In order for this post to make sense, please read this entry in Raph Koster's blog. I've also reposted it at the bottom of this post.
In his latest blog post, Raph talks about the importance of not just giving game designers a set of scripts to work with and that they understand the systems behind the scripts. To me, he just explained what I feel is missing from SWG. In fact, it feels missing from every other MMO I've played during the past 3 years. Many times I do feel like I'm simply walking through a database and not a game world.
Let me be clear, I'm not saying the current SWG devs are doing a poor job! They are currently doing a great job especially when you factor in how small the team is right now. They are working with the tools available to them.
With that out of the way... Think about it... How many times have we heard about how complicated the code behind SWG is? On many occasions it has been implied that too many systems are tied to each other or the code doesn't make sense. Over the years I think we've seen a lot of this "mystery" code removed and replaced with systems which use easy-to-understand scripts. These are the "tools" we hear sometimes hear devs talk about. The truth is, those difficult-to-understand systems are what really brought the world to life.
I don't understand how a sculptor carves a statue out of a block of marble, but I can appreciate how life-like and beautiful a statue can be. If the artist used a computer controlled device to produce his statue it may be perfect, to the micron - but I promise, it wouldn't be as beautiful and it would merely be one copy out of 1000. I eagerly await the day somebody or some company chooses to take the high road while designing their product. The path is more difficult, but the reward is well worth it.
-Yivvits
[hr]
Repost from Raph's blog:
The latest game dev debate around the blogosphere is about designer scripting. Joe Ludwig says,On the gameplay side we use a rich data-drive system that lets designers define an arbitrary list of “requirements” with which they are able to test most any condition. When a trigger fires, object is used, or skill is activated, an arbitrary list of “results” is activated which is capable of modifying just about any state in the game. The designers also have a few ways of maintaining persistent state on the characters depending on the circumstances. This system is working pretty well for us and eliminates the need for any designer-written scripts.No, it doesn’t. Because it means that implementing designers are nothing more than content creators, and that is not what the core job of game design is.In fact, it’s the most commodified part of game design. The core of game design lies in systems. And systems require massaging and testing and iteration. Doing it on paper is hopeless. At the very least you need to seat designer and programmer together to work like Siamese twins — like a lyricist and the composer. But better yet is to acknowledge that systems, for better or worse, are defined in code. And therefore knowing how to code at least a little is like saying that a painter needs to know how to use a paintbrush, or a composer really should play at least one instrument even if not as master.As one commenter said over on Zen of Design, a purely data driven system feels like wandering through a database. Well, yes. That’s because that is what it is. You can stick conditionals in everywhere you like, and it boils down to the fact that the inputs and outputs are fixed, a Chinese menu.Two points I must make even though they are obvious:
- Content creation is still a noble pursuit, and a difficult one. Yes, content is critical, it’s king, etc. It’s just not the core. No system, no content. And there’s a lot more people who can mak content than can make systems.
- Bad scripting is bad. Sure. Train your budding designers. Ramp them gradually. Still have the data-driven system, becauseyou do still need content. And feel free to have the scripting designer prototype and iterate, and then port the final result over to a robust programmer-created system.
It’s also worth pointing out that a designer who only works inside of data-driven systems will not have a career path and training path to learn systems design unless they are given access to system modifications. So I strongly advise designers to find a way to learn to code.Again, it’s not about being as good as a professional programmer. It’s about understanding the tools of your chosen medium well enough to actually work with them.
In fact, you can go back through this post, and substitute “Excel,” “presenting,” “visual design,” and “writing.” The gist of the post would be exactly the same.