Re: Is Innovative Gameplay a Dead End?

Hey PizaZ,

Well that rather is the point, isn't it: There isn't any clear sense of
Innovative Gameplay that I can find, and more often than not its an
obscurist term than a clarifiying one. At its most honest level, I think its
a sort of Holy Grail goal, a mysterious relam of synthespians, reactive AI,
holo interfaces and other similar dreamers aspirations which are nice. But
sort of missing the point. (example:
http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20031029/littlejohn_01.shtml)

Your list below encompasses a wide range of game elements (constructs,
interfaces, etc), and then you suggest that those elements are the
innovation. I don't disagree with you that these elements did not exist at
one time or another. But the root gameplay that the games with all those new
elements contain is still operating on the same basics. Games are still
shooting, exploring, solving, management and so on, and these paths are well
worn at this stage. Gameplay-wise, there isn't a vast difference between
Gauntlet and Halo, for example.,

What has grown over the years is the increased capacity for games to depict
a fantasy-with-rules. Gauntlet and Halo are obviously leagues apart, but
they are so because the elements have been improved, from perspective to
graphics, audio to AI, digital to analog controls. What has improved is the
"synthesis".

particle

"PizaZ" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I think when people talk about "innovative gameplay" they are talking
about
> bunch of different things.  Let's see if we all can come up with some sort
> of definition for the phrase "innovative gameplay" OK ?  I'm going to try
> and piece one together and hopefully others will modify it in whole or in
> part til we have something more complete than is already out there.
>
> Innovative Gameplay (as applied to 'video games')  -    Any new or
> fundamental changes to game mechanics, constructs, interfaces, and
metaphors
> that offers the player unique and/or enhanced experiences.
>
> Ok, so to understand what it means to create innovative gameplay is, we
need
> to understand what game constructs, mechanics, metapors and interfaces are
> right?
>
> Types of constructs:
>     - Levels
>     - End bosses
>     - Power Ups
>     - the NPC (non player character)
>     - the cut scene
>     - the in game scripted event (scientist getting pulled into air duct
by
> monster)
>     - the Flag (as in capture the)
>     - the Score Board / The High Score (the basis for so many coin-op
arcade
> games)
>     - the Quest or sub-mission
>     - the Fatality
>     - the combo move
>     - the alt fire weapon function
>     - the sniper zoom view
>     - the vehicle that works in First Person (like the Hovercrafts in
Tribes
> 1)
>     - the selectable player class
>     - the instant replay (particularly in sports games)
>     - the turn based combat sequence (like in the Final Fantasy series)
>
> Types of Game Mechanics (Goals and SubGoals or perhaps "mechanics" is
> synonymous with rules and objectives?  What about game modes lik
deathmatch
> versus capture the flag... where do those fall in?)
>     - find the keys
>     - kill monsters
>     - find the switch/lever/button/etc to advance
>     - manage your city
>     - make your sims happy
>     - capture the flag
>     - increase experience points - "level up"
>     - eat all the wafers, eat the power pills, get to the next level
>     - learn the uber cool combo moves to kill your opponent while
performing
> really cool combo moves on them
>
> Types of Metaphors (maybe these are really just the same as genres?  Or
> maybe roles since role types even between God style games are fairly
> different):
>     - Player as actor in an interactive movie (think games like Wing
> Commander 3 and 4)
>     - Player as God
>     - Player as Head of State/Commander of Space Colonies/Fleets
>     - Player as controllable avatar
>     - Player in soldier/warrior in the first person (maybe this actually
> marks a trend away from metaphors??)
>     - Player as pilot in the first person
>     - Player as coach or general manager
>     - Player as an entire sports team (hehehe)
>
> Perhaps innovation in user control interfaces and graphical interfaces
count
> too or would those fall under constructs?  things like
>     - mouse look
>     - ducking
>     - skiing (part of what makes Tribes fun)
>     - the transparent HUD
>     - the "buy screen" (as in Tribes and Counter Strike)
>     - the inventory (as in RPG's)
>     - the swing gauge (as in golf games)
>     - voice over IP (semi-real time player chat)
>     - multiplayer itself
>     - the persistant online world
>
> Anyways, at one point in time, none of the above things existed... and
then
> suddenly they appeared and offered the player new experiences.  I'd
further
> count as "innovation" substantial improvements to existing constructs or
the
> clever combining of existing constructs in new ways.  Well anyways, this
is
> my rough stab at answering the question what is "innovative gameplay."
>
> -PizaZ
>
>
>
> "Particle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > I wrote a blog post about this subject recently: (See
> > particleblog.blogspot.com)
> >
> > As a designer, I cannot help get the feeling that most videogame
designers
> > are massively wasting their time by focussing on the wrong end of the
> stick,
> > as it were. I'd be interested to hear some opinions on the matter.
Thanks.
> >
> > particle
> >
> >
>
>