The Straight Dope

Go Back   Straight Dope Message Board > Main > The Game Room

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-02-2013, 02:03 PM
astro astro is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
The game Minecraft took in almost one quarter of a billion dollars in 2012? WTF?

This game looks like the son of Wolfenstein 3D. The mind boggles.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/article...erging-markets

Quote:
Minecraft dev makes $100m in licensing alone, marks Brazil as a possible target for growth in 2013. Mojang brought in a reported revenue of almost $240 million in 2012, with around $100 million coming from license fees.

The information, originally reported by IT24.se, was passed to GamesIndustry International by Thomas Arnroth, a Swedish author who has followed the company for a year for his book, A Year With Mojang: Minecraft Behind The Scenes. According to Arnroth, Mojang turned over SEK1.5 billion ($237.7m) last year, including SEK640 million ($101.4m) in licensing fees and SEK580 million ($92m) in pre-tax profits.
Reply With Quote
Advertisements  
  #2  
Old 02-02-2013, 02:41 PM
Revtim Revtim is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
It's a lot of fun, a little like playing with Legos.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-02-2013, 02:42 PM
Suburban Plankton Suburban Plankton is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by astro View Post
This game looks like the son of Wolfenstein 3D. The mind boggles.

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/article...erging-markets
Because it's the ultimate sandbox game. What you can do in it is pretty much limited only by your imagination.

A couple examples:

Minas Tirith (from Lord of the Rings)

King's Landing (from Game of Thrones)
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-02-2013, 03:40 PM
smiling bandit smiling bandit is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by astro View Post
This game looks like the son of Wolfenstein 3D. The mind boggles.
May I pointy out that - amazingly - graphics don't actully sell games very well. Nobody bought FarCry because it looked good. It sold because they did some offered new and intriguing environments and gameplay. MineCraft does the same and appeals to a massive slice of people who weren't necessarily gamers before.

I don't play myself, but it's a fascinating game and very well done.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-02-2013, 03:51 PM
Asympotically fat Asympotically fat is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by smiling bandit View Post
May I pointy out that - amazingly - graphics don't actully sell games very well. Nobody bought FarCry because it looked good. It sold because they did some offered new and intriguing environments and gameplay. MineCraft does the same and appeals to a massive slice of people who weren't necessarily gamers before.

I don't play myself, but it's a fascinating game and very well done.
Graphics do sell games, the problem is though that they take money and time to develop and take a lot of RAM, all of which could be used for other aspects of the game

Minecraft is just one of the latest games that has gone down the road of sacrificing graphics for a gameplay element, e.g. the ability to have huge, highly-interactive and highly alterable worlds. I remember when the original GTA came out, its 2D top-down graphics were a step behind other games at the time (which was on purpose as with top of the range graphics it could not have done the other things it did on the hardware available), but its large open world where you were free to do what you want was highly-innovative.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-02-2013, 06:01 PM
Agent Foxtrot Agent Foxtrot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Doesn't surprise me one bit.

Now where'd I put my diamond pickaxe...?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-02-2013, 07:21 PM
Palooka Palooka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Minecraft has gameplay now? Maybe I'll find my account information.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-02-2013, 07:28 PM
tomcar tomcar is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
It is huge with elementary school kids... as well as adults.
It is also cheap. At around $20, most people can afford it.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-03-2013, 08:48 AM
Quimby Quimby is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 1999
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburban Plankton View Post
Because it's the ultimate sandbox game. What you can do in it is pretty much limited only by your imagination.

A couple examples:

Minas Tirith (from Lord of the Rings)

King's Landing (from Game of Thrones)
I find this ironic because it's a tool you can use to make anything you can imagine so they made something some one else imagined for them.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-03-2013, 09:11 AM
FoieGrasIsEvil FoieGrasIsEvil is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: The Nasty Nati
Posts: 14,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomcar View Post
It is huge with elementary school kids... as well as adults.
It is also cheap. At around $20, most people can afford it.
This. It's like crack to children. My sons absolutely geek over that game and the cool thing is that it's entirely appropriate for pretty much all ages.

