[MUD-Dev] DGN: Reasons for play [was: Emergent Behaviors spawned from...]

[Max Battcher]

Sean Howard wrote:

> Frank Lloyd Wright once created a gas station. I doubt very much
> that he'd ever thought about the problem before being presented
> with it, and yet, somehow, he managed to create a magnificent gas
> station. Likewise, when contracted to build a low cost housing
> complex, he managed to make something that was greater than the
> sum of its parts. Each building he designed was unique to the
> needs of the problem.

I would just like to point out that Wright's "magnificent gas
station", albeit architecturally somewhat interesting (but not by
much without taking into account the rest of the project that was
never actually built), was not of sound engineering.  Wright
considered the aesthetics only, and his original plan called for the
gas tank to be above the station so that the pumps could have the
easier job of "running downhill" and that the pumps would take up
less space and look nicer. However, as I hope most people would
agree, I really wouldn't want a large tank of gasoline above my
head.  Not to mention that it would never pass modern fire codes in
more major cities.

Back to the original point, no designer is perfect or infallible.
The one hit wonder isn't a bad thing, it just shows that either
someone was content with their earlier burst of passion or never
took the time to learn from any following failures.  I also think
that it shows some of the fickleness of "the Crowd".  Why does one
project succeed and another fail?

I also find it interesting that you, Sean, deride passion and yet
say that we need more dedicated game designers.  Are you claiming
(as it reads) that Frank Lloyd Wright had no passion for what he
did?

> Just once, I'd like to see this industry recognize a Frank Lloyd
> Wright before they become frustrated and leave.

That isn't going to be solved by removing the passion from game
making.

Most auteurs derive their skill from a passion to do things as their
vision sees it, whether they succeed or fail spectacularly.  The
failing one-hit wonder may be just as good an auteur as the seasoned
successful veteran, she or he just might not have found their niche
in the market, or found the right projects to direct their passion
into.  The key here is that the major publishers need to risk just
as much on the one hit wonders as on the veterans, and be able to
recognize good talent and real passion/vision when they see it.

The easiest role model here is Hollywood.  Some of my favorite
movies have become the ones from auteurs that have "failed" in box
offices... such as "Brazil" and "The Hudsucker Proxy".  Studios
didn't cut the auteurs behind these "failed" proejcts...  they gave
them more money to try again.  "12 Monkeys" and "O Brother, Where
Art Thou", with respect to each autuer, are two more "successful"
films filmed after said "failures".

On this topic, there was a Gamasutra rant recently on how the
industry should pay more attention to the rise of auteurs, and the
author predicts it will start with indie games.

  http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20050721/pfeifer_01.shtml

--
--Max Battcher--
http://www.worldmaker.net/
Current State of Mind: Vacation Preparation
_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev