editorial

Those who have been paying attention may have noticed DoFuss has been on a little hiatus recently. Basically personal life got the better of me and I decided to dedicate the start of the summer to sorting my life out, leaving gaming to wallow somewhere in the recesses of my mind. Luckily it seems my problems reared their head at the perfect time, with very little going on in the world of gaming while my attention was turned, with the exception of Star Craft 2, a subject which I don’t really know enough about to pass comment on anyway.

Now I am settled again. My new apartment is equipped with Internet and I have spent all my spare money on hookers and blow, so by necessity my time is being redirected back to the site. I even managed to amass a few game related stories during the debauchery to provide me with some material for the coming weeks. Though my TV is no longer high-definition, a fact that is affecting my enjoyment of gaming more than I ever believed it would, I even have time in my life play games again, so you can expect reviews to start creeping back on to the site soon.

This used to give me nightmares.

Thank you for you sticking with DoFuss over the extended break, and check back soon for The DoFuss Show 31 and new posts as service returns to normal.

Video games have always influenced each other. Growing from a few seeds the industry has evolved. Occasionally a single shoot is split, forming a new branch in the evolution. Some of these are dead ends, while others flourish. Even more rarely branches come together and make something new.

Not all previously divergent paths join with the same success. As I play more of these titles that attempt to blend separate evolutions together it is becoming clear that Japanese trees in this laboured metaphor are struggling to assimilate Western genetics.

I guess Japanese design ideas are dominant alleles.

Japanese developers soberness runs through all of their business structures. A rigid adherence to rules and bureaucracy that makes them slow to adapt. As a nation they have produced ingenious devices and innovations but as solutions to problems, rather than pure innovation.

Some realise this problem, with Capcom’s Jun Takeuchi acknowledging the issue of Japanese developer’s stagnation and the need for change if they are to survive. But even Capcom, one of the most internationally minded Japanese developers struggles working with Western teams and concepts, choosing poor properties or failing to understand the reasons behind gameplay mechanics, focusing on bullet points.

At a time when games need to reach an ever-widening audience to justify their development costs, it is an issue set to get worse. Though I hold a small fear that such shared ideals could lead to the homogenisation of games, I take heart in the fact the most unique elements of nature come from cross pollination and mutation.

See, less that 250 words... Not counting these.

If you are new to DoFuss you may be unaware of the sites beginning. Initially the concept was that all posts would be exactly a hundred and fifty words. It was very restricting but helped me form a more concise writing style, something I believe is essential when writing for an Internet audiences who have so many other sources of information vying their attention.

About six months after beginning the site I moved to longer articles. It was a move that allowed me to be more expressive, but which demanded considerably more of my time. It followed that the number of posts lessened as my time was sucked up by the longer pieces, a problem compounded by some of my energies being directed to writing for other sites.

But I kept playing games, and now there is a backlog of titles I want to talk about here on DoFuss. With that in mind, and because I think revisiting a more limited writing style could benefit my writing, I am once again imposing restrictions on my articles.

For the rest of May, and maybe June, DoFuss will be adopting a new format.  While it is to be more flexible than the old hundred and fifty word system, the essence of brevity is to return by restricting (most) posts to between two hundred and two hundred and fifty words (give or take).

With any luck by the end of June I will be all caught up.

Damn it, I did it again. A week of protracted writing and piece meal additions to an article left it nearly unintelligible. On the plus side during this torturous process I discovered that the fundamental conceit of the article was false, based on what I believed my own gaming proclivities to be, rather than what they actually are. Initially I was asserting that good character design is integral to making a good narrative focused game. Be it a title that allows you to make your own choices, or follow a predestined path, if a game does not create a sympathetic or relatable role or motivation for the player then the experience will fall flat. If that flaws last sentence has you fuming at your computer, I can see why, because I was clearly wrong.

Having conceded my error in judgment, I set about deconstructing why I had arrived at my conclusion in the first place. It transpired that in forming my theory I had approached the topic from the wrong angle. Like water hitting a ladle when washing up, my inaccurate positioning of the idea had resulted in misdirected spray, and the appearance of wetting oneself. My error is plain enough in retrospect; a character has little affect on a good game, but it can make a mediocre game better, or a god-awful game bearable, by creating an incentive to continue when gameplay alone is not enough.

2D, and no matter how much I enjoyed the game I can't in good conscience argue otherwise.

I should have realised my mistake earlier. Coming at the topic from two bad games, I’m Not Alone and Deadly Premonition; I was trying to shoehorn quality titles in to my argument to support a shaky premise instead of looking at my evidence. In trying to argue Gears of War worked because Marcus was driven by simple relatable emotions, I neglected that it was the quality of the game that propelled Marcus beyond his two-dimensional nature. To say this clearly the reason I’m Not Alone sits as perhaps the worst game I have every played, while Deadly Premonition is entertaining, is because of each titles lead protagonist.

I could no doubt find multiple other games to help me inform my position here, but Deadly Premonition and I’m Not Alone are ideally suited for comparison as they so closely parallel each other in key areas. From the onset neither game does anything to impress. Graphically both offer bland flat environments that look like original Xbox offerings. Yet somehow both succeeded in creating fantastically ghoulish adversaries whom have to be dispatched through combat that is unwieldy due to unusually (and at times antiquated) interface decisions. These are just a few examples of the vast array of problems each game possess, which leaves them fundamentally flawed. Yet where Deadly Premonition rises above the sum of its parts, I’m Not Alone is sent spiralling ever lower from its position second-rate.

Initially I thought that the root of the separation of each titles success originated with their stories, but both feature investigations of occult powers that offer some genuine (if poorly presented) intrigue. Managing to hook me with their underlying stories alone was not enough though, because while I found myself wrestling with Deadly Premonition for numerous hours, I’m Not Alone protagonist quickly soured me.

Agent York is fascinating, his presence alone providing much of Deadly Premonitions appeal.

Deadly Premonition centres on a FBI agent York, an interesting character who suffers from multiple personality disorder, leaving him constantly talking to his other personality ‘Zack’. He is detached, but believable so. Like a Jeff Goldblum character, Agent York frequently disappears inside his own thoughts, delivering insightful, or at the very least amusing, monologues. It is fascinating overhearing the half conversations he has with his other persona, especially when he reminisces about eighties movies. He provides a draw that, combined with the Twin Peaks styled story, extends far beyond the games limited core.

In contrast I’m Not Alone’s lead, Patrick Weber, is a shit (I would use stronger language but I am scared my mom will read this post). From the start he is over confident, condescending and generally a dick to everything that crosses his path. Add to these flaws the fact there is no sense of trepidation at the otherworldly abominations he confronts, and the result is a distant character, who (unlike York) has no reason to be detached. With every emotion he displayed being at odds with the tension of the story and the unease I felt as a player, it became impossible to empathise with him, so the motivation to follow his tale quickly faded. Ultimately I’m Not Alone failed for me because I was more interested in seeing the ghosts that attacked Patrick find some measure of peace  from their plight by killing him than I ever was in helping him escape the mansion.

This is Patrick. We don't like Patrick, or his silly little soul patch.

Characters are not as key to a games success as I initially supposed, but I still feel they can work in conjunction with other factors to support weaker titles. Perhaps this is commonsense; after all we play games for the ‘game’, but part of me always believed I was more interested in their narratives and worlds, with the play mechanic just serving as my locomotion through them. On reflection I realise that I have been lying to myself about my own habits. As I look at my own collection I see the answer staring back at me, games with interesting premises that I have abandoned because of poor gameplay, while other titles with appalling stories and characters sit finished thanks to core mechanics that entertained.