The other day my eleven year old floored me with this house he was building...it had a kitchen with an island, a sink, a stove...a living room with a working fountain, bedrooms with furnishings, all manner of detail. Which is funny because at the end of the day a dwelling for a Steve is really just a hiding place from zombies at night time.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-03-2013, 11:36 AM
smiling bandit smiling bandit is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asympotically fat View Post
Graphics do sell games, the problem is though that they take money and time to develop and take a lot of RAM, all of which could be used for other aspects of the game
I would definitely argue against that. But this is not the time or place.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-03-2013, 11:43 AM
Trepa Mayfield Trepa Mayfield is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
And anyway, I always liked Minecraft's graphics. They're evocative.

For example, these screenshots.

I am frequently awed by its blocky landscapes.

Last edited by Trepa Mayfield; 02-03-2013 at 11:44 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-04-2013, 06:17 PM
Der Trihs Der Trihs is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: California
Posts: 36,650
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asympotically fat View Post
Graphics do sell games, the problem is though that they take money and time to develop and take a lot of RAM, all of which could be used for other aspects of the game
Graphics can help sell games, but we've reached a point where they are just another quality that may or may not be important.
  • People have become sophisticated enough that "cool graphics" alone isn't enough; plus, there's so many games with cool graphics. Cool graphics don't make you stand out much.
  • By the same token, people have become sophisticated enough to look past simpler or outright retro graphics if the underlying gameplay is good enough.
  • We've reached something of a graphics plateau, where it takes a lot of resources for minimal improvement.
  • Lots of gamers are now older people, old enough to be nostalgic about older style games and an older style look
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-04-2013, 07:09 PM
Aspidistra Aspidistra is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 2,998
In a gaming landscape in which Dwarf Fortress is a perfectly viable commercial proposition, I'm pretty sure Minecraft's graphics aren't holding it back...
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-04-2013, 07:46 PM
Speak to me Maddie! Speak to me Maddie! is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
It is fun to play. The first rule of all gaming.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 02-05-2013, 10:31 AM
Airk Airk is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
I am incapable of thinking of Minecraft without thinking of this comic; It so flawlessly sums up both the objections of people who haven't played (and c'mon "it looks like Q-bert took a dump in my yard" is priceless), and the addiction of people who have.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 02-05-2013, 12:50 PM
hiebram hiebram is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trepa Mayfield View Post
And anyway, I always liked Minecraft's graphics. They're evocative.

For example, these screenshots.

I am frequently awed by its blocky landscapes.
Absolutely. In fact, I don't think still shots can really convey the feeling of moving through this enormous landscape mountains, forests, etc. Sometimes I have a difficult time just starting my house, because I don't want to disturb the natural order that you find.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 02-05-2013, 01:02 PM
Jragon Jragon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Miskatonic University
Posts: 8,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by smiling bandit View Post
I would definitely argue against that. But this is not the time or place.
I'd say it's a perfect time and place, considering the OP's main bogglement is at the game's graphics.

The way I see it, graphics are a tool. A game with immensely shitty gameplay but great graphics isn't likely to do well. A game with absolutely amazing gameplay and shitty graphics fairs better, but your gameplay still has to be REALLY good. All in all, though, style is more important than graphics. Minecraft has a coherent style. Sure they're just fundamentally texels, but making sure everything, from sword to fence is made of little blocks gives a coherent theme rather than simply coming off as lazy.

I've seen crappy indie games with 2D graphics that put me off because it was clear that they were trying but didn't hit the mark. The graphics don't have to be amazing, they can absolutely suck, they just have to suck in a consistent, self-aware fashion.

And graphics can bolster something. Can you make a (non-text, text is a whole other beast) horror game with crappy graphics and bad sound? Sure, but it's going to be a lot more difficult to create that atmosphere without it. It depends on the genre and what you want to achieve. And it's not always a "crutch" or bad to rely on graphics, sometimes it's just plain sensible.

