jack Herrington's review.)
- Nagios 3 Enterprise Network Monitoring A great book for anyone using Nagios as more than a casual user.(jgoguen's review.)
- Schneier on Security Schneier argues that security is not something you can buy; it is something you must get.(Ben Rothke's review.)
Submitting a review for consideration is easy; please first read Slashdot's book review guidelines. Updated: 2008114 by samzenpus
5887925
story
Comments: 236 +- Games: Variety, Social Aspects More Important To Game Success Than Graphics, Plot on Sunday September 13, @09:55PM
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicgraphics3.gif); width:69px; height:62px;
graphics
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicsocialnetworks.gif); width:80px; height:49px;
social
background: url(//a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/topicgames.gif); width:68px; height:77px;
games
proslack writes "In a study presented at the Human-Computer Interaction conference in Cambridge, England, British researchers Beale and Bond found that plot and graphics are not critical to the success of video games; price and the inclusion of social aspects (e.g. multiplayer or chat) were found to be more important."
An unfinished version of the paper (PDF) is available from the researchers' web site. They said, "One of the most unexpected findings was that gameplay was not featured as one of the most important categories to fulfill," though they acknowledge that variety and cohesion were measured separately from gameplay, which past studies have not done.
It doesn't much signify whom one marries, for one is sure to find out
next morning it was someone else.
-- Will Rogers
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2010 Geeknet, Inc.
Makes sense (Score:5, Insightful)
In other news fun is more important to a games success than graphics, plot.
Re:Makes sense (Score:5, Interesting)
My favorite example of this is Castle Crashers right now.
I'm lame, and I didn't discover it until about a month ago, but I'll be damned if it's not my favorite game right now. Flash style animation, simple mechanic, funny elements... That's all I really need.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
I sure wish they'd port that to pc. I seriously doubt I'll be getting a 360 until I find one in bin for $30.
Re: (Score:2)
I sure wish they'd port that to pc. I seriously doubt I'll be getting a 360 until I find one in bin for $30.
100USD and I'm game. Had one in the first couple months, surprisingly DVD-ROM went out and not the RROD, now that I've been burned once I shant be burned again. So I guess to get back on topic, price also plays an important roll in gaming. For instance I still use my ATI x1800XT, draws more power then I like but I find it hard to invest in gaming tech when so few good games come out. It seems to me games eat up ever more sophisticated hardware without a justifiable return of enjoyment.
Re: (Score:2)
Another ridiculous study proving nothing. And an unfinished one no less.
As the poster above said... FUN is more important.
This just seems like a study put out by game developers to justify doing even crappier AI than we already get.
Or of course they didn't ask any actual hardcore gamers who go back to the Atari 2600 as I'd rather spend an hour playing Maze Craze on that than most of what's released today.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think they simply don't know that there are different types of people who like different types of games.
Some people play for the shiny.
Some people play to collect.
Some people play to show off.
Some people play to talk.
Some people play to explore.
Some people play for the plot.
Lumping them all together will, by necessity, leave you with only the cross demographic factors like price, and some of the larger factors that cut across several groups. The show-offs, collectors and talkers all like multiplayer game
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ironically, I've actually got some pretty far out graphics in some ways, but it's just not cool in the way they expect.
Re: (Score:2)
Doubt it... (Score:2, Insightful)
Bull, as far as I am concerned:
1) Plot
2) Price
3) Graphics
.
.
.
374) Social
Re: (Score:2)
You place multiplayer capabilities at #374? Seriously?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
That's about right. If the core game sucks, it sucks more with a friend present and online-play can't fix it.
Re: (Score:2)
You place multiplayer capabilities at #374? Seriously?
Yeah, totally. Half-life, Zelda, Splinter Cell, and Super Mario Bros. would have been so much better as MMOs.
