Play, Create, Share (It's not coming back.)

[GENOSAD]

The tagline "Play, Create, Share" came with MediaMolecule's 2008 game LittleBigPlanet. I won't bother explaining the ingenuity and design philosophy behind it because you already know it. You've already lived through it, and you know that the sequel, along with Modnation Racers, solidified this design philosophy in gaming. Anything I say relating to these two games would just be parroting what's already been said.
But personally, I think that attributing this trend of games based on user-generated content to Sony is ignorant to the trend of creativity that was going on at the time when these games were released. I'm saying this off of three glasses of wine and some sips of bourbon, so I'm not likely to make sense, but if you'll stick with me you might see the point I'm trying to make. In addition to Sony's flagship PS3 games, Nintendo had also released Flipnote at the time, which of course was the blood of Flipnote Hatena and the endless stream of animations that came from it. In fact, the DS as a console was made for creativity, as was evident in the immature Pictochat scribblings we sent back and forth between each other as kids. In this sense, gaming in the late 2000s/early 2010s had creativity as a value, whether it was intentional or not. If the hardware wasn't made for the sake of creativity like the DS, then software would almost always have some kind of tool for creativity; whether it was an elaborate level designer or a simple character customizer.
This value, I believe, isn't held by gaming nowadays, at least not on console. Level designers are a thing of the past, and if we're being honest with ourselves, the only reason character customization still exists is because of the appeal of power fantasies where the player inserts themselves into the protagonist's shoes. What better way to do that than making a main character out of the player themself? No, creative tools are a PC-only thing, and even then they always require some sort of knowledge of modding and programming. The creative potential of a game's modding scene is always going to be limited by the requirements of programming knowledge and the difficulty of modding for any sort of game. Starbound comes to mind, as it's a game with hundreds of mods yet is an incredibly difficult game to modify. The only reason we have mods for it at all is because of its popularity and how stark the base game actually is. But when a game has some sort of creative software built into it, the amount of user-made content rises and leads to a more widespread value of creativity.
I feel like I'm about to run into a "quality vs. quantity" argument when I say that, so let me elaborate on why I think the amount of user-made content is important: It acts as a stepping stool towards more complex creative projects. The ease of making a platforming level in LittleBigPlanet could open a kid up to game design, which might lead to a more complex understanding of game design or push that kid towards learning programming or other computer-based fields of study. And of course, creativity is one of humanity's greatest strengths. What society was born without someone's creative adaptations of others' words and works? What story was told without creating an intriguing premise?
Hence my personal gripe with le society: Creativity is lost, and that's evident from the lack of popular games with creative tools. Thanks for coming to the TED Talk; I know you and I learned absolutely nothing from it, but at least I got to share what was on my mind.

 

[Ross_Я]

Being drunk and talking good talk, you are now my dude, Genosad. Signed and certified.

 

[Ross_Я]

What society was born without someone's creative adaptations of others' words and works?

Actually, I feel like I can add a bit more to this particular sentence. Thing is - and that is truly horrifying - this part of creativity is quite actively opposed.
Copyrights. They are everywhere. And they do not let you do creative adaptations of others' works, even if you are not planning to profit from it anyhow. Cases in point? Oh, plenty. My favorite turntablism definitely died out not in the last part because of copyright laws getting stronger with the advance of the internet. Or, if you want games - every gamer is at least vaguely aware of Nintendo's reputation. Or how about Games Workshop's infamous ban on the fan movie Damnatus: The Enemy Within? Or its more recent crackdown on pretty much every form of fan works?
And it's really happening everywhere. I'm not sure why it even happens. Bethesda Softworks was once the studio that encouraged modding the most and provided excellent tools. They ended up being the first studio that tried to monetize mods and the tools they provide are mostly there so players can fix the bugs they didn't bother to fix.
And the way Bethesda tried to monetize mods also speaks volumes about people running the business nowadays: they have no idea what modding community is, what it always was. In a sense, it is a complete communism: everyone is free to borrow any assets he feels to. To attempt and insert any kind of copyright into a culture the very point of which from day one is to introduce changes to copyrighted works is absurd. And it has been proven. For the time being, at least.
I mean, pretty much every big corporation frowns upon modders nowadays. It is no secret - it's all in the news. And everyone tries to insert some kind of protection into its files. Which is kind of useless, for multiple reasons. But all those encryptions are still there.
Modding and creativity are not simply dying out - they are being exterminated with a purpose.

