quote: Original post by Ketchaval
The Simpsons are a great example of a television series that caters to many audiences at the same time. There are jokes that children will laugh at (visual gags etc.), as well as jokes that only older people will understand. There are (undoubtedly?) some cultural references that only Americans will get. There is something for everyone.

Likewise The Matrix delivers gunfights, kung-fu action, atmospheric lighting and costumes. But, it also delivers an intelligently thoughtout world, and invites the audience to consider the philosophical (and moral?) issues that it raises.

The Matrix also contains a variety of references to ancient mythology, but also (creates some new mythology?).


So, is there anything to gain from adding layers of "interest" to our games? Through short bits of DIALOGUE, and SCENERY etc. Having the core of the game that should be enjoyable to a wide base of people, but then adding in cultural references, hidden symbolism etc.

For example you could have symbolic moments in the game, such as a "rebirth" scene where the protagonist has to go down a garbage shute such as in Nikita, and the awakening scene in The Matrix.

Subtle references to other games (ie. intertextual references) could be put into games so that people who have played lots of games would notice them..


But what would be the benefits? On the level I'm suggesting, I'd see that it would give more depth for analysis and discussion amongst the more "intellectual" members of the gaming community, but would this benefit your game? Maybe, possibly, this might help to add to the longevity or word of mouth about the game. On the level of adding jokes, most games don't involve jokes anyway.

(I like to post)

There are benefits to layering interest as you call it. You will find it in film all the time. Key objects (the film term) such as the maltese falcon (the subject of a film) used as a simple prop or background set dressing in another film. Using primary character names from previously done movies as bit parts (like in Aliens two, where the synthetic being makes reference to a subject that died on the operating table while having the alien removed from him having the same name as a character the actor played early in his career), or unseen characters in a subsequent film. Borrowing is done all the time, and I think it signals somebody did their homework in terms of symbological supplementation (in this sensory overload world, all the supportive symbology you can pack into your content will help drive the brand, so to speak, and help drive the impression you are trying to make) and it is also I think (just imho) a bit of a tip of the hat to the pioneers who came before without who's work we would not be where we are today, and a bit of the tongue in cheek as well when it comes to visually displaying our artistic influences.

It's pretty hard to create a whole new mythology, without making direct references to existing ones, simply because the rationales are so well defined, and logically hard to top. What is is usually more like is just old mythology redesigned and reframed/rephrased, so it has a new 'perceptual' look, feel, smell and taste to the perciever.

I think part of the benefit also is that it shows without saying or wasting screen time or screen space that you know your field, have the ability to play with it (play as in 'what is currently occuring onscreen in action'; not to be confused with 'the moment') and perhaps some people consider that a sign of experience.

Jokes and humorous references are different, and I think that the latter is useful, even if as a lighten up symbol in a seriously harsh level moment. A rough example might be on a Duke Nukem level a Good Humor ice cream truck deformed in an explosion halfway stuck into a wall with the sound track for the ice cream call all children practially know running slowly and dystonically to sound like Jimi Hendrix's "All Along The Watchtower" every other few seconds or so. It's a medium, and you are an artist, if you find significance of expression in something though some technique, significantlh express yourself, even if the expression is very subtle and buried under two or three layers of visual or audial clutter. Somebody will get it and appreciate it. Some don't. I've had directors tell me to take something out of a script because it legitimately didn't belong in there, prolly cause it was only funny to me.

Heck, I've been writing screenplays for almost twenty years, and even though I am not famous or rich, I am very good at what I do, and I can go to the movies and utter the next line before it's exhibited a great deal of the time because I know the structure so well I can anticipate what is likely to be exposited next according to filmic storytelling rules, inflexible ones or flexible ones.

I also think this kind of practice shows that you know the rules well enough to not break them, but bend them.

I had to consciously work to avoid sticking in Lara Croft Tombraider things into my adventure game. When the things were just too strong, and worked for my that construct of that part of the game, I either had to redesign them so they fit more my approach to adventure gaming, or, they had to show my thumbprint on them or they were just too good a device to not use for the needs of the game curve (a synthesis of player choice activities and expectations and the requirements of the game story to transition to the next level of challenge on the macro level of design, so the player does not feel like they are chasing their tail looking for something that may or may not be there).

This is all highly subjective what I have said here, and may not work for everyone. For me, the point is to be artistically satisfied, technically competent, and commercially viable. Whatever I can create that gets me into that zone is valid use.

Adventuredesign



[edited by - adventuredesign on June 29, 2003 8:23:51 PM]