GameSpotting


Greg Kasavin
Executive Editor, PC Games

Recent Favorites: Wizardry 8, Dark Age of Camelot, Breath of Fire (GBA)

Most Wanted: Warcraft III (beta)

New Year's Beverage of Choice: Blue Margarita

Martian Dreams, Part 1 of 2

When you stop to think about it, games are really strange. Imagine if a Martian landed on this planet, greeted you, and asked you in perfect spoken English, "What exactly are these games you play, and why do you and other people bother to play them?" The Martian, while learning to speak English and all other languages fluently, had been observing us for a long time and noticed that some of us would sit motionless and expressionless in front of a screen (large or small) for hours on end, day after day. Despite this Martian's intellect and open-minded curiosity, it still simply couldn't comprehend what the appeal was and decided to investigate directly. So you're tasked with explaining to this Martian exactly what's so great about games, and the Martian is eager to listen to whatever you have to say.

screenshot
Any Martian that lands in my backyard is going to end up like this one, mind you.
As far as I know, this Martian allegory was invented by Berkeley philosophy professor Richard Wollheim. Now that your stomach's settled from such a pretentious reference (so that he doesn't accuse me of plagiarism, since no doubt he's a GameSpot reader), perhaps you can see why talking about Martians--who are intelligent but have no sense of our culture--is a good, down-to-earth way of getting at something interesting about games. Or, failing that, at least we're talking about Martians. But the point is whether or not it's possible to explain or justify what's so interesting about games to someone who doesn't already know. If you stop to consider what you'd say to this Martian, you might initially be hard pressed to come up with something meaningful, something more than "Well, they're just fun." We'll come up with something better than that, though.

Maybe you're wondering what this Martian looks like. That's up to you--let's say it looks like whatever you think it should look like, or if you can't think of anything, then let's say it looks like a Sectoid from X-COM: UFO Defense. In my own case, it looks like my mother, my father, or my older brother--especially my older brother. Although all my relatives are each in turn a lot more belligerent than our patient Martian, what they share with the Martian is little understanding for what compels me to sit around and play games as much as I do.

I write a lot of reviews for GameSpot, all of which are designed ultimately to persuade the reader one way or another. I'm fully aware of the limitations of my abilities to do this because, despite having played games for almost my entire life, I've never managed to convince my family as to what's so great about them.

So if you follow my logic, the world is still predominantly filled with Martians like my family. Perhaps all of your close friends play games just like you do, but most of your other acquaintances--your relatives, your in-laws, your coworkers, your classmates, whoever--probably don't. They don't for good reason--like this Martian, they don't see what games have to offer. They only superficially can tell that games are expensive, time-consuming, and addictive--qualities that, let's face it, aren't really all that recommendable. Smoking cigarettes at least makes you look cool, right?

 
Do you think it's easy to explain why you like games so much?

Yes.
No.
I'm not sure.

 
For years I've fought tooth and nail to come this far, to the point that I have some immeasurably marginal degree of influence over how games are perceived--I'm a reviewer at a gaming publication and I have evidence that some people use my work to influence their buying decisions. As someone who is interested in the gaming industry's prosperity and longevity, it's my ultimate goal in life to get more people into playing games. Whether this is through my reviews or through actually working on a game design perhaps doesn't entirely matter to me, so much as the bottom line that I'm motivated to continue working in this industry by the knowledge that it keeps growing bigger, and I want to help it along its course.

screenshot
Only a gamer knows what it feels like to be out of mana.
Yet I know that the appeal of games isn't easy to explain, because the sensation and experience of playing games can't really be described. If I were to describe how I felt playing my favorite game, you perhaps could relate--say I'm down to a handful of hit points, so my life meter's almost empty and my mana meter already is, yet the boss I'm fighting is badly wounded too. Against all odds, I score a critical hit and barely manage to win! Great! You know how I feel. Someone who doesn't play games doesn't know what the hell I'm talking about, though. If you told this Martian that games were intense and exciting, it would be confused--if games are so exciting, then why do most people just sit there staring blankly at them? Maybe you're a noisy, active gamer who yells at the screen and bangs his controller in frustration when he loses. Even if that's you, you're still not like that all the time--you mostly just stare, just like me.

Until games are more superficially, outwardly appealing, they won't appeal to as many people as they could. Certain things that are inherent to games--the fact that they're played on screens, being able to use various kinds of controllers from keyboards to joysticks--are fundamentally alienating to people who aren't familiar with these things. I'm not asking for holographic games with neural interfaces--at least not yet. But I do think certain elements in games make them very obtuse and hard to get into. That is to say, most games are designed for people who have already played similar games before. This leaves curious but inexperienced individuals like our Martian friend confused and feeling left out.

screenshot
Death comes swiftly but has little meaning in most games. Weird.
One gaming convention that I personally find really odd is the idea of "lives." This is the idea that, once your character is killed, the events immediately leading up to the death of that character are erased and you are offered another chance to succeed where you failed before. It sounds downright religious, and that's the only way to describe it. Let's say the Martian has heard that shooters are really popular and asks you to show him an example of what makes a good one, so you show him Half-Life. You're in an intense firefight against a group of marines and a lucky grenade blows you up, unluckily for you, so you quickly restart at the beginning of the battle. The Martian stops you and asked what exactly just happened. During this time, you manage to get killed again. You try to explain that the game wouldn't be fun if you could live only once and that you die a lot in games like these.

What a strange concept. Maybe there's no way to make a game fun without focusing it around a life-and-death conflict. There may be a few exceptions, but most games do contain characters that can live or die depending on how you play. Next week I'll come up with an answer to the question I posed at the beginning of this article, but not before we explore several other gaming conventions that exist only because they're traditional.
 

« Previous Page Next: Renewed Faith »