Anyway, on Minecraft specifically, I stopped playing a long time ago. I tried again a few months ago, got a little bit in and then got bored. Minecraft is a great sandbox, but I feel that as a game it has poorly balanced progression and doesn't really offer much once you tire of building castles.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 02-05-2013, 03:58 PM
Jragon Jragon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Miskatonic University
Posts: 8,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jragon View Post
texels
... voxels
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 02-05-2013, 04:46 PM
Rhythmdvl Rhythmdvl is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Shakedown Street
Posts: 12,395
What's the game part of Micecraft? Am I anywhere close to correct in thinking The Sims::Barbie dolls // Minecraft::Legos?
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 02-05-2013, 04:53 PM
Jragon Jragon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Miskatonic University
Posts: 8,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhythmdvl View Post
What's the game part of Micecraft? Am I anywhere close to correct in thinking The Sims::Barbie dolls // Minecraft::Legos?
There's theoretically a long-term game progression about killing Endermen to get Ender Pearls, finding a Stronghold, using the pearls to open a portal, and going to The End and killing a dragon there. But:

1. It's kind of tacked on
2. The progression in Minecraft is rather terrible balanced, IMO, there's no really good correlation between how rare a material it is or how hard it is to find and the quality of goods (aside from the very basic, and very easily attainable progression to diamond gear).

It's not quite to Legos as The Sims is to Barbies. It's more like is Legos ate World of Warcraft while having an affair with Day Z.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 02-06-2013, 12:28 AM
Chicken Fingers Chicken Fingers is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
My elementary and middle-school kids play Hunger Games/pvp-types of games on Minecraft servers with other players. They also build houses with their friends. Personally, as an oldster gamer, I prefer prettier graphics, so I've never tried it.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 02-06-2013, 07:04 AM
Kinthalis Kinthalis is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
I wish we lived in a world where more games like minecraft made billions, and less games like Call of Texture Swap 4: Modern texture swapping made billions.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 02-06-2013, 07:19 AM
Johnny Bravo Johnny Bravo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kinthalis View Post
I wish we lived in a world where more games like minecraft made billions, and less games like Call of Texture Swap 4: Modern texture swapping made billions.
What a silly thing to say.

Minecraft makes lots of money because even though the graphics aren't great, the gameplay is engrossing.

The "Call of Texture Swap" games make money for the exact same reason.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 02-06-2013, 08:33 AM
Kinthalis Kinthalis is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Bravo View Post
What a silly thing to say.

Minecraft makes lots of money because even though the graphics aren't great, the gameplay is engrossing.

The "Call of Texture Swap" games make money for the exact same reason.
Eh no. It makes money because Activision has spent untold billions of dollars in marketing.

The gameplay (with a few exceptions here and there) is a tromp through an uninspired, corridor, whack a mole gallery.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 02-06-2013, 08:36 AM
Johnny Bravo Johnny Bravo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kinthalis View Post
Eh no. It makes money because Activision has spent untold billions of dollars in marketing.

The gameplay (with a few exceptions here and there) is a tromp through an uninspired, corridor, whack a mole gallery.
So what you're basically arguing is that none of the millions of people who play CoD across the various platform are actually having fun?
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 02-06-2013, 09:03 AM
Kinthalis Kinthalis is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Bravo View Post
So what you're basically arguing is that none of the millions of people who play CoD across the various platform are actually having fun?
They are like the kids in third world countries kicking around a tin can. I'm sure they're having fun. But then again, they don't have a basketball or a footbal, or a console/PC.

