Game Invader : Discovery and Exploration in Videogames

(this article appeared originally in my 'Game Invader' Column for the New Indian Express.)

For me, it began with Indiana Jones.

More specifically, the videogame 'Raiders of the Lost Ark' for the venerable ATARI 2600 system which was the first game I played which featured an inventory, multiple screens, and characters you could interact with (all standard features in modern adventure games, but this was 1982 ! )

For someone who cut his gamer teeth on single-screen worlds of Defender, Pac-Man and Space Invaders, this was a new proposition altogether. There were several different screens - a market, and caves, and a temple, and a mesa field! You could buy treasure maps and guns from sinister sheikhs! A pickpocket would steal your stuff if you weren't careful. There was a raving lunatic in the marketplace. My mind reeled, and we played it to death.

Exploring trees, caves and marketplaces was as exciting in Raiders of The Lost Ark twenty years ago as it is in Oblivion today. Believe me, in twenty years, Oblivion screenshots will look just as ridiculous.

Today, I understand why 'Raiders of the Lost Ark' was so exciting to me – I'm the kind of gamer who enjoys the exploration of worlds. I, like millions of other gamers, am happiest when travelling vast, expansive fantasy lands, meeting interesting characters, battling mythical beasts and being in a great story. 'Raiders' was the first game to give me a taste of the reasons I would list Baldur's Gate 2, and Fallout among my all-time favourites.

The amazing following enjoyed by games like the Grand Theft Auto series and the role-playing genre in general is largely due to this sort of appeal. Wandering through a free-roaming virtual city performing interesting, or even incredible feats offers a vicarious pleasure that connects with the very basic sense of wonder and adventure present in all of us.

Whole genres of gaming such as adventure and role-playing are founded on this very basic appeal. Action games such as Halo and Half-Life have also benefited greatly by creating richly detailed universes with great stories to embellish their top-notch gameplay. Even gamers whose chief pleasure is blowing things to smithereens seem to enjoy doing it in environments that they can explore as well!

In any modern role-playing game, in addition to adventuring and participating in thrilling battles, players also have to indulge in seemingly mundane activities such as shopping, repairing their worn-out equipment, eating, drinking, gossiping and finding places to rest. Far from boring us to death, these features actually add to the sense of immersion in the gameworld.

Richly detailed gaming environments fuel this sense of discovery. The exploratory gameplay involved in checking out every nook and corner of the gameworld for hidden surprises and delightful . . er . . ah . . . delights is used extensively by games like GTA and the Zelda series to draw gamers in further, engrossing them for several additional hours. There isn't a gamer who has played these titles who hasn't been rewarded with some precious bauble for taking the trouble to peek behind a rock, or explore an inocuous looking back alley.

Interestingly, virtual gameworlds seem to delight us in equal measure when they offer us settings far removed from reality (Oblivion, Mass Effect), or closely resembling it (GTA). While getting to know a virtual universe, it seems to matter little whether it's science fiction (Star Wars) , fantasy (Dungeons and Dragons), or close to reality (GTA again) – we love playing about in them all. We also seem to equally enjoy saving worlds, or exploiting them for fun and profit. As long as they're fun to discover, the game developers are getting our money.

Thanks to videogames, we don't have to be Indiana Jones to travel to exotic worlds and kick ass.

Game Invader : Idiotic game design decisions

Mass Effect's MAKO. Grrrrrrrrrrr. And no, that's not the engine noise.

If you've driven the MAKO in Bioware's Mass Effect, you're probably aware that it's an annoying, frustrating part of the game that mostly distracts from the core gameplay.

Most of the gamers who played Mass Effect are fans of Bioware and their brand of gripping storytelling, great characters and tense, tactical battles. The last thing they'd want to be doing is driving a crappy-handling armoured vehicle and indulging in pointless rail shooting sequences that interuupt the gameplay they shelled out sixty dollars for. And yet, for some reason, Bioware thought it was a good idea to force them to do exactly that.

