Jonathan Blow: Game design: the medium is the message

Jonathan Blow (Braid and Indie Fund) recently gave an amazing presentation on the evolution of Television, and he made an interesting parallel to the evolution of games: [VIDEO]

If anyone wants to see a good example of why you can't just toggle off IAP you should check out Jonathan Blow's talk about "Free to Play" games and how the business model deeply corrupts the game through the metaphor of bad 70's TV shows vs HBO: [VIDEO] The solution isn't to toggle IAP off in the game, it's the ability to toggle it off in the App Store. The difficulty is some IAP is legitimate and some is not. For example, Carcassonne has an IAP to upgrade the game into a slightly different game with additional tiles. It's only when the IAP is part of the core game mechanic that is troubling. I think categorising them and relegating them to a particular category like we do with FPS, RPG, RTS, etc.. would help.

Jonathan Blow -creator of Braid and working on The Witness- also has a very nice critique on the problems with games that are designed around micro-payments. The whole talk is interesting, but he starts discussing the issues around the 20 minute mark: [VIDEO]

I've followed Jonathan Blow for a while. He has a reputation for being condescending. If you follow him a Twitter then you might come to the same conclusion. But he has given some amazing talks. [VIDEO] <-compares games to televison [LINK] [LINK] [LINK]

>It is almost certain you have or are playing a game I have produced or worked on in a major capacity. Maybe for a few minutes. I like to think I'm good at analysing game mechanics, as a long time gamer and sometimes amateur game designer. So I mostly avoid F2P games. The tactics are repulsive to my tastes, and I can smell them from a mile away. When there's a choice between struggling to meet a challenge by improving my skill, or paying my way though, my inclination is to take a 3rd choice: stop playing this and do something else. So I much prefer paying up front for a game. I'm old-school that way. Maybe this option is viable, as a 'serious' gaming hobbyist, only temporarily. But right now, the best games (in my genres of choice) are sold on the traditional purchase model. They are PC and console games. Generally, I don't like 'endless' games; I prefer a game to have an ending: I play it, experience it 'fully', finish it, then move on to something else. (But... just to undermine everything I've stated above, I am playing Pac Man 256. It has good gamefeel. I'll play it until I get all the powerups, perhaps. No interest in high-scores...) tl;dr: IMO F2P games are inferior instances of the artform. Be cool like me and play superior PC and console games. Also, Jonathan Blow has some interesting points to make on how the payment form of games (and entertainment in general) affects their structure/quality. This is the one where he talks about addictive mobile Skinner box games [x

While I disagree with the word dumb and find "ignorant" more suitable, your Candy Crush comparison is bad. Jonathan Blow nailed it in this presentation: [VIDEO]

There's an interesting talk about that by Jonathan Blow, using the common phrase 'The Medium is the Message'. The eventual topic is mobile game design but he starts off with TV and how commercial and other constraints influence show (and game) design. [VIDEO]