Games 2.0: User Generated Gaming?

November 2, 2008November 2, 2008| schommerschommer| 0 Comment| 9:37 pm
Categories:

In a world driven by the Internet, global economics and the short attention spanned reader we’ve been bombarded with social networks and 140-character micro-blogging. We’re constantly finding ways to promote ourselves, promote our brands or tell people what we’re eating for dinner. Is this obsession with ourselves and our creativity bridging into video games?

It’s games 2.0 people!. A time when we’re inventing our own video game stages, characters and full blown casual games! Not only are people getting a chance to design their own games with Microsoft’s XNA, Adobe Flash or from small independent casual games, but we can design our own stages in games like LittleBigPlanet.

Microsoft wants to remind us that Boku is much like LittleBigPlanet in its user generated video game content. Seen in this video below:

It’s obvious their going down the same path as Sony has gone with creating your own stages with LittleBigPlanet and creating a new way of gaming: playing other people’s stuff. You can find some similarities with Guitar Hero: World Tour‘s ability to create your own songs and publish them for others to play.

Are we heading down a generation of games where some of the best stages are created by fellow dedicated gamers? Or, is this just a distraction and means for developers to have gamers invigorate and create more of a demand for the games they are making the money on?

(Thanks, Destructoid)

0 thoughts on “Games 2.0: User Generated Gaming?”

  1. LBP is a great game for creating other games! Not sure of M$ Boku endeavors (will it see the light of day?) The PSN is very cohesive with user generated content (like mods / mutators for UTIII, custom music authoring on GH:WT) none of which are supported by the M$ Live service. I would doublt if M$ Live ever will. M$ Live is 6 years old now but the PSN is only 2 and has already exceeded M$ Live’s user base along with functionality at a FREE price. Truly Game 2.0 is on course at least in the Sony Home-landscape.

    Reply

  2. LBP is a great game for creating other games! Not sure of M$ Boku endeavors (will it see the light of day?) The PSN is very cohesive with user generated content (like mods / mutators for UTIII, custom music authoring on GH:WT) none of which are supported by the M$ Live service. I would doublt if M$ Live ever will. M$ Live is 6 years old now but the PSN is only 2 and has already exceeded M$ Live’s user base along with functionality at a FREE price. Truly Game 2.0 is on course at least in the Sony Home-landscape.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Post

Episode 563: Welcome to the CloudEpisode 563: Welcome to the Cloud

This week, the gang discuss the provocative article by Forbes about Microsoft ignoring Sony in favor of combating Google and Amazon in the cloud space — and how Sony is renting Microsoft’s servers. No Gaming Flashback this week, though.

The news includes:

  • Microsoft: Amazon and Google are ‘the main competitors going forward’
  • Stardew Valley creator is working on two new games
  • Capcom removes Denuvo DRM from Devil May Cry 5

Question of the Week: “What’s your favorite videogame trailer or advertisement?”

Read MoreRead More

Bethesda’s Hines: Don’t Shoehorn MultiplayerBethesda’s Hines: Don’t Shoehorn Multiplayer

Bethesda Softworks vice president of marketing Pete Hines is critzing publishers and developers who shoehorn multiplayer into their games that doing such a thing is “a waste of time” and advises, “Just drop it, don’t bother…it’ll make for a worse game.”

In an interview with Next Gen BIZ, Hines states that using online multiplayer as a tool to prevent used game trade-ins and rental simply doesn’t work, and robs developers of valuable man-hours.

Hines stated:

“(People ask us) for a game like Skyrim or Prey 2, why doesn’t it have multiplayer? Well, our question is always the opposite when we talk to a developer. If you’re doing multiplayer, why are you doing multiplayer? What are you trying to accomplish?

“If you’re doing it just to check a box or because every other publisher says you’ve got to have multiplayer, then just drop it, don’t bother, it’s a waste of time, a giant distraction and it’ll make for a worse overall game.

“We want the best game possible. If that’s a singleplayer game that’s 15 to 20 hours, then make that! Don’t waste your time on features that don’t make the game better.”

The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim and Prey 2 are two Bethesda properties that will lack multiplayer, but one of the tools to encourage games to keep both games will be downlodable content and, even more important, good communications with the game communities and nurturing the fandom for both games.

Read MoreRead More

Evolution of RPG’s – Gamers Don’t Want an End?Evolution of RPG’s – Gamers Don’t Want an End?

I remember a day when old RPG games had either a level cap or a definite ending. From Pool of Radiance to Secrets of the Silver Blades to Final Fantasy the game had a final boss or stage and often had some type of level cap. Today, gamers don’t want it to end, they’d rather have the option to wonder around aimlessly or completing minor quests in order to soak up every ounce of money they spent on the title.

linkNow even Bethesda is saying “we’ve learned our lesson” from the whiplash of ending their game title and capping levels. Gamers want to go back and re-try content they missed, they want to run side quests and talk to everyone in the world they want to grind themselves to über powerful levels and become a god in their fantasy world. Can you blame them?

You can’t really blame them for wanting to maximize the content, although it’s slightly more evolved than RPG’s of old. Perhaps it was World of Warcraft and other MMORPG’s that brought us to the stage in life where we all want to squeeze every last RPG dime out of the title. As a kid I wondered the world of Hyrule and covered every tile of graphical color, burned every bush, bombed every stone looking for all the content. However, even Zelda had an end with scrolling credits – you didn’t just land on a platform with your master sword and a dream.

Other titles have used level caps to limit you and draw you into the next release of the game. This was popular in the D&D world because the game is designed to target specific levels of difficulty. They may only allow you to gain level 10 because the enemies are no tougher than level 13, allowing the challenge to be good but not overwhelming. If they allow you to get to level 50 they’d have to design the game so all the enemies grow powerful along with you — that’s not always a desired result.

Final Fantasy is a popular franchise that typically allows you to grow infinitely powerful depending on how much time you want to spend repeat killing the same enemies. Gamers aren’t always into the grind, they just want to grind “enough” to make the challenges a little more do-able.

Today, however, with larger storage capacity, larger development teams and the desire to build more value into your gameplay experience titles have dozens of side quests and sub-plots that are totally optional. The result of so many sub-quests results in a player who is much more powerful at the end of those quests compared to a player who sticks to the narrow path of the main plot. So, games much grow dynamically challenging to keep the fun per dollar high.

Do you like your RPG’s to have a definite end and a high but capped level?

Read MoreRead More