To start this one off, I’d like to just apologize for the lack of updates this week, as I was at a friend’s house at Flathead Lake celebrating the fourth of July! There should be more continuity in the articles to come.

I’ve been thinking about cross-system gaming lately after seeing some perky advertisements for games for PC that you can play against people on consoles. The whole idea of playing on a computer with a keyboard and mouse against someone with only a controller has been bugging me all week; I’ve come up with a couple points I’d like to share, as well as a couple of questions I’d like to get feedback on.

First of all: Is playing a game with a keyboard and mouse versus someone with only a controller fair?

I think this is one of the most important things about this question is the hidden one which lies underneath: which genre of game are we talking about? For example:

Playing an RPG without a keyboard isn’t really as “unfair” as it is “inconvenient”; you can move the similarly (if not more naturally) with a typical current-generation controller than with a mouse, but your communication options are severely limited. Since a big part (the biggest, if you ask me) of the online RPG experience is the community and your place within it, not being able to express your thoughts and ideas to others in an efficient way is a big deterrent. To give an example of the console/computer contrast, consider this: I used to love playing Phantasy Star Online for my Dreamcast. Before I bought a keyboard to go with it, communication was barely in real-time (canned phrases and a completely horrendous keyboard “thing” were available). Politeness, courtesy, and casual conversation were generally not possible, as they were regarded as a waste of precious play time. Getting a keyboard changed the entire game in this respect; it took the game to a whole new level socially.

To compare, playing a first-person shooter without a keyboard and mouse against others with them, in my opinion, could never really be fair or convenient. There are so many different key combinations on the keyboard for hot keys and the mouse is so conducive to aiming that even newer players could take out skilled console-FPS players with relative ease. Maybe adding things like auto-aim and the ability to adjust the sensitivity on the control stick can bring the playing field to a more equitable equilibrium, but I think the overarching benefits of keyboard and mouse FPS gaming outweigh any that the console could dish out. Anyone who’s played an FPS with a tightly-tuned sensitivity setting on their mouse will tell you about how fast they can spin 180 degrees by flicking their mouse, a luxury not really possible on the stiff control stick of the console.

Having said all of that, I realize that there are keyboard and mouse controllers available for many of today’s consoles. Going back to the Dreamcast: if I remember correctly, Quake III included the ability to play on non-Dreamcast servers, meaning that Dreamcast players could play against people with keyboards and mice on PCs. Of course, Dreamcast had a special mouse and keyboard which could be bought, and after that the game was bearable and even fun at times.

To be sure, there are many other genres to be considered here, but since I have a preference for the two listed above, I’ll keep the discussion focused there for now (in the interest of time!).

Second: Even if both parties have access to the equipment, are there any benefits to playing on a specific system?

This is where the issue hits home: if you own both a decent gaming computer and a current-gen console and the game is available for both systems, which one do you buy, assuming you’ve got the keyboard, mouse, and any other relevant peripherals? If there were no obvious benefits either way, it seems like we could expect a 50/50 split between what people buy. For 100 people in this situation, the company will sell 50 games for the console, and 50 games for the PC.

So what’s the result? What are the differences, if any, that would change it from a 50/50 split? Apart from the “I’ve already bought the keyboard, mouse, and all of these other relevant peripherals, so I may as well buy the console version” logic, what drives this decision? The longevity of the console versus the PC? What do you think?

Most importantly: what does the convergence of gaming equipment between the console and the PC mean for the future of each? (That is, if we all have keyboards, mice, and everything else on our computers and our consoles, what does it mean to be playing on a console versus playing on a PC?)

There are many sites dedication to bringing the casual (or hardcore) player information about very specific quests, monsters, and items in any given game. Clearly the usefulness of these sites increase linearly with the amount of precise information available on them (more is better); so what happens when the game adds and entirely new level of complexity to this information?

Standard strategy guides are so helpful for getting through single player games. These games are generally very linear (or at least very “event” linear, meaning that while you’re free to go wherever’s available at that time, you may not be able to go everywhere since you haven’t progressed that far yet), which means that someone with some time and energy to spend (and a fat paycheck waiting) can sit down and pound through an entire game and document every event that happens with relatively little ingenuity or effort. Then they can compile it in an easy-to-read book that follows the linearity of the game to a tee.

Then you’ve got the online games to which there’s really no possible strategy guide at all. The completely unscripted, non-linear games like Starcraft, Warcraft, Chess, and most online First-person shooters. These games have no plot, and the entire point is just to have a higher skill level than your opponent. I conjecture that in order to write a complete strategy guide for a game like this, the amount of pages (paper or electronic) you’d have to use would be monstrous, because it would have to account for every possible situation.

Somewhere in the middle of all of this fall those MMOs which allow character progression via quests and other means. This is where popular sites like allakhazam and others come into play. They amass unbelievable amounts of information about every quest, NPC, and item available in these games. They do an amazing job of it. However, most of their assumptions are based on a large, seemingly-dynamic world in which the characters remain completely constant. All of the NPCs are completely lifeless automatons that sit out in front of their shops or in their houses for you to find at your convenience.

My question is: What happens when these NPCs and other world-characters start moving?

continue reading "Horizontal (and Vertical!) Mobility of NPCs"