I never thought the day would come I'd see RPGCodex staff being apologists for "well, the game has to be easy because otherwise people get discouraged" design arguments.
It's a brave new world!
Don't you realize that you can't demand games that are targeted towards
your niche, and then claim that it's illegitimate to design games for the larger, AAA "niche"?
I'm not mad at Call of Duty or Skyrim for being designed for people who like those games. I just want games that are designed for people like me to exist too.
I'm not demanding nor claiming either such thing. It's perfectly fine for developers to make their games for the largest audience possible, and were I a businessman with no other concerns, I'd do the
exact same thing.
I just happen to believe such development principles are unlikely to result in games I'll enjoy. I don't begrudge developers their right to sell out--I just lose any and all interest in their games when they're honest about their target audience. It would be pretty stupid of me to respond to "we're not making games for hardcore gamers" with "I'm a hardcore gamer, therefore I'll totally convince myself your game is actually hardcore, buy it, and end up hugely disappointed!"
And yes, I'm amused that the Codex, a place founded purely to bitch about such developer trends (and the sad smallness it takes certain developers to say, "Well, see, it's valid game design, because... we were told we'd be fired otherwise!") is now defending them. I mean sure, there is a variety of opinion to be had purely because this is an unmoderated forum--actually my favorite aspect of the Codex--but how would Calis and St. Proverbius have reacted to this sort of argument? Maybe I'm an idiot and they would have just been so happy to see another Infinity Engine game* that Sawyer's horrific sayings vis a vis developer priorities wouldn't have warranted a second's thought.
*Actually, if memory serves, St. Proverbius hated Infinity Engine games.
I guess @
Zeriel has some kind of idealized indie-type narrative in his mind, where the desired state is that designers create their personal "dream games", with absolutely no regard to who their audience is, whether that audience is mass market or niche. Thing is, I'm pretty sure Josh Sawyer's dream game is not an Infinity Engine-like RPG.
I'm actually kind of afraid of what we might discover if we let all our favorite game designers design their personal dream games instead of making what we want them to make. Who knows how popamole their tastes are?
I don't like indy games, in almost all cases! I harken back to the DOS era, when mainstream developers were small enough that their primary approach for any project was to ask themselves what they'd like to play. It was simply the practical thing to do. There were no QA departments, there were no focus groups telling them what the "market" wanted. You might argue that this was a flawed approach that led to games that didn't match the market, but in my book it was a fantastic way of doing things precisely because it wasn't "targeted" at anything. There's a massive sense of variety in the DOS era. Contrary to public opinions, games weren't particularly hard, either. They just required a little patience of the player.
I think the best way I can think to put it is this.
The ideal game requires the player to compromise to make his way through its world and appreciate all it has to offer. The modern game invariably compromises itself, feverishly seeking the player's approval.
Just in case it wasn't clear: this is my personal preference, not an absolute univeral constant that can be derived mathematically. Clearly the market disagrees with my silly, outdated tastes.
