Ken Levine: Computer game plots must be stupid

[Slowtrain]

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=185894

 

So if I dye my hair some rich dark color, will I be entitled to complex computer games plots?

 

Granted a lot of morons play computer games, but a lot of people who play computer games are really smart. Nothing like feeding the masses their daily doses of idiocy and pablum. I'm salivating already, damnit. More, plz, Ken. Thanks. How do I install this Bioshock thingie anyway? Or more to the point, why should I bother if it is so ****ing stupid (your words, by inference).

[Slowtrain]

http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=185894

 

So if I dye my hair some rich dark color, will I be entitled to complex computer games plots?

 

Granted a lot of morons play computer games, but a lot of people who play computer games are really smart. Nothing like feeding the masses their daily doses of idiocy and pablum. I'm salivating already, damnit. More, plz, Ken. Thanks. How do I install this Bioshock thingie anyway? Or more to the point, why should I bother if it is so ****ing stupid (your words, by inference).

 

I hope that wasn't a April Fools thing, I just realized. Not that it is April 1 anymore, but it might have been when it was posted. It does seem totally unlike Levine to say that.

Edited April 4, 2008 by CrashGirl

[Moatilliatta]

Complex plots != good plots. The plot that Levine mentions that was dumbed down (70 years over three civil wars) would have been pretty annoying and confusing for the player (most likely). Levine's approach probably saved Bioshock's plot and as such I'm not complaining, since his oppinion won't spread to those that do make somewhat complex plots.

 

Oh and it does say 2-april-2008 in the article.

[Llyranor]

Levine: Plot has to be really f***ing stupid

Wednesday 2-Apr-2008 10:01 AM Less is more says Bioshock's creative director

 

Not stupid!

[Slowtrain]

Oh and it does say 2-april-2008 in the article.

 

 

Yeah, I just thought of that.

[Moatilliatta]

I must say that I'm a bit concerned about how many developers (including Levine and many other devs) talk about their fear of players missing stuff in their games, that players find everything on the first playthrough isn't neccesarily a parameter of succes.

[Tale]

I must say that I'm a bit concerned about how many developers (including Levine and many other devs) talk about their fear of players missing stuff in their games, that players find everything on the first playthrough isn't neccesarily a parameter of succes.

Why put a lot of effort into something only 5% of the players can see, when you can instead put that exact same effort into extra things for everyone to see?

Edited April 4, 2008 by Tale

[Moatilliatta]

Because I like that kind of stuff?

I could give you a longer reply but I won't as I can't be sure that you will see it.

[Slowtrain]

I must say that I'm a bit concerned about how many developers (including Levine and many other devs) talk about their fear of players missing stuff in their games, that players find everything on the first playthrough isn't neccesarily a parameter of succes.

Why put a lot of effort into something only 5% of the players can see, when you can instead put that exact same effort into extra things for everyone to see?

 

Wait, so you are saying that ideally games should be aimed at the lowest level of gamer? Those who find it impossible to take the time and effort to look into various corners of the gameworld and pursue obscure quests to see where they might go? I mean, the broad and well-marked path might be easy enough to travel, but it ain't very interesting. Or at least itr doesn't stay interesting for long? (Hello, my good friend Bioshock!)

 

In my opinion game developers (or at least publishers) are seriously beginnig to paint all gamers with the stupid brush.

[@\NightandtheShape/@]

Most game developers and publishers want to shift as many units as possible, this isn't because they think the whole entire fanbase of gamers are idiots, they merely acknowledge that idiots exist, and to increase game sales they have to appeal to as many intelligent and idiotic people as possible.

 

Not everyone has the time to dedicate themselves to exploring every part of a game... Those extra bits actually cost

[Slowtrain]

Point being, I don't think any developer thinks all gamers are stupid, they're just pandering to the masses to make

[@\NightandtheShape/@]

If only it was so simple.

 

You ever have the mispleasure of playing a game such as peggle, or Bejewelled... Generic dumb casual games, and also one of the largest market shares. It's surprising that gamers recieve anything with even a mere amount of intelligence.

 

You can stand up and I'll stand there with you as many others may and shout how games should be more intelligent and artistic! It won't make any difference, we really are too few by far. That's not to say that it won't change, it will. As is always said time and time again, the games industry is very young. It's just about coming of age, but it isnt there yet, it won't be for a while... I honestly believe that games will eventually be as intelligent as their users, as that kind of dynamic is infact the promise that games hold.

