Showing posts with label games. Show all posts
Showing posts with label games. Show all posts

Monday, July 6, 2015

Lessons from Family Feud



So, we have been playing a lot of family feud recently. It all started on our smartphones with the family feud two app. This got me thinking about how simply beautiful of a game that family feud really is in the way that it . So many game shows are about testing your knowledge of trivia or book-learning, but this game really seems to be testing a totally different part of our intelligence. Being good at this game does not seem to have much to do with your intelligence in the sense of remembering facts or solving problems as much as other games, although that might help some. Instead it seems to have more to do with creative thinking and with understanding social norms. To do well, you have to be able to identify what do most people in the US think like and how is that different from the way I think and what might they think of that I usually wouldn't, For example, with some of my answers, I often find myself thinking in terms that are too clever involving wordplay or too specific if I have a lot of knowledge about the topic area (like guessing hard drive for a question about something on a computer).

Not many other games really challenge you to think in these kind of terms, to try to fit in with everyone else and think they way they would think even if this is a dynamic we are all struggling deciding how to interact with all the time in our lives. We have to decide if we want to fit in with social norms and attempt to gain other's acceptance or feel like we are doing things the right way that others would approve of or that will yield the best results (Japanese style) or to intentionally buck the system and go against the norm or anywhere in between. Family Feud seems to be training us to be more in touch with ourselves in this sense. This seems especially interesting when I started to think about this in terms of Myers Briggs personality types. People who are SJs (sensing and judging) are the biggest part of the population when it comes to the 4 overarching personality characters. They are also the ones who really care about social norms and bringing people together and following the rules. They are often police officers, principals, all those type of jobs that like to enforce the status quo. This show seems to be right in their wheelhouses, whereas something like jeopardy is much more for people who have a certain level of traditional intelligence or ability to remember facts. We often think of games and game shows to be more of a chance to show off knowledge in a way where the people on their are really smart and sometimes even out of touch with social norms because they are too busy reading the encyclopedia, Yet, it seems like games rarely try to appeal to this kind of level of the common person.

Of course this is something many games and especially recent video games are doing to try to make themselves more accessible and get more people into them and make more money. Family feud has been doing this for years though and is remarkable not only in its accessibility and widespread appeal, but also the way that it reframes how we think about intelligence and puts it on more of a social level. This social aspect is something that games are really starting to play up more (like more and more MMORPGS) and something that seems to be one of the primary appeals to many games and something that can make gaming seem like less of a solitary activity that people are doing in their mother's basement without bathing frequently.



Playing the Android game got me thinking about the old family feud game from 1987 that we had on our old XT dos computer and I booted up dosbox to give it another spin. It was really remarkable how much different the two games were. The Android version actually has much worse and lamer graphics I would say even with the benefits of much better technology. In the dos version you get to see your family, along with all of their tacky 80s clothing, and how they react to each answer. You also get to hear the digs and see the board reveal the answers just like the looked on the show. The Android version looks much more like you are not actually on the show. There are no graphics of the families and no graphics of the host and the host has like 3 annoying and obnoxious sound clips that it repeats over and over for wrong answers. So much about the game screams that it was rushed out and had the family feud label slapped onto it because they know people would download it just for that. Much of the energy for the Android game was figuring out places for you to have ads and trying to get you to buy coins so you could play more than the daily limit of games. The nicest graphics in the game are when you get to spin a slot machine to get your coins for signing in that day. You also don't get to play the second half of the fast money round when you win, making it almost impossible to even get above 200 points. Meanwhile the older game seem to be more immersive and really make you feel like you are on the show even with its primitive graphics. You have twice the amount of time for each answer, can use a keyboard instead of a touch keyboard on the screen of your phone, and don't have to feel like the game is constantly taking you out of its world to pester you about coins and other Android apps.