Time after time, we see inexplicable features and minigames like this finding their way into the games we love, making us love them a bit less. Jumping puzzles in Half-Life. Monkey Combat in Monkey Island 4.

The excuse usually trotted out is 'genre blending'. Introducing aspects from different genres into a game to give gamers more value for money. Nonsense!

Don't get me wrong, there are games that do just this, and do it brilliantly. The Zelda games have been blending elements of adventure, role-playing and action into a delectable package for years. Games like Shenmue and Sid Meier's Pirates! are also shining examples where gameplay from different genres are used to add to the core gameplay, instead of detracting from it.

However, these are titles where the gameplay has been conceived with genre-blending in mind. It's quite different from shoehorning elements into a game with the misguided intentions of 'adding' something to the experience. Plus, unless you're a Shigeru Myamoto, Sid Meier or Yu Suzuki, it isn't easy.

Let's face it – action gamers want action. Racing gamers want to race. Role-players want story, character development and number-crunching stats. Adventure loyalists want clues and mysteries. That's the reason they spend hard-earned coin on the games that they want to play.

So it's stupid to force features on them that they don't want. Adding silly minigames or tacked-on features don't attract new audiences, but certainly annoy, and ultimately alienate the core market. Whether such suggestions come from ill-informed marketing suits or overambitious game designers is anybody's guess, but it's inarguably a cartload of bovine manure.

Which is why the great designers avoid it. Imagine if Sid Meier had said “Hey guys – let's add a fighting minigame to resolve combat in Civilization IV!”. Or if Bungie had tried to add some puzzle solving into Halo 3. Those great games would certainly have been diminished, not enhanced by such meddling, and the designers probably knew that.

The FPS genre has probably understood this best in recent years. Which is why it's probably the most thriving and vibrant of all – with the most quality titles coming out in the recent past. Games like Half Life 2, Halo 3, Call of Duty 4, and even Bioshock, for all their storytelling skills, are shooters at heart. It's the gunplay that counts, the action that makes gamers rave and crave.
And think about the horrors! Baldur's Gate 3 with platform jumping elements to attract Daxter fans! God of War 3 with a checkers minigame to appeal to board game fans! Forza Motorsport 3 with a lame-ass storyline! The mind shudders with fear.

I'm not against attempting to broaden the scope of games – I just believe it should only be attempted by the most skilled and visionary of designers. Er . . except Peter Molyneux, that is.

On being negative

Someone said this to me : " Life is too short to be negative".

But, by assuming that life is too short, isn't she being negative? And hence violating her own advice?

I helpfully pointed it out, but my efforts weren't well received.Luckily, she's too far away to slap me in disgust.

Long distance is teh_pWnage.

If Hitler had been killed off early . . .

I've actually read two separate books in which the authors have opined that the world would probably have been a lot worse if Der Fuhrer has been nipped in the bud. Strange indeed.

The first one is 'Making History' by Stephen Fry, in which the author steps back in time, and prevents Hitler from being born. This has the unfortunate side-effect of causing an even more dangerous and evil man to become the leader of the Nazi party - and much hilarity ensues.

The second is a very different book - the superbly retro-classic OMAC (One Man Army Corps) miniseries by John Byrne, in which the most badass superhero ever (trust me, I've read everything) has the same bright idea as Mr.Fry, and promptly wades into ole Adolf's heavily guarded residence, takes out a Rambo-esque number of vehicles, installations and infantry units before cheerily frying Hitler to a crisp. Many years later, OMAC regrets his actions, as the world that ensues after this becomes one of those sterile, fun-less utopias seen in disturbing movies starring Jude Law.

So maybe the old rascal served some purpose? A scary thought.

The Gods have appeared before us, and they have favoured us with five sets of divine brilliance.

Wasn't it the kind of sporting display that makes you glad to be alive and a witness to it?


Bud Collins has called it the greatest tennis match ever played. He should know.


