It’s August 15 and that means it’s the Independence Day of India. This year, its our 67th I-Day, the day India drove the British Raj out peacefully, spearheaded by the Mahatma Gandhi movement. Let us take this opportunity to talk about freedom and independence in video games, be it playing them or making them. Our Editors Sahil, Tathagata and Chirantan brainstormed over what freedom means to video games beyond just a story setting and their thoughts follow.
Chirantan Raut on Freedom in Gameplay
If one were to look at the trends in gameplay in major game titles in recent years, one would notice the rise in the number of titles touting an open world. An open world implies freedom to the player in that they are free to partake in the wonders of the game’s world and complete the game at their own pace. Players can rush through the main story line or engage in side quests they encounter while roaming the game world. This freedom seems to have been taken to a whole new level by survival horror games like DayZ and sandbox games like Minecraft.
Survival Horror games put the onus on the player to explore the game world and use the objects they find within it to continue playing. While there is the freedom of movement and crafting, the threat of death is always looming over the player and makes it hard to trust the other players one encounters. Sandbox games on the other hand give you creative freedom to reshape the world as you see fit. You can interact with almost any object in the game world and use it to build something of your own. The success of Minecraft is testament to player preference for such freedom. These pioneering games have inspired quite a few developers to build on these ideas and make new games whose core gameplay is centred on giving the genre defining freedoms to the player. Many of these games are being shaped through player feedback as they have been released in early access.
Even traditional genres, like RPG, Racing, Action Adventure and RTS, are embracing this open world concept, and in the process, are making for a richer player experience. Some developers like Ubisoft are also using the open world to distract players from the main quest line by purposefully adding side quests and minor distractions like collectibles in the player’s path. Far Cry 3 is an example of this approach. One must wonder if the freedom on offer is actually a ploy to keep you trapped in the game.
Multiplayer is also getting on this open world bandwagon by trying to implement ideas from massively Multiplayer online games like seamless multiplayer which lets other players hop in to the same shared single player world while you’re playing and can result in them helping you by co-operating or hindering you by impeding your progress. This freedom of participating in multiplayer while in single player has been perfected by games like Dark Souls. The Just Cause 2 Multiplayer Mod demonstrates just how much chaos can be unleashed when you populate a sandbox open world single player game with other human players and how this can increase the fun factor for an old game and breathe new life into it.
Free-to-Play games are also contributing to the player’s in-game freedom by letting players have the freedom to choose how much money they wish to invest in the game. There are some games that are pay-to-win, but those stifle player freedom in order to milk them for money. Fair free-to-play models usually have core gameplay elements accessible to all for free, albeit with a time cost. The objects that cost a premium are cosmetic in nature and appeal to the player’s wishes for having a unique identity within the game. The Gameplay systems built around these monetisation models are those that offer greater freedom to the player, not only in terms of consuming the game, but also in terms of paying for it.
[divider]
Tathagata Ray on Elemental Freedom
One thing that catches my attention instantly in relation to the amount of freedom that the upcoming next gen games are going to deliver, is the field of accessibility. With the launch trailer of Ubisoft’s most promising title this year – Far Cry 4 , at E3, we know now for sure that games don’t need to be physically bought in order to play and enjoy. Your friend, who doesn’t have a bought copy of Far Cry 4, can jump into a co-operative mission in your game and experience the same Far Cry 4 moments, that may or may not prompt him to buy the game.
Games are changing and evolving with time, with creative companies like Ubisoft always experimenting with core game mechanics to embroider an old story with creative new approaches. In my opinion, Assassin’s Creed Unity’s choice of freedom in the way you play is raising new hopes in my hackeneyed AC memories. Freedom to experiment is moving the banner of Call of Duty under the wings of Sledgehammer, who deem it right to move away from the horizontal frame shooter to include every aspect of the screen as a possible threat. Do we say more? Battlefield Hardline is coming right from it’s epic disaster called Battlefield 4, which was a subject of mass upheaval culminating from the unfinished quality of the released game. And they’re already adopting a more free, cop-goon (Did someone say PayDay 2?) style of play, that we have never ever seen in a Battlefield game. Will it do wonders? Only time will tell.
Freedom of being online or progressing offline is one of the key takeaways of this next gen: with both The Crew and Destiny beating hearts to provide a standalone RPG experience irrespective of whether you suck at online competitive formats or not. The famous Crucible matches of Destiny pit players against each other, with huge takeaways (special armour, guns, credit) at the end of a successful round, it is designed to make the gamer sweat hard to get close to the booty. Being offline you can follow the same Destiny story with obviously lesser help coming to your doorstep and highly challenging battle scenarios.
The fact that games like Goat Simulator and Day Z are coming to consoles (Xbox One and Playstation 4 respectively) show that the devs are ready to experiment with the freedom that they’ve got at their disposal. Barely would you estimate Hideo Kojima to drop a huge trailer for the next Silent Hill encoded in a demo session of a game encrypted PT (which now has been confirmed as Guillermo Del Toro and Norman Reedus starrer Silent Hills, mind the extra S). It shows that Kojima’s weapon of choice has been not to go all gung-ho but guerilla instead.
[divider]
Sahil Arora on Masked,Misused and Abused Freedom
Freedom is a funny word. Not all’s so butterflies and sunflowers with freedom. Freedom is misused, and at times, especially in video games, is forced down your throats. Don’t mind me speaking on a negative note here, but this is a serious disease, one that is causing games to break completely in the name of freedom. Every big game is wanting to be an ‘open world’ game, giving the player the impression of being ‘free’ to do whatever you want.
Masked behind this pretense of open worlds, one is forced to go through bloated and repetitive chores. Even the Need For Speed franchise, one which transformed from ‘menu interfaced’ game to an open world game where you as the driver are supposed to drive to race locations to initiate a race. It might have worked well, but it was far from being revolutionary. I enjoyed the NFS when it was fully accessible through menus, tracks, cars, modifications, etc.
How can I talk about freedom and not mention Ubisoft, a company that glorifies freedom in games, albeit with the same formulas over and over again. We all know that Watch Dogs is basically a Ubisoft Greatest Hits Compilation. Watch_Dogs was touted as the epitome of freedom in games. We all know how that turned out. Sure, the game made a lot of money, but was only due to the hype Ubisoft created around it.
Long back, Ansh Patel, the creator of Exist, spoke about so called ‘innovation’ that games so easily glorify, and how that innovation is smothered down our throats. This article’s a solid read, do check it out. Freedom and Innovation, when related to games, run parallel, as each is holding on to the other to co-exist.
Games separate themselves from other forms of media (like music, movies) by being the only form that is intractable and manipulative. But how genuine is this interaction that leads to freedom, ask yourself and let your inner self spit out the truth.
[divider]
While those are the thoughts of our editors, we would appreciate feedback from our community. What sort of gamer are you, one that loves being confined to the same arena over and over again in hopes of mastering it, or one who wishes to be spoilt for choice? Do closed out corridors scratch your itch or must you need a wide expansive world to explore? What do you believe comprises Freedom in a Video Game? Let us know in the comments.
