4th September 2004, 10:16 AM
I meant that for the idea that the game would not just seem to the player to be totally open-ended, but it would actually not be guiding the player towards preset goals. That seems like an incredible task that would require the game to constantly look at what the player is doing and adjust accordingly, like the DM of a tabletop RPG... and that is something that computers cannot do. They can only follow instructions, which requires some degree of restrictions of freedom of action.
As a medium... some games have succeeded in being more. But generally that 'more' is admittedly being more like other mediums -- more like a book, more like a movie, more like a series of works of art, etc, and not 'more like what the interactive medium is fully capable of doing that only it can do'. But given what games can do now, the best way to make the game more than just average is probably TO make it like other mediums. While trying to do something that makes it do more than that medium could with interactivity.
Yes, they haven't reached their full potential for sure. But I wouldn't say that they have done nothing, not even close, and I'm sure everyone here would agree with me on that...
As a medium... some games have succeeded in being more. But generally that 'more' is admittedly being more like other mediums -- more like a book, more like a movie, more like a series of works of art, etc, and not 'more like what the interactive medium is fully capable of doing that only it can do'. But given what games can do now, the best way to make the game more than just average is probably TO make it like other mediums. While trying to do something that makes it do more than that medium could with interactivity.
Yes, they haven't reached their full potential for sure. But I wouldn't say that they have done nothing, not even close, and I'm sure everyone here would agree with me on that...