Here are several news articles, just a few from the top of my head:
www.techdirt.com/2022/07/12/take-twos-war-on-its-own-modding-community-continues-harming-take-two/
www.kotaku.com/take-two-interactive-removes-more-gta-mods-using-dmca-s-1848053219
www.gameranx.com/updates/id/479932/article/capcom-says-they-define-all-mods-as-cheats/
www.ign.com/articles/capcom-expresses-concern-over-mods-that-are-offensive-to-public-order-and-morals

 

[GENOSAD]

Modding and creativity are not simply dying out - they are being exterminated with a purpose.

If only we knew it would only get worse...

 

[Ross_Я]

There's at least one more point underneath this whole thing which I want to underline. Thing is, modding video games promotes technical knowledge out of all things. To mod video games properly, you got to know specific software, some code, headers, hex, all that jazz. And when you do know that thing, you can read a video game inside out. And when you can read the video game inside out, you can rather easily stand against the most predatory tactics the modern video game publishers have.
Thing is, with modding knowledge you can, for example, give a try in unlocking the DLCs. Because, if you haven't known, a lot of DLCs nowadays are in the code of the game from day one. All you buy for your money is a small key that unlocks the access. In this case, modding knowledge is your lockpick. Rather often even platform-exclusive DLCs are present in the files of the game - no one really bothers to cut out some PS3 exclusive skin out of your PC version.
Pre-order DLCs, Kickstarter exclusives, whatever else - it is all there in the code. Chances for your lootboxes? Right there. Premium currency or whatever? Hack away!
One of my favorite personal experiences is the Bulletstorm original release, where the access to the pre-order DLC, after the file has been decrypted, has been located in a simple text file, with the code being something along the lines of:

//Do not change this to 1, this is for pre-orders
UnlockPreOrderDLC = 0;

It is really that simple and they charge money for it. Of course they do not want people to know about things being like that.
Pretty sure this is not the whole reason. In fact, this particular reason might not be the most significant one, but this thing is there and it surely plays its role when it comes to video games.

 

[Punp]

Spicy magic hot takes:

Games like Super Mario Maker existed for several reasons.

• Makes an easier pathway for modders to make content for the game but restrict it to Nintendo's IP and platform
• Makes free, relatively endless content for the game which they monetise with a sale of the game, hardware, plus a subscription model
• Removes the will of young developers to make competing or IP-breeching versions of their IP/market space
• Establishes Nintendo as the center of game development and increases the Nintendo-exclusive hiring pool

I'd also like to argue against @Ross_Я's post. The people who complain about companies "being greedy" and not sharing their IP fundamentally lack the seed of creativity required to just make something new. I don't know why anyone would contribute to the popularity or lore of any major IP knowing in advance that the business will profit from it and then punish you for it.

Oh noooo [established IP] won't let me steal their carefully created and paid-for character designs to make my horse cock mod waaah they're so selfish.

Give me a break.

While I appreciate that modders can always make games better, repair bugs and elongate the longevity of a game, there really is big amounts of entitlement and abused spouse syndrome going around.

 

[Ross_Я]

Oh noooo [established IP] won't let me steal their carefully created and paid-for character designs to make my horse cock mod waaah they're so selfish.

Yes. Bite it. [established IP] should be free for everyone to use. It's another problem if you want to use it for horse cock mods and that is the problem that should be dealt with separately - it doesn't anyhow change the original notion.
It's because of the [established IP] we see things like GW trying to put ™ on a "space marine". It's because of that Damnatus: The Enemy Within got blocked from official release after being all but done. It's because of that Nintendo moved in to ban almost 400 fan games at once.

