And you missed the point again. I have a few minutes, so I'll explain Animal Crossing to those that don't think it's a "game".
Pretty loose definition of a game, sport. I don't consider riding my bike a "game". I don't consider taking out the trash a "game". I don't consider going to the mall and buying Christmas presents a game. And I sure as hell don't consider collecting virtual knick-knacks, writing meaningless letters to virtual acquaintances, and dorking about with a virtual jukebox a game.
I do, however, consider the latter a little sad. I understand that some folks want games to be entirely about escapist fantasies, and I'm cool with that. But Animal Crossing -- it's all immersion, and no mechanics whatsoever. It's a tacit admission that you don't want to be challenged, but instead want an alternate reality, where your little obsessive-compulsive disorder is rewarded and everyone is nice to you in a safe, predictable fashion. It's a shallow little cartoon world conceitedly wed to a clock that apparently provides a sort of post-modern digital outlet for a select group of socially anxious and monstrously bored kids. That, and the little masturbatory Nintendo references, of course -- never let it be said that Drinky Crow discounts the narcotic influence of gamers' childhoods!
At the VERY least, if Animal Crossing WAS all about these moments, they could've wrapped it in a more modern audiovisual wrapper and given us some fuckin' eye candy.
Absolutely apropos to the definition of a game is the idea that there are SOME fundamental mathematical qualities underpinning the experience; algorithms to which the player provides input either directly or indirectly. That's what separates passive activities like watching a movie or reading a book from, say, Gradius V. That not to say that the code that comes on these little discs we covet can't provide passive experiences -- I'd venture that many Japanese RPGS, especially those of the Xenosaga creed, are probably closer to a Dragonlance novel than they are to Tetris -- but the less pervasive and critical the player's actions become in influencing the overall system state, the more they deviate from the original concept of a game, which is to provide a challenging, competitive set of mathematically deterministic rules under which to perform and measure yourself, and under which failure conditions are always a palpable possibility.
Animal Crossing has none of that; it's just a little shallow make-believe cartoon world for the anxious to try and lose themselves in. It's psychotherapy in its best form, and it's a complete waste of mental energy in its worst. It's another snowglobe -- shake it, and be mesmerized by the limited set of random events. If I want to experience a world of seemingly random events and interactions, I'LL GO OUTSIDE.
Personally, talking to NPCs in JRPGs has been very, VERY low on my list of things I enjoy in modern gaming, as has the aimless collection aspects of the N64 platformer set. Hell, even fucking Shenmue, garbage as it was, had a middling-to-decent fighting game wrapped up in it.
You can love or hate Animal Crossing, but your opinion doesn't change the fact that it's an amazingly unique game.
No, I've had plenty of chances to play shit like this back in the C64-era of gaming.
In conclusion, I knew Animal Crossing was brilliant was the first time I had K. K. Slider play a song. You just don't get moments like that in most games. Perhaps Nintendo fans see more in games than you think.
Or, maybe, just MAYBE, they shit their pants over nostalgic cues the rest of us don't get or do get but dismiss as crap because our tastes have expanded beyond a sixteen-year-old fanboy's arena.
Why do people enjoy riding down the road in a game if there's no race, nothing to kill or run over? Why would any gamer enjoy throwing a frisbee to a dog?
Because they're GAMES with MECHANICS? Terrain itself can be a serious challenge for any bicyclist, and teaching your dog to play catch takes a lot of effort and energy expended for a massive payoff. If not, they're just aimless activities; things that occupy time without purpose, kinda like, y'know, ANIMAL CROSSING.
You've criticized Nintendo for creating games that are mired in convention. And you're right. Wind Waker's control setup is outdated, especially with games like Prince of Persia and Ninja Gaiden on the market. There should be voice acting in the game as well.
I think voice acting is a plague on the industry.
So why then would you mire the industry in convention by defining what gamers should be enjoying? There will surely come a point at which you realize that the average game isn't interesting enough for you, and no developer will be there to fill that void. But that's what you wanted.
Again with the strawman. I don't care if ANY company makes Animal Crossing clones until the moon shits blood and Jesus comes back to save us all from AIDS monsters. I don't care if people enjoy -- hell, if they raise that banjo-playing dog up as a fucking idol and worship him --those sorts of experiences, but it doesn't change my point: that Animal Crossing is far closer to being an interactive screensaver for the OCD set than it is to being Kirby's Star Stacker.
