An Alternative Take on Freeplay (The IGDC)
Freeplay was the most exciting and positive games conference I have ever attended. As I said again and again, both in my panel discussions and in conversation with the other attendees, I could never have imagined that the local independent scene was so enthusiastic, so ambitious, and frankly - so big. Five years ago, there’s no way I could have predicted this level of participation and interest.
One of the things I liked best about Freeplay was the emphasis it placed on the individual. At larger events such as the AGDC, the sheer cost makes it difficult for individual enthusiasts to attend, meaning that the events tend to be populated almost solely by commercial game industry workers. Because of the nature of the commercial industry, it is often not only impossible to discuss the project you’re working on with other industry workers, but there is also occasionally an air of hostility and competition. This means there’s very little exchange of helpful knowledge and experience within the industry. Many people I talked to at Freeplay enjoyed the feeling that they could walk up to anyone, no matter how big a name, and chat to them without feeling intimidated or competitive.
As David Williams of Samu Games set out in his keynote speech, the independent games scene is composed of many different sorts of people with vastly different aims - from those who run small scale MUDS, to those hoping to start their own games companies, to those who are interested in the idea of using gaming as a legitimate form of artmaking. Compare the situation to the independent music scene, which encompasses everything from garage rock to hardcore doof - very disparate forms with different audiences, but which nevertheless both exist outside the mainstream industry. Some attendees felt a little disgruntled by the juxtaposition of some of these different attitudes and aims in the confrerence. For me, this wasn’t a problem - I’m interested in any sort of game practice. Others were a bit disgruntled - and yes, it must be admitted that the pornographic presentation Monty refers to was pretty confronting and unexpected. The general emphasis of the conference was not `How do I start my games company?’ but `How do we make better games and ensure an Australian independent games industry is viable?’, which to me is a more important issue.
The most important message I hoped to put across at Freeplay was that the independent games scene should not be regarded as simply a stepping stone to the commercial industry. Independents should revel in the freedom their lack of obligation to publishers and other commercial concerns. This freedom is, quite honestly, the envy of many other Australian game workers who are required by financial necessity to toil through sequels and games based on mediocre IPs, while actually encouraging themselves NOT to come up with creative ideas because there is so little chance of them coming to fruition.
I have been saying for many years that a strong independent industry could easily give a bloated retail industry a good kick in the pants. If a great game is available online for free or for a small fee, who is going to pay $90 for yet another glossy, cliched fragfest? And if and when that happens, how will the commercial industry respond? Either outcome is good news for gamers, and Freeplay proves that these ambitions are achievable.
posted by Tripitaka · at 12:20 pm · filed under Editorials
Hello all startups, if you really want to succeed you will need to consider AI.
The next step in gaming needs to be a quantum leap in AI, people crave interaction with/against a biological mindset. IF THEN ELSE just won’t cut it. RND() also won’t cut it since there is usually only a limited amount of random options.
“Online” seems to be main direction of the industry but the reality is “online” has been around 10years+. Online will not save the industry, online play is a feature and should never become the main driver. The Ultima/Everquest series are popular but not mainstream and will not become mainstream because of the ongoing costs involved.
Currently the best xyz type games involve mulitplayer/online/network play because the AI of the computer controlled players is lacking. I have yet to see a computer controlled opponent surprise me in a way a human can. Yet time and time again I am surprised how a computer opponent can get “unfair” boosts to compensate for poor AI. This is not a good situation.
Cut to a future scenario, user x turns on ps5 or xbox4, inserts racing game, after loading time (loading times will always exist - m$ will soon realise HDD’s are only a liability) the game will start.
Instead of a standard “boring” menu screen, a sentient virtual host will interact with the user to make choices. The virtual host will have a sense of time, and can calculate gameplay patterns of the user so it comment on long periods of inactivity or skips in the pattern. (ie the user goes on a 4week holiday - when the game is next used it can comment on why it has been so long and can also adjust the difficulty down a little to allow the player to ease back into the game quicker).
There is nothing more annoying to a player than to find the sequence required to beat a game, a game should be adaptive enough to learn from its own limitations. Reality is though, it usually takes a view “from the outside in” to make it possible. This is where the virtual host can identify the program and alter the underlying program of the game so that user will find that the sequence no longer works. This also needs to be done with a sense of realism, making a game unrealistically difficult will only frustrate a player. This may sound difficult bit the reality is that the virtual host is merely changing values in a .ini file.
Jump-Jump-Hack-Slash-Left *repeat* (yawn)
Think of the sentient virtual host as a referee in a sports match.Other areas where this could work, sports “virtual coach/manager”, racing “virtual co-pilot/manager/race director”, platforms/adventure “virtual client/boss” etc. Think of a Star Trek game where the sentient being is the ship’s computer. Computer - Warp 5.
If you compare the evolution of graphics to AI over the past 10 years, you will notice a huge variation. The computing power is available or can become available, the computer hardware industry is on the verge of stalling as there is no real demand for 3GHz + computers with nvidia 6800 series vcards. Doom3 only requires 1GHz CPU power. 17″ LCD monitors only have 1280x1024 max res screens.