Manual Mayhem: Where Did Our cloth Maps Go?

I was born in 1988 and grew up in the grip of Nintendo mania.  During that time, I played a number of fantastic games from the NES and SNES, as well as the Sega Genesis and Master system.  However, the games were only half the fun for me, as a child.  My brother liked to hog the systems, so I amused my self with his copies of Nintendo Power or with the manuals that came with our games.  Why?  Because in that era, manuals for video games were works of art unto themselves.   Which is why today, it pains me to denounce the video games industry for their exceedingly pathetic supplemental material for modern video games.

3 pages.  Why is this manual 3 pages?!

            Now, for anyone born after 1998, this may raise a few eyebrows.  Video games come with manuals, naturally, but they aren't anything special.  They give you a little background into the game, the story, the characters, and tell you the controls.  However, as time wore on, the need for manuals seemingly decreased.  Games had tutorials for teaching players the mechanics and if they wanted story, they could just play the game.  However, this logic is, in my opinion, horribly flawed.  Game manuals and supplemental materials can do far more for video games than simply instruct.  They can immerse.

            For example, Final Fantasy 3(6) for the SNES was a crowning achievement in 16-bit RPGs, meshing charming graphics and an unforgettable score with a moving story full of unique characters.  However, the game wasn't the only part of Final Fantasy 3(6) which was special.

            Showcased above are images from the manual.  They are in color and chocked full of interesting illustrations from the Final Fantasy series's longest running character designer, Yoshitaka Amano.  It's more like an artbook than a manual in some places.  Next to each character is a small poetic description, meant to excite the players.  Along with these descriptions, the characters get their own illustrations and a thorough explanation on how their special moves work, some coming with necessary advice or tips to make them more effective.  The back of the manual is full of tips and advice, while the front contains a dramatic recounting of the War of the Magi, a conflict central to the plot of Final Fantasy 3(6).  It immerses players in the world's lore, while giving them advice on how to proceed.  It wasn't the only thing that came with the game though.  There was also a full color, double sided map to help keep players on track.  This entire package sold, at the time of its release, for near what a collector's edition sells for now.  However, this was just the standard edition.  Final Fantasy 3(6) came with all this standard.

            Other games in the early 90s, realizing how difficult they could be, had full color, hundred page strategy guides pre packaged with their games.  Phantasy Star 3 is one such example, offering complete maps, bestiaries, and item lists for gamers looking to get a little help with their RPGs.

            Even more basic games which didn't have name brand value at least gave it their all.  The game manual for the NES title Crystalis had explanations of all the items, a few tips, story bits, and illustrations based on the actual gameplay.  They had effort.

            Compare that to manuals of today.  In front of you is the manual for White Knight Chronicles 2, part of a pair of games that are incredibly complex, have a deep character driven plot, gorgeous graphics, and lots of story.  So, how do they do this epic justice?  With seven pages giving the most basic description of controls with no attempt made to actually educate gamers on some of the nuances of game play.  The manual comes up to fourteen pages if, and only if, players count the foreign language sections.  This is pathetic, showing no effort or attempt to immerse or engage the players.  It is the most bare bones, waste of space manual one can have. 

            When did manuals start receiving such disrespect?  I remember a time when the manual was an integral part of the game because it offered something the game couldn't.  Take the manual to Metal Gear Solid 2.  It contains within it a small comic that actually explains gameplay by showing how it would work in the game.  The main character dodges guards, avoids alarms, and uses his weapons or his fists in the comic in the same way the game uses them.  It shows an attempt to engage players with a unique approach to tutorials and interesting art design.

            But games do not even need to be this inventive.  Adapting gameplay into comic form is hard.  However, incorporating world building can be astonishingly easy for those with a little forethought.  Take the manual to Final Fantasy Legend on the Game Boy.  It contains many useful tips as well as information on players, the world, and items.  However in the very back of the book is an adventurer's diary.  It tells the first few levels of the game as if they were straight out of a novel or a diary of a fallen adventurer, talking about characters fighting, leveling up, and advancing through the game.  It is engaging and it is little more than a few words on a page with the occasional bit of art thrown in, like a helmet or a sword.  It requires no effort beyond someone typing up a few pages of fluff on a computer.  This.  Is.  Easy.  Why don't developers use this more?  After all, an engaged player is a player more likely to come back to the same game series and the same developer.

             Some games can have basic manuals, but can require players to think outside the box as well.  Literally.  The original Metal Gear Solid, along with its remake on the Game Cube, had players look on the back of the box for a code necessary to advance through the game.  This fourth wall breaking approach adds not only humor but a sense of involvement from the player in the game, making them more engaged.

            The current trend of pitifully uninspired game manuals saddens me greatly.  True, not all manuals need to be epic novels, but they are as much a part of the game as the story or gameplay.  They deserve respect.  And it is only in recent years that the plight of manuals have become so dire.  While I never owned any of the Ultima games, they came with special fluff books and cloth maps that fleshed out the game world.  These days, games with these "extras" require a premium price. 