(/me stops typing before I start to sound like Gabe. [penny-arcade.com])
Re:Doubt it... (Score:4, Insightful)
Wasn't the Half-Life mod Counter-Strike (which requires other players) pretty freaking awesome? IMO, it kind of sucked to play against bots.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Battletoads with a second player was NOT better...
Good gods...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You place multiplayer capabilities at #374? Seriously?
Given the lame state of games on most servers, I don't place multiplayer very high either.
See The More Things Change [penny-arcade.com] for an example among many...
Let's Play "Spot the Friendless Dude" (Score:4, Funny)
1) Plot
2) Price
3) Graphics
Just give us a heads up if you intend to buy a van and a whole bunch of fertilizer.
Parent
For certain markets... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It also assumes that gamers know what actually is necessary for a games success. Much of what causes a game to be a success is many times NON OBVIOUS.
A word like "Gameplay" is too deep and nuanced and changes from game to game, just like how do you capture the "Feel", control and sense of speed in a racing game?
Or what about the fluid battle mechanics of god of war compared to other clunkier games?
Truth is one study is not definitive and I'd trust hardcore gamers before I trust pointificating researchers o
Also (Score:5, Insightful)
Gamers often don't know what they want. Customers in general often don't know what they want. Just because someone says "This is what I want," doesn't mean you can take it at face value. They will claim to value something highly, and then put little to no value on that in actual purchasing. Basing your study on reviews is thus not a good idea.
You can witness this in terms of people who continually cry about wanting more "quality" electronics, yest consistently purchasing the cheapest crap they can get their hands on. When you talk to them, they claim that quality and reliability are things they value highly. However their consumption habits show that isn't the case, what they value is low cost an features.
Also it is likely that what people value depends on the kind of game. In some kinds of games, plot is unimportant. A good example would be an online shooter. Even if there was a fairly good plot, people would skip it to get to the game. The point is to get in with other people and play in a simple, non-persistent environment. However in RPGs, plot is often much more important. People play the game to experience the story. Likewise, in some RPGs multi-player might actually be a drawback. You don't want other people ruining your experience of the story.
So I agree it is silly to look at reviews and say "This is what is important to gamers." No, that may be what they claim is important, may not be what they actually buy on. Likewise it may be important only for certain types of games.
Social aspects are very important to my in TF2. The ability to play with others is what makes the game fun, and the ability to have lists of friends and to talk in game is very important to me enjoying it. Plot is not. I'm fine with the fact that there is no plot to speak of, I'd not bother with it if there were. I want to get in and shoot people.
Socials aspects are not important to Mass Effect. Frankly, I want to be left alone when I play that, it is like a good book where I wish to get enveloped in the story. Plot is highly important. The biggest reason I like that game is its amazing story. I find myself very drawn to it and, like a book, wanting to finish the "good parts" when I get to them.
Both games are good in different ways, both have received my money. Neither would be improved by trying to take what makes the other good.
Parent
Maybe true for the teeny-boppers (Score:4, Insightful)
This may be true for the teeny-boppers who've probably never played a game with a real plot and great game play. Most modern console games have pretty similar graphics and tend to have the same lack of plot or original thought - so yes, I'd believe that being able to chat with friends would be "important" to them because it allows them to be distracted from how boring the game is.
However, with older gamers, it is normally universal that plot and game play come before graphics and most of us couldn't give a rats ass if you can chat with your friends in-game. We already have a great way to chat with friends while playing if we need to - it's called a phone.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Older, but only sightly. Too old, and you may realize we already have a way to get a good plot, and they're called "books". No, all it matters to me is gameplay and yes, the "social aspect" you deride so much. Give me a fun game, and an easy way to find others who play it, and I'm all set.
That's why my favorite RPG is Guild Wars, the plot may be an endless stream of cliches and the graphics may not be anywhere near as good as those of Mass Effect or the latest Final Fantasy, but the battle system is fun as
Methodology is everything (Score:5, Insightful)
In other words: "We didn't like the result we got, so we massaged the data until we got something we liked, and called that our method."