I'd also like to argue against @Ross_Я's post. The people who complain about companies "being greedy" and not sharing their IP fundamentally lack the seed of creativity required to just make something new. I don't know why anyone would contribute to the popularity or lore of any major IP knowing in advance that the business will profit from it and then punish you for it.

I'd like to argue that it is next to impossible to create anything totally new in this day and age to begin with. Space marines are space marines, whether you call them spartans, stormtroopers or whatever else - all you can do is to change the cosmetics, but create new ideas? Huge doubt. If you can - you're one of the wonder people that I can count by the fingers of my one hand. For the average creator though, all that's left is to bend and mix the things that already were before him. Needless to say, some of the mixes and personal takes can also be creative and stylish as fuck - there's no shame in using the ideas that came before you. This is how humanity got where it is now - by building upon the foundation that the humans before laid down for the next generation.
The seed of creativity? You need a fucking forest of creativity to create unique things in 2024. But that forest won't grow if you would not let the seeds grow. And that's what you are purposing to do.
Next, there are tons of romhacks and fanfics out there. Sure, there is more than enough garbage, but some of those are creative, and some of the creative ones even get due recognition. Heck, I'm not even sure how using others' IP anyhow hinders your own creativity. It's like saying that if you are not building your own car, you suck at driving. If you are able to write coherent plots and create interesting gameplay loops, it doesn't matter much whose characters and universes you use.
And if you are not making anything new - you are just making a remake. Now that's lacking creativity. Guess who makes remakes, by the way. The people who hold those IPs in the first place, the greedy talentless hacks.
Why anyone would contribute to the popularity of lore of any major IP? Well, there are many reasons.
First of all, maybe people like something. That's crazy, I know, but those guys in Germany - they liked Warhammer 40000, and so they made a whole fan movie.
There might be more practical reasons. Like, maybe it's vice versa. Maybe one does not want to contribute to the popularity of a major IP, but instead want to have some cool idea and they want to make it more visible by sucking up to the major IP. It is arguably easier to promote a fanfic about Darth Vader or something instead of trying to push your own character. Dirty trick, sure, but yet another possible reason still.
And, after all, some things might be just iconic. Like, why would I want to use first gen Dodge Viper specifically somewhere? Is it because I cannot design a car of my own? No, it's because first gen Viper is a 90's revolution, the only perfect combo of sports and muscle aside from Corvette with a unique V10 engine. When people want to use something iconic - they use it one way or another. In case of cars, we just get cars without badges, and so we get tons of Cobras and Venoms and Black Mamabas that are Vipers in everything but the name and the badge, so what is the point either way if it is still there and everyone understands what it is.

I could continue, but I'd rather point out that I am the man who complains about companies being greedy and not sharing their IP. Do I fundamentally lack the seed of crativity?

 

[Punp]

[snip]

Thanks, I was thinking on this today and recognised my reasoning was unfair - there are certainly reasons to reuse an IP. I think you've pinpointed that the reason anyone uses an IP is because it's a shortcut. It's essentially building very specific tropes. In language someone might say "he's like darth vader" or "that car is like a dodge viper". It's a shorter path to just say it is those things. Certainly consumers of x things will know they will want to consume more of x thing and so it shortcuts that route of acquisition.

That said, it being effective doesn't make it somehow more creative. Sure it's easier to buy a car than build one, but if everyone just bought cars instead of building them we'd still be driving the first car.

Innovation is about recombining elements of things to make a statement - certainly nothing is made from scratch, but neither are they direct copies of whatever IP came before. i.e. a Japanese office environment combined with cute animals and 2D animation makes Agretsuko. Samurai, space and cowboy tropes with a theme of rebellion makes Starwars. Both of these have mixes of ingredients which both show and hide their inspiration but aren't direct clones.

Don't get me started on fan fiction. The short version is that all the hard work of creating characters and setting has already been done and the fan artist just has to dollhouse them together.

Do I fundamentally lack the seed of creativity?

