The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I want a career in games. Possibly starting off as a programmer/developer for a small games company, before eventually being elevated to the same exalted level as the ‘big guys’ like Miyamoto and Molyneux.
After a lengthy argument with my parents over this - they aren’t sure that a games programmer is a ‘viable’ option for their son, which is understandable - I eventually realised that my mother’s main reason against me becoming a games designer was the excess of violence in videogames. It took me fifteen minutes with her and a copy of Black & White to prove that not all modern games are mindless and gratuitous as far
as violence is concerned.
This got me thinking though. Obviously, many games - particularly the big ones - are violent. Recent additions to the fold include ‘Return to Castle Wolfenstein’, ‘Medal Of Honour: Allied Assault’ and the hyper-realistic ‘Soldier of Fortune 2’. Games like this, especially the latter, are praised for their ‘realism’. However, this is easily translated as the amount of blood spattered across a wall after an accurate headshot,
or the amount of time developing the right feel for the game’s weapons, while systematically ignoring every other aspect of a game.
Yet many games are not mainly violent. Some of the biggest sellers of recent years are ‘Black & White’, the ‘Civilization’ series and many sports games like ‘Championship Manager’. While some of these games have a degree of violence, this is necessary to maintain a constant feeling of immersion in the game-world.
Why do we play games at all? They are generally a form of escapism - how many times have you wanted to run in to a medieval castle with a huge machine gun and shoot lots of Nazis?
OK, bad example. :)
But still, there is always the element of role-play in a game, regardless of it’s genre. A typical FPS tends to make you the ‘world’s last hope’ or something similar, whereas games like B&W and Civ put you in the position of a god - something I *know* you’ve all wanted to be at some point or other. The problem is that violent games get the most hype, and are subsequently blamed for violent events (i.e. the recent school shooting in Germany), instead of real stuff like wars.
Games are a way to do something you could never do for real. Nothing more, nothing less. We should simply enjoy them for what they are.
Cheers for reading :)
After a lengthy argument with my parents over this - they aren’t sure that a games programmer is a ‘viable’ option for their son, which is understandable - I eventually realised that my mother’s main reason against me becoming a games designer was the excess of violence in videogames. It took me fifteen minutes with her and a copy of Black & White to prove that not all modern games are mindless and gratuitous as far
as violence is concerned.
This got me thinking though. Obviously, many games - particularly the big ones - are violent. Recent additions to the fold include ‘Return to Castle Wolfenstein’, ‘Medal Of Honour: Allied Assault’ and the hyper-realistic ‘Soldier of Fortune 2’. Games like this, especially the latter, are praised for their ‘realism’. However, this is easily translated as the amount of blood spattered across a wall after an accurate headshot,
or the amount of time developing the right feel for the game’s weapons, while systematically ignoring every other aspect of a game.
Yet many games are not mainly violent. Some of the biggest sellers of recent years are ‘Black & White’, the ‘Civilization’ series and many sports games like ‘Championship Manager’. While some of these games have a degree of violence, this is necessary to maintain a constant feeling of immersion in the game-world.
Why do we play games at all? They are generally a form of escapism - how many times have you wanted to run in to a medieval castle with a huge machine gun and shoot lots of Nazis?
OK, bad example. :)
But still, there is always the element of role-play in a game, regardless of it’s genre. A typical FPS tends to make you the ‘world’s last hope’ or something similar, whereas games like B&W and Civ put you in the position of a god - something I *know* you’ve all wanted to be at some point or other. The problem is that violent games get the most hype, and are subsequently blamed for violent events (i.e. the recent school shooting in Germany), instead of real stuff like wars.
Games are a way to do something you could never do for real. Nothing more, nothing less. We should simply enjoy them for what they are.
Cheers for reading :)
I'm 17, in Sixth Form, about to take my AS exams. I intend to take Computer Science at degree level, and I either want to work in the programming or the sound production aspects of game creation.
At present, I'm learning Visual Basic, C++ and Java programming. I hope this'll be enough :). All you need is one good idea, and you could be sorted for life. Although I intend to think of something better than two ugly Italian plumbers.
