Newbie

So last time, I focused on the social aspects of games. And I was pretty much ready to say then, that for me anyway, games could be defined as social activities. Then I did a little more thinking and decided that that just wasn’t the case.

In addition to playing a lot of games with my family when I was a kid, I spent a ton of time playing games on my own. Sometimes they were store-bought games and sometimes they were games of my own creation. Hockey was huge in the 1970s in Boston where I grew up, so I invented my own hockey game. I’d bat a marble back and forth with nickels inside a shirt box. The objective? To get the marble into one of the paper cups on either side of the box and score a “goal.” I played that game for hours and hours!

Now if you’re playing a game by yourself, there has to be some mechanism for variability. And in many of the store-bought games that meant you needed these….

One of my favorite games involving dice was this one -

It was Sports Illustrated’s “Decathlon” game. It was an easy-to-play simulation and I absolutely loved it. You rolled the dice and then compared your roll against a set of cards that showed probable outcomes for each athlete in the various track and field events. The Olympics were quite a big deal back then and it was great fun to pretend I was one of the athletes that I’d seen on television.

When my parents split up, my Mom, brother and I went to live with my uncle for a month or so. We couldn’t bring very much stuff with us, but one of the things that I did bring was that Decathlon game. It engaged me big-time when I needed to be engaged. Simple design, simple game play. And I could do it by myself all afternoon long….

So I won’t define games as social activities. They can also be great solitary activities that challenge us (as per “The Sims 2”) and fill us up when we need it (“Decathlon”).

Finally, I do feel confident about defining good games as “sticky” (technical term, that…). They connect us with each other… or they connect us with our imaginations.

And I guess that the best ones do both.

If someone had asked me last year (prior to my work on Learning Games to Go) whether I was a gamer or not, I’m quite sure I would have answered in the negative. I mean “gamers” were people with joysticks (or whatever the 21st century equivalent was…). I was definitely savvy with computers, but I had virtually no knowledge about the latest, hottest games and certainly didn’t own a joystick or a console or a whatever. But what do you know? It turns out that I am a gamer… and that I’ve been one for a long time.

Back when I was a boy (soon after the Earth cooled…), we only had a handful of TV channels and the VCR hadn’t been invented yet. And of course, there was nothing like video on demand or TIVO, either. So we had very few “choices” at the end of the day when it came to video media – there was either something kind of good on one of those snowy TV stations, or more often than not, there wasn’t.

So my Mom, my brother and I played a lot of games at night… at the kitchen table. Some of our favorites were Boggle, Yahtzee, Scrabble and of course, Monopoly. And we’d listen to music while we played – Steely Dan and Elton John, Elvis Costello and Patti Smith. And when we let my Mom have a go at the turntable, it’d be time for Mr. Barry White! It was great. I remember all of us laughing a lot and being super-competitive and feeling like such a close unit at the same time. It really was so much fun.

Now the games that we played were cool and well designed, and they’ve stood the test of time (they’re still out there…). But when I think back on it, it wasn’t the games that made those nights so much fun. It was the fact that we were playing those games together. Those games gave us a way to connect, especially during the tough times that every family has when we didn’t have a lot of words for our feelings (or at least didn’t want to say them out loud). Whatever else might have happened during the day, we knew that we’d be around the kitchen table at night… and each of us would be hoping to buy Boardwalk and Park Place.

So I’ve been a gamer for a long time.

And it seems like one of the overlooked components (at least, for me) of the new-fangled video games is the social element that indeed meant so much to my family and me a long time ago. In my work on this project, I’ve seen groups of kids gather around the lone computer in class so they can all be part of the game being played by the one lucky kid with the mouse. And then they talk about it afterwards… and before they play again. And then there are the online games where even folks who are by themselves in the real world can connect and socialize with other players around the globe, creating a giant “kitchen table” for game play.

So the social aspect of games is huge.

I see it around me. And I see it in my own experience (these days, with my two kids).

Games definitely help us to connect.

Every once in a while, something happens that makes us realize that we have to seize every opportunity we get in this world - to have fun… to connect with the people we love… to learn new things.

