The Escapist, Issue 29: The Virtual Coffeeshop

[Evil Avatar]

Get a group of gamers together without anything to game with and inevitably they turn to talking about games. Our authors wax philosophical, as one does over a good cup of joe, in this week's issue of The Escapist: The Virtual Coffeeshop (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/issue/29). Articles include:

John Szczepaniak: Late 1980s and Beyond! (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/issue/29/3)
Some of the world's commentators say videogames are either incapable of having meaning, or are only now reaching that stage. John Szczepaniak disagrees, providing examples from gaming history.

Pat Miller: Metal Gear Pacifist (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/issue/29/7)
Beneath the stealth action of Hideo Kojima's genre-defining series lurks a message that many gamers probably never notice. Pat Miller explains how gameplay can be used to convey messages in ways that other media can't.

Patrick Dugan: An Exit (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/issue/29/11)
"Most game designers would balk at the term 'interactive drama,' off handedly dismissing the possibility of virtual characters and social gameplay as being contrary to the nature of computers." Patrick Dugan looks at Façade, an interactive drama.

Dana Massey: History Through Games (http://www.escapistmagazine.com/issue/29/15)
"It is the responsibility of society as a whole to make sure future generations, not just stuffy historians at the local college, remember the past. Yet, doing so requires they want to learn, and that is why I look to the entertainment industry to pass along this knowledge to the masses." Dana Massey discusses preserving history through games.

[Roc Ingersol]

Issue 29: The Virtual Coffeeshop
aka: Suck It, Ebert.

[gatmog]

it seems as if history is being lost

Excuse me?

How can this person omit the Age of Empires series? Aside from the latest iteration, it was pretty good at preserving historical accuracy. Or better yet, an entire genre of games, ie. purist wargames like Austerlitz, Panzer General, or Sid Meier's Gettysburg and Antietam?

This is a fascinating topic that was basically turned into another disposable "we need more [insert genre here] games!" statement instead of looking at what has been done in the past (not just games released in the last 12 months) and ways to improve their accessibility, while still providing some kind of educational value.

[Rirath]

and that is why I look to the entertainment industry to pass along this knowledge to the masses." Dana Massey discusses preserving history through games.

I don't want yer fancy book learnin' in my game! As the poster above me points out, several games are historically educational already... I would think Civ 4 and AoE alone would score major points. But seriously, it's the entertainment industry. It's not their job to educate the masses.

[Ghostpilot]

I don't want yer fancy book learnin' in my game! As the poster above me points out, several games are historically educational already... I would think Civ 4 and AoE alone would score major points. But seriously, it's the entertainment industry. It's not their job to educate the masses.


Quoted from the "History Through Games" article.

"You cannot lose sight of the main focus of a game: fun. However, I am not so jaded to believe people do not want to learn and explore their past if they can have fun doing it. As games grab more of our society's attention, they take it away from areas that had previously preserved history in the minds of the average person. In doing so, game developers take on part of the responsibility, and not only give a generally accurate portrayal of the past, but also make sure people can learn a thing or two from their game."

Speaks for itself. =p

[TheKeck]

So, my life is incomplete because I've never played the Metal Gear Solid games. If I ever do play the third, one, though, I know to KILL NOBODY!

It made me think of the Hitman games. The premise is very violent, but you are highly rewarded for taking as little life as possible. The extreme of this can be seen in wanton violence. Most of the time, any Hitman level can be beaten quite easily and quickly by going on a shooting spree. The fun and challenge, however, come when you try to go undetected, rather than murdering everyone.

EDIT: There is one ironic problem with Hitman, though. I said that you are "highly rewarded" for avoiding killing. The major reward you get for beating a given level on "Silent Assassin" is that you are given a nifty gun for your arsenal. So, by the end of the game you have a bunch of powerful weapons... that you never use because all you do is sneak around and not kill people!!!

[Spigot]

The Thief games were the same way. You could kill people, but I never used my sword in any of the games unless it was absolutely necessary. By the time the third game rolled around, all I needed were a steady supply of water arrows and my trusty blackjack. Anything else usually languished in my pack unused (noise & moss arrows aside).

Heck, the higher difficulties in the Thief titles had "No Kill" requirements. The tales of people 'ghosting' their way through missions without being detected or leaving any trace of their passage are pretty impressive.