There are many games, in the same genre even, that are WAY better in almost every respect. But they don't have billion dollar marketing campaigns.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 02-06-2013, 09:37 AM
Johnny Bravo Johnny Bravo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kinthalis View Post
They are like the kids in third world countries kicking around a tin can. I'm sure they're having fun. But then again, they don't have a basketball or a footbal, or a console/PC.
Which is exactly what could be said (and has been said) about Minecraft, which is why I find your comments very funny in the context of this particular thread.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 02-06-2013, 09:42 AM
MsWhatsit MsWhatsit is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
My 11-year-old and 8-year-old are both obsessed with this game. They are always installing mods and building new things. They have also discovered the world of Minecraft parody videos on Youtube, which has given them many hours of shared hilarity.

I'm not really into it that much myself, but it is definitely huge with kids. My oldest tells me that most of the kids in his class play it.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 02-06-2013, 10:54 AM
Miller Miller is offline
Sith Mod
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Bear Flag Republic
Posts: 36,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Bravo View Post
Which is exactly what could be said (and has been said) about Minecraft, which is why I find your comments very funny in the context of this particular thread.
I like the Call of Duty games, and have played most of them. That being said, if you asked me to name one other game like Minecraft, I'd be hard pressed to come up with an answer. If you asked me to name ten other games exactly like the latest Call of Duty game, I could do it just by counting backwards through the franchise.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 02-06-2013, 11:41 AM
Stink Fish Pot Stink Fish Pot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suburban Plankton View Post
Because it's the ultimate sandbox game. What you can do in it is pretty much limited only by your imagination.

A couple examples:

Minas Tirith (from Lord of the Rings)

King's Landing (from Game of Thrones)
I am going to show my age here, but I don't get it. I looked at your first link, and played the YouTube demo. How does this game work? Someone spends a year building the world... Then, I assume he advertises it somehow to let other people know where it is and how to play it, then everyone in the world bounces toward the castle shooting arrows at each other, killing the players as the go. Is that the idea?

I watched about half of the YouTube thing, and saw nothing but what I described above. I assume if you play it by yourself, you can explore the castle or whatever it is, but with people who you don't even know shooting at you, I fail to see the enjoyment.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 02-06-2013, 12:47 PM
Johnny Bravo Johnny Bravo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller View Post
I like the Call of Duty games, and have played most of them. That being said, if you asked me to name one other game like Minecraft, I'd be hard pressed to come up with an answer. If you asked me to name ten other games exactly like the latest Call of Duty game, I could do it just by counting backwards through the franchise.
Yup. I'm not arguing any of that.

In fact, I'd agree that the CoD games are fairly cookie cutter and that each iteration makes (mostly) small improvements from one to the next.

There's a lot of really legit complaints about the entire CoD series, not the least of which is the fact that each new game is barely more than an expansion pack for the last.

None of that changes the fact, though, that there's a massive population of gamers who find the gameplay lots of fun, and that's despite the massive competition from other similar games, most of which are incapable of competing for any real length of time.

All I'm saying is that it's silly to say something like, "Minecraft is great, even if a lot of people don't understand why it's fun," and then in the next breath say, "People who play CoD don't even know what a good game looks like - it's not a fun game at all."
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 02-06-2013, 12:48 PM
Speak to me Maddie! Speak to me Maddie! is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stink Fish Pot View Post
I am going to show my age here, but I don't get it. I looked at your first link, and played the YouTube demo. How does this game work? Someone spends a year building the world... Then, I assume he advertises it somehow to let other people know where it is and how to play it, then everyone in the world bounces toward the castle shooting arrows at each other, killing the players as the go. Is that the idea?

I watched about half of the YouTube thing, and saw nothing but what I described above. I assume if you play it by yourself, you can explore the castle or whatever it is, but with people who you don't even know shooting at you, I fail to see the enjoyment.
It is a an electronic Lego set, with a billion pieces, and a ton of interaction. The fun is in the design and building of things, the creative aspect. Many people enjoy this sort of game. The type of people who would play SIMS just to build houses and then start a new game.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 02-06-2013, 12:58 PM
Ellen Cherry Ellen Cherry is offline
Rich as a Lannister
Moderator
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Near Eskippakithiki
Posts: 11,264
I have an 8-year-old son who loves it, and has gotten his dad hooked too. Now they play it together. We have it installed on several devices, and you can interact with one another (apparently). The houses my son has built are incredible; he has a tree house that *I* envy. He also likes to have lots of cats and dogs around too, and we've done a lot of research on ocelots since that's apparently an animal in the game.