Yes. You can edit and appreciate art but you lack that fundamental spark to make something new or original because you assume nothing can be original (or convoluted enough to seem original). Your paragraphs above specifically puts you into the group of people that see creativity as some communal gift that was accidentally distributed to a select few which you somehow have a right to despite making none of the investment of time, money or effort into the original thing.

I will concede, however, that there is some element of creativity in writing a story based on an established story. Like you say, there's narrative craft and presentation, the art and rendering in the case of the 40k fan works. It's not without merit or effort - but it is lacking that fundamental seed of creativity. To argue otherwise would be to suggest that a chef who buys food from McDonalds and presents it nicely on a plate "cooked" the meal.

Thanks for responding so thoroughly btw. I've needed a good debate for a long time and I appreciate the effort you've put in to respond.

 

[Ross_Я]

That said, it being effective doesn't make it somehow more creative. Sure it's easier to buy a car than build one, but if everyone just bought cars instead of building them we'd still be driving the first car.

That's why that particular example was underlined in the "use of an icon" section - when you want to use something iconic, you aim to do just that, not to create something new. The said usage on its own might be improtant part of a bigger creative work, to the point that there's was movie straight away named Harley Davidson And The Marlboro Man.

Thanks for responding so thoroughly btw. I've needed a good debate for a long time and I appreciate the effort you've put in to respond.

You are welcome, but I do not see it continuing anyhow, since our positions are fundamentally different. You see that "Samurai, space and cowboy tropes with a theme of rebellion makes Star Wars" and I see that Star Wars is nothing but samurais and cowboys in space with a theme of rebellion.
I mean, if you see that as creativity, why the hell in several lines later you say "You can edit and appreciate art but you lack that fundamental spark to make something new or original"? I do just that - I edit art and mix it up. As everyone fucking else does.
As a matter of fact, I should count as a creative person by your merits and uncreative by my own. Which is not quite true, as I also - and that has been mentioned - find that editing and mixing can be creative. It's just that "being creative" doesn't equal "being original", even though it somehow does in your worldview, it seems, and that's where the fundamental difference lies.

To argue otherwise would be to suggest that a chef who buys food from McDonalds and presents it nicely on a plate "cooked" the meal.

Now that's obviously an incorrect comparison. You are not using a ghost writer - you are writing your own story. You just use other's characters and setting. Essentially, you buy salad, cucmbers, onions and mayo, probably couple of plates as well, but you still have to mix that all up to make your salad or whatever.

The short version is that all the hard work of creating characters and setting has already been done and the fan artist just has to dollhouse them together.

This is closer. The problem is that in our case, building the dollhouse is the most important part. Surely, you are provided a kit to build your car, but you still have to build it all in order to drive it - you can't just sit on those 4 wheels with a steering wheels in your hand.
And no matter how funky that engine is - it might be the best engine out there, the most efficient internal combustion mechanism ever devised - it won't fucking do anything unless you connect a fuel pump and an air intake.
So putting that car/dollhouse together without screwing it up and making it all work is essential, and it does require skill. Otherwise that pump won't pump fuel and that car won't run. And the dollhouse - you will just sit on it before you'll ever finish, since you are such a clumsy ass.
You feel that? There are people out there, you know, they engage in "worldbuilding" - so fucking what? Even the best world is just a world without a good story to make it shine.

Your paragraphs above specifically puts you into the group of people that see creativity as some communal gift that was accidentally distributed to a select few which you somehow have a right to despite making none of the investment of time, money or effort into the original thing.

...wow. Where did that even came from?
Somebody spilled your coffee or something?

 

[Punp]

[snip]

The discussion isn't a foregone conclusion. Afterall I make games for a hardware owned by Nintendo. I trade on the good name of that hardware, so I'm hardly "mixing my own paint" so to speak.

Perhaps there is a divide between "originality" and "creativity". When I say "seed of creativity" I mean the basis of a creative project, an "original idea".