 

But for now, we'll just have to put up with the likes of Cliffy B and GoW... Because it sells, and while it sells, and the demand is there things will stay the same.

 

Sadly not every company is like Obsidian, I'll always give them kudos for the fact they're trying to push forwards story telling in games, instead of totally pandering to the masses, but even our humble friends have to make allowances for gamers of different levels. It's just the way it is... But hey what do I know, I'm just a programmer...

[Whipporwill]

Having played games since I first put a quarter in a Pac-Man machine as a tiny lad, I can firmly state that the vast majority of gamers are utter mouth-breathers. I don't know how much of this is the general stupidity of the human animal and how much is specific to gaming, but I do know this: Ken Levine is right. Gamers, on the whole, do not care about your stupid plot. What they care about is being told they are "teh winnar." Oh, and bloom. Apparently.

 

Yes, I am bitter. Thank you for noticing! Grump.

[Slowtrain]

If only it was so simple.

 

You ever have the mispleasure of playing a game such as peggle, or Bejewelled... Generic dumb casual games, and also one of the largest market shares. It's surprising that gamers recieve anything with even a mere amount of intelligence.

 

 

Well, I don't think that casual = dumb. Casual games can be fun, too. Tetris is fab. I enjoy most forms of solitaire. etc

 

Incredibly complex games can be bad, too. Its just not much an issue these days, cause not too many incredibly complex games are made anymore.

 

 

Sadly not every company is like Obsidian, I'll always give them kudos for the fact they're trying to push forwards story telling in games, instead of totally pandering to the masses, but even our humble friends have to make allowances for gamers of different levels. It's just the way it is... But hey what do I know, I'm just a programmer...

 

I dunno. Look at Obs 2 games in development here:

 

One is based on an existing IP, developed under license. Bleah. Now, in point of fact, I have some hope for the Aliens game, simply because the aliens universe is a decent IP, discounting the mauling it has received at the hands of the AvP movies. There is potential to develop a game that has some interesting aspects to it. I'm not saying this game will, but I am hopeful

 

The other appears to be a beyond generic computer game, utter formula, connect the dots, etc. Even the name Alpha Protocol. It sounds like a really bad DTV release, maybe one of Steven Seagal's recent films. The lead player character looks generic as crap. The screenies look generic. Heck, when I look at that batch of screenies I'm seeing screenies of games that were released three years ago, just updated with vanilla next gen graphics. When developers are looking no further than last years games as inspiration for this years games, how excited can I possibly get? I'm sure it will be a fine, vanilla game. But there are a lot of fine bland games on the market every day.

 

 

 

If bad games is all people have to play then that is what they are going to play. Its the same with movies. If Hollywood just releases piece of crap after piece of crap film, people are stil going to go see them because people want to go to the movies on Friday night. If all people know is crap, then what else are they going to do. I think what is happening to gaming is that publishers (and probably some developers) think gamers are idiots and so they make games that are especially geared for idiots. That's why I was so blown away by that "quote" from Levine. I couldn't believe that some major developer would have the balls to come out of the closet and fess up to what he really believed. Guess that didn't happen after all, but I was so excited at the time.

[Slowtrain]

Yes, I am bitter. Thank you for noticing! Grump.

 

 

Me, too. Usually, I don't even get worked up about it anymore. Apathy creeps deeper into my soul every day.

[@\NightandtheShape/@]

Well, I don't think that casual = dumb. Casual games can be fun, too. Tetris is fab. I enjoy most forms of solitaire. etc

 

Incredibly complex games can be bad, too. Its just not much an issue these days, cause not too many incredibly complex games are made anymore.

 

Casual games are always simple, they lack plot, the don't NEED anything more than the simple game mechanics, which is what makes such games addictive. I wouldn't say they were pushing any bounderies, but they are making alot of money, from games which are simple. Are they dumb? Well that's a matter of debate for another time. I personally hate 90% of casual games and find them to be utter dross.

 

My point was simple, casual games are for all intense and purposes incredibley simple, and simple is synonymous with stupid. Now the difference is that while they're dumb, they can infact be alot of fun for alot of people of varied skill levels. I think that is something that is important to remember, intelligent doesn't = fun nor does stupid = fun.

 

Planescape : Torment is seen as a high point of story telling in games by many, but all's said I can assure you it wouldn't even be as fun to some people as others.

