Quote:Update: Apogee Software and Deep Silver have issued a statement to Shacknews, confirming that there is a "situation at 3D Realms" but stressing they are not affected.
"Deep Silver and Apogee Software are not affected by the situation at 3D Realms," a representative for the companies has told us. "Development on the Duke Nukem Trilogy is continuing as planned."
In development at Frontline Studios, the Duke Nukem Trilogy represents three new Nintendo DS and PSP titles, with the first, Critical Mass, hitting in September. The trilogy is separate from Duke Nukem Forever, which was in the works at 3D Realms proper.
Original story: A very reliable source close to Duke Nukem Forever developer 3D Realms today confirmed to Shacknews that the development studio has been shut down.
The closure came about as a result of funding issues, our source explained, with the shut down said to affect both 3D Realms and the recently resurrected Apogee. Employees of both entities have already been let go.
Phone calls and e-mails to various 3D Realms veterans have thus far gone unanswered, with 3D Realms publishing partner Take-Two and Apogee partner Deep Silver likewise unavailable for comment.
The orders here don't mean a lot. This was inspired by watching some original-series Inspector Gadget episodes again... that show's still great... :)
Cartoon shorts
--
1. Looney Tunes/Merrie Melodies
2. Disney
3. Tom & Jerry
Television cartoons (for kids)
--
1. TMNT (original series)
2. Inspector Gadget (original series only)
3. Scooby-Doo (original or the newest TV series)
Television cartoons (for adults)
--
1. Futurama
2. Duck Dodgers in the 24th and 1/2 Century
3. The Simpsons (I guess, those two are way ahead really)
4. The Flintstones
As far as movies, I really don't know... Disney's the best at that, though.
Yesterday (the 28th) was the official anniversary, technically, and the 26th was the anniversary of the first day people who preordered (like me) could play the full final retail version.
And that's just since the official release, it'll be the fifth anniversary of the first public test open beta (when I first played the game) next month.
Amazing... it's already been that long? It doesn't feel it... it's still the best game released since, well, Guild Wars came out. Starcraft II will beat it I'm sure, but until then, nothing else matches it. I haven't been playing it all that much in the last year or two, compared to previously (I'm only at a thousand hours total, including beta) and haven't yet finished two of the four campaigns (though I am two thirds of the way through one of those two), but still, it's an amazing, amazing game that I still love. Because of the anniversary I've started playing again, and played over four hours yesterday... it's such an addictive game, it's so easy to play for a long time without even noticing...
The music and art design is as great as ever, too. Just amazing stuff, and it's great to see the game doing so well. :)
I swear, I thought for years that Angelfire had just deleted this page (as with most of the others I had). Yet, it still lives, and has been consuming resources on their servers for almost ten glorious years!
Still, I was a pretty terrific webmaster in my day.
Or "Geoshitties" as it was often called. I thought this died out long ago. In the Facebook and Blog and Twitter age, I'm not sure I even know anybody with a personal website anymore.
For a little nostalgia, here's a quintessentially late-90's Geocities webpage I found a few months ago: http://www.geocities.com/CollegePark/Campus/4076/. I sure do miss "About Me" pages and guest books. :(
I gotta say, it's about what I expected going in. Noting "it rips off God of War" kinda misses one obvious point that God of War "ripped off" Devil May Cry. Not that that's a bad thing necessarily.
I will say this. I don't think a DMC style game is the best fit for Dante's Inferno. Firstly, why are we Dante instead of Virgil? Sure Dante's in the name of the game but so was Zelda and I never minded not playing as her. Of the two, I would expect Virgil to be the one capable of fighting demons.
However, that brings me to my second issue, which is why the heck are we fighting all the time for this? They've clearly had to change large parts of the story and just use the poem as a rough guideline already. It's likely to only get worse.
Personally I say that, if they had to have fighting, it should have been a Zelda style adventure game. Then you'd have a lot more character interaction and exploring with some puzzle solving. Heck, it would probably have worked best as a pure adventure game without fighting. I think doing various tasks for lost souls would be very engaging. Of course I'm sorta the sort who thinks puzzle game interfaces should sorta go back to not highlighting interactable objects and giving you a list of possible ways to interact with things (touch, look, talk) instead of the do-all clicker so I'd end up going that way, but at any rate I think that of all the ways to travel through Dante's Inferno that'd be the most satisfying.
Opinion: The Breadth Of Game Design
by Jean-Paul LeBreton
April 27, 2009
Opinion: The Breadth Of Game Design
[In this fascinating opinion piece, BioShock 2 lead level designer Jean-Paul LeBreton looks to the past, present and future of gameplay mechanics, and how designers may use them to adequately reflect true human experience.]
---
As of 2009, the game industry seems to want two fairly contradictory1 things:
- Make games, using proven mechanics from the last 20 years, that sell millions of copies.
- Give people a broad range of experiences that affect them as powerfully as those found in other forms of art.
We can debate whether encompassing a broader range of human experience is indeed a goal of importance, but if even a God of War game feels the need to have scenes that evoke strong emotions, you might at least concede that it’s something many developers seem interested in furthering.
To cut right to the heart of the conflict I see here, I don’t think we as developers can continue holding our breath and waiting for games that revolve around shooting, driving, running and jumping to someday make a great leap into expressing all kinds of things they were heretofore incapable of.