            There are exceptions to this rule, of course.  Take the Last Story.  It was a game released in packaging that resembled a book, with an artbook inside as well as a fully equipped manual that gave character descriptions, world building elements, and tutorials.  However, this game was only released as such because it was a pre-order only release.  A re-release of Tactics Ogre on the Playstation Portable included a pack of tarot cards matching those used in the series.  But only if players pre-ordered it.  The Arc The Lad Collection on the Playstation 1 contained a huge full color art book that doubled as the instruction manual, included standard.  However, the collection was rare, as games localized by Working Designs were wont to be.  Only for a premium price or in rare cases do game manuals get the respect they deserve.

            Players who think that this is not an issue should take a short trip through time with me.  From 1993-1998, the Legend of Zelda games have included a delightful assortment of manuals.  They are all colorful, with cartoonish illustrations of items, fold out or separate maps, and in-depth character backgrounds.  Compare that to the White Knight Chronicles manual, with it's black and white walls of text meant to give as little imagination as possible.  Game manuals have slowly, but steadily been dying out or getting worse.  Even the Skyward Sword manual, which I no longer have, sadly, was in color, even though it lacked maps or character bios.

1992

1993

1998

            On one level, I understand.  The world of video games is going further and further towards digital releases.  Steam, XBLA, PSN, the Virtual Console.  All of these negate the need for manuals to a degree.  Yet, many still include manuals or instructions within the game.  So, let me make an ultimatum for game developers.  Games are constantly being re-released, released with pre-order only content, or released in collector's editions for this supplementary material which was once standard.  Yet mainstream games are criminally neglected.  It's time to make a choice.  Do not try to play both sides, games industry.  Either have your collector's editions, while giving us the manuals we deserve, that do world building, engage, inspire, etc...or eliminate them altogether and go digital.  I do not want to see manuals die out, as they helped me learn to read as a child.  However, the world is going in a new direction.  And sometimes we have to adapt to change.  But what I hate is a games industry trying to play both sides, by showing zero effort with their manuals on regular editions, but releasing "the good" versions for collectors just so they can milk another 10-60 dollars from players.  Do not short change manuals to save a buck if you're still going to pretend that they need to be there.  Go all or nothing.

            I grew up with video games which were fighting for their audience.  And all the pictures above are of games and supplemental material from my personal collection.  I decided to include them because I wanted to show how these older games had to engage players on a greater level than games of today.  They included guides, maps, colorful booklets...and that's why I lament seeing a tiny instruction manual like the one in White Knight Chronicles 2.  It shows a general lack of effort in the game industry, which has punctuated this generation of gaming.  A lack of effort which disengages gamers.  Why is this personally important to me?  Well, because I've got a list of modern games I thought I wanted to play.  But no matter how cheap they get, I can't bring myself to buy them, because they are so samey.  So unengaging.  So...boring.  Compared to the games I just mentioned, they are like trying to tell someone that a piece of lead is actually gold, painted grey.  And that is bad for the whole games industry...whether they realize it or not.

            That brings me back to the question asked in the title of this article.  Where have all our cloth maps gone?  They've either been trashed to save a few dollars, or they've been stuffed into an expensive collector's edition.  A cruel fate for something that can do so much for world building.  And without a solid foundation for world building...these game worlds will eventually come crumbling down.

Ignorance is Idiocy. AKA, Use it or Lose it

Well, crap, it's been over a month since my last post.  Life has basically given me a swift kick to the nether regions in this absence, but, hey, I'm back with more insight into the wonderful world of video gaming.  Enjoy.

Ignorance is Idiocy.  AKA, Use it or Lose it

            In the current era of console and even PC gaming, there is little that holds more power than a sequel.  Sequels are signs of success and comfort for many gamers, as they bring back stories and game concepts that enraptured players from the start.  Sequels are not free money...however, they almost always have an audience, no matter how small.  They do not need to prove themselves in the same way that original property does.  A Bioshock sequel, no matter how poor, has a greater audience by far than an original property which uses the same concepts, even if it is superior.  However, in this era of sequels, there is a disturbing trend.

My thoughts exactly.

            Halo.  Call of Duty.  Far Cry.  All of these games are, in their own right, very well made and with a specific audience in mind.  They cater to gamers who enjoy war games and in sequels offer them more of the same.  They have proven themselves.  However, countless other games mimic and copy the successes of these titles, but without even a modicum of the same originality, polish, or passion.  In fact, as sequels keep going into larger and larger numbers, many gamers collectively grown because there is stagnation.  They do not bring back great gameplay or tell epic stories, it is merely more of the same.  A game such as Fracture or Turok copy from the Halo formula in hopes of cashing in on its success, but ultimately glut the market.  Ironically, however, this glut is not, in and of itself, the trend I was speaking of.  What I refer to is the tendency to ignore one's own property in favor of chasing after someone else's.