At present, I'm learning Visual Basic, C++ and Java programming. I hope this'll be enough :). All you need is one good idea, and you could be sorted for life. Although I intend to think of something better than two ugly Italian plumbers.
Games Designers are very creative people, I thinkit's a great job, infact anything to do with PCs is great, being at the head of technology is never a bad thing, becoming as big as Miyamoto and Molyneux might be a problem though :) good luck, also have you started your path to becoming a producer? don't kow how old you are, are you at school/college/work?
I want a career in games. Possibly starting off as a programmer/developer for a small games company, before eventually being elevated to the same exalted level as the ‘big guys’ like Miyamoto and Molyneux.
After a lengthy argument with my parents over this - they aren’t sure that a games programmer is a ‘viable’ option for their son, which is understandable - I eventually realised that my mother’s main reason against me becoming a games designer was the excess of violence in videogames. It took me fifteen minutes with her and a copy of Black & White to prove that not all modern games are mindless and gratuitous as far
as violence is concerned.
This got me thinking though. Obviously, many games - particularly the big ones - are violent. Recent additions to the fold include ‘Return to Castle Wolfenstein’, ‘Medal Of Honour: Allied Assault’ and the hyper-realistic ‘Soldier of Fortune 2’. Games like this, especially the latter, are praised for their ‘realism’. However, this is easily translated as the amount of blood spattered across a wall after an accurate headshot,
or the amount of time developing the right feel for the game’s weapons, while systematically ignoring every other aspect of a game.
Yet many games are not mainly violent. Some of the biggest sellers of recent years are ‘Black & White’, the ‘Civilization’ series and many sports games like ‘Championship Manager’. While some of these games have a degree of violence, this is necessary to maintain a constant feeling of immersion in the game-world.
Why do we play games at all? They are generally a form of escapism - how many times have you wanted to run in to a medieval castle with a huge machine gun and shoot lots of Nazis?
OK, bad example. :)
But still, there is always the element of role-play in a game, regardless of it’s genre. A typical FPS tends to make you the ‘world’s last hope’ or something similar, whereas games like B&W and Civ put you in the position of a god - something I *know* you’ve all wanted to be at some point or other. The problem is that violent games get the most hype, and are subsequently blamed for violent events (i.e. the recent school shooting in Germany), instead of real stuff like wars.
Games are a way to do something you could never do for real. Nothing more, nothing less. We should simply enjoy them for what they are.
Cheers for reading :)
After a lengthy argument with my parents over this - they aren’t sure that a games programmer is a ‘viable’ option for their son, which is understandable - I eventually realised that my mother’s main reason against me becoming a games designer was the excess of violence in videogames. It took me fifteen minutes with her and a copy of Black & White to prove that not all modern games are mindless and gratuitous as far
as violence is concerned.
This got me thinking though. Obviously, many games - particularly the big ones - are violent. Recent additions to the fold include ‘Return to Castle Wolfenstein’, ‘Medal Of Honour: Allied Assault’ and the hyper-realistic ‘Soldier of Fortune 2’. Games like this, especially the latter, are praised for their ‘realism’. However, this is easily translated as the amount of blood spattered across a wall after an accurate headshot,
or the amount of time developing the right feel for the game’s weapons, while systematically ignoring every other aspect of a game.
Yet many games are not mainly violent. Some of the biggest sellers of recent years are ‘Black & White’, the ‘Civilization’ series and many sports games like ‘Championship Manager’. While some of these games have a degree of violence, this is necessary to maintain a constant feeling of immersion in the game-world.
Why do we play games at all? They are generally a form of escapism - how many times have you wanted to run in to a medieval castle with a huge machine gun and shoot lots of Nazis?
OK, bad example. :)
But still, there is always the element of role-play in a game, regardless of it’s genre. A typical FPS tends to make you the ‘world’s last hope’ or something similar, whereas games like B&W and Civ put you in the position of a god - something I *know* you’ve all wanted to be at some point or other. The problem is that violent games get the most hype, and are subsequently blamed for violent events (i.e. the recent school shooting in Germany), instead of real stuff like wars.
Games are a way to do something you could never do for real. Nothing more, nothing less. We should simply enjoy them for what they are.
Cheers for reading :)