By Phil Day
The internet provides a rich taxonomy of what a gamer is. There are casual, competitive, and professional gamers, and there are newbie’s and so on. From what I can understand, these classifications are accurate enough, what I’m interested in is why some people see a hierarchy in those terms:
A gamer, MF (aka – Masked formatter), has been interested in video games for nearly 30 years. He played his first FPS (First Person Shooter) in 1996, the game was Doom. MF was late in playing Doom (it was released in 1993). In the game MF, like everyone else who played Doom, controlled a nameless space-marine on Mars shooting alien-demonic hordes (very ordinary plot, but perfect for a video game). To do this MF needed to use the keyboard and the mouse. The left mouse button fired the space-marines gun; the right mouse button moved the marine forward. The ‘<’ key moved the space-marine left, and ‘>’ turned moved him right. The ‘space-bar’ made the space-marine jump. Moving the mouse positioned the head of the space-marine. This way the MF could have his space-marine running in one direction while looking in another direction to shoot a monster. This was all fine until another FPS game by the name of Quake was released, and a gamer by the name of Thresh started beating everyone at it.
Thresh (Dennis Fong) is to FPS games what Shane Warne is to cricket, or Bobby Fischer is to Chess. But there was something different about how Thresh played these games. He didn’t use the same keys to control his space-marine. Thresh didn’t use – what is now universally known in the gaming community as – ‘Classic Doom Controls’. Instead, Thresh used the keys w, a, s, d, the space-bar, and the mouse and its left button – this configuration of key commands became know as WASD. ‘w’ for forward, ‘a’ for left, ‘d’ for right, and ‘s’ for back. The mouse was used for steering head movement, and the left mouse button for firing weapons.
Thresh didn’t invent this configuration, but he did employ it to beat his opponents. Its success was – so it is believed – on reducing stress on the mouse. Classic Doom Controls caused more activity on the mouse which is what is used to aim the gun, so pressing two buttons – often simultaneously – can cause minor unwanted movements on the mouse, and therefore reducing accuracy. Thresh’s soon became a gaming superstar with win after win. And his status has had a lasting affect on the gaming community and in turn video game designers. Before long, the default settings for FPS games were the WASD key. This wasn’t good for MF.
MF had become adjusted to Classic Doom Controls and never made the switch, even now he still plays all FPS games (including Counter Strike, DOD, and Left 4 Dead) with the Classic Doom Controls. But I suspect there is a stubborn affectation in his defiance to use WASD keys. He likens it to a left handed golfer being forced to use right handed golf sticks, which is acceptable, but there is something else there that he won’t quite admit. But I think I know what it is.
I overheard MF talking to a gamer friend of his (who goes by the gaming name of Madmilko). Madmilko made the remark that MF had ‘all screwed up controls’ –the snide remark carried the implication that MF’s controls were the cause of errors in there co-operative gaming. But MF’s quip to Madmilko’s sledging couldn’t have been better. He replied: ‘Newbie.’
Newbie is one of the worst insults a gamer can receive (only second to ‘Noob’).
Another gamer friend of mine, Requiem (his gaming name), was the entertainment editor for PC Active, and a contributor to PC Powerplay and Hyper Magazine, and is also a gamer snob. As he put it, “I’m a self confessed computer game snob”. He believes that those who play consoles are casual gamers, who he holds in contempt; contempt because they are not looking for the ‘better’ gaming experience. He says, “[Console gamers] usually play simplistic games that require less skill or understanding of gaming.” Therefore he sees himself, and other PC gamers, as connoisseurs. PC games deserving of the equivalent of Michelin stars while consoles are more like your fast food restaurants, saying, “they’ll tie you over, but you wouldn’t eat them if you had another choice”. He went on to argue that the cause of poor gaming in consoles is two-fold: poor controls, and poor players.
Requiem does have a point when it comes to controls. Console don’t have a mouse, and if you need to move left then right, there is a marked time difference between moving a toggle or joystick from left to right than there is from simply pressing the ‘a’ key to hitting the ‘d’ key – and at a competitive level those nanoseconds are going to cost. I agreed, but this was only true in regard to games like FPS, I didn’t think this would the case with fighting games like Tekken in the arcade or on a console, or platform games like Super Mario World on the Super Nintendo Entertainment System. He agreed. He also thought both those games were excellent titles on consoles, particularly Super Mario World, but he felt this best illustrated his point. “You wouldn’t want to play them on a PC, the same logic applies with FPS and RTS games. Why would you want to play them on a broken system [meaning the console controls] when you have a one that is more suitable?” I can follow his logic; some games require particular controls. Missile Command wouldn’t have been so good with a joystick, and Pac-man wouldn’t have been so good with a trackball. No argument there, but his argument only supported that idea that the PC had more suited controls to FPS and RTS games. Requiem then presented his position on console gamers. Basically, he believes, they lack depth of play.