Damn right

            Let us return to my previous example.  The original Turok: Dinosaur Hunter was a Nintendo 64 game about a time traveling and dimension hopping Native American warrior, equipped with outlandish weaponry fighting aliens and dinosaurs with everything from probes that bored into enemy skulls to magic tribal arrows fired from a regular bow.  The newer version of Turok rips off countless things from Halo, such as regenerating health, guidance markers, character archetypes, etc. It makes Turok a space marine, removes his interesting character traits, and gives him samey, boring weapons.  It is essentially, a clone trying to cash in on a previous game's fans.  No different from the atrocious Golden Axe: Beast Rider game for the Playstation 3 and Xbox 360 or the mediocre Altered Beast game for the PS2.  They take the original game's concept and completely alter it to fall more in line with modern trends, hoping that name value alone will sell titles, ultimately creating a generic experience with a thin veneer of the original coating the property.

Believe it or not, this is the good one.  This is the FUN one.

            And that is really the biggest shame of all.  Turok: Dinosaur Hunter was not a smash hit, however it garnered a cult following and earned a sequel on the Nintendo 64.  However, many of the fans probably felt betrayed by this new game, which used name value only to try and sell its property.  This is one of the bigger problems in the game industry.  Ignorance.  Many companies either forget what made their titles superb and beloved in the first place in favor of following modern trends.  Or worse, game companies forget that they even own said properties and leave loyal fans who are willing to pay money out in the cold.

Say it ain't so!

            There are a number of examples for this.  So many it is actually quite depressing.  Capcom is perhaps the most egregious offender.  Capcom is often known as the house that Megaman built.  However, when Keiji Inafune left the company, so to did much of its love for the blue bomber.  Megaman has been around for over two decades, yet lies almost completely forgotten of late.  The main series, Megaman X, Megaman Zero, and the countless spin offs are things of the past.  New Megaman games are practically nonexistent past 2010.  There was talk of Megaman Legends receiving the third game which fans had craved for almost a decade, however it was canceled at the last moment.  Capcom is letting the franchise that built them die.

Capcom...with all due respect...are you out of your damn mind?!

            To be fair, if a franchise has outlived itself or grown stagnant or had a satisfactory conclusion, it may be fair to allow it to rest.  The Shadow Hearts series created a nice little timeline for itself and ended with a satisfying conclusion, having only  one spin off that was mostly inoffensive tacked on at the end.  However, Megaman fans still cry out for sequels.  And Capcom ignores them.  It is not only Megaman, however.  Breath of Fire, a staple RPG series from the SNES era into the Playstation 2 era has withered and disappeared, last seen as a poor PSP port of the third game in a series of five.  Other series get drowned before they have a chance to flourish.  The Okami series had room for sequels, but after just one it seems a lost cause to hope for more.  The same can be said of Viewtiful Joe.  This habit of abandoning the properties that make game companies money is baffling to me.  There are fans.  Megaman has fans.  Breath of Fire has fans.  Viewtiful Joe has fans.  Yet save for cameos, these series remain dormant.  To release a game with one of these names would guarantee at least a few thousand sales, if not tens or hundreds of thousands, which is more than many original properties can guarantee.  So, why not revive them?  Gargoyle's Quest was a series which only lasted for three games, but which disappeared after the SNES era.  Why not bring it back?  Fans remember.  And fans are loyal.  Not to companies, often enough.  Capcom has proven to be quite ruthless with on disc and frivolous DLC releases, lock out procedures, and policies meant to enrage their own customers, but fans are loyal to games.  If you make them, they will come.

It's been almost 18 years since Firebrand's last solo game.  Isn't it time for a comeback?

            However, like developers following modern trends, game companies seem bound and determined lately to forget what made them so successful to begin with.  While not as apparently blind as Capcom, Konami has let Castlevania rot, of late.  Castlevania has always been popular in its 2-d iterations, yet there has not been a 2-d release for years, unless you count the storyless, rehashed multiplayer fair that is Harmony of Despair.  Instead, the closest thing we get is a "reboot" called Castlevania: Lords of Shadows, which is more interested in stealing ideas from God of War and Shadow of the Colossus than rewarding the loyalty of fans.  True, it had unique ideas and was a fine game in its own right, but it is following the trend of cramming what sells into any game with fan recognition.  And this is a terrible idea.  Betraying fans means losing potential sales in the long run.  Sales in the long run are everything for game companies.  Short term sales are needed to keep it afloat at the moment, but to have any longevity, game companies need to think in the long term.

Remember when you made games like this, Konami?  Fun, colorful, insane games?

            Perhaps worse than sequels which betray the concept of the original, however, are sequels that only aim to tease the fans, rather than placate them.  Franchises often build up a large shared universe, with rules that must be followed.  Even the disconnected Final Fantasy series has many elements in common, such as the character Cid, summoned beasts like Bahamut, and monsters such as Tonberries, Behemoths, and Ahrimans.  However, trying to copy these elements into a bastardized version of a game may only enrage fans rather than placate them.  They ask the question "Why isn't this in the world or in the style that I know and love?"  And when that question is asked, the game is already lost, no matter how fine a product.  Suikoden Tierkreis is a fine example of this.  It is not a bad game on its own merits and stays true to some of the styles of the Suikoden series, however it is set in an alternate universe.  There are none of the alliances or relationships, none of the recurring characters or elements, and no continuing story from previous games.  This is almost like a slap in the face to fans of the series, who wait patiently for a new iteration to a favorite series of theirs only to be rewarded with something that looks similar, plays similar, but isn't what they want.  It is akin to trying to buy a Halo game but coming out with Turok.  All the elements are there, but it is still lacking.  This plays into ignorance of what made the game in the series enjoyable to begin with.

