Thoughts – Better Meta
by Michael Cook on Jul.11, 2009, under Thoughts
So, what is the deal with gaming diaries, anyway? They’re all… too long and not that good. It’s fun to watch other people play games, isn’t it? Some games anyway. I have fond memories of trudging over to my friend’s house on a Saturday afternoon to watch him beat half of Devil May Cry on the PlayStation2, and spectator gaming has got it all – backseat puzzle-solving, shared moments of swearing at the screen, and of course the knowledge that if it all goes to shit then, hey, you didn’t do it.
The problem with reading about someone playing a game is that it’s not as immediately gratifying. If at The Blue Casket I posted my recent retread of the point-and-click classic Day Of The Tentacle, then you’d probably stop reading after the second post, which would consist of me saying, “Then I sat down for an hour and tried every inventory item on everything in the room.” Much like the distinction between watching a film and playing a game, reading about games lacks the potential for interaction. You can’t be a part of it so easily.
As I trawl the internet for more things to post up here, it becomes increasingly obvious to me that very few people do this sort of thing, and so the blogs I host here are probably some of the only ones to really think about how to entertain the reader. They all take a different approach. Andrew Dunn’s Reggio Perino blog in Mount and Blade has been designed so that Andrew sets himself an overall goal that’s guaranteed to produce a lot of interesting conflict, for instance, whilst Jiiiiim’s The Amateur was powered by a self-imposed narrative about a man accidentally mistaken for an international assassin.
It needs that hook, that little something that changes the game and tells readers that even if they’re experts at this game, they’ve probably not played it quite how this guy has. And once you have that hook, as long as you’re handy with the screenshot key and willing to throw in a few jokes, then you’re probably good to go.
There are a lot – a lot – of AARs out there on the net and they’re the closest thing we have at the moment to a big metagaming community. But they’re mostly heavy to read, with overblown sections of storytelling that doesn’t really drill down to the playing of the game itself. It’s offputting, because it makes you think that perhaps there’s nothing in this idea after all. But all it needs is a bit of refinement, and a bit of forethought, to become something really entertaining.
Next week on The Blue Casket – a bunch of picks from a fresh gaming site (for me, at least!) and possibly a new homegrown diary. If the updates to the site flag a little over the coming week and a bit, don’t fret – I’m moving back to London after a stint away for personal stuff. Normal service should continue!











July 21st, 2009 on 5:31 pm
I think some games lend themselves to AARs better than others. Monkey Island is pretty much the same no matter how you play it – the order of the jokes doesn’t change the fact that everyone will probably find mostly the same jokes in there and follow the same story.
Games that offer you different approaches work best – so The Amateur twists what can be done with the game to make it more interesting, as well as being entertaining in its own right. It’s a combination of doing something interesting and saying it in an interesting way, then. That, and a healthy dose of virtual schadenfreude.
August 17th, 2009 on 7:35 am
Your points are true! I think games with a lot of player freedom provide the most interesting environments for interesting LPs/AARs. This appropriateness to AAR is heightened if the game itself has a fair degree of randomness or the potential to “surprise”. Thus, Dwarf Fortress, The Sims, some strategy games and no doubt others I’ve missed can allow great AARs by giving the writer the freedom to play in a strange or amusing way while also providing the potential to surprise both the player and the audience with emergent events.
Or something