We also presented him with a stuffed Creeper at Christmas, along with a pixilated sword and he was so happy!
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 02-06-2013, 01:39 PM
Kinthalis Kinthalis is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Bravo View Post
Yup. I'm not arguing any of that.

In fact, I'd agree that the CoD games are fairly cookie cutter and that each iteration makes (mostly) small improvements from one to the next.

There's a lot of really legit complaints about the entire CoD series, not the least of which is the fact that each new game is barely more than an expansion pack for the last.

None of that changes the fact, though, that there's a massive population of gamers who find the gameplay lots of fun, and that's despite the massive competition from other similar games, most of which are incapable of competing for any real length of time.

All I'm saying is that it's silly to say something like, "Minecraft is great, even if a lot of people don't understand why it's fun," and then in the next breath say, "People who play CoD don't even know what a good game looks like - it's not a fun game at all."
Is that what I said?

Pretty sure all I said was that I wish more games like minecraft made more money, and then I made an intimation as to Call of Duty's "cookie cutter", barely an upgrade at each iteration, nature - which you seem to agree with!
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 02-06-2013, 01:53 PM
mlees mlees is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Another strength of the game is that it's modifiable by the player fan-base. I don't know what language it is written in (Java?), but IIRC, it's not a proprietary one.

The gaming industry is learning that players like games that they can modify, or write additional content for. (Look at all the fan-sourced content for "The Elder Scrolls" series of game titles, for example.)
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 02-06-2013, 02:24 PM
SenorBeef SenorBeef is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 22,275
Quote:
Originally Posted by mlees View Post
The gaming industry is learning that players like games that they can modify, or write additional content for. (Look at all the fan-sourced content for "The Elder Scrolls" series of game titles, for example.)
Quite the opposite. Ten years ago the amount of community made content for games was staggering. Many of the greatest games of all time were free mods created by the fans. Millions of custom maps for games. Gameplay mods, etc. Things have been getting steadily worse over the years to the point where the moddability of a game is a rare notable feature rather than something standard, there are very few big mod projects, and most games lock down any sort of content creation.

There are exceptions here and there, but the general trend has been moving away from user created content. Today there's big press when a major mod comes out, like Black Mesa or Day Z, which only highlights how rare they've become. A decade ago, those sorts of things were popping up constantly.

I'll let you fill in the blanks as to why that might be.

Last edited by SenorBeef; 02-06-2013 at 02:27 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 02-06-2013, 02:38 PM
Johnny Bravo Johnny Bravo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kinthalis View Post
Is that what I said?

Pretty sure all I said was that I wish more games like minecraft made more money, and then I made an intimation as to Call of Duty's "cookie cutter", barely an upgrade at each iteration, nature - which you seem to agree with!
I thought it was funny that you made a joke slamming CoD's textures while praising a game like Minecraft, is all. Surely you can see the disconnect there. I'm really not trying to get into an argument with you.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 02-06-2013, 02:38 PM
Airk Airk is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorBeef View Post
Quite the opposite. Ten years ago the amount of community made content for games was staggering. Many of the greatest games of all time were free mods created by the fans. Millions of custom maps for games. Gameplay mods, etc. Things have been getting steadily worse over the years to the point where the moddability of a game is a rare notable feature rather than something standard, there are very few big mod projects, and most games lock down any sort of content creation.

There are exceptions here and there, but the general trend has been moving away from user created content. Today there's big press when a major mod comes out, like Black Mesa or Day Z, which only highlights how rare they've become. A decade ago, those sorts of things were popping up constantly.