What don't I see here...ah, right, Tierkreis.  Take the hint, Konami.

            In that same vein, I must reluctantly point out that Square Enix has followed a similar pathway.  Final Fantasy has seldom been a sequelized property.  Each new game has additional numbers beside it, but each is its own story.  The games have evolved with the times, keeping a strong story, music, and gameplay that the fans have recognized.  However, Square, after its merger with Enix, ignored all that and started fresh.  Final Fantasy 11 and onwards have followed the gameplay of MMORPGs and while financial success has followed, it has been with even more bloated development costs, critical pandering, and the scorn of long time fans.  If you wanted to make a new game series, why not make a new game series, rather than enrage fans?  The point I wish to make to all game companies is to ignore your properties, either what made them good to begin with or to ignore them entirely, is rank stupidity. 

Go back in time ten years.  Would ANYONE have thought this was a Final Fantasy game back then?

            Many games have fans slavering for a sequel.  The Legacy of Kain series, which Square now owns, ended after five games with several plot lines unresolved and a canceled game to follow.  If fans were shown that they still matter with a collection or a finale, then it would doubtless be at the very least a modest success.  However, the time for sequels and franchises passes quickly.  Legacy of Kain as a series was released in the 1990s and held power into the early 2000s, but has been dormant a long time.  Many of the voice actors who provided the performances that made it so memorable are either dead or growing too old to wait for a sequel.  The same is true of any franchise.  There are still many who yearn for Megaman, for the old Final Fantasy games, for Gargoyle's Quest, Breath of Fire, and Suikoden.  However, these gamers are getting older.  They are doggedly staying loyal to old favorites or they are moving on with their lives.  If Capcom, Konami, and many others do not move soon, they risk losing the power their franchises once had.  In twenty years time, the name Megaman may be worth less than nothing, when in the 1980s, it sold games without a second thought.

Time is running out for this Legacy, sadly.

            Many game companies have horded rights to franchises or sequels through acquisitions.  Through mergers, seizures, and purchases, many of these companies have a large library of names that they simply ignore.  And some defunct companies, like Quintet, have great titles that are fondly remembered whose rights could be bought for a pittance.  However, if these rights are shelved and sat upon, waiting for their value to appreciate, then eventually...they will stop being worth anything at all.  An Action Comics #1 is worth a great deal these days...but only to those who are willing to pay for it.  If the companies wait too long, people will give up hope on a Megaman 3...or build one themselves.  And then where will Capcom be?  They will have lost fans and by extension, lost sales.  Worse, they will be hated by their fans for not being more faithful to them, the people who pay their bills.

Hording rights is like hording comics.  They're only worth a crap if someone actually wants to pay for them.  Wait too long and eventually...no one will care.

           In the world of game development, modern trends can be useful.  Showing what is possible and what is profitable, they can be a great way for smaller companies to follow the big boys while still making something that is theirs, something special and enjoyable.  However, ignoring past successes just to chase modern trends is utter folly.  When it comes to game franchises, names, and sequels, you need to either use it...or lose it.

Alternative Control Schemes: Why They Are Important and Why People Don’t Use Them as Much as They Should

In the world of video games, there is one rule above all others in defining an experience.  Interactivity.  If a game is not interactive, then it is not truly a game, but rather a film, a television program, a piece of music, or what have you.  Interactivity defines video games in the world of media as something unique.  However, how enjoyable a game is often comes down to how easy it is for a person to play it.

Simple and easy to figure out.

            Good games have a fairly predictable formula.  Easy to learn, hard to master, addictive once started.  Nothing breaks this formula quite like poor control schemes.  When a game does not do as it’s told, there is a jarring disconnect between player and game.  This, for many, kills a video game’s fun factor and many will leave it by the wayside because of this.  Thusly, I have a question for modern game companies.  Why do you insist on making ridiculously unintuitive control schemes…and not allow us to change them to suit our tastes?

Control schemes don't get much more unruly than the one for this mech game.

           Alternate control schemes are the most basic form of customization and can add a personal touch to any video game.  But they do so much more than that.  They can make games accessible to a wider variety of people.  For example, if someone’s index finger was crushed in an accident, they might not be able to use it to play a game.  If they were accustomed to using it for the trigger on a Playstation or Xbox controller before the accident, they would have to use another finger, like their ring finger or their index finger, which would be clumsy and unaccustomed to the controls.  In a shooter, where a moment’s slip-up could mean death, this can ruin a game for someone like that, especially if that control is related to the guns.  Say it could be altered, though.  So that the trigger activated the pause menu and another easier to reach control activated the guns.  If that happened, the crushed finger would not be as much of an issue and the game would be more intuitive for that person.  Would they not then keep playing and possibly pick up a sequel to that game when it was released?  While this example might seem like a long shot, there are people everyday who cannot or simply do not wish to use the control schemes the developer used.  And they leave a game behind specifically because of that.