It's possible to be creative within someone else's sandbox, and indeed restrictions breed creativity. Making a new starwars story while remaining a starwars story is in itself a challenge. Every sequel struggles to reimagine itself while retaining the soul of the original and few succeed.

The threshold of remixing vs creation is the granularity by which you mix the parts. Putting jam on bread is less original than making a jam pudding because it requires better integration, understanding of the subject and a reimagining of the base ingredients in a more complicated and integrated whole.

...wow. Where did that even came from?
Somebody spilled your coffee or something?

Sorry, I edited this several times to make it less harsh but I don't think it came across well. Put it down to clumsy wording, it wasn't meant to be an attack.

 

[Punp]

More food for thought - if anyone can adapt an IP and make things with it, does it dilute the value and meaning of that IP?

What makes Mario and Luigi more attractive than Arthurian Legend or Leprechauns?

 

[Punp]

@Ross_Я I'd like to make a retraction - I was thinking about what we said today and remixes (specifically, Vaporwave remixes) rehash and reframe original materials to make new things all the time, and those are inherently valuable and creative endeavours.

If not original, they are at least a new window on a subject.

 

[vulonkaaz]

creativity ain't dead, kids just aren't playing mario maker anymore, instead they make movies using gacha life and weird ipad video editing apps

 

[Ross_Я]

@Ross_Я I'd like to make a retraction - I was thinking about what we said today and remixes (specifically, Vaporwave remixes) rehash and reframe original materials to make new things all the time, and those are inherently valuable and creative endeavours.

If not original, they are at least a new window on a subject.

This makes me think, actually, that I somehow never remembered to mention the turntablism in this discussion.
Original DJs are probably the pinnacle of... creativity without originality. On the surface, all they did was taking the records of the other people, cutting them up and mixing them, adding some needle scratching and beat juggling along the way.
But from another point of view, it was a radically new way to create music to start with, completely different from usual composition, where you have to think with samples instead of notes in order to create a new melody.
Some people are absolute masters of the genre, it is impossible to call guys like QBert or Shadow uncreative. They are monsters of their area. Organ Donor uses Giorgio Moroder's Tears for the best part of it, but how cool Organ Donor is!
Daft Punk were in DJ Hero for a reason as well. Their use of classic funk tracks is impeccable. That duo took music from the 1970's and made it sound like it's straight from 2270's...

More food for thought - if anyone can adapt an IP and make things with it, does it dilute the value and meaning of that IP?

Now, this is a harder question. From my personal viewpoint - of course not. Clinging to the example above, I discovered a lot of music through samples used in various mixtapes. Daft Punk opened Breakwater for me, and I enjoy both Organ Donor and Tears, since both are great pieces on their own.
But here comes the fact, which, I think, I have the right to state: I like to dig for the roots, to see what was in the beginning, which samples were used and what references were made. And then I'm able to evaluate said samples and references independently from the art pieces that were built with said references and samples. Warhammer is probably another prime example here, since GW pretty much gives the rights to make the game to said "anyone" - and, frankly, in this particular case, "anyones" are people who keep this IP going. In fact, perhaps GW realises that without outside ideas that are borderline fan projects, they will stagnate and go out of business, and so they give their IP to most unexpectable teams on the scene.
It's a two-edged sword though, I definitely can easily see the situation where the extended use of the IP dilutes the original; it definitely can happen as well.

 

[punisheddead]

Modding and creativity are not simply dying out - they are being exterminated with a purpose.

This is kind of my take as well, creativity is suppressed. Just look and see what communities do and create when they're given the tools and time.

Corpos just don't want a passionate kid or community to make a fool of the corpo and eat in the profits something that has been done time and time again.

There's also the more sinister reason, that many games are now a statistically analyzed and highly predetermined product. What the fuck does that mean? Well basically corpos want to mold your experience into one that will end up with you spending the most money. It's why most games are live service, you have absolutely no control, you can only play by the rules and pay up like the good pay piggy you are. Mods would break this mould and so would meaningful customization.