 

I dunno. Look at Obs 2 games in development here:

 

One is based on an existing IP, developed under license. Bleah. Now, in point of fact, I have some hope for the Aliens game, simply because the aliens universe is a decent IP, discounting the mauling it has received at the hands of the AvP movies. There is potential to develop a game that has some interesting aspects to it. I'm not saying this game will, but I am hopeful

 

The other appears to be a beyond generic computer game, utter formula, connect the dots, etc. Even the name Alpha Protocol. It sounds like a really bad DTV release, maybe one of Steven Seagal's recent films. The lead player character looks generic as crap. The screenies look generic. Heck, when I look at that batch of screenies I'm seeing screenies of games that were released three years ago, just updated with vanilla next gen graphics. When developers are looking no further than last years games as inspiration for this years games, how excited can I possibly get? I'm sure it will be a fine, vanilla game. But there are a lot of fine bland games on the market every day.

 

IP == Sales.

 

I make my opinion based on the product. I'll buy them both, if they both suck then more fool me, but frankly I imagine they will entertain me, and perhaps even make me think a lttle.

 

If a product didn't appeal to me at all I would not buy it.

 

Alpha Protocol is the first game of any type of RPG genre that is likely to appeal to my brother. It ticks all the boxes. It's certainly also a game AIMED very much at a male audience, much as such movies... That's not to say it's utterly sexist, just matter of fact.

 

I'm interested in the Aliens games mostly because I'm curious about how they will deal with the combat, and how cross-product development will work out, hence I will also pick-up the gearbox alien game. I'm also hoping for some good gore in the Aliens game, I wanna see some really gut wrenching stuff... But I probably won't.

 

If bad games is all people have to play then that is what they are going to play. Its the same with movies. If Hollywood just releases piece of crap after piece of crap film, people are stil going to go see them because people want to go to the movies on Friday night. If all people know is crap, then what else are they going to do. I think what is happening to gaming is that publishers (and probably some developers) think gamers are idiots and so they make games that are especially geared for idiots. That's why I was so blown away by that "quote" from Levine. I couldn't believe that some major developer would have the balls to come out of the closet and fess up to what he really believed. Guess that didn't happen after all, but I was so excited at the time.

 

What is bad, what is good? That's purely subjective... And in case of the gaming media, purely bias, but I vowed to stop picking on mkreku, it's not his fault.

 

Every games developer I've spoken to, and there have been a few, big and small, they've all had different outlooks, and while that is so I don't think we'll ever get the whole Hollywood releasing the same crap over and over from development studios... Although any tendancy for remaking games is abhorant.

 

The problem is also that some studios also get typecasted.

[Pop]

Well, my indignation is certainly righteous.

Edited April 4, 2008 by Pop

[Slowtrain]

Well, my indignation is certainly righteous.

 

 

SO is mine, but if I ignore it for a while it generally goes away.

 

One thing I have noticed is that as I get older I become more accepting of mediocrity in all aspects of life. Not something I am particularly proud of really when I think about it, but maybe an inevitable side effect if the aging process?

 

Computer games used to be fairly riveting experiences for me now they are mostly just time-killers. And since I don't feel I've gotten any smarter or sophisticated in the last ten years, I can't believe its because I've outgrown them. The design paradigms have changed.

[Slowtrain]

Well, I don't think that casual = dumb. Casual games can be fun, too. Tetris is fab. I enjoy most forms of solitaire. etc

 

Incredibly complex games can be bad, too. Its just not much an issue these days, cause not too many incredibly complex games are made anymore.

 

Casual games are always simple, they lack plot, the don't NEED anything more than the simple game mechanics, which is what makes such games addictive. I wouldn't say they were pushing any bounderies, but they are making alot of money, from games which are simple. Are they dumb? Well that's a matter of debate for another time. I personally hate 90% of casual games and find them to be utter dross.

 

My point was simple, casual games are for all intense and purposes incredibley simple, and simple is synonymous with stupid. Now the difference is that while they're dumb, they can infact be alot of fun for alot of people of varied skill levels. I think that is something that is important to remember, intelligent doesn't = fun nor does stupid = fun.

 

Planescape : Torment is seen as a high point of story telling in games by many, but all's said I can assure you it wouldn't even be as fun to some people as others.

