the iconmaster

Scribblenauts is a wonderful game. Enter nearly any noun in the English language (within a few very reasonable restrictions — nothing vulgar, nothing copyrighted), and that item is summoned for you to use in solving the game’s puzzles. Need to protect a sandwich from some ants without killing the critters? You might beam the food up in a UFO. Trying to grab something from across a pond? You could build a bridge, or just lasso the object.

I’ve enjoyed the game tremendously. The puzzles aren’t all equally inspired, the controls can be fidgety — but the feeling of semi-omnipotence that comes with accessing the game’s vast dictionary more than makes up for these shortcomings. The only thing the game really lacks — as suggested to me by Ian Bogost — is a system of ethics.

Some puzzles do enforce conditions that resemble ethical restrictions. There’s a “heist” level featuring security guards whom you are not permitted to eliminate. But for the most part, Scribblenauts’ ethics are decidedly situational. In general you are allowed to wound, even kill, the most innocent of non-player characters (NPCs) without suffering any in-game penalty.

That’s not meant to be a criticism. The game is juggling quite a few balls as it is. But I’ve found that I have the most fun with Scribblenauts when I deliberately impose ethical restrictions on myself: Don’t attack human characters. Only use weapons in self-defense. Disarm or incapacitate rather than kill.

It occurred to me that it really wouldn’t be that hard to build an overarching ethical system into a future Scribblenauts sequel. So here’s my proposal for a morality mechanic in 5th Cell’s next big hit… Scribblenauts: For Great Justice.

The Justice Meter: In addition to the Budget Meter, which fills as you add objects to the level, For Great Justice would feature a Justice Meter. At the start of a level, the Justice Meter would be filled to 100%. Performing unjust acts, or allowing unjust acts to be perpetrated, would drain the meter. If the Justice Meter drops to nothing, you fail the level.

Events that would drain the Justice Meter: Killing a human NPC would instantly drain the Justice meter. Attacking a human NPC would drain it, but at a less drastic rate. Allowing two NPCs to hurt each other would also drain it, but less drastically still. Killing or attacking animal NPCs would drain the meter, but at a less drastic rate compared to the respective human NPC events. Allowing two animal NPCs to hurt each other would have, I think, no effect on the meter. Circle of life and all.

Special events: In addition, 5th Cell could design levels with specialized justice effects. You might need to find a way to stop a rich man stealing from an impoverished person — the Justice Meter draining all the while. Or a construction crew could be in the process of demolishing an orphanage and it’s up to you to disable their equipment. Loggers might need to be stopped from destroying a forest.

Personally I’d love to play a Scribblenauts sequel with these features. Games are largely about succeeding within a set of restrictions — so why not ethical ones?

For those on the outside, it began with a Penny Arcade comic (warning, slightly strong language).

Then rumors started swirling, and were confirmed by the comic’s authors, that the comic was true — Jeff Gerstmann, editor-in-chief and 11-year veteran of the gaming site GameSpot, had been axed for panning the game Kane & Lynch, an Eidos Interactive title that was being heavily advertised on the GameSpot site at the time.

Naturally, Eidos weren’t pleased that the site they had poured thousands of dollars into was pooh-poohing their product. But what happened next sent a shockwave through gaming journalism.

C|Net, the owners of GameSpot, shattered the wall between editorialism and marketing and unceremoniously dumped Gerstmann for the “tone” of his review.

Multiple industry insiders have come forward to confirm these events, and I’ll leave the Googling to those who want more proof. Valleywag offers an account of the debacle from another, supposed GameSpot editor (note: strong language); and it certainly has the ring of truth about it.

So what can gamers do about this, if they value integrity in gaming journalism? First, obviously, you can boycott Kane & Lynch. That shouldn’t be hard, as the game is seriously flawed. But on top of that, you can boycott those responsible for the mess — C|Net and all the sites they own:

gamespot.com
gamefaqs.com
metacritic.com
gamerankings.com
cnet.com
news.com

I realize this may seem like a tempest in a teapot to those who don’t pay much attention to gaming. But there’s a larger issue at play here — specifically, Do journalists answer to their readers or to their advertisers? In most every other industry — movies, for example — this question has been satisfactorily answered. (Think a movie reviewer would be let go for giving Fantastic Four a less-than-glowing assessment?) It needs to be answered definitively here too.

When I first heard that ActRaiser was being released for Nintendo’s Virtual Console, I rushed to slap down the plastic. ActRaiser was a game released by Enix (now Square Enix) for the Super NES back in 1990. It’s a strange breed of game, combining two completely different genres into one experience — a side-scrolling, hack ‘n’ slash action mode, and a town-building simulation mode that resembles Populous or Sim City.

The game holds up well, 17 years later. ActRaiser is remembered in no small part for Yuzo Koshiro’s symphonic score (a fully-orchestrated version was made available on CD, but it’s a rare find), and the aural portion has lost none of its luster. Graphically the game looks slightly dated, but only because of its somewhat choppy animation. The art direction and use of color (lots of simultaneous contrast in the creature designs) still impress.

It’s hard to imagine any major publisher greenlighting a game today that combines two so totally different modes; and it has to be said that ActRaiser’s action mode isn’t the most compelling example of its genre. (Super Castlevania IV, released on the SNES a year later, showed how deep action games on the new system could be.) Control of the character is a bit labored, and there are really only three moves at the player’s disposal: slash, kneel and slash, and jump and slash. Still, the sequences are fun enough and provide a good excuse to listen to Koshiro’s compositions.

However, what finally sells these segments is that they actually have some meaning. In ActRaiser you are a deity working to restore a ruined world. To even have a chance at creating a peaceful civilization, you’re required to eliminate the monsters that plague the land. So as you slice your way through these creatures, you’re not just clearing a level; you’re cleansing the world. It’s remarkably satisfying from that perspective.

Still, it can be argued that the simulation, town-building mode is ActRaiser’s real backbone; and these portions continue to impress with their solid gameplay. The townspeople will build and (apparently) reproduce on their own, but they require your divine intervention to clear the land of obstacles, protect them from wandering monsters, and give them a little urban planning guidance. Occasionally some crisis will arise requiring particular attention. Some even require the player to transport the fruits or inventions of one village to another — a nice touch. While ActRaiser’s simulation segments are much more linear than, say, a game of SimCity, they keep the player constantly engaged.

Having played ActRaiser again on the Virtual Console, I can’t help but long for a sequel. However, it’d have to be a true sequel — not the action-only diversion ActRaiser 2. I’d love to see a current-day release with deeper action (perhaps borrowing heavily from God of War) and an even more intricate simulation mode. Clearing obstacles and transporting items between towns was a good start; what about making use of the town’s particular resources or the possibility of managing political relations between villages? Could towns declare war on each other? Would the player be forced to involve himself (via the action mode) in settling these conflicts? The dual-mode design makes for many interesting scenario possibilities. For now, though, I’ll just content myself with this strange and wonderful classic.

Shine on, little naked cherub. Shine on.