Most games require two hands to play, so what happens to those too old, crippled, or injured to play?  This is where alternate control schemes can shine.

            This cuts at the two biggest reasons for including alternative control schemes.  Comfort and accessibility.  With a crushed finger, one could still play a game, more often than not.  But would it be comfortable?  Would it be enjoyable?  Would it be fun?  Probably not.  And if something is more trouble than it is worth, why would anyone do it?  At the same time, a player needs to be able to choose which actions in a game have priority over others.  For example, in Rogue Galaxy, all characters have close combat weapons, like swords or axes, and long range weapons, like guns and bows.  Being able to choose which of these weapons is more useful, and by extension which buttons use them, is key to creating an experience unique to the player.  It defines their whole play style.  So, it is important that players can access the game’s functions to its fullest.  It needs to be both comfortable enough to play and accessible enough that the player can gain enough skill with it to win.

Battle axe or minigun.  Which is more your style?

            At its core, a control scheme needs to minimize the interference between player and game, so that the player feels immersed in the experience.  Nothing is as responsive as a controller, because they are wired directly to the game and almost directly wired into the hand.  A player sees something, hits a button, and is rewarded instantaneously with a proper action.  Alternate control schemes are an extension of this principal.  Everyone plays games differently.  Some people have large hands, broken fingers, weak thumbs, or what have you and cannot play the game as the developer intended.  Their reaction speed is crippled due to circumstance.  However, with an alternate control scheme, they can define for themselves how best to interface with the game.

The less interference between player and game, the better.

            Given how useful alternative control schemes can be for comfort and accessibility, why then do developers not offer more options to customize controls within their games?  Well, a simple answer is gimmick.  Some games have interchangeable controls that can be tweaked without hurting the experience.  Fighting games, for example, often let players map different attacks to different buttons.  Where if the developer programmed a button to kick, it could be changed to punch or grab to match the player’s style.  However, imagine a game system that is a bit more experimental or gimmicky.  For example, a game that uses the Nintendo Wii’s motion sensor will almost never transfer well to a basic control scheme mapped to a controller.  Dragon Quest Swords on the Wii relies on players slashing across the screen horizontally, vertically, diagonally, holding the sword up to the sky, holding it down to the ground, and holding up a shield to block attacks.  These kinds of controls cannot be altered anymore than someone can treat a sword like a bow.  It is in the nature of the system.  This is not merely limited to motion controlled games, however.  Some games require specific button sequences for events to play out, such as quick time events, and to alter all those buttons would make the game more confusing when the time to input the sequence rolled around.  It would end up being even more frustrating than having to implement an alternative control scheme.

With a game like this, alternate control schemes aren't really possible.

            When the gimmick is valued more than the game design, developers may even opt to not include an alternate control scheme to simply push the platform.  A number of Nintendo DS games require the stylus to work.  However, a large number of games don’t.  Yet, some of these games, which were clearly designed without the use of a stylus in mind, force players to use the stylus based controls with no options to change them.  Magical Starsign is one of the most egregious offenders in this department.  It is a typical turn based RPG, which could very well have come out on the SNES or Playstation, however it is entirely controlled through the stylus.  Even though the controls would probably be more fluid with the d-pad, the gimmick is more important than functionality.  Wii games also suffer from this.  While Metroid Prime 3 is an outstanding game and really makes use of the Wii-mote to its fullest, the option to have a more standard control scheme is suspiciously absent.  It’s not as though it didn’t exist, as the previous two games had been on the gamecube with a regular controller.  It was purposefully held out to push the system.

            Gimmicks are not the only reason for not including alternate control schemes.  Just the most common one.  Complexity is another good excuse.  Many games have controls or actions that are so complex that to alter the buttons would break the game design.  In Okami, players hit a trigger button to freeze the game and bring up a paint brush.  Then, they use a face button and the control stick to paint on the screen.  To alter this entire sequence, which is used as often as ten times a minute in the game, would require the entire flow of the game to be altered.  It is a three layered sequence of events that requires enough input that it cannot be altered, in good conscience, without breaking the game.  This is a very common reason for a lack of alternative control schemes.  A game like Metal Gear Solid 4, which requires a player to get into a stance, line up their shot with a control stick, then fire with a trigger button, would be a nightmare trying to program alternate control schemes.  And it would ruin the game’s design.

With actions that are complex or require specific commands, alternate controls would needlessly complicate the game.

