Storytron’s Chris Crawford: “Screw graphics” |
|
| BY Adam Sandberg Sep. 15th, 2008 | More on: |
It seems as if it was a bit rowdy-going at the opening of this year’s Austin Game Developers Conference. The notorious author and game developer Chris Crawford - currently famous for his work with his program Storytron - said that today’s games have shifted towards the wrong way. The open spaces, the brutal graphics and the detailed plots we think of as natural in current-gen titles are evidently ruining what games are all about - people and interaction.
Crawford said that interactivity should always be the top priority. To make it very clear how wrong today’s focus is put, he said “Screw graphics,” and added that “without interactivity, you ain’t got nothin’.”
Basically, Crawford thinks that graphics, plot and space solely exist to support the interactivity. If developers focus more on the eye-candy than the actual interactivity, the previous will just get in the latter’s way. First you should design how the player will interact (a good way of doing that is to define what goals there are and then define all the verbs required to achieve those goals) and then start the engineering.
Most gamers will agree that a lot of games of the 21st century lack in story and gameplay, and that the focus has been too heavily shifted towards stunning graphics and cool nonsense features. But at the same time (this will upset retro gamers), don’t we live in a super-awesome time for gaming? They’re beautiful, have multi-million dollar production budgets and many designers have been around since the dawn of gaming, and I dare to say most of them are pretty damn interactive.
Now, everything can be improved, and according to Mr. Crawford, his own program Storytron can be the way of the future. What do you think, should game designers listen to this or are we currently riding the right wave?
September 15th, 2008
at 4:00 pm
I agree. I decided to stop riding the wave this generation since graphics and pretty visuals seem to be the only things developers focus on to sell a game, and in the end, super next gen future consoles. Reminds me when CG started coming into fashion at the end of the 90’s, and although the technology was cool, it’s not enough to support an entire movie or make it “better”. Visuals should support game play and interaction, not the other way around.
September 15th, 2008
at 4:21 pm
Yeah, I do agree with you, but at the same time I’m just thinking how fun and advanced today’s games are and that lots of modern games DO focus on gameplay and interaction, not the other way around.
September 15th, 2008
at 4:35 pm
Hmmm, it’s a tough one. I reckon a lot of gamers nowadays THINK their games are interactive, when in actual fact they are in awe of the graphics and repetitive gameplay. However, I do think there is a tendency for what I call gaming snobbery. I mean, could anyone call Pacman ‘interactive’…it’s a friggin yellow blob eating yellow pellets in a maze going ‘waka, waka’. I’ve got my old consoles…they are great. I’ve got my Wii, its great for some different games and Ninty stuff, but I thought my PS3 would be mindnumbingly simple. It isn’t! The hardware and graphics do help with interactivity. Gran Turismo 5 Prologue is stunning and the hardware allow for such amazing visuals and depth that I twist and turn my head thinking I’m in the car…I NEVER used to do that!
BUT, developers shouldn’t rely on this. Look at Guitar Hero, they knew what they wanted to do and then built a controller around it…perfect!
September 16th, 2008
at 10:51 am
You may as well take the Video out of Video Games if your attitude is to “Screw Graphics”. Even board games require compelling graphic design. To ignore graphics, or to put them as a secondary component, is to refuse to admit that video games are a VISUAL MEDIUM. Video games consist of equal parts that all work cooperatively, and to degrade or add more importance to any one of them will end up ruining the whole.
The fact that games these days are lacking in interactivity and originality has nothing to do with the focus and budget that devs are giving to art teams. It has to do with publishers not funding something that won’t secure a profit, like new IPs or ideas. It’s wonderful that we are capable of the graphics we can do these days, and they should be embraced, not blamed for the sad state of the industry.
November 20th, 2008
at 7:33 pm
Yes well…my creative writing hs teacher argued that the more that was left to imagination was good for print, but the bigger bang made in big bux in vid stuff was in the “feelies” (where the real moolah was). Not that that would mater to Mr. C. What I would like to know is where his “kim”tanktics went, it was a pretty good two player game, & I find it nowhere on line…strange, indeed.
Did ATARI buy it?
I would bet his bit in his book about throwing the phonebook against the wall is bs, more likely he met someone through DARPA’s PLATO project, that made his nice “nut” if that lingo jingles…