I'll let you fill in the blanks as to why that might be.
I don't really agree with this; Yes, there were lots of mods "back in the day"; There are lots of mods now too.

Most of the mods back in the day weren't on the scale of Counterstrike, Natural Selection, Project Brittannia or Fall from Heaven. Most of the mods today aren't either.

I'm going to need some convincing to believe that we've actually seen a decline in "big mods" since you yourself just pointed out two big ones we've seen fairly recently. I think we have a tendency to have a selective memory here - you remember the Natural Selections and the Counter Strikes, but nobody remembers all the games that came out that didn't support modding (of which there were plenty.).

I think the actual test of your theory is whether we still see big mods in 3-5 years. Because when you really think about it, mods like Counter Strike and whatnot don't exactly come out the same year as the game they are built on top of. A "big" mod is usually the work of a year or two at least. So you'll be finding out whether last year's games produced a sufficiently large crop of mod-able titles in about 2014.

Edit: I also submit that you don't really need a LOT of games to be moddable. If Call of Battlefield X is moddable, probably doesn't really matter if Medals of Brother VI is. Similarly, I daresay Skyrim has most people's "moddable fantasy RPG" needs covered, etc.

Last edited by Airk; 02-06-2013 at 02:42 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 02-06-2013, 02:41 PM
Drunky Smurf Drunky Smurf is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
I've never played the game but I can see the appeal.

And this minecraft video gives me endless delight.

The Cat Fountain.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iNw2YcAK9Wc
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 02-06-2013, 02:50 PM
Johnny Bravo Johnny Bravo is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airk View Post
I'm going to need some convincing to believe that we've actually seen a decline in "big mods" since you yourself just pointed out two big ones we've seen fairly recently. I think we have a tendency to have a selective memory here - you remember the Natural Selections and the Counter Strikes, but nobody remembers all the games that came out that didn't support modding (of which there were plenty.).
There was a period of time when a good number of games were releasing some really impressive modding tools. I remember that Unreal Tournament released tools very similar to what the actual developers used to make levels. A friend of mine created a 4-team CTF mod that became super popular for a while.

Nowadays I can't think of too many games that give that kind of freedom. The Starcraft II tools are pretty robust, but so were the tools for the original Starcraft back in 1998. There are also a lot of mods for Team Fortress, but Team Fortress started out as a mod way back in the day so that's to be expected.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 02-06-2013, 03:11 PM
Kinthalis Kinthalis is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Bravo View Post
I thought it was funny that you made a joke slamming CoD's textures while praising a game like Minecraft, is all. Surely you can see the disconnect there. I'm really not trying to get into an argument with you.
No I wasn't dissing it's textures... wait, I think I'm being wooshed.

In case I'm not, I was calling the game Modern Texture swap, because that's essentially what they do with every iteration - same game, swap out the textures.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 02-06-2013, 03:29 PM
SenorBeef SenorBeef is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Posts: 22,275
Quote:
Originally Posted by Airk View Post
I don't really agree with this; Yes, there were lots of mods "back in the day"; There are lots of mods now too.
I have a hard time believing you were actually a gamer through the years in question if you take this stance. It's not a subtle difference. There was a bigger modding community by orders of magntiude in the late 90s early 2000s than there are now.

Quote:
Most of the mods back in the day weren't on the scale of Counterstrike, Natural Selection, Project Brittannia or Fall from Heaven. Most of the mods today aren't either.
There were far more total conversion mods available then than there are now. Not all of them were wildly successful, of course, but the fact that there were many meant that more would be worthwhile after floating to the top.

Quote:
I'm going to need some convincing to believe that we've actually seen a decline in "big mods" since you yourself just pointed out two big ones we've seen fairly recently. I think we have a tendency to have a selective memory here - you remember the Natural Selections and the Counter Strikes, but nobody remembers all the games that came out that didn't support modding (of which there were plenty.).
I don't know how to prove it, other than a lot of busywork trying to add up the mods by searching by year on a mod site or something, but I don't even know if any mod sites have consistently operated for 10-15 years. I tried to google "number of mods by year" and stuff like that, but I couldn't find somewhere that anyone else did an analysis.