            One of the more frustrating reasons for not including an alternate control scheme is the amount of contents in a game.  Many developers want to pack a ton of extra features into games, from side quests to minigames.  While a ton of content is usually very well received and helps a game in the long run, it leads to one phrase dominating design meetings.  “If we change the controls, we won’t be able to do everything we want to do.”  This might sound a bit selfish, but actually it is entirely reasonable.  Games like Jak and Daxter, Ratchet and Clank, and Sly Cooper, offer some customization of controls for the basic game.  However, complete customization would mean they would have to go into each and every one of their minigames, such as defending a beach with a turret, hacking a computer by playing pac-man, or running through a 2-d side scroller side mission, and change the controls each time.  Mini games would hurt arguably the most from this sort of implementation, but it would also rob games of their immersion.  Taking them out is not really an option either, since without the extra content the games would lose some of their variety.  Many designers can only choose one of the two, and in a pinch, they will choose content over customization of controls.

One minigame that lasts roughly a minute.  Imagine how difficult it would be to rebind controls for like a dozen of these in a 20 hour game.

            That brings us to the most frequently used reason for a lack of alternative control schemes.  Negligence.  Many game designers are either too strapped for time or simply do not think of them.  The games industry is a cutthroat business and developers who do not meet milestones are soon dead and buried.  The luxury of time to implement all the features that they may plan is not something most developers have.  They need to ship their product and recoup their money, because every month they have to sit on their game is tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars lost.  So, the first feature to go is usually alternate control schemes.  If it’s thought of at all.  Many developers truly believe they’ve found the best control scheme for their game and don’t wish it changed or don’t believe it needs to be changed.  It is unfortunate that developers don’t take the minimal time needed to simply offer the option to rebind buttons and allow the controls to be rebound with them.  This is done frequently in quality assurance testing for developers, so simply giving gamers that option would be more than they’re used to.  However, when you’re in the crunch, you either don’t think of or don’t have time to implement such luxuries.

            All the same, despite the myriad reasons why developers do not embrace alternate control schemes more readily, even though they should, I remain hopeful.  Because, with indie gaming now in full swing, developers are more able to be flexible with their game design, including options for alternate controls, the ability to rebind keys, or supporting third party control systems.  The perfect example of this is the USB gamepad.  Logitech frequently releases USB gamepads that function just like a Playstation or Xbox controller, but which have drivers that enable it to have buttons bound to it in a certain way.  Games like Orcs Must Die, To the Moon, Wizorb, and PC ports of games like Silent Hill Homecoming or the Overlord games all include options for a gamepad as well as a keyboard and mouse.  And with the Logitech software, these gamepads are programmable to a degree.  Other games are realizing the importance of control and simply allow their entire command set to be rebound, like with Smite, which can have any control bound to any key on a keyboard, any button on a controller, or a combination of the two.

I have seen the future and it is usb controllers.

            Alternative control schemes are not dead and, thanks to modern technology, especially from modders making their own changes to games they love, they are starting to become more prevalent.  In this way, PC gaming is often more accurately described as superior to console gaming on sheer virtue of versatility.  If console developers wish to continue to be competitive, they need to make a product that is more accessible and more comfortable than, or at least on par with, their competitors in the PC market.  Unfortunately, with time, manpower, and costs for developing AAA games increasing, alternate control schemes may not be something the industry will readily embrace.

Rebindable controls like this make games so much more personal and enjoyable.

            As technology increases and functionality starts winning out over shipping a game by a certain date, I believe that alternative control schemes will become more prevalent.  And, as a result, I think that more people will find time for gaming, because they will be comfortable enough with the controls that they can enjoy the experience.  The future is not in fixed controls.  It’s in flexibility.  When there is a game built for two hands, but that allows a one armed man to play it with no handicaps, alternative control schemes will have really won the day.  And people will finally appreciate their USB controllers, the option menus in their favorite games, and the versatility of motion controls.  Until that day comes, keep on trying to find the control system that works for you.  And don’t let any developer tell you that what’s comfortable for you is the wrong way to play.

Cult Followings: Working With the Fans

There are a number of things in the game industry that confuse me to no end.  Perhaps at the top of the list is the Mother series in Japan.  It is a quirky 16-bit RPG series that has gained a huge following in the U.S.  While I have yet to play it, I know a great deal about the series.  While it did see a limited release in the west under the title Earthbound, it seems odd that games like Infamous are getting a re-release collector’s edition less than four years after its initial release, but this quirky series is left by the wayside.  The fans are there and have made themselves known to Nintendo, so why? 

17 years and Nintendo still remains silent on the Mother/Earthbound series

Nintendo claims that there might be legal repercussions based on musical ques and names as the reason for the game Mother 2 or Earthbound not being re-released.  However, this doesn’t stop Mother 1 or Mother 3 from being released as part of a compilation set or on the Virtual Console on the Wii or 3DS.  Yet, Nintendo continues to be silent on this series.  One of the arguments for this is that these games are text heavy RPGs that would require too much time to translate and adapt to the U.S.  And that is a fair complaint.  I understand that a lot of great RPGs and other uniquely Japanese games weren’t released because of translation issues.  Translating the Japanese text and mannerisms to make sense in English would cost a great deal and take a huge amount of time.  However…why doesn’t Nintendo use the fan translations?

This is the only way to play Mother 3 in English...so why doesn't Nintendo just reach out to the fans for the translation and schedule a release of the game stateside?

