In response to an great article by simpleek, I offered my own thoughts on the recent trend of “infinite” games, and what it might mean for those with a beginning, middle, and end. Here on Virtual Bastion.
Fellow blogger simpleek recently posted an interesting and insightful article concerning “infinite” versus finite games. Or, to put it another way, games driven by play, like Fortnight, that don’t have true endings, versus games driven by stories, like Dragon Age, that have definite endings, sequels notwithstanding. As someone who’s recently taken a liking to an “infinite” game (Neverwinter) and is having trouble completing story-heavy games (Red Dead Redemption II), simpleek’s article struck a chord, one that really got me thinking about the evolution of games.
In a sense, infinite games have been with us since the beginning. Early arcade titles like Space Invaders, Pac-Man, and Centipede are, in essence, infinite games. Sure, they may have fabled end points, but reaching them doesn’t really mean you’ve completed the games. What it does mean, however, is that you’ve become the best player. While…
View original post 631 more words