My kids usually like to hang around at the playground when I pick them up at school each day. They love it because they get to play with their friends, and I love it because it’s an easy non-scheduled play date (and I get to space out for a little while). Last week, my daughter Nellie was playing on the swings with one of her friends, and they were trying to figure out some scheme about swinging higher or longer or some such playfulness. Nellie’s friend said they’d never be able to do what they wanted without help from a grown-up. To which Nellie responded, “Don’t worry. Daddy will help us.” And of course, I did go over and help them. And that was that.

But no.

Afterwards, it sunk in that Nellie had called me “Daddy” with her friend: “Don’t worry. Daddy will help us.” Now my older daughter, Grace, has long since referred to me as “my Dad” when talking about me with her friends. She’s reached the point (fourth grade) where that’s just the way kids do things. It would be perceived as “baby-ish” if she ever called me “Daddy” in front of her pals. But Nellie’s not there yet (she’s in first grade), and I’m still always “Daddy,” no matter the situation or the company.

Someday, though, I know that this will be me….

… there will be no one to push on the swings. And there will be things that I can’t help my girls with. And there might even be times when they’ll use utterly horrible names and words to describe me to their friends (just as I’ve done with my parents).

But for now, I think it’s a really good idea to push my girls as high as I can on those swings.

This blog is about an old guy who’s trying to learn about games and a bunch of other things, too. And one of those “other things” is the value of embracing new experiences no matter how difficult that might be. And I think that we do a better job of engaging with the world around us when we’re occasionally reminded that every experience (and every opportunity for an experience) really and truly does come with an expiration date, often much sooner than we’d like.

I promise to talk about games next time.

But for today, swing as high as you can.

Here’s a picture of me at Woodstock –

And that’s my bus, “Coriander,” in the background. Those were the days….

So given my history, how could I possible resist a game called –

“Flower Power” is another one of those groovy games from our friends at Cognitive Labs. Happily for me, the game is very simple and easy to play. It looks like this –

Basically, you shoot at the flowers and try to make them go away before the world comes crashing down on you. Now that I think about it, this game isn’t particularly “groovy” or very peaceful, either. Oh well, it is fun….

Now the interesting thing about playing “Flower Power” was that I really, really didn’t want to lose at this game. I mean I REALLY, REALLY DIDN’T WANT TO LOSE!

And here’s the proof.

As you might imagine, I have to do a certain amount of work collecting screen grabs while I play these games (since I want to show you what the games look like). Generally, this has been an easy thing to do, especially with un-timed games like “The Sims 2.” But with “Flower Power,” I had to keep continually shooting at the flowers or else I’d be annihilated. And it was unbelievably hard for me to stop and get that screen grab… because I just didn’t want to lose….

Smarter folks than I can probably explain why in the world shooting at flowers can suddenly become the most engaging thing in the world. All I can do is to marvel at the power of such a simple (and not that special game).

I hope we can harness this power for the forces of good in the world!

I’m done philosophizing (at least for a while…), and it’s back to the games today.

Cognitive Labs has a great site where you can play all manner of cool FREE video games online. And they even have “Space Invaders,” a game that I did, in fact, have a little bit of experience with back in the day. So I just had to try it out.

There are two listings for “Space Invaders.” One is a new-fangled game that is described on the site as being “a little harder than the original.” How hard can it be? I fire up the new “Space Invaders.” It looks like this….

And that puff of smoke that you see in the bottom left-hand corner is me… exploding. OK, so the game is really and truly a little harder than the old one. But it’s also totally fun.

I am amazed at how engaged I am while I play the game. I actually feel my heart pounding and notice how my jaw is clenched with something a lot like steely resolve. Of course, none of this keeps me from getting blown to smithereens… but it does make for a cool experience.

How can this minimalist game with 2-D graphics and no real characters be so exciting???

I feel like part of it is the urgency created by the time limitations in the game – if I don’t get the invaders before they get me, I’ll get blown up. And even a Newbie doesn’t want to get blown up! This is a very different vibe from games like “The Sims 2,” which proceed at a leisurely pace and with fewer immediate consequences (although of course, if the pizza doesn’t arrive in time….). Games like “Space Invaders” are basically thrill machines. And providing thrills within a short timeframe is something that games are really, really good at. “Space Invaders” is still cool. And addictive.