Requiem argued that even the successful games on consoles (like Tekken and Super Mario World) don’t offer the depth of play that FPS and RTS games offer. At this point I felt like saying that neither of them offers the depth of play that Chess offers. So I enquired about the success of Nintendo’s Wii instead (which as of 30/9/09 has sold 56 million units world wide) suggesting that it’s success could be due to the innovative console controls which employ infrared technology and a range of other devices, including a pulse oximeter, asking the gamer to physically move their whole body to play. I also asked about the success of APPS games (application games) for the Apple’s iTouch and the iPhone, could it also be due to the innovative controls where games are played by simply touching or titling the screen. Requiem believed this could be the case; regardless these gamers were only playing for short bursts of time, usually to alleviate small times of boredom. Real gamers, he suggested, allocate time to play, and they play competitively against their opponents, be they person or computer, and they play to win – not simply to fill in time. And it is this that concerns him most. He fears that as consoles grow and dominate the market, games will have to suit that biggest part of the market, and the result will be shallow games – games that are equivalent of bubblegum pop.
I couldn’t help but ask myself that if I were interested in video games and they were a source of entertainment for me, and I wanted to play what the latest video games had to offer; wouldn’t I have to own a console? Since I don’t own a console, and I don’t have any games on my PC, and I don’t own an iTouch or iPhone (I don’t even own a mobile phone), I thought it would be better to ask Requiem:
“With the popularity and financial success of consoles, how long will it be before you are forced to buy one if you wish to play the latest games?”
His answer: “I already have a PS3.”
What Requiem is saying may be true, I’m not sure. I have played FPS and RTS games, and I believe that games that preceded these – like Pong (I’m not joking), and Donkey Kong, Pac-Man, Galaga, and Tetris all offer a depth of play that is still relevant, so much so that if it wasn’t for Robotron: 2084 we might not have Left 4 Dead – not only that, but I have to ask myself: Is Left 4 Dead an improvement on the game play of Robotron: 2084?
The internet provides a rich taxonomy of what a gamer is. There are casual, competitive, and professional gamers, and there are newbie’s and so on. From what I can understand, these classifications are accurate enough, what I’m interested in is why some people see a hierarchy in those terms:
A gamer, MF (aka – Masked formatter), has been interested in video games for nearly 30 years. He played his first FPS (First Person Shooter) in 1996, the game was Doom. MF was late in playing Doom (it was released in 1993). In the game MF, like everyone else who played Doom, controlled a nameless space-marine on Mars shooting alien-demonic hordes (very ordinary plot, but perfect for a video game). To do this MF needed to use the keyboard and the mouse. The left mouse button fired the space-marines gun; the right mouse button moved the marine forward. The ‘<’ key moved the space-marine left, and ‘>’ turned moved him right. The ‘space-bar’ made the space-marine jump. Moving the mouse positioned the head of the space-marine. This way the MF could have his space-marine running in one direction while looking in another direction to shoot a monster. This was all fine until another FPS game by the name of Quake was released, and a gamer by the name of Thresh started beating everyone at it.
Thresh (Dennis Fong) is to FPS games what Shane Warne is to cricket, or Bobby Fischer is to Chess. But there was something different about how Thresh played these games. He didn’t use the same keys to control his space-marine. Thresh didn’t use – what is now universally known in the gaming community as – ‘Classic Doom Controls’. Instead, Thresh used the keys w, a, s, d, the space-bar, and the mouse and its left button – this configuration of key commands became know as WASD. ‘w’ for forward, ‘a’ for left, ‘d’ for right, and ‘s’ for back. The mouse was used for steering head movement, and the left mouse button for firing weapons.
Thresh didn’t invent this configuration, but he did employ it to beat his opponents. Its success was – so it is believed – on reducing stress on the mouse. Classic Doom Controls caused more activity on the mouse which is what is used to aim the gun, so pressing two buttons – often simultaneously – can cause minor unwanted movements on the mouse, and therefore reducing accuracy. Thresh’s soon became a gaming superstar with win after win. And his status has had a lasting affect on the gaming community and in turn video game designers. Before long, the default settings for FPS games were the WASD key. This wasn’t good for MF.
MF had become adjusted to Classic Doom Controls and never made the switch, even now he still plays all FPS games (including Counter Strike, DOD, and Left 4 Dead) with the Classic Doom Controls. But I suspect there is a stubborn affectation in his defiance to use WASD keys. He likens it to a left handed golfer being forced to use right handed golf sticks, which is acceptable, but there is something else there that he won’t quite admit. But I think I know what it is.
I overheard MF talking to a gamer friend of his (who goes by the gaming name of Madmilko). Madmilko made the remark that MF had ‘all screwed up controls’ –the snide remark carried the implication that MF’s controls were the cause of errors in there co-operative gaming. But MF’s quip to Madmilko’s sledging couldn’t have been better. He replied: ‘Newbie.’
Newbie is one of the worst insults a gamer can receive (only second to ‘Noob’).
