Blog Banter - Pique my interest

Welcome to the latest installment of Blog Banter, the monthly blogging extravaganza created by bs angel and coordinated by Game Couch. Blog Banter involves our cozy community of enthusiastic gaming bloggers, a common topic, and a week to post articles pertaining to said topic. The results are quite entertaining and can range from deep insight to ROFLMAO. Any questions about Blog Banter should be directed here. Check out other Blog Banter articles at the bottom of this post!

From Crazy Kinux, Does every game need to be a grade-A blockbuster title? Would you be willing to play more average games or should every game shoot for the 10.0 rating?

Good public speakers and stage thespians understand one important rule -

KNOW YOUR AUDIENCE

Comedian Louis Ramey Jr., who recently appeared on Last Comic Standing, once talked about how he was booked for a gig at a ski resort and when he got there the staff was flabbergasted and said that no one had showed them a picture of him. As it turned out, they had booked him to be the closing act to end a meeting for a white supremacist group. Louis Ramey Jr. is black. I think Mr. Ramey would agree that the type of audience you have is important.

What does that have to do with this month’s topic?

The question for this month’s Blog Banter “Does every game need to be a grade-A blockbuster title? Would you be willing to play more average games or should every game shoot for the 10.0 rating?”. I think anyone who is a regular reader would know who I feel about the overhype surrounding Metal Gear Solid 4 or Grand Theft Auto IV and how put off I am by the current game review pedastal of holding up a game with the nebulous criteria of being “more polished” than it’s competition. I suppose if I go Brasso a cow turd I could call it art. I don’t consider myself a hardcore gamer by any means but I’m far from any definition of casual you might try to apply. I think of myself as a gaming enthusiast. That said, what I get enthusiastic about isn’t necessarily games in general. I suppose I’ve talked around the main point long enough.

The easy answer is that I’m not too concerned with the quality of a game so long as it offers a good experience. I’m not demanding the greatest graphics, the best writing, or the latest technologies. I do expect game designers and developers to use adequate tools for the job though. However, pretty pictures only count for so much and if I want to see dazzling graphics the Internet has plenty of screenshots for me to peruse. If a game scores “average” but I enjoy it then I have no regrets. The real difficulty for any game is convincing me why I should buy it. I feel it’s fair to ask “what’s in it for me” since not only do I have to spend money on a game but devote time to playing it. In fact, I’ve passed on games that are cheap enough for me not to blink at the price simply because I’m concerned my minimum time commitment will be wasted.

However, for an average game to get my attention it’s going to have to offer me something I can’t get anywhere else. For example, I really have no interest in some mediocre military style first person shooter when I already own Call of Duty 4, Rainbow Six Vegas, Rainbow Six Vegas 2, etc. This is a field with plenty of titles that range from merely good to excellent. Why would I care for a middling to poor experience? Yet I also purchased, after an extensive search, History Channel’s Civil War, a title as mediocre as they come. Why? Well, to put it simply, how many Civil War shooters are on the market right now? Sure, they could have done better, but the game found a place in my library for its uniqueness.

If a game developer knows they don’t have the time or money to develop a AAA title, then they should not focus on trying to do something everyone else has done and has been able to do better. I will grant that my example of Civil War was poor because it was not a hot selling title, but there are plenty of other games out there that have not been graced with high review scores and universal praise that have still sold well. If you want to get attention in the market, then do something to stand out instead of trying to be like everyone else.

Participants : Zath!, Delayed Responsibility, Silvercublogger, weblog.probablynot.com, Crazy Kinux, Gamer-Unit, Unfettered Blather, MasterKitty, Game Couch

Other Reading from Blog Banter Participants -
An Editorial on Video Game Journalism
The Free World


You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

6 Responses to “Blog Banter - Pique my interest”

  1. I look at it like movies: not every movie has to be Citizen Kane to be worth paying for, sometimes you want Happy Gilmore. Similarly, not every game has to be Halo 3 to be worth paying for, sometimes you want Carnival Games.

  2. For the record, I loved Happy Gilmore.

  3. I will often play games for a certain aspect I like or a feature it offers. I often hold up Return to Castle Wolfenstein on the PS2 as one of the most underappreciated gems of the FPS genre (I know Jason is sick of hearing me use this example for the untold time) but if you want to be honest it was just a solid FPS, not as epic in presentation or artsy as Call of Duty or the Medal of Honor games, but it allowed me to save anywhere I wanted.

    It was a great game but by the standards of most modern title it was mediocre in terms of story, cutscenes (all game animation) and weapon selection (It’s ID software afterall)

    Still I hold it up as one of my favorite FPS experiences because it gave me a few very well thought out options. I never understood why 5 to 6 on a scale of one to ten was so bad to some people, then again I realize that the scale people use to review games generally starts at ten and works backwards. Essentially the game gets worse with each lower number, farther away from perfect. Titles aren’t “average” at 5, it means they are 5 points removed from the perfect game experience and thats treated as a fault. Average translates as “doesn’t totally suck”.

    I would rate House of the Dead 2& 3 as a very solid 5 or average and thats not bad at all. This quest for the perfect experience every time is just silly. I can watch bad science-fiction all day long if it tries something new and games to me are no different. What is better, a game with solid but predictable controls you can get involved without some asinine learning curve or does everything have to wow you?

  4. Give us something different, something new, something we’ve never played before. The industry needs to learn to take risks. And if that means smaller budget and no photo-realistic smoke clouds than so be it.

  5. I actually did play Civil War on 360! It was not that bad actually. I kinda enjoyed it. It would have been played more if it had online multiplayer.

    Something new is always good. The next Call of Duty goes back to old style… enjoy. lol!

    Good article :)

  6. Dammit, now I’m curious to play History Channel’s Civil War. And I agree with your points. I, for one, never need to fight another WWII battle.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.