- Theme:
- Light
- Dark
The Emergent Trend
Highbrow gamers these days love to talk about what they like to call emergent gaming, which is the label they've given to games such as Grand Theft Auto III--games that give you more freedom than usual within the confines of the gameworld. The pseudo-intellectual debates rage on, in the wake of discussions about whether consoles are better than PCs or about whether girls are ever going to be interested in games, topics that are, like, so totally passé. That was so 2003. Today, then, the main question at stake is this: Are emergent games really the way of the future, and should more games aspire to be "virtual sandboxes," inviting the player to run amok and experiment as much as possible? Or is there still something to be said for the tightly scripted, carefully contrived, more-cinematic gaming experience--for example, games such as Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell or Max Payne? Let me tell you what I think about that.
 |  No, this isn't an article about how this game turns people into mindless killing machines. |
A good rule of thumb is, prior to deciding whether to choose between A or B, one should first look carefully at what other options may exist. I like to look over people's discussions on the subject of emergent games and watch as most of them invariably split into camps either for or against there being more of these types of games. The arguments for and against are equally convincing, yet as things go on Internet message boards, no one ever concedes to the other side, and an apparent stalemate sets in before the discussion gets completely derailed. However, a passive observer to all of this (better known as a lurker) may be left with a more-balanced outlook on the matter.
Call me a lurker.
|  Emergent games have been around for years. They seem to be getting more attention these days, though. |
First of all, I'm hoping someone can explain to me why there's been so much talk about emergent gaming as if it were something new. Because, I don't know about you, but I've been playing these types of games for as long as I can remember. Long before Morrowind, many classic computer role-playing games, such as the Ultima series, were extremely open-ended in much the same fashion. And before he worked on Deus Ex, Warren Spector worked on other, similar games such as System Shock and Ultima Underworld. Grand Theft Auto III may be the poster child for emergent gaming, as anyone who's played and enjoyed the game no doubt has any number of unique stories to tell about his or her specific experiences. But just because GTAIII is more fun and has sold more copies than most games, that doesn't strictly mean it's more innovative. In fact, any long-standing GTA fan would readily admit that the main differences between GTAIII and its predecessors are graphical. GTAIII has a more realistic look and feel to it, but structurally it's quite similar to the original Grand Theft Auto game from 1998.
Admittedly, perhaps I'm misrepresenting some of the facts here by implying that all the talk about emergent gaming these days means this is somehow a new trend. The new trend is the discussion itself, as though now, suddenly, we stand at a turning point, where many game designers--and gamers--are deciding which route is the better of the two.
There probably is some truth to that, and I've already alluded to it. Some of the best-selling, most popular games around fall into one category or the other. Emergent games such as Grand Theft Auto III and The Sims offer continuous rewards as the player delves deeper and deeper into these open-ended experiences. These are games with tremendous lasting appeal and staying power, and despite being single-player-only games, their longevity rivals some of the most popular multiplayer games around.
|  Are emergent games inherently superior to more-traditionally linear games? |
This may be the key to the appeal of this style of gaming. Meanwhile, heavily scripted games such as Splinter Cell and Max Payne are the ones that drive all the discussions about how the gaming industry is starting to get all up in Hollywood's business. Why go see the new summer blockbuster when you could get yourself a new game, which delivers the same sorts of pyrotechnics and drama? These types of games, the ones with the very high production values, can also be very successful these days. But clearly, it's a very different process to construct an open-ended game than a linear one. Also, the obvious disadvantage of scripted games such as Splinter Cell and Max Payne is that, though they may be fun while they last, they're over soon enough and don't necessarily leave you with much more to do.
One of the reasons I like emergent games is that I actually do prefer single-player experiences to multiplayer ones, and yet I like for a game to last me a good, long time. I also like being able to come back to a game every once in a while and not necessarily feel pressured to reach a finite conclusion. Emergent games are very low stress in this regard. You can play GTAIII for a half hour or for three hours straight and still have a great time. You can stop playing it for a year and come back to it and still have a great time.
I imagine you'd need to be pretty confident to try to design a truly open-ended game. It's certainly the case that some of the best games ever made are as good as they are because they invite the player to go wherever or to do whatever he or she wishes. When you play the occasional game that pulls this off, you know it's something special. At the same time, just about any game benefits from giving the player plenty of context--it's good to have clear-cut goals so that we know what we're doing and what we're up against, and when we've accomplished something.
| Next: Check the Name » |