Another gamer friend of mine, Requiem (his gaming name), was the entertainment editor for PC Active, and a contributor to PC Powerplay and Hyper Magazine, and is also a gamer snob. As he put it, “I’m a self confessed computer game snob”. He believes that those who play consoles are casual gamers, who he holds in contempt; contempt because they are not looking for the ‘better’ gaming experience. He says, “[Console gamers] usually play simplistic games that require less skill or understanding of gaming.” Therefore he sees himself, and other PC gamers, as connoisseurs. PC games deserving of the equivalent of Michelin stars while consoles are more like your fast food restaurants, saying, “they’ll tie you over, but you wouldn’t eat them if you had another choice”. He went on to argue that the cause of poor gaming in consoles is two-fold: poor controls, and poor players.
Requiem does have a point when it comes to controls. Console don’t have a mouse, and if you need to move left then right, there is a marked time difference between moving a toggle or joystick from left to right than there is from simply pressing the ‘a’ key to hitting the ‘d’ key – and at a competitive level those nanoseconds are going to cost. I agreed, but this was only true in regard to games like FPS, I didn’t think this would the case with fighting games like Tekken in the arcade or on a console, or platform games like Super Mario World on the Super Nintendo Entertainment System. He agreed. He also thought both those games were excellent titles on consoles, particularly Super Mario World, but he felt this best illustrated his point. “You wouldn’t want to play them on a PC, the same logic applies with FPS and RTS games. Why would you want to play them on a broken system [meaning the console controls] when you have a one that is more suitable?” I can follow his logic; some games require particular controls. Missile Command wouldn’t have been so good with a joystick, and Pac-man wouldn’t have been so good with a trackball. No argument there, but his argument only supported that idea that the PC had more suited controls to FPS and RTS games. Requiem then presented his position on console gamers. Basically, he believes, they lack depth of play.
Requiem argued that even the successful games on consoles (like Tekken and Super Mario World) don’t offer the depth of play that FPS and RTS games offer. At this point I felt like saying that neither of them offers the depth of play that Chess offers. So I enquired about the success of Nintendo’s Wii instead (which as of 30/9/09 has sold 56 million units world wide) suggesting that it’s success could be due to the innovative console controls which employ infrared technology and a range of other devices, including a pulse oximeter, asking the gamer to physically move their whole body to play. I also asked about the success of APPS games (application games) for the Apple’s iTouch and the iPhone, could it also be due to the innovative controls where games are played by simply touching or titling the screen. Requiem believed this could be the case; regardless these gamers were only playing for short bursts of time, usually to alleviate small times of boredom. Real gamers, he suggested, allocate time to play, and they play competitively against their opponents, be they person or computer, and they play to win – not simply to fill in time. And it is this that concerns him most. He fears that as consoles grow and dominate the market, games will have to suit that biggest part of the market, and the result will be shallow games – games that are equivalent of bubblegum pop.
I couldn’t help but ask myself that if I were interested in video games and they were a source of entertainment for me, and I wanted to play what the latest video games had to offer; wouldn’t I have to own a console? Since I don’t own a console, and I don’t have any games on my PC, and I don’t own an iTouch or iPhone (I don’t even own a mobile phone), I thought it would be better to ask Requiem:
“With the popularity and financial success of consoles, how long will it be before you are forced to buy one if you wish to play the latest games?”
His answer: “I already have a PS3.”
What Requiem is saying may be true, I’m not sure. I have played FPS and RTS games, and I believe that games that preceded these – like Pong (I’m not joking), and Donkey Kong, Pac-Man, Galaga, and Tetris all offer a depth of play that is still relevant, so much so that if it wasn’t for Robotron: 2084 we might not have Left 4 Dead – not only that, but I have to ask myself: Is Left 4 Dead an improvement on the game play of Robotron: 2084?
You can't knock Requiem for having his own preference. Very few players who don't play or know about high-level DK, Pac-Man, etc. Won't know the depth of those games.
ReplyDeleteIn a game like the Starcraft the depth is more obvious. In SC you have to harvest resources and build soldiers and tanks and use them to beat your opponent. And you can't just start the game and create the strong stuff right away; you have to to have the right buildings in your territory before you can do that.
Players will have their own preference you can't force Requiem to play Galaga any more than you make Eric Akeson play a Call of Duty.
Royallance,
ReplyDeleteI'm not knocking Requiem. My article is about his opinion that console games have simpler controls because the games are less demanding because those who play them don't desire more depth to their games. From this it is easy to think that Requiem would think that DK, with only a four way joystick and one button, would be a game that was designed for 'casual' gamers. There is some truth to this, but Chien, Wiebe , and Mitchell are demonstrating there is so much more.
From what I've read, Starcraft has a depth of strategy that is continually changing. New players bring new approaches. I'm not sure how your point relates to the disdain that Requiem has for console controls.
Requiem does have his preference - PC titles for PC controls, which is fine. It's just that I don't think there is a hierarchy in systems, while he does. I didn't think I was suggesting that Requiem play Galaga, or Eric Akeson play COD, was I?
Phil