The new issue of Played to Death magazine is ready to go. It’s a Retro issue and my contribution was an aesthetic analysis of the Intellivision controller overlays.
I am one step away from writing for Architectural Digest.
The Videogame Style Guide
June 5th, 2007 by Troy Goodfellow · Media
The Videogame Style Guide is now available for aspiring game writers. I still think videogame should be two words. Like board game. Or card game.
But aside from that quibble (and a few others) the guide is an excellent tool for new writers. Experienced writers will find little here that is surprising or distinct from what you would find in a good general style guide. (e.g., only use abbreviations after the first mention of term) But if you are under the delusion that video game writing is really different from other types of writing, or think you need a little more help, buy this book.
The glossary of terms makes up most of the book. It is intended to encourage standard usage across ludology, mainstream coverage and the enthusiast press. Most of the terms are straightforward in and of themselves, and I’m not quite sure that we need an entry defining and delineating “death” or “score”. And it’s not always clear why certain usages are preferred over others. (What’s wrong with Wiimote? It’s natural, mnemonic and cute.) But any guide that says to avoid using the term “fun factor” is A-OK with me.
I applaud the efforts to standardize the descriptive language of gaming, though this sort of thing is more useful for those outside the enthusiast press than within it. Most gaming journalists know the difference between griefing and grinding, campaigns and cut scenes. Academics who dabble in gaming as media studies or entertainment journalists trying to pick up a few bucks here and there will find the definitions and usages most useful. The style problems with professional gaming journalism are largely not usage related.
And some of the examples are a little funny. For example, on the usage of “campaign”:
Although the combat in Rise of Nations: Rise of Legends remains enjoyable, the core fun of this game comes from completing the twisting and turning plotline presented by its engaging campaign mode.
Sure, it’s just an example to show how the word fits in a sentence, but clearly someone has never played the Rise of Legends campaign.
The glossary still has some very valuable information tucked in it. The ESRB rating system is explained in detail with a brief nod to the European equivalents. The definition of “casual games” is a good first crack at the term, though the authors do admit that the line between casual games and others is rather blurry at the moment.
Even though the glossary takes up most of the book, the guide is more than that. It has a simple timeline of the hobby (which, curiously, spends a lot of ink on financials, especially in recent history), sales figures for console systems and identifies important companies and figures in the history of gaming.
NITPICK MODE: I have no idea why Dan Bunten/Danielle Berry is left off the list. S/he was probably one of the most influential game designers of all time – Will Wright to the nth power, in my opinion. And where’s Chris Crawford? David Jaffe makes the list with God of War and being an “outspoken critic”. Crawford invented “cranky game designer” and pioneered the discussion of game design as a serious study. It’s not that the list privileges the present (lots of old adventure game names are here). Could it be that these people are already forgotten?
Many new writers will be drawn to the book because it promises to define what a good game review is. And it says what experienced writers have been saying for years. Avoid using words like “fun” or “fun factor”. Don’t emphasize how many hours you spent, since people play at different speeds. Be clever, but not too clever. Don’t emulate Gamespot in all things.
Unless specified by your assigning editor or formal publication policy, don’t separate your review into distinct sections. (Paragraph one covers graphics, paragraph two deals with gameplay, etc.) Instead, weave all these elements into a single, compelling critical narrative.
I would have liked to have seen some words on how long a game must be played before it can be properly reviewed and maybe even strong warnings on not reviewing preview or beta code. And the reference to “C” being average encourages the idea that 60% is an average score no matter what scoring system is being used. But the review guide comes down strongly in favor of rigor and efficiency, and I’m all for that.
David Thomas’ essay on criticism goes further, implying the best reviews have some element of criticism in them, even if they are mostly consumer advice. He identifies a four-level “iceberg” of criticism with “What is it?” at the top and “What does it mean?” at the bottom. If I never read the names Pauline Kael or Lester Bangs in an article on games journalism again it will be too soon, but the call for true gaming criticism is valid and important.
Summary verdict? If you want to write about video games and don’t know where to start, this is a must have book. Not the only book, to be sure. But a necessary one. Yes, there are lapses, but I’m sure many of them will be corrected as other people make suggestions about errors and omissions. This is another step forward in the professionalism of the press. It will not be a substitute for any internal editorial style guides already out there, but if your website doesn’t have one, get the Videogame Style Guide. It may not be the AP guide for the industry, but it’s a good first crack.
→ 9 CommentsTags:
June Strategy Preview
June 4th, 2007 by Troy Goodfellow · Preview
It’s not the dog days of summer yet, but we’ve already run out of strategy games.
June 4 – Circus Empire (Enlight)
June 5 – Hospital Tycoon (Codemasters/Big Red Software)
June 19 – The Sims Pet Stories (EA/Maxis)
June 22 – Arena Wars Reloaded (DTP/exDream)
June 26 – Seven Kingdoms Conquest (Enlight)
There’s also a stand alone expansion for Pacific Storm (Buka/Lesta) called Allies on the way.
It’s a bleak month when Seven Kingdoms is the only even remotely plausible option for entertainment.
→ 9 CommentsTags:
Aging Gracefully?