And I’m still bad at it.

As I’m leaving the site, I notice this –

Now my computer has tons of memory, but I don’t think that’s the kind of memory these guys are talking about. I quit out of Firefox and run upstairs as quickly as possible.

I’m always happy to get feedback on the blog. I write the thing in my basement
surrounded by no one, so it’s a treat to know you all are out there. Today we take a look at some of your recent comments.

Several folks have written about the “risk-taking” that I find difficult, but which is second nature for many….

“… I am not convinced games are teaching this behavior [risk-taking]. I (and many of my friends who regularly play games) often ‘fiddle’ with things to see what happens. I know that many of us grew up without an aversion to risk and [with] a healthy curiosity. We liked taking chances as a kid and found a way to keep doing it (in a game) without worrying about really messing things up….”

In another comment, a reader touches on the power of “undo” insofar as it related to my daughter making a card in Photoshop:

“Undo is definitely something we take for granted. The power of non-destructive editing is as revolutionary today as it ever was – but now we come to expect it. On the converse side of the ‘willingness to experiment’ – it certainly allows the person to be less careful as well – whereas if you were making that card with paper, you’d be much more careful about making mistakes because [if you messed up] you’d have to do it all over again….”

These comments are so thoughtful – please keep them coming! And they lead me to this….

In addition to writing and designing, I do a lot of video editing. As you might imagine, I am indeed old enough to have worked with the ancient tape-to-tape editing systems (back when the earth was still cooling!). I remember the horror when I’d realize that one cut in the middle of a show just didn’t work. That disaster would leave me with a couple of options, neither of which was particularly good:

1. Start editing again from the point in the tape that I wanted to change, meaning that I’d have to re-do all of my editing to recreate the sections that came after my “mistake.” (It was linear editing and you simply couldn’t adjust only one section of a show — very much, that is - without impacting the rest of the video.)
2. Live with my “mistake.”

Now I struggle with perfectionism (surprise, surprise!). So I would usually choose the first option, making a better show, but also taking a ton of time (sometimes more than I really had available). After this happened a few times, I became an ever more “careful” editor, trying to plan out my every cut so that I wouldn’t have to endlessly re-cut my shows.

Today I use Final Cut Pro to edit video on my computer. I can now create about a million (more or less…) sequences in the time it used to take me to cut one on the old tape-to-tape systems. And as a result, I’ve loosened up in my approach. I take a lot more chances, and I think that my work has improved because of it. But I still often find myself somewhat reluctant to move any of the on-screen controls “all the way to the right, and all the way to the left.”

So what’s the upshot of all this? I believe that risk-taking vis-à-vis technology is the result of both nature and nurture. Some of us are just hard-wired to take more risks. But I also think that the chickens among us (like me…) can indeed get braver and more adventurous if we give ourselves the chance to learn how to do it.

I’m definitely not going to get any younger. But I might be able to take a few more risks….

I’ve managed to eat more “Flow” creatures and make myself a little bigger:

But I’ve also noticed that there are actual Forums on the Flow game website. This seems bizarre. How much can there be to say about such a simple game? Uh-oh….

It turns out that the game is a bit more complicated than I thought. As you eat more and more creatures, your avatar actually evolves into something increasingly complex (kind of like in Will Wright’s Spore). It not only gets bigger but changes its form and becomes capable of eating more and more of the other creatures who float about on the screen.

The not-so-immediately-obvious layers of complexity in this game remind me of my first year in college. Like all English majors at my school, I had to take a survey course that covered the “greatest hits” of English and American literature. I remember my shock when my wonderful teacher said that we’d be writing four-page essays on Shakespeare’s sonnets. That is, a four-page essay on one sonnet. I couldn’t imagine that there was any way I’d be able to fill up four pages with my thoughts on 14 lines of poetry. Such a short poem had to be simple. I mean how much could there be to say, right?

