The first game that I bought for my 3DS was Monster Hunter 3. For a long while there, I was the epic adventurer. I scoured forests and deserts, fought giant beasts, and crafted devilish weapons. Still, I find that there is more to my hunt, stronger beasts that I have yet to vanquish. And how have I been spending my time? I fish, and am the mayor of the small town of Sindane. I have been playing way too much Animal Crossing: New Leaf.
There is a lot to be said for non-combative gaming.
For those of you who don't know, Animal Crossing is a game unlike many others. It is a life sim, with anthropomorphic animals as your neighbors (figure that one out). It's about living day to day, making money, making friends, and customizing your home and character. You can fish, hunt for insects, dig up fossils, and interact with friends in town, as well as visitors. The most "intense" moments are when you're trying to real in a rare fish, or when those bloody tarantulas start chasing you down. It has none of the adrenaline pumping flash and spectacle that a lot of games have, but I still find myself engrossed in it.
This is something that I believe a lot of game publishers need to start figuring out. The market is saturated with hyper-violent and combat intensive games. Try to think of the games that don't have you slicing, punching, shooting, or otherwise ending someone's life prematurely. We've got a pretty small list. Harvest Moon, the Sims, maybe a few others, but the pool is pretty small. Yet, Harvest Moon and Animal Crossing have been very popular, at least in Japan. While I am not saying violence in a game is inherently bad, an excellent game can be made without serious and bloody combat.
Violence is often one of the biggest complaints that this industry gets. How often have we heard games like Call of Duty being associated with school shootings and violence. They've been called terrorist simulators even. Rough criticism, (and mostly stupid) but they point at the violent trend that we have in this medium. So, I think it is time for developers to look at some non-violent methods of design.
I have had in mind a project that I want to work on with simple tools like the RPG Maker. RPGs, in the old Final Fantasy styles, are pretty easy to adapt to some non-combat elements. It isn't hard to image switching attacks and spells to arguments and word choice. What I want to design is an RPG where every attack and spell is named for some element of speech. While the mechanics function the same, the theming will make all interactions like a conversation. The overall goal will be to convince someone of a higher social standing than you to think your way. It is a small step toward making a game that is not focused on the violence. Let's be honest, arguments can be just as heated and adrenaline pumping as combat.
Maybe I'll add the option to pull a gun on someone if things get hard...probably not.
Just something to chew on.
What's your opinion on Portal then? It's an adrenaline-laced, shooting (in a way) game where no nobody (except you and some turrets) get hurt. It's really more of a puzzle game.
ReplyDeleteMini blog post incoming:
ReplyDeleteSo I love Portal; it's a phenomenal game. But it is still an inherently violent game, despite being centered around its puzzle mechanics. Here's why.
First, and most obviously, GLaDOS wants to kill you. Straight up, there is no way around that. Everything she does is meant to inflict serious violence against you. Her big thing is the deadly neurotoxin that she flooded the facility with in the first place. The turrets, by extension, are her trying to kill you in a more traditional method. And let's not forget the lake of fire at the end of test chamber 12.
Now, for something you might not have recognized, Chel also commits acts of violence. It's hard to image throwing the Companion Cube down the incinerator or dropping block on turrets violence, except when you consider how the designers treat these objects. They are personified. The Companion Cube is the closest thing that Chel gets to a friend in Portal 1. Thus, when you are asked to burn it, you actually feel a kind of regret and sadness. You wanted to hold onto that cube, it was the only thing that seemed to be your friend. Now, with the turrets, Chel is violent against them for two reasons, her own safety and the need to progress. As the player, we get a satisfaction when we put a turret out of commission, knowing that it can't hurt us. Despite being inanimate, its personality makes it more human and gives us a more visceral response. And with the final fight with GLaDOS, you can't tell me there isn't some real satisfaction when you finally break her.
This idea of personality goes even farther in Portal 2. Wheatley has loads of personality and GLaDOS' personality gets even more fleshed out. When Wheatley turns "evil" he makes purposeful acts of violence against you. Just try out the first minute in the chapter "This Is The Part Where He Kills You."
Portal doesn't get out of the violence bubble just because its a puzzle game. The personification that is added to the objects makes what would basically be smacking a trash can into an act that gives personal satisfaction to the smacker over the smackee. That is the crux of any mindset in a game, what does the player feel when doing an action.
Some snack food.