June 2nd, 2007 by Troy Goodfellow · Me
The first game I bought for my Xbox 360 was MLB 2K7. The local used CD shop had it on sale and baseball is the best game. I really love my management sims, so the chance to relive my action sports days with my Washington Nationals is very appealing.
Boy do I suck.
Part of it is the number of things I have to deal with on the controller. Bumpers. Joysticks. Triggers. D-pad. Four buttons. Instead of pushing a button to swing, I have to time the release of one of the sticks. I lost my exhibitions game 11-1, finally scoring in the 9th inning and striking out 12 times.
I am hoping that some of this incompetence is due to basic unfamiliarity with when I am supposed to do what. I fear, however, that a lot of it is because my action-y reflexes have atrophied to such an extent that death and failure will be my lot with a console heavy on twitch/timing/vertigo gameplay. Have I gotten to the point where I’m just too old for today’s biggest games?
(My Live name, by the way, is troysg. I may put a gamecard here on the sidebar.)
→ 3 CommentsTags:
Twilight Struggle Turn Two
June 1st, 2007 by Troy Goodfellow · AARTwiStr
If you missed Turn One, you should read that so you can see where we were. If you already read it and forgot what happened, I can summarize. Bruce is killing me in Europe.
On to the second turn.
TURN 2
Headline: USSR Suez Crisis (-1 Israel, -2 France, -1 UK)
USA: CIA created (event). USSR hand revealed
USSR hand
Korean War
5-Year Plan
Duck and Cover
Vietnam Revolts
Containment
Defectors
Arab-Israeli War
Troy: So now Bruce knows what I have, and what I have are some pretty lame cards. Containment gives the US +1 on all influence points for the turn, so I can only use that in the Space Race if I don’t want to get hurt. I also have the US Event cards Duck and Cover and Defectors, both of which give the US victory points. Nice, huh? The Five Year Plan card isn’t much better since it costs me a card to play.
Bruce: The most important thing I learned here is that Troy has Vietnam Revolts. That means I will be instigating a coup in Vietnam this turn. It’s just a question of when.
Because the US doesn’t have influence adjacent to the interior SE Asian countries right now, the only way for me to get in there (without the painful, phase-by-phase process of closing in, one country at a time) is via coup. Vietnam has a stability of 1. That gives me a good shot at toppling the government without using a high-value card.
Action Phase 1
USSR: Containment (3) into Space Race. Die roll = 6 fails
Troy: First things first. I could, I suppose have saved this card to near the end of my round, but as long as it is in my hand it’s a threat. The Five Year Plan could fire this card off, giving Bruce just the points he needs to win this thing. And I don’t even get into space.
USA: Indo-Pakistani War (2) for Realignment. US gets 2 Realignment rolls.
Iraq: USA rolls 4 (+1) = 5 USSR rolls 1. USSR influence drops to zero.
Austria: USA rolls 4, USSR rolls 6. No effect.
Bruce: This is going to be a weird turn, because we both know that there is no chance of having a scoring round this turn. All three Early War scoring cards came up in Turn 1. So I’m kind of at a loss. I don’t want to go into Africa too early, because putting influence in countries with a stability of “1” is just inviting your opponent to flip them with a coup. I’m not a big fan of realignment rolls, but if I can knock Troy out of Iraq, he will be cut off and have to first go through Israel to be adjacent and place influence there. I have two adjacent controlled countries, so I get a +2 die roll modifier. Troy gets +1 for having more influence in Iraq than I do. So I get a bonus. I can’t gain any influence through realignment – only reduce that of my opponent. Which in this case is fine.
Austria is a wash because while I have two controlled, adjacent countries, Troy has one, plus a bonus for having more influence there. It did not occur to me that East Germany was adjacent to Austria. I know – it is a game and that is how it is. Plus, I already announced the rolls, so what can I do? This was not a very successful turn. I think I’m losing my edge.
Action Phase 2:
USSR: Five-Year Plan (3) for Influence (USSR must discard Arab-Israeli War) +2 Israel, +1 Austria
Troy: The Arab-Israeli War card isn’t a lot of good if Israel is in play, so I don’t mind losing it to spend 3 points. I get influence in Israel in any case, plus a point to support our comrades in Vienna.
USA: Nuclear Test Ban (4) for 3 VP and the Defcon Level goes up.
Bruce: Nuclear Test Ban is a 4-ops card. However, the Defcon is 5, and the associated event (playable for either side) gives you VP equal to the Defcon level minus 2. So that’s the maximum I can get for it. With the US already at +11 VP on turn 2, there is a very real chance I could win this by automatic victory (getting to +20 VP) if I play this right. So the VP instead of the ops seems like a good move.
Action Phase 3:
USSR: Korean War as event, needs roll of 4-6 for win. Die roll 6 – 1 (for Japan under US control) = 5. USSR gains 2VP and replaces 1 US influence in South Korea with USSR influence. USSR now has 5 influence in South Korea.