The problem is that the better versed you are in game conventions, the easier it is to separate the core mechanics of a game from its fiction and theme, and thus say that a game like BioShock is a meditation on free will, the dangers of ideological extremes, and whatever else… despite the fact that you spend about 90 percent of it shooting people in the face.
The world can see this disparity more clearly, ironically by virtue of being less game-literate. For many among the gaming literate, that sort of insight hits pretty close to home.
For a perspective from the other end, I was struck by this comment on io9, a non-gamer blog, from this post about BioShock 2:
I can see how a first-person shooter would be interesting and entertaining, but I would have to fall short of “compelling” when you have to spend that much time, er, shooting.
This person wasn’t being an unreasonable jerk, or advocating the censorship of games. Shooting lots of insane people in a dark, weird place probably just isn’t their idea of a good time.
The common response to this from developers has been things like, “We just need to hire better writers”, “We need better technology”, “We need better artists”, “We need to spend more time planning out our stories”. However, we’ve been doing this for more than 10 years. Whereas if you look at the points where this medium has made the most progress, whenever the expressive capabilities of games have expanded significantly, it’s actually been because new mechanics, or significant developments upon existing ones [3], have emerged that enable new aesthetics. Those other things are quite important, but we seem to have them covered.
One problem is that, deep down, many designers view game mechanics more as structure (or “form”, if you prefer) than as content, when in fact they are both. If you treat them exclusively as structure when designing, you get all manner of unintended message and context… in a nutshell, ludonarrative dissonance. Which in 2009 means mashing the circle button to overcome an emotional inner conflict. Another designer’s analysis accepts this completely at face value, which if anything demonstrates that this issue transcends our usual valuations of craft and art. It’s almost invisible to us, but quite apparent to outsiders.
So as developers, we need to deal more honestly with the disparity between our reach and our grasp - which is to say, what we tell ourselves our games are about, versus what they are actually about. History will see this decade as the period when games struggled with their destiny in this way.
I’m optimistic though, both because of the progress we’ve made in the first three decades or so of our medium, and because the solutions are right under our noses, deep in the fabric of all games. We must search out, and in some cases rediscover, core mechanics that engender new types of experiences - rediscover, because many have already been done at the fringes, promising yet underexplored. Here are some examples I find especially interesting:
AI Companionship: Holding hands in Ico
You reach out to a non-player character and become connected to them. Suddenly you’re no longer a lone entity; you must account and take responsibility for an Other. Sometimes they’re a hindrance, sometimes a help. Whether or not you buy into the designers’ attempts to make you sympathize, you have a real connection to something that’s reinforced by strong kinesthetics. In Ico, there was plenty of platformy adventuring to go along with this, but it seems inevitable that someday a game will make this its primary emphasis.
Victory via Self-Enrichment: Culture in Civilization
Sometimes you can triumph over an adversary simply by being better than them. Rivals come to view your achievements as an example to be followed. Each accomplishment that enriches you internally affords you expansion and encroachment via indirect force. Tend to your own garden and you will become powerful and influential without firing a shot.
Social Reasoning: Diplomacy
The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Many wargames have a diplomacy component, which gets especially interesting when other humans are in the mix. However in a game where direct force isn’t possible, social standing would be its own capital. This is a large part of why character-driven TV shows are popular; humans enjoy exploring the workings and permutation spaces of social networks.
Hopefully this gives an idea of the breadth of directions available to us as designers. It’s equally fruitful to look to the past, at how certain ideas bubbled up from nowhere to expand the expressive range of games.
Circa 1997, before Thief and Metal Gear Solid, Stealth was one of those underexplored mechanics. Suddenly, as it caught on, there were new play sensations we’d never had before - being some combination of sneaky, clever, afraid, transgressive. It transformed players’ perspectives on familiar game environments. It even brought some new people into the medium.
These are basic changes that everyone feels deeply, from a jaded critic to someone completely new to games. They are interactively “true” in ways that a change in setting can only rarely be, no matter how beautifully realized.
As a medium, we’ve proven we can seek out novel settings, themes, art styles, characters and tropes. We have other media to learn from, after all. New mechanics, however, are uniquely difficult. The only inspiration we can find for them is human experience itself, and then comes the struggle of synthesizing, systematizing and iterating. This is the central challenge of working in this medium, and it’s never been more important that we embrace it.
[1] While some of this could be explained as the disparity between what game publishers want and what developers want, that might be giving too little credit to the former and too much to the latter. If there were more proven game mechanics and styles that enabled new experiences, publishers would probably sell them. Past a certain point, the burden of proof is on us.
[2] I want to make it clear that I’m not disparaging GoW:CoO, or speaking in any sense other than constructive criticism. I haven’t played it; in all likelihood it’s a great action game. I’m simply holding it up as an unwitting example of a much more existential crisis in game design today, much as other designers have held up stuff I’ve worked on in a similar light.
[3] Movement is something that gets re-discovered every so often; Mirror’s Edge being the recent example. Flaws in execution aside, players recognized there was something unique there.
----
So just ...so I understand, a game-story where the main character kills enemies cant be viewed as a compelling insight in to humanity or a richly story driven experience?
Of course, everyone can edit anything (though I think in this case you have to get an account), but I encourage everyone to play around with it as time permits.