After awhile, of course, I learned that there was lots and lots to say about 14-line poems (at least, about really good ones). Sometimes, I’d actually be frustrated by the four-page limitation – I wanted to write more!

Now I’m certainly not saying that the game Flow deserves a place in the pantheon of fabulous-things-that-will-live-forever, like the writings of William Shakespeare. But I am struck by the fact that some things at first seem very simple, but ultimately turn out to be surprisingly complex and ultimately very engaging because of that. Being reminded that at one point, I had absolutely no idea how to read Shakespeare (or much of anything else!) also gives me hope that there might more things out there - things that I haven’t experienced and enjoyed yet, only because I haven’t known how to “read” them… until now.

So I tried a new online game called Flow. It’s very, very cool. And it feels just right for me. This is what the first screen looks like (I put a red circle around the little creature that serves as my avatar):

The point of the game seems utterly straightforward. Despite the fact that it features very soothing background music, Flow is about the dog-eat-dog world. You move your mouse around to guide your creature and make it eat other creatures so it’ll get bigger. And that’s it.

It’s so easy that I wonder whether I’m missing something. So I check the directions:

Now these are the kind of directions the Newbie loves! No huge tome like “The Sims 2”; just a short description that makes the game seem like a piece of cake.

I really get into it and enjoy gobbling up the little creatures. It’s tremendously engaging for something that seems so uncomplicated. In that way, it reminds me a bit of Pong - a simple game scenario that creates compelling (and potentially addictive!) game play.

I will play more of this game.

Here’s an image from Will Wright’s new game, Spore:

In this game, players will be able to build creatures at the cellular level and ultimately adapt/evolve into more and more complex creatures until they basically have the smarts (and I guess, the need) to populate other planets. It sounds like heady stuff. It also sounds like it would make my head explode.

Will Wright is an amazing guy. In every interview I’ve ever read with him, he has come across as an interesting and interested super-genius. In spite of the fact that he designed my arch-nemesis, “The Sims 2,” I see him as a great force for good in our world.

And I recently read that just like me, he’s 46.

How in the world did this happen? The most celebrated and popular game designer in the world is the same age as me? He makes stuff. And I make that stuff die. And we’re the same age???

I must be an old 46….

“You can not only watch TV, but now you can actually live it.”

So says an MTV executive in a recent article about the latest craze among the young people, Virtual Laguna Beach. (The NY Times piece is available here if you’re a subscriber.)

My television watching is generally pretty lame: sports, news, a few HBO shows and that’s about it. So I wasn’t up to speed on “Laguna Beach.” But now I’ve learned that it’s way hot and of course, I’m on-board.

Virtual Laguna Beach looks like this -

Don’t you want to be him/her???

Virtual Laguna Beach is another one of those role-playing thingies, only this time you get to act out some of the “real” plotlines from the popular TV show. The first step on the road to bliss is to choose an avatar. Here’s the one I chose:

I tried to pick one that wasn’t too “hot,” because I was worried that I might not want to walk it like my avatar talked it. He seemed fine – sensitive, a little bit sad, no doubt misunderstood – in short, a young me with no glasses or beard.

The next step was to download the software. I’ve got a speedy connection and a powerful computer, so this should have been no problem. Then I saw this -

It’s a dreaded (for Mac users like me) .exe file!!! Windows only!!! I ain’t going to Laguna Beach after all. Oh well….

But it all gets me to thinking about the appeal of not just watching the show, but “living it.” Make-believe and storytelling are older than dirt. I definitely believe that they’re in us, part of our DNA. My kids love to pretend. I love to pretend. But the role-playing in these games feels a little different to me. And I’m not sure whether it’s because I’m an old dude or whether there’s really something weird about it all.

I mean I have problems just like everyone else, but I really like my life. I don’t want to live someone else’s life. I’ve enjoyed “The Sims 2” (well, kind of…) because it feels like a puzzle to solve, not because of the appeal of the vicarious experiences. Does someone who spends endless hours playing Virtual Laguna Beach and games like Second Life invest so much in these games because he doesn’t like his first life???

I wonder what I’m going to think if my girls become immersed in these games when they’re a little older….