Troy: Here’s one for the alternate historian junkies out there. I control both Koreas, but still sponsor a Northern invasion of the South. I need the VPs badly, even though I only have a 1/3 chance of making my roll because of the Japanese. The big thing is that I now have a stranglehold on a battleground state. It’s only a 2 ops card, and there’s no chance of a scoring card this turn. If I am going to get victory points, I’m not going to get them by adding one here or two there. I need to take some action if only to slow Bruce down.
USA: Olympic Games (2) as Coup in Afghanistan (stability 2, x2 = 4). +2 US Milops. Die roll = 2 + 2 ops = 4. 4 – 4 = 0 No effect
Troy: Bruce has gone coup happy. Kissinger would be thrilled.
Bruce: As we saw last turn, being without required Milops can be really bad. I could have used the Olympic Games as an event and taken the +2 modifier to try and extract another 2 VP, and probably should have. But 2 VP gained there is 2 VP lost due to insufficent Milops, and at least with the coup, I get Milops credit whether the coup succeeds or not.
Action Phase 4:
USSR: Vietnam Revolts (2) as Event. +2 Vietnam (control). Remainder of USSR ops in SE Asia this turn are +1.
Troy: This is a big event for me, as we’ll soon see. Southeast Asia has its own one-time only scoring card in the Mid War part of the game, so anything that gets me in the area is a good thing. But I’m nearing the point where I have to play my bad cards – the ones that give Uncle Sam points. So I need to make the most of them.
USA: Romanian Abdication as coup in Vietnam. Event occurs, +1 Romania (control). Die roll = 1 + 1 ops = 2. Stability = 2. No effect
Bruce: I can play this card because I have Independent Reds, which will allow me to match whatever influence Troy ends up with in Romania. I could have used a better card for a larger die roll modifier. But hey, I can only fail if I roll a 1, right? What are the chances of that?
Action Phase 5:
USSR: Defectors (2) as Influence. US gains 1 VP for event. (+1 ops in SE Asia) +2 Thailand, +1 Laos/Cambodia, USSR now controls both.
Troy: This is all about setting the stage for dominance in Asia. The plus one bonus from the Vietnam card gives me both countries and routes to Malaysia and Burma. Then India and Indonesia. Then the world. Too bad about that VP.
USA: Independent Reds as event. +3 Romania (now US 3, USSR 3).
Bruce: So a turn goes by without my increasing my Space Race lead, although I further infiltrate E. Europe. I don’t feel very good about this turn, despite having increased my VP lead. My position is pretty tenuous, and I just now noticed that I forgot to redress my position in France. I hope that doesn’t come back to haunt me.
Action Phase 6:
USSR: Duck and Cover as influence, event fires. Defcon to 3. US gains 2 VP. +2 Burma, +2 Malaysia.
USA: East European Unrest as Influence. +3 India (control).
Troy: This one hurts me. Duck and Cover increases the Defcon level to 3 and then does some math to give Bruce 2 more VPs. Bad. But now I own Southeast Asia. The problem is that all these Yankee VPs are adding up. Whatever inroads I’ve made this turn will need to wait for the next scoring card and even then they will likely show a stalemate. By adding India and Japan to the American column, even my stronghold of Asia has some problems. The SE Asia scoring card is still at least two turns away, but I need to keep Bruce from getting four more victory points.
Bruce: I was going to use this as a one-two punch with Independent Reds and really hammer Troy in Europe, but I can’t afford that luxury right now. I just used Indo-Pakistani War at the beginning of this turn, so I know it won’t be back for a while. Thus, I’m pretty comfortable with my control of those two countries. The problem is the rest of Asia . Right now, Troy is one Battleground country away from dominating it. Troy controls eight countries to my four, but we each have three Battlegrounds. If I hadn’t taken India in this phase, and Troy were to draw the Asia scoring card next turn (we will be reshuffling the discards back into the draw pile for sure, as we will run out of cards) he could hit me for another 5 VP by playing Asia scoring as a headline card.
Milops: Defcon is 3. US 3 – 3 = 0. USSR 2 – 3 = -1. +1 VP to US
CURRENT VP TOTAL: +16 USA (+20 is an automatic win.) Here is where we stand at the moment.
Troy: This looks bleak, but a lot depends on the breaks. The next hand will need a reshuffle of the Early War deck, so some nice cards might pop-up to help me. The funny thing is that the score is more lopsided than the map would indicate. Europe is still pretty much a draw, the Middle East is only marginally American and Asia looks pretty Red once you get past India. The score reflects when the scoring cards are played, not actual or inevitable control. At this point, even if I owned Asia, Bruce could play a MidEast scoring card first and get very close to winning it all. Like a lot of card games, it’s about when as much as about what.
Bruce: That’s a pretty good summing up. I’ll just let you all enjoy it.
→ 2 CommentsTags:
Another Milestone 5000
May 31st, 2007 by Troy Goodfellow · Blogs
In August 2005 I made a big deal about passing the 5000 hit counter for all time. That took about nine months.
May 2006 on its own will have 5000 hits. Plus the few dozen who get the feed through Feedburner or Bloglines or Google Reader or what have you. Traffic is growing steadily and I have you all to thank for it. (In fact, comments are more than keeping pace with posts – I’m closing in on two comments per post.)
Tell your friends.
→ 7 CommentsTags: