Why I (heart) (asterisk) Warriors
This morning I checked out the official site for Dynasty Warriors 6 (or DW5 in Japan)… and, after watching the video, I admit it. I’m excited. I’ve bought every game (including both Samurai Warriors) since I first gave the series a try at Dynasty Warriors 4 and now have Orochi Warriors on pre-order. The question I have to pose however is… why?
The Warriors series rarely gets good reviews anymore. Gametab reports a series high average score of about 80% (For DW 3 and 4) and an average score of 63% for the most recent Samurai Warriors 2. Nonetheless, my PS2 is reporting 120+ hours played on Samurai Warriors 2… There must be a disconnect! Despite poor scores, despite “playing the same game before”, I’m itching for it. I’m about ready to stage a cunning raid upon Pat’s office even as I write this. The programmers and designers between there and will never know what hit them!
So… um… WTF?
Before I go one I should quickly note why I find The Warriors series so compelling. Certainly there’s the shear awesomeness of being presented with a battlefield of hundreds (or thousands) of enemies and being able to say, “Bring it on.” But it’s more than that: It’s important to note that it’s not you vs. a thousand… it’s you as the hero of an army. The battle itself is important… The little guys are important (although typically in an “OMG! Don’t do that!” way). Some of the other games in the genre have missed this point (Devil Kings in particular). Yes, it’s cool to mow through hundreds and hundreds of guys. But what takes it to the next level is not those kills (which, aside from enemy officers, are all but pointless) but rather the immensely dramatic effect you’re having on the battle. I won’t drag this out by going into the intricacies of the genre more specifically and where Samurai Warrirors 2 and Dynsaty Warriors 5 beat out Devil Kings and Dynasty Warriors: Gundam (that could be an entire rather long article into itself). But I think it’s worth mentioning here why I think these games have value and a lasting fun factor.
Regardless the simple fact is that I love these games and reviewers hate them. So what’s the magic bullet? What makes me willing… nay, excited about the opportunity of plunking down another 40-60 bucks each year for this content? And plenty of other people too. Keep in mind that the Warriors series has sold millions of copies worldwide (this is largely in Japan but it has regularly moved a few hundred thousand copies in the US with each iteration (breaking half a mil with DW4) which is nothing to laugh at).
We know people are buying it. So what’s the reviewers’ beef? Well, after taking a look at the reviews, it’s obvious what the biggest concern coming up again and again is: the reviewers have played it before. The only changes are subtle ones and extra content (more characters and new levels/scenarios). In grade school terms this means that the sin of being “the same thing” has brought a game worthy of a solid “B” grade down to a low “D” (and even an “F” to some reviewers).
Thus the unforgivable sin is a lack of sweeping innovation.
Or is it? Remember, we’re talking about a company that posted 223 million dollars in revenue in 2005. Samurai Warriors 2 sold in excess of 325,000 copies in Japan week one. Simply put, both from my perspective enjoyment and from the simple goal of maintaining the bottom line the reviewers I believe are missing the point.
Take football, baseball, chess, go, or any other game that’s been around for years and they’re all the same. People have seen the Super Bowl before. Hell, it’s rarely even a great example of football, but it’s also the highest rated television of the year typically. Now, I’m not exactly a huge consumerist but it seems to me that there is a point where one needs to get out of the ivory tower and hit the streets. If only new things are valid entertainment than that leaves us in a difficult spot. Does that mean the ‘08 Football season is going to suck if they don’t radically change the formula with new four ball play, simultaneous, real-time offense and defense, and cheerleader driven attack vehicles? While I’m not about to argue that the Warriors series is anywhere near the level of polished gaming of our professional sports, I’d hope that the ludicrousness of Four Ball Simultaneous Football will at least make some alarm bells go off.
Frankly all of the biggest titles of the last few years are “more of the same”. GTA: San Andreas? Check. World of Warcraft? Check. Halo? Check. The simple lesson is that there is nothing wrong with continuing to attempt to polish and tweak the same experience. And if people are willing to pay for it than you’re doing it right! Does this mean all we should do is iterate? Definitely not. We need Katamari Damacy and Okami just as much as we need Madden. Yes, I’m even justifying Madden here (ignoring the monopoly license agreement and those issues for the moment). The point is that neither path is intrinsically better. Both are very good. Innovation brings us Thief and Deus Ex. Iteration and polish bring us GTA and Halo. Look at it another way: Even if Four Ball Simultaneous Football is awesome does that make the current football bad?
It’s really that simple. I love the * Warriors series. Because it does something I find fun really well. That’s really all there is to it. That’s all there has to be to it. And I’m OK with that.
And we should all be OK with that. There’s absolutely nothing intrinsically wrong with iterative games and development. Iteration and Innovation need to live hand in hand. Just as even EA is coming to realize that new IP is good it’s equally important for developers and reviewers to avoid being elitist and realize that old IP is good too.