Zynga only wants money. But so does Nintendo. And Blizzard. And Valve.

Photo by aresauburn

“Blizzard and Nintendo don’t care about money; they only care about making fun games.  Zynga just wants to turn a profit by making terrible games.”

Not exactly.

Video games, like painting, music, film, and theater, are a form of art.  At the very least, they are a creative media that can be used to express any number of themes, ideas, fictional stories or worlds and convey experiences.  For this reason, many players and developers have deep emotional attachments to the games that they play, games that touched their hearts and took them places they had never been before.

Companies that make these kinds of games are held in the highest esteem by players and fans.  Nintendo’s Legend of Zelda games have always been known for their charm, easy-to-understand controls and challenges, and their flair for presentation and playability.  Valve’s Half-Life and Portal games have many die hard fans who greatly respect the artistic integrity of the plot, storyline, and characters surrounding Gordon Freeman’s adventures.  And Blizzard’s Warcraft, Starcraft, and Diablo franchises have given the company a seemingly unshakable reputation for high quality, polished experiences that are near-perfect.  Each of these companies make the highest quality games in their own way, and saying that a game is “A Blizzard Game”, “A Valve Game”, or “A Nintendo Game” carries with it a mark of passion and dedication associated with those development teams.

However, other companies make games that are not as popular with the traditional gaming crowd.  Currently the popular scapegoat is social networking companies, such as Zynga or Playdom.  Games like Farmville or Sorority Life are wildly profitable, but they are often criticized for sacrificing fun and player entertainment in exchange for turning a buck.  Clicking on crops day in and day out just doesn’t seem to have the same “labor of love” feel that went into a Zelda game.  Rather, these games appear to some to be evil slot machines designed to maximize monetization.

This complaint is a serious misconception of the intentions of game companies.  Those who voice this complaint believe that commercial games must be fun, that they must be of the highest quality, and that their number one, ultimate goal is to make a critically acclaimed product.

This is false.

WAIT! There is more to read… read on »

A Necessary Evil: Grinding in Games

“I hate World of Warcraft.”

“What?  Have you ever even played it?”

“Yes.”

“How far did you get?”

“I got to about level 60.”

“And you didn’t like it?”

“No.  I hated it.”

I was amazed to find that a friend of mine had put in weeks of time into Blizzard’s World of Warcraft, and yet he felt like he didn’t have any fun.  He described the experience as though he was being tricked into playing, that he was “grinding” all the time.  He kept on playing, but for some reason, had an internal struggle that pulled him forward without providing excitement or enjoyment.  He was miserable.

Most gamers know the term “grinding”.  Grinding can and has been called many things, but generally it is defined as when the player needs to do the same thing over and over again in order to progress, seemingly for arbitrary reasons.  Dragon Quest was one of the classic RPG’s that seemed to be defined by grinding.  Enemies would suddenly appear that required the player be at Level 15 in order to beat, when currently the player was probably around Level 12.  The result?  In order to go further, the player needed to go back and fight the same old monsters over and over again, until their Level was high enough.

Grind is generally viewed as a bad thing.  But rather than just complain about it, how can a grind be understood from a game developer’s perspective?  Is there ever a time a grind should be used, and how can it be avoided? WAIT! There is more to read… read on »