I watched it from my living room, thousands of miles away from where it was happening, and yet I was a part of it. As was every single person who was privileged enough to witness two great champions produce a once-in-a-lifetime reminder of what pure sport is supposed to be.


This was a day I felt sorrow for those among us who don't watch sports – those misguided mortals who would rather watch a movie or step out for a nice dinner. Sunday's final was perhaps the finest example of the kind of rivetting experience that only sport can deliver.


Blasted thing went on till almost 2 am (in India), and the afterglow lasted for almost another hour. Brilliant. Nadal vs. Federer was inarguably a shining instance of teh_pWnage.

Game Invader : Worst Game Ever

I finally played Big Rigs. And, in order to profit in some way from my misery, I promptly wrote a column on it for good ole Zeitgeist.

Read it here, and don't mind the punctuation ;)

Elsewhere on the same paper (right next to my column, in fact), Videep Vijay Kumar reviews SHOGO : Mobile Armor Division.

Game Invader : Drop Dead Gorgeous

This article first appeared in my column for Zeitgeist, the New Indian Express' Saturday supplement in Chennai. They don't seem to have uploaded it to their site, so I've taken the liberty

Two games I've played in the past week are notable for being among the best looking games I've ever played. They're Assassin's Creed , and Colin McRae : DIRT – both titles have managed to drop my jaw.

I happen to be one of the loudest voices in the 'gameplay over graphics' camp, and I still stand by that credo. However, it's nice once in a while when a game (or two) comes along that simply blows you away by simpy being stunning.

DIRT is far and away the best looking racer I've played. Period. The car models, tracks and environments simply bristle with life and detail – grass rustles, dirt and gravel fly off the track, debris scatters and remains on the track as you make another pass. The damage to your car is also spectacular – dirt and grime, scratches and dents, and cracks on your windscreen all show up to realistically reflect the wear and tear that would be obvious on any car driven as badly as my Chevrolet SUV in DIRT. In fact, I normally prefer racing from a completely first-person view, but DIRT has me switching to third person so I could fully take in the graphic splendour this game delivers.

Who says dirt is ugly? A poke in the eye!

The DIRT menu screens are the most pleasing in recent memory – it's a delight to simply browse through the splendidly designed menus that take you through the game's tutorials and various game modes. Top notch. Deserving of a 'best UI graphics' awards – in fact, they should institute a category just so that DIRT could win!

Assassin's Creed needs no introduction to gamers, but I can't help stating how brilliant the game looks. The level of detail present in the gameworld is unprecedented – no other game has felt so alive. While other fantastically detailed worlds exist (Oblivion, Mass Effect), Assassin's Creed surpasses those in terms of sheer believability. Walking through the crowded streets of the game's locations, you truly get a sense of moving among living, breathing people. The excellent sound design and voice work augment this, but it is unquestionably the visuals that deliver the knockout punch.

Altair effortlessly moves through the crowd, like Karamchand in that classic opening sequence.

Altair's cloak billows in the wind as he free-runs through the treacherous, dizzying levels like some sort of medieval spider-man. The animations are fluid and flawless, the textures meticulously crafted and the colours muted and believable. A pleasure to play, and a treat to watch.

Of course, it helps that both games are fun to play. If they weren't, I wouldn't have lasted long enough to take in all the breathtaking eye candy they pack within. Still, it would be pretentious to assume that the graphic excellence in these titles is in any way subservient to the gameplay – they stand tall as examples of games which would have been less fun if they didn't look as good as they do. A case of graphics greatly enhancing gameplay.

It's also important to note here that DIRT and Assassin's Creed are not 'Crysis' gorgeous – they don't depend purely on technical strengths to strut their stuff. I ran DIRT on the humble XBOX 360, and Assassin's Creed on a laptop running a GeForce 8400 GS, a decent card, but not a monster by any means. Crysis wouldn't even run on these configurations, let alone look pretty. It's important, in my book, to deliver good visuals on medium range systems, and certainly on next gen consoles. (While on that topic, take a bow, Valve, for your source engine)

Games like these are poster children for the 'next-gen' gaming experience – games that make it easy to believe that total immersion is eventually possible, and that one day we won't be able to distinguish virtual worlds from real ones.