Here is the meat of our subject today.  Fan power.  Gamers who love games will go to all manner of extremes for them.  Fan fiction, fan art, fan translations, even fan mods and fan sequels.  These extensions of popular games are uniquely tailored to their audience and will thusly appeal to them, more often than not.  The biggest hurdle to these fan creations being released for profit is the threat of legal action from the company that owns rights to the original.  However, what if the game companies, instead of threatening legal action or trying to shut down or ignore these fan communities and fan creations, tried to make use of them?  Market them legitimately?  In fact, mods, or fan created additions, to PC games are how many gamers get jobs in the industry.  Showing they understand the tools needed to make games by adding on to games they already know and love.

And some of these fan creations show real time, effort, and dedication.  Many games never reached the shores of the U.S. because of time, money, or apparent lack of interest.  However, fans who had imported the games loved them so much that they wanted to share them with others and took to translating them.  Many fan translation or localization groups have put forth work purely out of their own interest with no hope of profit.  This is how the Mother 3, Bahamut Lagoon, and the original Final Fantasy 2, 3, and 5 translations were released.  However, fans can go even further.  One intrepid group of young hackers put games from the Satellaview, a Japanese only satellite gaming service, online for all to enjoy, with the caveat that if they were contacted by Nintendo or other companies and asked to remove them, they would.  They also stated that if the games were released stateside, they would take down their website.  What makes this remarkable, however, is that not only was the Satellaview released only in Japan, but many of the games for it had holes in the code which were meant to be filled by the satellite broadcasts.  So, these hackers not only translated the games, but filled the holes in their code, retooled their controls, added in the old music from the broadcast, and released it, for free, so that others could enjoy it.

Zelda on the Satellaview, in English, available to the masses, all thanks to fans

No matter what anyone says about copyright violation or piracy, one has to admire the passion involved in projects like this, where dozens of people spend their own time, without pay, to share the games they love with others.  However, I personally believe that this is an untapped resource for game companies the world over.  Rather than re-releasing some games as many as five times, Square-Enix, why not look at some of your older properties that have gained a cult following but were never released in the west?  If the fans have done their work right, you could offer to buy their translation from them and release your old game to the west, but at full price on a new platform.  It would require some quality control and play testing, but the lion’s share of work necessary to make it viable for a western release would already be done.  However, even given such a unique opportunity to work with fans, most game companies do not cooperate.  In fact, some go out of their way to destroy the hard work of fans.

Most fans respect the wishes of the game companies and agree to shut down their work if they are asked.  And some companies, like Nintendo, agree to look the other way so that the fans can be fans.  However, many game companies take one look at a promising project and immediately shoot it down.  For example, a 3D remake of the critically acclaimed Chrono Trigger was being made by fans and the company who owned the rights to it, Square-Enix, threatened them with litigation if they did not cease and desist.  This effectively killed the project.  However, think for just a moment.  Square-Enix has a propensity for re-releasing their popular titles.  Recently, Chrono Trigger was just re-released for the Nintendo DS.  So…why not simply work with the fans instead of threatening legal action on them?  Buy them off and have them continue their work.  Square recently released a 3D remake of Final Fantasy 3 done in house, a process which had to be unbelievably expensive.  So, if a group of gamers who loved the game are working to create the exact same thing, but are doing it for free…then buy them off and have them continue their work.  Don’t simply waste all their time and effort by threatening legal action.

This is what Chrono Trigger would look like in 3d...if it hadn't been shut down.  Yeah...thanks for that, Square-Enix

Fans of video games, like fans of almost any property, can have an unbelievable drive, love for their medium, and a power to change it.  However, too often, game companies see them as the problem, not the solution.  In my opinion, game companies have forgotten that fans are the force which keeps them profitable.  Without the fans, they are nothing.  Yet, every day the gaming world is outraged at some new form of on disc DLC or DRM which locks players out of games they paid for, or online passes.  Game companies treat gamers more like thieves or free money than lifelong friends.  And that is a major problem.  Fans will continue to love games, regardless of the companies, but if companies don’t understand and respect the power of fans it will hurt them in the long run.  Before being acquired and merged with Activision, Blizzard, for example, knew how to treat fans.  After releasing Starcraft, Blizzard encouraged its piracy to a degree.  Burn a copy, share it with friends, and then they might go buy a copy themselves, or at least share the popularity of the game with their own friends, who might go buy a copy.  While this kind of policy changed after their merger, this should prove that fans have power.  And fans want to be friends to game companies, even if the reverse is not true.

Blizzard used to just spread the love.  Then Activision happened.  And now we get online passes.  Progress...?