Re:Methodology is everything (Score:5, Insightful)
In other words: "We didn't like the result we got, so we massaged the data until we got something we liked, and called that our method."
You said just about all there is to be said. They changed their method to make the results match their hypothesis. They acknowledge poor methodology in their data collection, so even the original results are suspect. The only place this paper ought've been published is in a landfill. Beale and Bond should go back to 101-level courses, and the headline of this story should be "Don't Publish Research With Obvious Flaws".
Parent
Back in the 1980's.... (Score:4, Informative)
One of the first multiplayer games we played was 'grid' [imageshack.us] by Peter S. Langston - it came with a USENIX archive tape. The game itself was an ASCII rendering of 'grid war' in first person perspective, but it supported inter-player communication. Other mainframe multi-user-dungeon games [wikipedia.org] were also popular as they also had the multi-player capability.
how to you measure such things? (Score:2, Interesting)
Look there are good movies with car chases, a rouge cop and one liners, and there are bad movies with such things. Any kind of list of 'qualities' is useless because it's not what it has it
Conclusion (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Quake, anyone? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
So are you saying that perhaps innovation could top plot? For something like quake, I'm not sure I could base my love for it on the social aspects.
Re: (Score:2)
In practice, theory and practice are different... (Score:3, Insightful)
Except this isn't always the case.
As seen in another recent posting, you tend to get pushed to the 'indie' section of gaming if you don't have the visuals that people want. People like looking at pretty screen-candy, and game makers know to indulge people in this. You can certainly have good games without amazing visuals, but they won't ever be mainstream.
Most people love their graphics, even if they'll then claim 'gameplay' is important on some survey.
An interesting but not thorough study (Score:4, Insightful)
don't forget (Score:4, Insightful)
Video games are now mainstream, just another Hollywood, and what we can learn from movies and apply to our preferred entertainment is that unmitigated mediocrity is no obstacle to making money. How many cookie cutter romantic comedies come out each year? There's no innovation, no surprises, but they keep making them so the money's coming from somewhere. OMG, he travels through time, but he still loves her and she loves him back? Shit bitch, no way! How about generic action movies? Three Transporters, Two Cranked's and Death Race, and I'm sure they're making Death Race 2 right now... in case we forget Jason Statham is awesome. The examples go on. If these movies are making money somehow that means there's enough people out there who are buying, for who those movies offer enough. And yay, look out, the same is true for games. We're measuring different things here, and we even have a study for some reason, but it's no surprise that the average person's demands are for something that's "good enough" in a few basic areas.
Games list? MUD's. (Score:2, Interesting)
idle gossip (Score:5, Interesting)
The PBS special, titled "The Brain's Big Bang", suggested gossip accounts for 2/3 of our speech activity. The episode went on to offer the now widely touted conjecture that social networking may have been one of the prime movers behind development of our comparatively big brains. Idle conjecture can take it to a simpler, more fundamental level. Apoptosis or programmed cell death is thought to be initiated by lack of inter cellular communication. Cells programme themselves to die when they no longer receive communications requiring them to live. It's easy to extrapolate from those findings to an individual's need to socially interact.
Depth (Score:2)
I've spent hours and hours playing Hearts of Iron 2. Can't play HoI3 because the graphics engine is too bloated and won't run on my laptop. I like the depth they added, but in this case increasing graphical quality actually makes the game unplayable. And I'm not alone, a lot of people complained about the system reqs.
Poor terminology (Score:5, Insightful)
DOS based games (Score:5, Interesting)
I got old MS-DOS formatted floppy disks that have my old DOS games on it. I am finding new use with them via DOSBox [dosbox.com].
Modern games, mostly Windows based DirectX memory eating and bloated but full of 3D graphics and surround sound audio aren't as good to play as the old DOS games. The old DOS games had a limited memory system and most were written in assembly or C and had to fit in under 12M of RAM using XMS or EMS etc RAM that extended over the 640K of DOS. They didn't have gigabyte hard drives back then and had to fit games on 120M hard drives or lower. They only had 640x480 VGA graphics and Sound Blaster 16 Pro audio.