It's just not as profitable, simple as. Also modding has always dependent on the good will of the company and it's completely in their rights to just not let you do it. It's shitty sure but it is what it is.

So just support games and devs that have a thriving modding community and make creative experiences with plenty of customization, they're still out there.

if anyone can adapt an IP and make things with it, does it dilute the value and meaning of that IP?

IMO it really depends on the "adaptation". A good adaptation will be it's own thing and deliver a unique experience that isn't just trying to replicate the original. A poor copy does replicate in most cases and poorly. Now what is a good adaptation and what is just a poor copy is subjective. Kinda like principle U.S fair use actually.

instead they make movies using gacha life and weird ipad video editing apps

I'd argue that's expressing creativity too, in it's own and often very, very cringy way. They're kids though, what can one realistically expect?

 

[vulonkaaz]

I'd argue that's expressing creativity too, in it's own and often very, very cringy way. They're kids though, what can one realistically expect?

never said otherwise it truly impressive what those kids manage to make just using their mom's phone fr, sometimes I watch that stuff been a long while since I last watched a gacha movie tho

---

---

are there people who even own game consoles anymore ? it feels like there's just no games on those anymore and they became so filled with pointless restrictions (example: ps4 can literally not play audio CDs), online features and mandatory subscriptions that they became actually less user friendly less noob friendly than computers at this point

it's not just the "play create share" that is gone, it's the whole ass "play" as well, console gaming just fell off, maybe gaming as a whole is falling off as well, whatever its not a big deal honestly, hopefully we'll just start to go outside again

 

[Ross_Я]

are there people who even own game consoles anymore ? it feels like there's just no games on those anymore and they became so filled with pointless restrictions (example: ps4 can literally not play audio CDs), online features and mandatory subscriptions that they became actually less user friendly less noob friendly than computers at this point

PS4 can be jailbroken, at least. There's really no reason to buy a console with OFW though, so even if people get those, I really don't know why.

whatever its not a big deal honestly, hopefully we'll just start to go outside again

Yeah, sitting around a fire in a cave, drawing paintings on walls with our fingers. Surely would be great. Returning to stone age is not a big deal.
I'm exaggerating - obviously, I think - but death of a medium is quite a big deal.
Also, it would be nice to point out one more thing.

creativity ain't dead, kids just aren't playing mario maker anymore, instead they make movies using gacha life and weird ipad video editing apps

Well, I don't know what kids are doing with their iPads, but this thread was about creativity regarding video games, and that part of creativity is quite dead.

 

[Punp]

Well, I don't know what kids are doing with their iPads, but this thread was about creativity regarding video games, and that part of creativity is quite dead.

There's nothing more creative than watching kids play. Apparently the way young children interact with games is not as the game intended - it's things like walking the avatar around and taking them to the shops or having a little dialogue about 'grandma' as they drive around in GTA, or making up characters in the character generator. It really is a fascinating topic of unlicensed play without rules.

 

[Allen]

You really notice how unlimited the LBP potential is when there are still ongoing YouTube channels created solely for it, uploading gameplays and in-game movie levels from LBP 2 and 3. You could get an endless amount of experiences from the game: serious shooting and horror levels or casual "bomb"/"shark" survival levels. I couldn't get tired of it for years.

I wish these types of games would return. Flipnote was another drug for me back then, couldn't believe it didn't came on the 3Ds as well.

 

[Punp]

You really notice how unlimited the LBP potential is when there are still ongoing YouTube channels created solely for it, uploading gameplays and in-game movie levels from LBP 2 and 3. You could get an endless amount of experiences from the game: serious shooting and horror levels or casual "bomb"/"shark" survival levels. I couldn't get tired of it for years.

I wish these types of games would return. Flipnote was another drug for me back then, couldn't believe it didn't came on the 3Ds as well.

Apparently flipnote was banned because people were sending explicit pics to kids over wireless comms. I really miss those connectivity options and little drawing packages.

I got a Nokia 3410 a few years back for the drawing software on it and it didn't disappoint. You used to be able to compose music and pictures and send them to friends.