06-02-2009, 11:42 PM
Quote:Four years ago, Steven Spielburg told us that video games were on the way to becoming a viable storytelling medium that could tap into a viewer's/player's emotional core, but it "wasn't there yet". Fast-forward to today, with an odd advance or two in the game industry, and he thinks that the end is almost in sight.
What I read in Spielburg's statements and why I think he is correct:
Each of us can throw out our anecdotal experiences with games and say "such-n-such game" gave me a wonderful emotional response. And generally the games people report in this way are the same few over and over (Aeris in FFVII is probably the all time highest reported instance.) Despite this, though, games in general don't seem to have any ability to consistantly create or maintain such an emotional impact.
There are two things working against video games that prohibit any sort of consistancy in emotional impact. The first is simply the cost of entrance. By this I don't mean price of hardware or software but more learning curve related to controls and the system elements of how the game worlds work. This is not a small hurdle for people to overcome. The Wii-mote brought a lot of people into games that probably normally wouldn't, but it definately didn't bring them towards games which have any chance for emotional impact. In the end it remains a gimick; any new gamer that jumped on with the Wii probably isn't playing Metroid or Zelda or any of the Wii games that could be said to have a higher emotional journey. They are still playing Wii Sports.
The other side of this coin which ends up working against games having emotional impact is the effect of metagaming. For those gamers which pass the cost of entrance and get a hold of control and system schemes they very soon become burdened with the effects of metagaming. Each new game you pick up ends up getting assimilated into the schemes you've created for previous games and the opportunity to actually challenge a gamers emotions from story etc. are limited just based on the fact that the experience they are having with actual gameplay has already been routine. I personally have played enough MMO's now that I have, unfortunately, lost the ability to be suprised by them. I have so sufficiently internalized the system of these games that there no longer remains any real feeling of exploration or that "anything may happen." I can pretty close to 100% understand what my gameplay experience will entail within the first 30 minutes or so of playing these games and that experience will pretty much conform throughout any amount of time I invest in the game.
These two factors working together create a very small margin for creating an emotional effect on the player. A game creator pretty much needs to release a game on the early edge of new tech (FFVII came out at the dawn of 3d gaming and as such gamers had not yet created schemes for these games) so that gamers who have a hold on the control issues will still not be limited by metagaming.
If Natal can do what MS and Spielburg hopes, it can be that item which lowers the cost of entrance that the Wii-mote wasn't. It can allow people that aren't totally adept at the control complexities to play games which would generally be relegated to the "hardcore." And thus increase the gap between Cost of Entry and Metagaming, allowing a much wider swathe in which games can effect a players emotional experience.