How many remember Syndicate, XCOM, Dune II, Master of Orion 1 and 2, Master of Magic, Bard's Tale (EGA graphics and no sound card support but the Bard's Tale Construction set fixed that with VGA and Sound Blaster support), and other classic DOS games?
I heard a rumor that the classic DOS games are coming back via online services for $5 each because modern games don't have that enjoyability that the old 1990's DOS games had, plus people are learning how to run old games via DOSBOX or emulators that run DOS operating systems. The online services allows a DOSBox type DOS emulator/environment to run the DOS video game in it.
Almost every gaming company is trying to get the best graphics and sound effects, and it seems like they followed the Doom first person shooter model too closely with variations and modifications to it and forgot to make it entertaining and mean something via those social aspects of it. Not just chatting with other players, but the social aspects of going up against a computer controlled AI opponent(s). One of the few modern games that does that is Civilization IV, but it is basically the same game since Civilization II (or the original Civilization for DOS and the SNES) with more graphics and sounds added to it with movies and animation and then some bonus features but still plays the same as the original pretty much. Send settlers to build cities, take your civilization from the stone age to modern times without an enemy civilization taking yours out and develop technology for stronger military units and improvements to cities and world wonders. But in order to bring it to video game console units they had to dumb it down to Civilization Revolutions.
People want a game that is challenging, but they can set the level of difficulty. Sometimes the turns based game is better than the first person shooter realtime game that eats up lots of RAM and hard drive space for all of the animation and sound. Think of Tetris and other innovative games that did something different from all of the rest, and didn't need the animation graphics and sound effects to win over gamers. Just have an easy to use interface that doesn't require a user manual to be read in order to play it. Some of the best video games the player just clicked the start button and then just joined in the game learning as they went along. Which is what saved games are for, if you mess up, load a saved game before you messed up so you can avoid it.
Define success. (Score:4, Insightful)
Perhaps fiscally.
But not in my book.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Games could always get away without having a decent plot, just as they can today, so I don't think much has changed there. I mean, you can't possibly say with a straight face that Doom, or Age of Empires, or Super Mario Bros had great plots, and those were all classic games.
I also wouldn't say that there's a lack of plot in games today. Lots of games are still about telling a great story (RPGs, Heavy Rain, the Halo series, Bioshock) just as much as they are about fun gameplay. There are still both games wit
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Plot... I will miss you (Score:5, Interesting)
I played WoW for the arenas and always laughed to myself at the nerds who cared about the backstory of Archimonde and blah blah blah. The plot in these games is just a device to move the game forward. A boss that respawns every week and exists in infinitely many instances does not make for an interesting plot. When I want good stories, I read books.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I have a new dream though. It isn't as big as the old dream, but it could be potentially more fun. Game Master driven CRPGS. I know they have them already, but I'd want
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Game Master driven CRPGS. I know they have them already, but I'd want to do one well. Theoretically, you can get a better experience through a computer than Pencil and Paper. And with computer you can play with people who all aren't in the same physical location. This dream isn't big enough to pursue however. I have so many things on my plate that I want to do.
You don't have to do it.
http://www.rpgobjects.com/index.php?c=orpg [rpgobjects.com]
Re:Nahh (Score:5, Insightful)
"before multiplayer"? Weren't both Space War and Pong multiplayer-only?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Interesting - so you're posting on a social website about the fact that you don't like social games?
Seems odd, maybe it's just me but anyone who really didn't like to interact probably wouldn't be posting on slashdot.. I mean if slashdot isn't a social site what is? Isn't 99% of the content user generated, the vast bulk of it effectively a giant chat room? As in almost 100% social?
I suspect that the issue you have with games isn't the social side, although you're decided it is, I suspect there's something e