MS: "Fewer but better games from now on"

[One Man and his Dog]

OMAHD would consider Spy Hunter, Train Simulator and Roadblasters to be racers.

I can't comment on Train Simulator as I have never played it. I don't even know what format it is on.

Spy Hunter and Roadblasters have some definite similarities and yes, I would describe them as mainly racers. However they differ in the same way that a first person shooter and a vertically scrolling shooter differ. The main difference between them is the perspective.

Jsut a quick web browse:

http://www.klov.com/game_detail.php?letter=S&game_id=9742

http://www.klov.com/game_detail.php?letter=R&game_id=9332

I'm obviously not the only person in the world who sees them both as racers.

As dr_lha mentioned I consider the core of a game to be what you actually have to do to progress in the game. This is why I disagree that Ikaruga is a puzzler. Solving the "puzzle" is not necessary to progress. At best I would call it a "vertically scrolling shooter with a puzzle element" but even that is psuhing it as I think the idea of it being a "puzzle" is quite ridiculous.

Frankly your argument has been riddled by extreme pettyness getting in the way of actual debate. Good examples being Ikaruga not being a vertically scrolling shooter as it stops scrolling for bosses and F-Zero not being a racer as I used the word "motorised" when I was obviously talking about vehicles that are powered in some way to move them forward.

I swear I could get more intelligent discussion out of a five year old.

[D-Side]

You do appear to be concentrating on the smaller points I've made during this thread, rather than tackling my main argument. I can only presume the reason for this is that you have nothing to say on the matter.

Good day.

[One Man and his Dog]

You do appear to be concentrating on the smaller points I've made during this thread, rather than tackling my main argument. I can only presume the reason for this is that you have nothing to say on the matter.

Good day.

As far as I am aware I have tackled all your main points. Please update me with anything you think hasn't been addressed.

[D-Side]

This one:

Me: Genres, as a concept, are useless. They do little to describe the very nature of certain games, given the variety we have today. It is strange that while games have come on in leaps and bounds, our dictionary has remained the same.

You: Spy Hunter is a racing game.

Me: But you don't really race at all. There's no racing involved. There's no competitive nature in your driving at all. You simply have to survive rather than beat the opposition.

You: Spy Hunter is a racing game.

Me: In fact, Spy Hunter is more comparable to vertical Schmups, given that the core of the game is very similar. Except for perhaps the environment negotiation, that's all a bit more complex than other games in that sort of field.

You: Spy Hunter is a racing game. Klov told me so.

And so on. Basically, you could supplement Spy Hunter for any title under discussion in this thread, and you'd still offer no argument except a hyperlink and some waffle about how it can be easily sorted into a specific grouping. And as for this:

I swear I could get more intelligent discussion out of a five year old.

Discussion requires at least two individuals. I'm not sure you qualify for such a high brow topic.

[Alex W.]

I think that both sides are missing the point here.

Spyhunter isn't a racing game by any stretch of the imagination (unless we're talking about the 3D remake). It's more like a scrolling shooter, really, in fact I made a couple of games like it on SEUCK. However, you can still only vaguely place it into a grouping. This is true of all games.

Therefore: The concept of a genre isn't universally applicable, but nor is it universally false.

D-Side: if genres are so utterly devoid of meaning, why the big hoo-haa over Ikaruga being a puzzle game rather than a scrolling shooter? Surely my argument that it is in fact both makes a stronger case for the weakness of genres as catch-all labels?

Hmm?

[One Man and his Dog]

Ah, so when you said " You do appear to be concentrating on the smaller points I've made during this thread, rather than tackling my main argument" you actually meant "You haven't tackled the argument that was put forward in one post and I am ignoring the fact that you have tackled just about everything I have said over the previous 8, 9 pages or so?".

Genres, as a concept, are useless.  They do little to describe the very nature of certain games, given the variety we have today.  It is strange that while games have come on in leaps and bounds, our dictionary has remained the same.

Genres exist in many artforms that have existed for centuries, not the handful of decades that games have. Why do you expect the concent of genres suddenly to not be valid when music, cinema, novels, hell even sports have been doing perfectly well with genres for hundreds of years?

But you don't really race at all.  There's no racing involved.  There's no competitive nature in your driving at all.  You simply have to survive rather than beat the opposition.

The surviving-by-collecting-fuel-pods style of game was actually very common for racing games during the 1980s. For another example see LED Storm.

Another variation on the style is Road Fighter which, instead of required fuel to be collected, simply required you to get to the checkpoint before running out of fuel. There is no competition, again you simply have to survive whilst keeping an eye on your fuel level. In some games (like Spy Hunter) you have to collect fuel, in others (like Road Fighter) you have to go faster to get there without running out of fuel, however your position in comparison to the other drivers does not matter at all.