Keep It Simple, Stupid!

This article first appeared in my column for Zeitgeist, the New Indian Express' Saturday supplement in Chennai. They don't seem to have uploaded it to their site, so I've taken the liberty

Playing Metroid Prime 3 : Corruption on the Wii is an eye-opener, even for a battle-scarred oldie like me. In perhaps one of the best control schemes to use the Wiimote's motion sensing capability, Nintendo has once again indicated the direction in which gaming needs to progress.

Consider this – the modern videogame controller has two analog 'joysticks', one directional pad, and anywhere in the region of ten (yes, TEN) buttons arranged in finger-twisting positions. To be able to effectively play a modern day shooter like Call of Duty or Halo, you need to use every single one of these in various combinations. To the experienced gamer, this may seem like no big deal, but it makes these wonderful games extremely difficult to learn for someone with no previous experience.

In my personal experience, there have been numerous instances where I've sat down with an eager friend, all set to introduce them to videgames, only to have them quickly lose interest because they're overwhelmed by the controls. Rest of the evening spent over beers and television. Much less fun.

As has been the case all too often in the history of gaming, it's Nintendo who is showing the way.

In Metroid Prime 3, you aim the gun by simply pointing with the Wiimote, wherever you want to aim. Just like a real gun. This simple modification alone dramatically reduces the coordination levels required to master the rest of the controls. Yes, there are still several button presses to master, but by removing one level of abstraction from the mix, the designers free up the gamer's mind to focus on the other aspects of the control scheme. Resident Evil 4 is another game that lends itself beautifully to the Wii controller – and is in fact even simpler to learn than Metroid.

The control schemes for these games aren't quite perfect yet, but they inarguably are giant strides in the direction of more intuitive, less abstract control schemes for videogames.

And with the advent of intuitive controls, one great roadblock towards the mass adoption of videogaming as a hobby will have been removed. For gaming to compete with movies and music as forms of entertainment, designers need to keep the games simple to play. It's easy to watch the best movies. It's easy to listen to the best music. By comparison, it's insanely difficult to play the best videogames.

Of course, I'm not suggesting oversimplification to a degree that the games become boring, I firmly believe that most games today tend to err in the direction of packing in too many features at the cost of accessibility. RTS and FPS games are the major culprits, but other genres aren't immune to these failings either.

Nintendo gets this. Which is why they're working hard and smart towards reducing button presses in favour of easier to understand control actions like pointing, punching, swinging and tapping which normal human beings can learn easily, and get on with the fun part of actually playing the game, as opposed to playing hour-long 'tutorial' levels just in order to get started. In fact, even the process of learning to use the Wiimote is far more enjoyable than a similar process with a conventional controller.

The Wii and the DS (Ninty's equally innovative handheld system) have outsold every other contemporary gaming platform worldwide by large margins. There's a reason for this – a reason other gaming hardware and software developers should do well to heed.

Game Invader - When Role-Playing isn't Role-Playing

I've cribbed for a long time that modern role-playing games are increasingly moving away from the core role-playing aspects of the genre, focussing instead on the action, strategy, storytelling and exploration aspects.

Read more on the subject at the latest installment of 'Game Invader'.

Elsewhere , Videep Vijay Kumar reviews Assassin's creed. He always gets the nice graphics. I get a bad caricature. Eh? Oh. Buy Zeitgeist (the Indian Express Saturday Supplement) and you'll understand.

Game Invader - handhelds and fanboys

Two more links to my columns on zeitgeist :

• Why you should buy a handheld
• Gamers, don't be fanboys, try something new.

Actually, the second one is based on an earlier post on this blog, but I can be forgiven for plagiarizing from myself ;)