And it is curiously true that many times, fans orchestrate the biggest changes in the gaming world.  Gamers modding Half-Life created the incredibly popular Counter-Strike mod that has become a mainstay of Valve’s and which has seen several sequels and spin offs.  Importers who picked up Demon’s Souls, even though it wasn’t planned for a western release showed Japanese developer From Software that there actually was a market for their game in the west, convincing them to release it and its sequel, Dark Souls, in the west.  The Defense of The Ancients mod in Warcraft 3 became so popular that it even spawned an entirely new genre of game, the massively multiplayer online arena fighter, which has one sequel in the works and at least a dozen competitors.  The highly publicized Operation Rainfall brought awareness to the titles Xenoblade Chronicles, The Last Story, and Pandora’s Tower, and helped them get out of Japan, into Europe, and eventually to U.S. shores.  Fans have an incredible gift for changing the industry and game companies need to start respecting and making use of their fans, like partners, rather than treating them like thieves trying to take a piece of their pie.

This funny little fan mod spawned an entire sub genre of MMO games

If game companies would open themselves up to fan assistance they would not only find strong potential employees, but might actually get to release some games they would not be able to otherwise.  For example, Vanillaware recently had to cancel the western release of a game called Grand Knights History, due to “lack of resources to localize.”  However, what if fans stepped in and agreed to work with the designers to get this project done?  Some wouldn’t even ask for payment, so long as the game was released.  Fans can be a powerful boon for small companies that need assistance and can be loyal followers for stronger companies who already have their footing, provided they don’t alienate their fans.

Yeah, this ain't making it stateside anytime soon

Perhaps the biggest issues preventing gamers and companies from coming together are legal concerns and profit concerns.  This is frustrating, because gamers are more than willing to lend their hand to help make something they want a reality, but game companies have their own interests to protect.  Legal concerns, such as the rights of the fans making the game vs. the company would be a problem and if any materials or resources, such as the game engine, levels, or characters, were used in other projects by the fans, there might also be a need for litigation.  Game companies are very protective of their assets, most of the time.  And there would also be the issue of compensating the fans for their work and whether or not their work turns a profit for the company.  Game companies, especially the big ones, like Square-Enix and Electronic Arts, have to protect not only their own profit margins, but cater to their investors and shareholders, which would make any project with fan assistance a hard sell, as investors are naturally skeptical of people not on their payroll and who they cannot properly penalize should something go wrong.

Pretty much how game companies feel if a product bombs...and we want them to approve fan games?

            I really do believe that with the right business model, any number of game companies could use work done by the fans and turn a profit, for both themselves and those who worked on it. NES Reproductions, for example, has managed to make a fair profit by releasing fan translated NES games for sale directly to gamers.  They can do this because the copyright on the games and the technology is usually long expired, since the NES and Famicom were released almost thirty years ago.  This kind of business model takes the work of the fans and turns it into something that can be bought and sold for a profit.  If an independent party can do it with properties that have passed their expiration date, imagine what a game company still holding onto the rights for almost a dozen retro titles never released in the west could do.  I have a vision that I’d like others to indulge in for just a moment.  Say, instead of making reproduction cartridges with fan translated or altered games on them, game companies created a digital service, like Steam?  Then, took old games like the Mother series, Bahamut Lagoon, Sweet Home, or any number of other titles they still owned and released them at a fair price, like 10-20 dollars?  If they used the fan translations and gave a cut of their profits to the translators, that’s a tidy amount they had to do basically nothing to make.  Granted, this kind of business model would require a digital distribution service and would take time to set up, but it would go a long way in discouraging emulation and piracy.  As it stands, emulation is the only viable way to play English language copies of games like Mother 3 or Bahamut Lagoon for most people.  However, if the game companies made it easier to get these games off their service, perhaps with a sale or two and built in rewards just to sweeten the pot, emulation would practically die out overnight.  This happened for countless Wii owners who found games they used to emulate on the virtual console for a fair price.  The Extra Credits crew have said time and again, if you provide a better service, people will use that rather than piracy.  Convenience is the key.  A service like Steam or the Wii’s virtual console caters to fans and makes it easier to get the games they want.  Emulation has a lot of legal and computer based issues.  However, when emulation is the only option, then that is what people are going to choose.

How many people would give their left foot for this game to be released overseas legitimately?

            Regrettably, this kind of business model may never see the light of day.  There is a lot of red tape involved in some of these dealings, such as giving proper credit to the fan translators, ensuring they get fair compensation, the compromise between game companies who have had their properties tampered with and the fans who only want to bring old favorites to the masses, and countless other problems.  Most game companies don’t want to adapt to make use of their fans.  And the sad thing is, unlike some of the other issues discussed here, they don’t really need to adapt.  Fans will continue translating, making unofficial sequels, modding, etc. as long as it gives themselves and other gamers joy, while companies will either tolerate them or crack down on them so long as they feel their rights are threatened.  If a company cracks down, the fans may just make the game an original title and release it as an indie game on Steam or some other digital service.  So, while there isn’t really a big loser if these two sides stay separate, I feel that it is a huge missed opportunity for the developers and publishers to foster relationships with their fans that benefit everyone.  Even if fans keep on being fans and companies keep on being companies, imagine what they could do if they came together to work on something they loved?  We could get a third Chrono game, translated versions of games that were never released stateside, genuine fan feedback on changes made to try and modernize old classics…the possibilities are limitless.  Well, even if it’s never meant to be, we can all dream, can’t we?

Dare to dream, people.  Dare to dream.