Somewhere in here it seems important to realize how looking at these two family feud games is indicative of how corporations and their advertising has changed in the last 30 years between the releases of these two games. Of course the old family feud game and the family feud show are trying to make money as so much of our capitalist society is focused on, but it did it in a way where they created something that immersed you in a game world more so than encouraged you to obsessively collect coins. I don't want to sound like an old fogey here not liking new technology just because it is new, but where is the point here where we realize that the Android version of family feud has fewer features and more annoyances than a game made 30 years ago and that is not okay? This isn't the only kind of product that this has happened with either. So much of our food, toys, appliances, so many different products are cutting corners more and more without most customers noticing much or being able to do much about it. Of course, lots of video games do a much better job of not losing their immersion like the Android version of family feud while still trying to get you to buy more content like DLC or expansion packs. And it seems to go back to that same mentality of many people (especially SJs) wanting to fit into social norms and not question what they are living their lives as much as they want to fit in. Many people don't think critically about the products they are buying outside of how it is fulfilling a need or want for them. Except for more niche markets of people who want to nerd out and get the best, most customizable product they can for their money, we have slowly been conditioned by advertisers to expect a worse product and be okay with that. We are the ones spending the money. How have we allowed this to happen?

Friday, June 26, 2009

Number 20: Solitaire


Quick: What is the most used computer application in the world? If you said Solitaire, you win a bucket of fried chicken. Bill Gates has told us that more people use solitaire than any other program included with windows. This seems to suggest something very negative about our culture/civilization, although I'm not sure what. Post your thoughts in the comments.

The pleasures of solitaire are simple. It's accessible, easy to understand, and requires little time, yet is just complex enough to be interesting. How many computer games can you say that about?

And who can't say that they have felt a vague sense of release and returning boredom after watching the cards bounce around the screen after winning a hand? Just think of how much slight joy those bouncing cards have brought to millions of people who only moments earlier were bored.


Oddly, no other top PC games list I read included this game. Millions of people have played it; I'd estimate more than 20 percent of the world's population. How does that not deserve a spot on a great games list. And any game that has surely been responsible for numerous firings and countless lost hours of work has to be considered an incredible achievement. I mean, this has to be the 2nd biggest killer of productivity for the world behind the internet. Considering how many evil corporations exist in the world that have lost millions of dollars because of this simple game, well, that deserves a noble peace prize in my book.

If only windows hadn't made that unfortunate sequel . . .



Tuesday, June 23, 2009

The Top 20 PC Games of All Time

Have you ever read one of those lists of the top 20 or 10 or 100 PC games of all time at some internet website? Well, in my quest to be a real American hero, I'm going to be counting down the top 20 PC games of all time on our fabulous blog one post at a time just like those big name websites. In my preparatory research, I have noticed most of the other lists have two common themes.

Firstly, they have major gaps. Some only focus on first person shooters and strategy games leaving other genres in the cold or with only a token mention. Most lists leave out older games and adventure games in addition to whatever kind of game the author of the list was ignorant about despite being a site that is supposed an expert opinion.

Secondly, every list acts like it is the definitive list of PC games because they are experts of unquestioned authority. There are so many thousands of PC games in existence going back decades. How could anyone have played a quarter of these games in depth? Yet, because these "experts" can beat their friends at Crysis, they feel like they are the authority on all computer games. It would be nice if at least one list would point out what an absurd and complicated task it is to narrow down the best PC games of all time.

Any idiot can throw every game ever made by Blizzard, a bunch of first person shooters, and The Sims and call it the greatest games, but who will actually go out on a limb and say that their list is total unresearched, impulsive bullshit? Me. I haven't even played many of the games on this list and am not even going to try to base my list on any kind of objective or logical criteria. Instead, I've made my choices because these are the games I felt like putting on my list and if you don't like it, make your own list.

Honorable Mention - Mr. Mayank's SAT Preparation Challenge (1987)

That's right, I'm starting with an SAT preparation game. And a damn good one. Where else can you see your cacti garden grow as you answer SAT questions correctly? Mr. Mayank, an ordinary high school guidance counselor, unfortunately did not sell many copies of this game, but not for the lack of trying. Every weekend he had his booth set up at the flee market and would often position his students in front of grocery stores to compete with the girl scouts. Unfortunately, Mr. Mayank died in a drug overdose in 1998, but his legacy lives on both in this game and in the beautiful cactus garden Joey has grown in an abandoned building to honor his memory.