It's true that not all games used to be moddable, but it was certainly more common. Depending on how you define "modding", allowing users to create custom maps was nearly universal.
Quote:
I think the actual test of your theory is whether we still see big mods in 3-5 years. Because when you really think about it, mods like Counter Strike and whatnot don't exactly come out the same year as the game they are built on top of. A "big" mod is usually the work of a year or two at least. So you'll be finding out whether last year's games produced a sufficiently large crop of mod-able titles in about 2014.
I don't see why the 3-5 year things matters. We can see what mods are coming out now based on games that were a few years old, and we can see that the number is consistently drying up. I'm not saying today's, 2013's games, are suddenly less modable - I'm saying that the availability the amount of modding games allow you to do and the number of mods and players have mods has been steadily declining for a decade.

Quote:
Edit: I also submit that you don't really need a LOT of games to be moddable. If Call of Battlefield X is moddable, probably doesn't really matter if Medals of Brother VI is. Similarly, I daresay Skyrim has most people's "moddable fantasy RPG" needs covered, etc.
Entire classes of games that used to be big in the modding community are dissapearing or becoming unmoddable. Q3 and UT style games simply don't exist anymore because you can't play them on a gamepad. The last call of duty that allowed mapmaking or modding was COD4, which had tens of thousands of user made maps and various mods (minimal competition based mods that tweaked game balance to full conversions that turned COD4 into lasers and robots star wars battles). Since then, modding and mapmaking has been deliberately removed from the game because they think they can sell more ridiculously overpriced official map packs if they don't allow users to create (often superior) free maps. Battlefield 3 disallows any sort of modding, but at least their reason (that their maps are too complex for amateur modding teams) is at least somewhat plausible. All the call of duty games are still based on the quake 3 engine - people could whip up maps for those almost instantly.

In general, there are just fewer people playing these sorts of games on PC than in the past where PC was basically the sole platform for them, so with fewer people they're concentrated into fewer games, there are fewer people to try out new mods.

Consolization isn't the only factor - digital distribution has allowed indie developers to make a run at making a paid product rather than a mod, so some content that would've probably been a free mod 10 years ago now comes out as a $10-20 indie game.

There are still plenty of great mods available, but it's nowhere near the golden age. Not even in the same ballpark.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 02-06-2013, 09:59 PM
Stink Fish Pot Stink Fish Pot is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Speak to me Maddie! View Post
It is a an electronic Lego set, with a billion pieces, and a ton of interaction. The fun is in the design and building of things, the creative aspect. Many people enjoy this sort of game. The type of people who would play SIMS just to build houses and then start a new game.
Well, this actually makes she sense, and it actually sounds like I would like it. I can certainly understand how one would enjoy putting together anyone they want from Legos, especially an unlimited supply of them. God knows the hours... The days I spent building forts out of Legos that could withstand the bombardments from my friends and brothers cannonballs (marbles).

With that said, what was I watching then? I see the great big castle someone built, but then I see a bunch of different characters running toward it, and the game player recording it shooting everyone with an arrow. Some people were building a ladder one section at a time to crawl over the outer wall... But that's as far as anyone got.

So, my question is, is building things out of limitless Lego sets the only thing you do, or is there interactive stuff? For instance, what was the YouTube video teying to demonstrate?

Thanks!
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 02-06-2013, 10:10 PM
Jragon Jragon is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Miskatonic University
Posts: 8,817
There are two modes to Minecraft: survival and creative.

In survival mode you're not given anything and there are monsters that spawn in the dark. You use materials gotten by breaking blocks and digging to make better equipment so you can get more materials and build grand things. You can build some impressive stuff in this mode and it's generally pretty rewarding because it takes some effort to make really grand things.