 

I dunno. Look at Obs 2 games in development here:

 

One is based on an existing IP, developed under license. Bleah. Now, in point of fact, I have some hope for the Aliens game, simply because the aliens universe is a decent IP, discounting the mauling it has received at the hands of the AvP movies. There is potential to develop a game that has some interesting aspects to it. I'm not saying this game will, but I am hopeful

 

The other appears to be a beyond generic computer game, utter formula, connect the dots, etc. Even the name Alpha Protocol. It sounds like a really bad DTV release, maybe one of Steven Seagal's recent films. The lead player character looks generic as crap. The screenies look generic. Heck, when I look at that batch of screenies I'm seeing screenies of games that were released three years ago, just updated with vanilla next gen graphics. When developers are looking no further than last years games as inspiration for this years games, how excited can I possibly get? I'm sure it will be a fine, vanilla game. But there are a lot of fine bland games on the market every day.

 

IP == Sales.

 

I make my opinion based on the product. I'll buy them both, if they both suck then more fool me, but frankly I imagine they will entertain me, and perhaps even make me think a lttle.

 

If a product didn't appeal to me at all I would not buy it.

 

Alpha Protocol is the first game of any type of RPG genre that is likely to appeal to my brother. It ticks all the boxes. It's certainly also a game AIMED very much at a male audience, much as such movies... That's not to say it's utterly sexist, just matter of fact.

 

I'm interested in the Aliens games mostly because I'm curious about how they will deal with the combat, and how cross-product development will work out, hence I will also pick-up the gearbox alien game. I'm also hoping for some good gore in the Aliens game, I wanna see some really gut wrenching stuff... But I probably won't.

 

If bad games is all people have to play then that is what they are going to play. Its the same with movies. If Hollywood just releases piece of crap after piece of crap film, people are stil going to go see them because people want to go to the movies on Friday night. If all people know is crap, then what else are they going to do. I think what is happening to gaming is that publishers (and probably some developers) think gamers are idiots and so they make games that are especially geared for idiots. That's why I was so blown away by that "quote" from Levine. I couldn't believe that some major developer would have the balls to come out of the closet and fess up to what he really believed. Guess that didn't happen after all, but I was so excited at the time.

 

What is bad, what is good? That's purely subjective... And in case of the gaming media, purely bias, but I vowed to stop picking on mkreku, it's not his fault.

 

Every games developer I've spoken to, and there have been a few, big and small, they've all had different outlooks, and while that is so I don't think we'll ever get the whole Hollywood releasing the same crap over and over from development studios... Although any tendancy for remaking games is abhorant.

 

The problem is also that some studios also get typecasted.

 

 

I'm sure Alpha Protocol wil be a decent enough game. All the boxes ticked, as you say. I might even buy it. But probably not. The Alien IP has enough of the unknown in it to be potentially interesting.

 

I'm not sure why you brought up the male audience thing. That sorta stuff doesn't really come into play for me one way or the other. On either side. I just like games.

 

on a completely and totally unrelated note. Are you fan of Big Red? Or do you just have her in your avatar and sig for some non-fan reason?

[Hell Kitty]

One thing I have noticed is that as I get older I become more accepting of mediocrity in all aspects of life.

 

Nah, you're as grumpy and whiny as you always were you old boob.

[Pop]

One thing I have noticed is that as I get older I become more accepting of mediocrity in all aspects of life. Not something I am particularly proud of really when I think about it, but maybe an inevitable side effect if the aging process?

As I've gotten older I haven't really seen a decline in the quality of the games I play. Maybe it's because I didn't latch onto any of the niches that dried up in the scheme of things in the 90's, like adventure games or turn-based tactical combat games. Or maybe it's just because I'm not convinced that what I loved when I was 16 was the pinnacle of everything good, or that fidelity to the ideal ostensibly set by those games ought to be the goal of game development. I don't enjoy playing games as much as I used to, but I'm not going to convince myself that the medium has changed in any fundamental way that would allow me to cast blame on plebians and their taste, or that it has turned away from the importance of player choice or whatever (The Witcher was chock full of player choice and it felt and played like cough syrup tastes). I just don't have the luxury of 12-hour endurance runs anymore. My brain isn't malleable and young anymore.

[Lokey]

Most game developers and publishers want to shift as many units as possible, this isn't because they think the whole entire fanbase of gamers are idiots, they merely acknowledge that idiots exist, and to increase game sales they have to appeal to as many intelligent and idiotic people as possible.

I thought that was the point of selling the specially prices 29.95 game guide to the drool dispensers? Granted that money probably isn't going anywhere near the people that actually built the game...

[random n00b]

So if I dye my hair some rich dark color, will I be entitled to complex computer games plots?

I like dark hair.

