Saturday, January 12, 2013

What do you look for when you play a game?

                      When we play games, we often do so passively. What I mean by this is that we don't go into games expecting to take a particular thing out of it. Our requirements are pretty low: entertain us. This is very akin to the process some people take into reading books or watching movies. Not everyone goes into a book and movie expecting a search for meaning. And that's fine. I think the world has enough snobs like me, putting down movies because they aren't narratively up to snuff. Still, the flip side to this are the movies and books that captivate you over and over again. These pieces make it so that eventually you look for more than what you initially bargained for and as a result, enjoy the movie far more than you did before.
                      But sometimes we just don't know what we're supposed to be looking for. When it comes to books and movies, there are entire departments in universities, that devote themselves to answering the title of this post (except for their respective mediums instead). Video games, while appreciated by some places, don't really have a literature that sets up formal theory or explanation on what components of a game people should pay attention to. So we rely on critics and websites that are often ran by complete idiots. These people are in the business of selling games, making the integrity of their critique dubious (There are definitely some video game critics that I respect, but I think most of them are huge sellouts or sheep or both). So I've frequently needed to ask myself what should I be looking for when playing a game. This usually leads to more questions such as, should be I be looking for the same core things in a game? Does this mean that all video games have the same core components? If these components exist, then what are they and why are they so important to the video game process? The logical query goes on and on, but when I play games, none of these questions cross my head. Perhaps it's because my training as an English major kicks in. As an English major I find myself often dealing with text in a baptism by fire fashion. The best way to know what to look for is by jumping into the brisk waters of the uncharted and begin looking. If what you're supposed to find is somewhere in there, then if you look at every single detail you should hopefully find it. The life of an English major ( and basically anyone who does some sort of analysis) is the gathering of tiny strands of strings that may lead to a trap door or a dead end.
                     That was the short answer of what I look for when I play a game. I'm sure I have a less pretentious answer somewhere in me that would come shining through if you would ask me in person. But when thinking about it alone, I realize that often my answers to people in person are spurred by my insatiable desire to talk about video games with people. When I have to talk about this alone, I simply can't.
                     Games are rich pieces that can continually be analyzed. There is no right thing to look for and even if you're judging a game based on a small feature or simply on how awesome its soundtrack is, there is some validity to your opinion (if you can show evidence from the game that supports your claim about it). It'd do you an injustice for me to tell you what you should you look for.
                           I guess this begs the question of what the hell was the purpose of this post? It's to encourage all of you out there, who's willing to take the dive into playing games actively that they are not wasting their time. It makes me happy to take games apart and derive more meaning from them. Games can make me cry. They can make me laugh. They can make me shout out in anger and disgust. And I want to know why, just like how I want to know why I am so moved by the death of Dido or the triumph of McMurphy. So for all of you gamers out there that look for more, know you aren't alone. 

Thursday, January 3, 2013

What happened to Terranigma?

           For those of you who might be avid readers of my blog (basically 4 people according to my view reader), you may have noticed that I never finished the classic action RPG Terranigma. This may have caused some of you to assume that it shares the same fate of Final Fantasy and Secret of Mana, both games that I stopped playing due to intense boredom. Well no, Terranigma did not share their fate. The abrupt abandonment of Terranigma is just a product of bad timing. I was finished through I'd like to say 40% of the game and then RA training and school came around, essentially derailing me from the game. The question of why I haven't picked it back up is easy to answer. I've forgotten the gameplay system and so it would be an annoying learning curve to go back into playing the game, especially on my laptop. So I've just accepted that it's a game I'll try to do another time. 
            What I do remember about Terranigma is that it was shaping up to be an incredibly powerful game. The tone of the game was for the most part incredibly serious, lending to it an ominous feel. The game relied on one's natural inclination to bring balance to the world, since the world you're saving isn't a foreign land, but the actual decimated planet Earth. The game is very mindful on how it uses and portrays nature and it's heavily polluted Earth feels quite real to a 21st century gamer. I remember that some character plots were quite exciting and developed cultures for each type of organism. The love interest in the game was also very interesting and how she was going to connect later on is something I was curious to find out. 
         I can't give something my stamp of approval till I've legitimately finished it (on the contrary, I can give my stamp of disapproval to anything that displeases me in the first 20 minutes), but I can encourage you guys to try the game for yourself. It was a tad difficult at parts, but the game seems fairly paced and very fun to play through. Tell me how it turns out for you and if the reception is great enough (i.e. greater than 1 comment), then I will definitely revisit it. 

Wednesday, January 2, 2013

A blog gone astray

         I realized that yet again I've managed to turn this blog into what it's not. This blog's primary purpose was to review old games, thus the name "Retrospect". The idea was by reviewing these games with a modern take, unsung classics ( and some well known classics) would be revisited and cherished for the masterpieces they are. Well I'm glad to announce that I'm going to refocus the blog this coming year. The next few games I'm going to be reviewing are going to be indie games akin to the 8-bit era that I've been so endearing too. Then I'm going to go back to the Super Nintendo and search for more classics to enjoy.
        The purpose of reviewing old games is not only to get people to look back, but to also remind people the power of video games without the flashy graphics and complicated plots. I want to bring people back to a time where tools were limited and so developers did more with less. I believe if current game designers aren't playing these games, then they are truly missing out and doing an injustice to the games they are currently working on. Just like how a poet who hasn't read Shakespeare is completely blind to a world of possibility, a RPG game designer who hasn't played earthbound is completely blind to how amazing the normalcy of the world can be. I hope bringing this blog back into focus will make my devotion to it stronger and will help spur more conversation on the site (since it currently has none).