Micro-Gaming

As I was actually bothering to fill in my Backloggery last night (it's still nowhere near complete), I noticed the new trend in game-making - micro-gaming. That is, to make one shorter game around an innovative mechanic, rather than a much meatier, lengthier one. Dark Void is the latest to try this with a large budget; Mirror's Edge did this earlier, and with indie game developers, it is all the rage. Yet I'm not convinced of its worth. Two games I'd like to compare in this discussion are Braid and Spelunky.


Braid probably epitomizes this movement. Critically acclaimed for its unique puzzle mechanic, the game is also fairly short. I'm not comfortable calling it a great game, though. Is the time-traveling genius? It is, and it's well-implemented. Stylistically and musically the game is well-done, too. Still, I can't help but think that the game would be much better if it actually had reasonably decent controls. Jumping is awfully short, and enemy detection is very, very sensitive. If you were capable of Mario-style jumps, or if the enemies had more forgivable hitboxes, it would be a lot more pleasant to play. As it stands, though, I cannot even count the amount of times that I've been stuck between two rabbits and a missile with literally no way to proceed, short of shifting back a significant length of time and trying again, again, and again because with the limited range of movement there is literally no way to dodge.


So, is Braid an excellent game for using such an innovative idea? Or, is it a mediocre game because it fails to implement this idea well into a larger one? As a whole the mechanics suffer, and a lengthier experience would be frustrating and impossible because so much of the game is wholly unenjoyable - yet by playing to only its strengths, it manages to squeak by. Bringing this into the macro sense, does the micro-gaming trend show an increased ability in game design, or an actually weakening one, where developers have less talent to make a game with rounded, enjoyable mechanics that stand the test of time and prolonged playing?


This is why I'm using Spelunky as a counter-example. I cannot fathom the amount of hours I have spent playing Spelunky. The game is simply perfect, from all angles. There are few games that I could give a ten two, but Spelunky is absolutely one of them. Beyond standing the test of repeated gameplay, Spelunky gains from it. The more it is played, the better, the more addictive and genius it becomes. Its primary feature would be its random levels, if we were to take one and give it parity to Braid's time-traveling. Spelunky's innovative feature forms the rest of the game, but it does not define it - there is more than random levels, it is fun to play.


The recent wave of "innovation" does have me puzzling. We had innovation in older times, but it was often of a less dramatic sort, and, more importantly, was utilized by the game. Super Mario 3's suits didn't define the game, but they certainly enhanced it - it represented a more holistic approach.


Maybe I'm being unfair to Braid by not judging it as a puzzle game, but rather as a platformer; nevertheless, that is precisely my point. Braid only works as a puzzle game because the developers were incapable of expanding its core mechanic into something more significant. While the innovation was there, and the implementation of one specific aspect was superb, its length was its only saving grace. Are micro-games short because of their narrowly focused experience? I argue that their narrow focus is the product of the developers' lack of experience and ability.


Half-Life 2 is five years old, but it is one game that made me think about this. I just started playing it, and while HL2 really brings nothing particularly innovative to the table (besides a now boring physics engine), it's a superb experience; the mechanics are so fantastic that it can fill a lengthy time. Micro-games tend to be weak on many counts. I respect indie developers for their work - for people with limited capital and experience, they do a great job, but for the majority, their efforts cannot rival larger companies. What they tend to have in innovation, they lack in polish. This is why people like Derek Yu deserve so much credit - independent developers who create truly excellent experiences that compete on a one-on-one level with major releases are few and far between.


Not that I'm hating on all micro-games. Braid is still a good experience, and Portal is one of the best things that I have ever played. It is the trend that I am cautioning against. We should be wary to place so much praise on it, because while we get good ideas, they become less well-implemented as part of a holistic experience.