Experienced Points: Something for the Ladies

By Shamus Posted Friday Jul 31, 2009

Filed under: Column 75 comments

This article is what you get when you take ten thousand words of ideas and cut them down to 1,500 words. The article I didn’t write dwarfs the one I did, and even at that the final product is a bit too long and leaves too much out.

One thing I hopefully avoided was the usual arrogant tone of diversity scolds. Studies like this one begin by point out – as I have – that videogame characters trend heavily towards young white males, but then go on to have a “therefore the designers are sexist bigots” subtext, and blame designers for making the world a worse place. I think the most important thing to realize is that the current landscape has been shaped by economics and the tenancy for people to write what they know, and isn’t the result of anything insidious.

Still, I’m all for seeing a wider variety of characters to inhabit. If nothing else, I’d like to have a little moratorium on space marines and their variants for just a little while.

 


 

Stolen Pixels #112: Ready to Settle

By Shamus Posted Friday Jul 31, 2009

Filed under: Column 18 comments

Now Travis gets to take a shot at the Langdell issue, which I mentioned last week.

For those of you who will want to squint to see the game in detail, I have the fully view of Travis’ game box below:

Continue reading ⟩⟩ “Stolen Pixels #112: Ready to Settle”

 


 

Double Helix and Silent Hill

By Shamus Posted Wednesday Jul 29, 2009

Filed under: Video Games 25 comments

Ugo interviewed the team from Double Helix about their botched controls in Silent Hill: Homecoming.

We specifically called the mode invert aim and not invert camera to differentiate its function from the normal invert we see in games. We made a decision during development to support invert aim and not invert camera.

I still can’t imagine the rationale for this. This wasn’t an accidental oversight, this was a design decision. A decision to give an option that makes no sense and is useless to both invert and standard style gamers. Why would anyone want to invert the controls sometimes?

Unfortunately none of the team nor any of our test group actually had a preference for playing with an inverted camera, so the issue of its omission never came up. Given the furor on the net it appears this was the incorrect choice to make and one that I will apologize for.

This is exactly the sort of thing that ought to come out in testing. I know I make fun of Valve and their obsessive-compulsive testing loop, where they will take an already awesome game and work on it for months and months just to make it slightly more awesome. But Double Helix seems to have gone to the opposite extreme. The camera inversion, the difficulty spikes, the unclear and frustrating dodge mechanic, the game-killing three-nurse fight, the game-killing mechanic of a foe that can only be killed by bullets: All of these are things that would have been easily smoothed over with some very straightforward tweaks to gameplay. Just a couple more weeks in the oven would have translated into vast improvements to gameplay.

Double Helix is an odd developer, and I’m still not sure what to make of them. One of their current projects is the tie-in game for the upcoming G. I. Joe movie. The movie itself looks to be an awful bastardization, and movie games usually drop the quality meter a few points beyond that. This does not inspire confidence. (The movie looks less like an adaptation done with caution and love – Spider-Man and X-Men spring to mind – and more an adaptation done with greed and contempt for the source material – like LXG or Transformers.)

I’m not sure what to make of these guys. During their interview with The Escapist, I got the impression that they weren’t really Silent Hill fans. They didn’t hate it, but they weren’t passionate about the series either. Like the G. I. Joe game, they were given some IP and sent off to see what they could do with it. That’s not a crime, but it’s not exactly the kind of daring artistic endeavor that will excite the fan base. Or anyone else.

The thing is, I want these guys to succeed. Unlike Yahtzee, I don’t think the franchise needs to die. Silent Hill is traditionally not hampered by the need for canon-clogging continuity. Each game can take the premise (twisted other-reality ghost town) and do something fresh with it. There’s no reason you can’t just keep making them. This is in contrast to something like Resident Evil, where each new game adds to the rancid heap of nonsense and stretches the limits of disbelief as the Umbrella Corporation engages in ever-more destructive and unprofitable enterprises for no other reason than they need to make monsters for you to shoot. Double Helix doesn’t have this problem with Silent Hill. They have everything they need to make the thing work. Aside from enthusiasm.

 


 

Software Engineering

By Shamus Posted Tuesday Jul 28, 2009

Filed under: Programming 44 comments

A student emailed me, asking about what I do for a living. Not just my job title, but what specifically the job entails on a day-to-day basis. You know, that’s an interesting question, because I had the same question myself at that age. I loved programming. I knew I wanted to do it a lot, which suggested it might be a good career. But I didn’t have a clear picture of what a day at work would really be like. Certainly the job is more than just writing code, right?

The answer is, annoyingly, “it depends”.

Continue reading ⟩⟩ “Software Engineering”

 


 

Stolen Pixels #111: The Lesser of Two Evils

By Shamus Posted Tuesday Jul 28, 2009

Filed under: Column 10 comments

This is an Overlord comic, but it’s not really about Overlord. It’s about a game which is not Overlord. If you want this to make sense, then you’ll just have to read it for yourself.

 


 

Never Gonna Give Your Teen Spirit up

By Shamus Posted Monday Jul 27, 2009

Filed under: Movies 49 comments

Ugh. Monday morning. I’m not a fan. Bad things happen on Monday mornings. For example, this:


Link (YouTube)

Well, the week can only get better from here, right?

(“Thanks” to Leslee for the link.)

 


 

The Vendor Client Relationship

By Shamus Posted Saturday Jul 25, 2009

Filed under: Movies 29 comments


Link (YouTube)

I’ve heard many of these excuses and pleas before, or variants on these themes, and I’ve never even been involved in the financial end of things. This really is how people do business, and it’s sort of funny to see this same thinking applied to everyday situations. I watch this and nod my head, this is SO true.

Having said that, I actually think it’s not unreasonable to haggle a bit when you’re negotiating for goods or services that you’ll be using for years and that will run you in the millions of dollars. As a vendor, you can’t just slap a $999,998.98 pricetag on something and call it a day. Well, you can but you’ll be losing money on one side or the other if you just stick to that price. Some companies will be huge and rolling in cash, and your product is peanuts to them. To them, buying your stuff is the equivalent of a beer run. They just don’t want a lot of hassle, and you can pad the everlovin’ crap out of your invoices and they’ll never care. On the other hand, a mid-size company might only be able to buy your thing if you come down a bit. If you start high and let them haggle you down, you’ll get as much as possible from both types of clients.

But the price isn’t the really volatile part of the equation in my experience. As someone who has done some contract work, the place they really bleed you dry is in the implementation. It’s no good feeling smug when you get the customer to pay $10k for $5k worth of programming, only to have them squeeze $20k worth of work out of you with endless changes, refinements, and new features masquerading as “bug fixes”.

A skit about that would have the customer agree to pay $100 for their steak dinner ahead of time, but then nickle and dime the restaurant by asking for endless small little freebies and favors during the meal. (And sort of passive-aggressively holding the entire check ransom each time you balk at their demands.) By the time they leave they’ve had a steak dinner, three bottles of wine, two desserts, and they’ve left with the silverware, a chair, and the waitress. You started out so happy you were going to sell them $9 worth of meat and labor for $100, and now you’re wondering if you can escape this deal while you still have a restaurant.

It’s worth a great deal to me to be as far from the financial end of the business as possible. Let me write the code and for the love of ANSI don’t tell me anything about the money, it will only drive me mad.