In fact, Spy Hunter is more comparable to vertical Schmups, given that the core of the game is very similar.  Except for perhaps the environment negotiation, that's all a bit more complex than other games in that sort of field.

Much like some here believe Ikaruga is a vertically scrolling shooter with a puzzle element, Spy Hunter is a vertically scrolling racer with a shooter element. Much like Roadblasters is a third-person racer with a shooting element. The core gameplay is based around a common style of racing game from the period.

Basically, you could supplement Spy Hunter for any title under discussion in this thread, and you'd still offer no argument except a hyperlink and some waffle about how it can be easily sorted into a specific grouping.

Genres link similar things, not exactly the same. I have simply argued that the games you have put forward have at their core very similar essential aspects. This is what makes them fit in with a genre. You seem to have an issue with the whole concept of genres, as shown by the first part of your post, so obviously I could argue my case here until I am blue in the face and you still won't agree with me.

Discussion requires at least two individuals.  I'm not sure you qualify for such a high brow topic.

Whatever. Getting bored and rushing back to insults are we? How tiresome.

[Alex W.]

Discussion requires at least two individuals. I'm not sure you qualify for such a high brow topic.

You're one to talk, you've not provided a particularly clear argument and have disagreed with me even when it weakens your own stance.

[D-Side]

Spyhunter isn't a racing game by any stretch of the imagination (unless we're talking about the 3D remake). It's more like a scrolling shooter, really, in fact I made a couple of games like it on SEUCK. However, you can still only vaguely place it into a grouping. This is true of all games.

Which is what I've just said.

D-Side: if genres are so utterly devoid of meaning, why the big hoo-haa over Ikaruga being a puzzle game rather than a scrolling shooter?

For the last time Alex, Ikaruga is not truly a puzzle game, but it certainly is not a straight shooter. It defies description, which bodes well for my argument.

Genres exist in many artforms that have existed for centuries, not the handful of decades that games have. Why do you expect the concent of genres suddenly to not be valid when music, cinema, novels, hell even sports have been doing perfectly well with genres for hundreds of years?

Simply because variety in gaming is in a state of accelerated growth. Other artforms, to my mind, aren't.

Edit: And, I might add, when comparing the vast vocabulary that music, cinema and literature have for describing facets and styles of the form, we've been gyped.

The surviving-by-collecting-fuel-pods style of game was actually very common for racing games during the 1980s. For another example see LED Storm.

Another variation on the style is Road Fighter which, instead of required fuel to be collected, simply required you to get to the checkpoint before running out of fuel. There is no competition, again you simply have to survive whilst keeping an eye on your fuel level. In some games (like Spy Hunter) you have to collect fuel, in others (like Road Fighter) you have to go faster to get there without running out of fuel, however your position in comparison to the other drivers does not matter at all.

That's all very nice, but you don't actually collect fuel pods to progress in Spy Hunter. Counter for 300 clicks, then one life after the counter, additional lives depending on score. Ergo, it's more like a shooter.

You seem to have an issue with the whole concept of genres, as shown by the first part of your post, so obviously I could argue my case here until I am blue in the face and you still won't agree with me.

Indeed. But the real mystery is: Do you finally understand my point, wonder boy?

You're one to talk, you've not provided a particularly clear argument and have disagreed with me even when it weakens your own stance.

I've disagreed with you because you've misunderstood my point time and time again. It's something that I've got used to mind.

This has now got to stop. If you're happy with the way we feel obliged to label everything, then fine. Woopty doo. Go bother someone else. I'm not, I've said as much, and I've done a far better job of expressing my thoughts than most in this thread.

[Hackign]

So MS eh, what will they figure out next?

[Alex W.]

For the last time Alex, Ikaruga is not truly a puzzle game, but it certainly is not a straight shooter. It defies description, which bodes well for my argument.

How could you have gone on for so long arguing that it is more of a puzzle game than a scrolling shooter, if you did not have those two genres as reference points?

See where I'm going with this? It reminds me of when I started considering ludology and narratology on Edge, and people accused me of wanting to pile games into two groups. I'm not, but I think that having more adjectives is better than having fewer.

[D-Side]

How could you have gone on for so long arguing that it is more of a puzzle game than a scrolling shooter, if you did not have those two genres as reference points? 

Because it's like Othello in a way. Or that other one. Can't remember now. It's the whole naturally occuring pattern thing. All in threes.

See where I'm going with this? It reminds me of when I started considering ludology and narratology on Edge, and people accused me of wanting to pile games into two groups. I'm not, but I think that having more adjectives is better than having fewer.

And you think that by keeping the same language as we've had for years will help this aim? I disagree.

[D-Side]

So MS eh, what will they figure out next?

Who?

[Alex W.]

And you think that by keeping the same language as we've had for years will help this aim? I disagree.

Who ever said it's the only language we can use? As I've stated before, it's just... useful. Especially when time is short and a game is generic (for better or for worse).

[D-Side]

Yes, they're very useful if you want to skip over things quickly.

Ta-dah!

Oh look, there's my point again.

[Alex W.]

Yes, they're very useful if you want to skip over things quickly.

Ta-dah!

Oh look, there's my point again.

Hilarious.

Don't you think that it's a bit of a waste of time to describe Quake's first person moving, shooting, switch-throwing and item collecting from scratch to an audience which has played Doom II to death?

[D-Side]

You consider it a waste of time, Alex. I don't.

I really can't see the problem with that one. Would anyone else like to say that Quake is just like Doom II? Come on, I don't mind.

[Alex W.]

You consider it a waste of time, Alex.  I don't.

I really can't see the problem with that one.  Would anyone else like to say that Quake is just like Doom II?  Come on, I don't mind.

You move around levels viewing them from a first-person perspective firing a weapon with its firing vector locked to your view vector while killing enemies with a progressively more powerful succession of aformentioned weapons which happen to have consumable ammo, all the while discovering level "secrets" activated under familiar conditions (shooting certain walls, locating certain switches).

This is true of both games. It was once fresh (in Doom), but rapidly became familiar with the swathe of generic "Doom Clones" these days called First Person Shooters. As these features are common to almost all the games, it is therefore far more efficient and will give an immediate understanding in the reader's mind if you describe these games as "Fundimentally first-person shooters, but...".

[One Man and his Dog]

Simply because variety in gaming is in a state of accelerated growth.  Other artforms, to my mind, aren't.

Merely because it is a new artform. What makes you think other artforms haven't been through such a phase? Did film slowly amble its way towards what we have today once the process was invented?

That's all very nice, but you don't actually collect fuel pods to progress in Spy Hunter.  Counter for 300 clicks, then one life after the counter, additional lives depending on score.  Ergo, it's more like a shooter.

True. I couldn't be arsed to hunt down the ROM to check the ins and outs so went from memory. Luckily I have just refreshed my memory with a version at shockwave.com. Amazing to see the core game being based around a car, a track and the ability to change gears, accelerate, break and steer. To be honest it plays like Road Fighter but with the addition of weapons.

Indeed.  But the real mystery is:  Do you finally understand my point, wonder boy?

I understand perfectly that you don't like genres as you think it is too limiting. I disagree and am putting forward my case. Me understanding what you are trying to say doesn't actually make you right.

I've disagreed with you because you've misunderstood my point time and time again.  It's something that I've got used to mind

Oh I understand what you are trying to say. I just don't agree with it. Again, just because you have an opinion and I understand it doesn't make that opinion correct.

This has now got to stop.  If you're happy with the way we feel obliged to label everything, then fine.  Woopty doo.  Go bother someone else.  I'm not, I've said as much, and I've done a far better job of expressing my thoughts than most in this thread.

You seem to have a very high opinion of yourself. Maybe a bit of modesty is required. Frankly you don't appear to have convinced anyone here, so you can't have done that good a job.

Really, all your whining against "labelling things" makes you sound like a third-rate student indie band who's oh so desparate to be different than everyone else.

I'm sorry to break it to you, but there is very little true originality out there. That's why it is quite easy to pigeonhole things. Sad but true.

[D-Side]

Question: Can you accurately aim in Doom?

I also remember asking whether you thought Dark Forces and Jedi Knight were essentially the same game. I haven't had an answer on that one either.

Anyway, putting that to one side, can we at least agree that games commonly known as 'First Person Shooters' are moving away from the guns and glory model of old? Diversifying as it were. In which case, surely some of these games are stepping out of the realm of the old definition?

[Alex W.]

Question: Can you accurately aim in Doom?

I also remember asking whether you thought Dark Forces and Jedi Knight were essentially the same game. I haven't had an answer on that one either.

Anyway, putting that to one side, can we at least agree that games commonly known as 'First Person Shooters' are moving away from the guns and glory model of old? Diversifying as it were. In which case, surely some of these games are stepping out of the realm of the old definition?

Yes, fairly. You can aim better in Quake, but that's not something that breaks the genre rules.