 

 

Wait, so you are saying that ideally games should be aimed at the lowest level of gamer? Those who find it impossible to take the time and effort to look into various corners of the gameworld and pursue obscure quests to see where they might go? I mean, the broad and well-marked path might be easy enough to travel, but it ain't very interesting. Or at least itr doesn't stay interesting for long? (Hello, my good friend Bioshock!)

 

In my opinion game developers (or at least publishers) are seriously beginnig to paint all gamers with the stupid brush.

Games are meant to make money. And while I'm sure devs would love to make the critically acclaimed CRPG of the century, few would be happy to repeat the debacle of say, Vampire Bloodlines.

 

It's nothing new really. The same happens with books, for instance. Just look for the sales of Thus Spake Zarathustra and compare them to the same numbers for the latest Harry Potter release.

 

It's a sad state of affairs, but once more, the masses rule. You can find comfort in thinking yourself an exception. Or not.

 

 

I dunno. Look at Obs 2 games in development here:

 

One is based on an existing IP, developed under license. Bleah. Now, in point of fact, I have some hope for the Aliens game, simply because the aliens universe is a decent IP, discounting the mauling it has received at the hands of the AvP movies. There is potential to develop a game that has some interesting aspects to it. I'm not saying this game will, but I am hopeful

 

The other appears to be a beyond generic computer game, utter formula, connect the dots, etc. Even the name Alpha Protocol. It sounds like a really bad DTV release, maybe one of Steven Seagal's recent films. The lead player character looks generic as crap. The screenies look generic. Heck, when I look at that batch of screenies I'm seeing screenies of games that were released three years ago, just updated with vanilla next gen graphics. When developers are looking no further than last years games as inspiration for this years games, how excited can I possibly get? I'm sure it will be a fine, vanilla game. But there are a lot of fine bland games on the market every day.

I can't agree with this. OE have shown in the past their ability to produce above-average writing and levels of plot complexity that are not quite the norm. Even in such a silly setting as Star Wars, they managed to produce a dark and mature story. I think they at least deserve the benefit of doubt.

 

But perhaps you are seeking to be engaged intellectually in all the wrong places? Gaming isn't exactly the most challenging of activities for the mind, anyway, and I don't think it's ever been intented to be.

 

 

If bad games is all people have to play then that is what they are going to play. Its the same with movies. If Hollywood just releases piece of crap after piece of crap film, people are stil going to go see them because people want to go to the movies on Friday night. If all people know is crap, then what else are they going to do. I think what is happening to gaming is that publishers (and probably some developers) think gamers are idiots and so they make games that are especially geared for idiots. That's why I was so blown away by that "quote" from Levine. I couldn't believe that some major developer would have the balls to come out of the closet and fess up to what he really believed. Guess that didn't happen after all, but I was so excited at the time.

So it *is* an april Fool's then? It's good material for debate anyway.

[Morgoth]

Without reading the previous posts, I gotta agree with Ken's statement. After all, the games with the greatest longevity are the ones where you can right jump into it and have fun, without any "stupid" deeply involved plot that just hinders your entertainment. Think of Blizzard games, Diablo, WOW etc. I sure don't play these games for the story. And the more developers concentrate on interesting gameplay, and narrative that really comes through suggestive themes instead of cutscenes, the better. Good story is nice and all, but like many "story-driven" games like Bioware games, NWN2, Kotor etc. I only play them once, then I sell them, simply because they lost any appeal to me after a playthrough.

There's hope though that Obsidian will accomplish a classic with Alpha Protocol. Cool setting, cool locations, good action, fast story delivery. No "stupid" line after line reading. Yay!

Edited April 4, 2008 by Morgoth

[Kaftan Barlast]

Its a bit late into the debate for this, but the reason why most games have a completely retarded plot is that the designers lack even fundamental storytelling ability. They dont know how to construct an understandable and enjoyable story, so they choose to simplify it to the point where they cant fail (or they just fail).

 

If you look at the Imdb top 100 list, you can see that many of the top selling films have relatively complex plots, yet the public have no problem understanding them. So, people are not the morons Ken levine would like to think they are.

 

 

Aristotle penned down the basics of storytelling/drama 2000 years ago, and hollywood is full of "Storytelling for dummies" books. All you need to do is read the stuff and apply it. Stuff like how all stories must have a climax that is proportionate to the buildup to said ending, or that cliffhanger endings dont work if the audience has to wait more than a week for the next part etc.