The other mode is creative, in which there's no weapons or monsters, but you get infinite blocks ("legos") and can build to your heart's content.

However, on multiplayer servers I think admins can give people any blocks they want, and enable things like flying. So you can build huge castles and then use the weapons and stuff to play in them.

Most of the really impressive stuff, though, were built with modelling programs and scripts. For instance, there's a full scale USS Enterprise someone made, but he didn't actually build it -- rather he used a modelling program to make it and then wrote a script to convert it into a minecraft savefile.

Last edited by Jragon; 02-06-2013 at 10:11 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 02-06-2013, 10:12 PM
shijinn shijinn is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stink Fish Pot View Post
Well, this actually makes she sense, and it actually sounds like I would like it. I can certainly understand how one would enjoy putting together anyone they want from Legos, especially an unlimited supply of them. God knows the hours... The days I spent ...
you're thinking of building your own robot girl army aren't you?
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 02-06-2013, 10:25 PM
dzeiger dzeiger is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stink Fish Pot View Post

So, my question is, is building things out of limitless Lego sets the only thing you do, or is there interactive stuff? For instance, what was the YouTube video teying to demonstrate?

Thanks!
Interactive, if you wish it to be. Any copy of Minecraft can act as a server, so if you set up a world that you really like, you can have some friends come on and see it, or fight each other on, etc.

There are a couple of different "play" modes. Creative, which is the full-on "lego" mode. Survival, which is the default mode where you start with nothing but your are hands and if you want to make a castle out of stone, you have to create tools and dig up all the stone yourself, while avoiding nighttime or underground monster attacks. Adventure, which is mainly a mode for running maps other people have made that has various restrictions--for example if someone creates a map where the player is supposed to be investigating a haunted house, you don't want them to be able to break down the walls.

So the map in the video, along with many others people have made, is available for people to download and play--if you and a bunch of friends want to play on it, just load it onto your server. Many popular map types, particularly PvP ones, have servers that are publicly accessible, they just reset the map after each match or whatever.

There are also lots of public creative or survival servers out there, where people all join in and build a town or community or whatever. Such servers usually have some sort of application or trial process, as just letting anyone on with the power to place or remove stuff just leads to griefing issues.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 02-06-2013, 10:34 PM
RandMcnally RandMcnally is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
I like the fact that someone built an in-game version of minecraft.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 02-07-2013, 12:12 AM
Merneith Merneith is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller View Post
I like the Call of Duty games, and have played most of them. That being said, if you asked me to name one other game like Minecraft, I'd be hard pressed to come up with an answer. If you asked me to name ten other games exactly like the latest Call of Duty game, I could do it just by counting backwards through the franchise.
Allow me to draw your attention to Terraria. It's like Minecraft, only instead of being a 3d world, it's 2d side-scrolling platformer. There are monsters, and there's no creative mode without monsters, but the shrubbery doesn't explode destroying hours of building progress so it has that going for it. It's about $10 on Steam. They just released a console version too, but I like the m/k better so I can alt-tab to the wiki.

http://www.terraria.org/
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 02-07-2013, 02:20 PM
Airk Airk is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorBeef View Post
I have a hard time believing you were actually a gamer through the years in question if you take this stance. It's not a subtle difference. There was a bigger modding community by orders of magntiude in the late 90s early 2000s than there are now.
You REALLY need to stop with the whole "I have a hard time believing that you...<insert thing that people have absolutely no reason to lie about here>" thing.

Yes. I have been a "gamer" since like 1982. I have not stopped. I have never really cared about the size of the "modding community" however - if I see a cool mod come up for a game I play, I nab it, but I'm a picky bastard and most mods are absolutely not even worth my time to keep track of, then or now. Believe it or not, just because people were in the same enormous hobby as you during the same time period doesn't mean that they paid the same amount of attention to the same titles, or even if they have, that they come away feeling the same way about them.

It's really quite frustrating to be dimissed like this over stupid stuff.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright 2013 Sun-Times Media, LLC.