No, you didn't ask me that, as far as I can recall. From what I can remember of the two games, they were really different in their level design, and Jedi Knight was one of the first titles to play with a third-person view as an option, as well as heavy ability-based platform-RPG (genre label again) type things.

And lastly, of course. Like I said genre labels aren't universally true. Games like Metroid Prime, System Shock 2, and Half Life are doing to the FPS genre what System Shock 2 did to the RPG genre, Half Life did to the adventure genre, and Metroid Prime did to the platform shooter genre- blurring it.

[D-Side]

I'm sorry to break it to you, but there is very little true originality out there. That's why it is quite easy to pigeonhole things. Sad but true.

Clearly, you've been playing the wrong games.

Edit:

Oh I understand what you are trying to say. I just don't agree with it. Again, just because you have an opinion and I understand it doesn't make that opinion correct.

Did you understand that I wasn't actually talking to you at this point?

Yes, fairly. You can aim better in Quake, but that's not something that breaks the genre rules.

It's not a question of being able to aim better, it's the fact that the game requires you to use this new ability to the full. It opens up a players combat options, freeing them from the Dos4gw constraints of 'face and shoot'.

[Alex W.]

Games like Metroid Prime, System Shock 2, and Half Life are doing to the FPS genre what System Shock 2 did to the RPG genre, Half Life did to the adventure genre, and Metroid Prime did to the platform shooter genre- blurring it.

My God that's shit. Here's a better description: they're doing to the FPS what Metal Gear did to the vertically scrolling shooter, or Gran Turismo did to the driving game, or In Memoriam did to the concept of a game itself... smudging out the genre boundaries. Games will probably always be referenced relative to genre landmarks, but over time there will be more landmarks and less clarity as to where they cross over.

[Alex W.]

It's not a question of being able to aim better, it's the fact that the game requires you to use this new ability to the full. It opens up a players combat options, freeing them from the Dos4gw constraints of 'face and shoot'.

Well, that's fair enough. I consider it an evolution, branching, and expansion of the previous game and the genre it represented, though, rather than a completely collapse of it... much like Halo. The seed's still there, deep down, but it's becoming an irrelevance over time.

[D-Side]

Alex, you seem to have called it. Well done. And it only took us six odd pages.

Still, I'm not sure whether games will be set against genre landmarks, or simply landmarks that are comparable.

I'm sure that most don't see a connection between BG&E and Zelda. Personally, I don't see them in the same genre, but there is something in the way they both play out.

[One Man and his Dog]

Clearly, you've been playing the wrong games.

I don't deny originality exists, how else would genres appear? There has to be a start point, be it something new or an evolution. It is just that overall the gaming world is swamped by generic (interestingly a word that shares the same root as genre - the latin "genus") tat. The vast majority of games can be comfortably pigeonholed.

Again, this can be seen in all art forms.

[Alex W.]

I think we were on the same wavelength all the time, TBH, but we just needed to hammer out a mutual understanding of what eachother was going on about.

An 11-page topic that comes to a satisfying conclusion? Who'd a thunk it? This is what forums are meant to be like!

I'll be keeping an eye on you, D-Side, you've got the right stuff.

[Alex W.]

The vast majority of games can be comfortably pigeonholed.

Again, this can be seen in all art forms.

Yeah, but those aren't the good, significant ones, which is what I think D-Side was getting at with his "playing the wrong games" jibe. Even a game which is generic in one way will usually be antigenre in another (see: Rez).

[One Man and his Dog]

Yeah, but those aren't the good, significant ones, which is what I think D-Side was getting at with his "playing the wrong games" jibe. Even a game which is generic in one way will usually be antigenre in another (see: Rez).

Yes, but that came on page eleven after countless pages of denying the existence of the genre of "first person shooters" and claiming Ikaruga didn't have a vertically scrolling shooter as its core dynamic.

[Alex W.]

Yes, but that came on page eleven after countless pages of denying the existence of the genre of "first person shooters" and claiming Ikaruga didn't have a vertically scrolling shooter as its core dynamic.

Well, the first I'd say was more of a misunderstanding and stubborness from all parties, and the second is a matter of opinion more than anything else.

[D-Side]

It is just that overall the gaming world is swamped by generic (interestingly a word that shares the same root as genre - the latin "genus") tat. The vast majority of games can be comfortably pigeonholed.

Let's wheel out some well recognised classics.

Prince of Persia: Sands of Time

Rayman 2

Ico

Metroid Prime

Now, effectively all of those can be pigeonholed as platformers. IMO, I only really consider one of those games to be a true platformer. Can you guess what it is yet?

It's true, I see no need for genres. I suppose it's because I see more and more games defining themselves as superior experiences, rather than comparing well to past genre leaders.