Nicked from Tony's post on Social Footprint
. To be fair, it's not the statement itself, but the larger picture I think it refers to.
Straight up, larger social foot-print means more of a barrier to entry. A higher barrier to entry means less people will enter. Less people willing/able to play a game with me means less gaming, and that sucks.
There is something disturbing in this and I can't quite put my finger to it. Where has this need of intensity
come from? Why should the "fun" and "cool" and "conflict" be served right here, right now, in next twenty minutes - and if not, things are "boring" or "not fun"? It sounds a lot like hyperventilation just waiting to happen.
Is it about player engagement? Does the barrier of entry suddenly rise without the intensity? Or does it rise if the intensity is not kept up? Why?
And why the need for games which can be played in small amount of time? Are people in such a hurry? Is the some reason why they don't want or can't commit for longer time? Longer playing sessions or number of sessions? Is there some kind of need to experience this thing, right now, and then move on to the next thing?
Is this somehow tied to the culture at large? People seem to have less time, these days. The movies are getting more intense, with faster cutting, high-adrenaline stuff thrown at the spectators, very Quentin Tarantino-style. Is this a design focus for games? Fast in, experience a lot of stuff in short amount of time, fast out?
I can buy the entry drug-approach; selling roleplaying to people who have not done it before and convincing them that it's an intresting thing to do, engaging them quickly. I can also buy some of the time allocation-problems and need for games that can be played in short time.
But I don't really understand the intensity and that almost all games seem to be designed to be played in relatively short time. And why it looks like almost everyone in the independent design circles seem to be aiming for the same goals?
I'm trying not to point a finger. It feels more like a bigger, cultural thing, than really just a roleplaying game design focus. Do they market two-hole golf courses for people under 50 and the full 18-hole golf courses only for pensioners?Edit: Written in hurry.