Play Meter
Issue: 1985 June 01 - Vol 11 Num 10 - Page 72
(CUnunueu;rum pugt: .JUJ
When operators started discounting tokens, they allowed
players to burn out on the games quicker.
want, whenever they want. There is no denial, and that's a
big part of marketing.
PLAY METER: Recently weve heard comments from
certain members of the manufacturing establishment
where they have pronounced in the mass media that the
coin-operated amusement industry will never again
achieve its past greatness. From a design point of view,
would you agree with that?
KIRK: That's a helluva poor attitude, a self-serving atti-
tude by manufacturing administrators. It's an alibi so
they don't have to explain their own inability to produce
good games. You can alibi anything by saying the busi-
ness is over, and that way you don't look so bad. Or you
can do something about it.
You want my opinion. 111 tell you. The potential for
games is greater, much greater than we had even during
the video game boom, but it's going to have to come from
creative people. It's not going to come from administra-
tors. The coin-op amusement industry is no longer going
to be an administrative business. Manufacturers have to
be controlled by creative people; and, when they are,
you're going to see the next boom in games. The types of
games may be entirely different. For instance, in the
video game business-and I've presented this proposition
over a period of five or six years but still haven't met
anyone who believed strongly enough in it to put up
money on it-in the video game business, you're going to
see the video game by remote location.
PLAY METER: Could you explain that?
KIRK: We're getting back to the social aspect of games
again, of people playing against people, rather than
against machines . Let's say, for instance, we set up a
video game on a network where you go in and buy time at
a terminal. And that terminal connects in with other
terminals, be they across town, across the state, or across
the nation. But the games are all tied in. And you can
jump into the game as one of many people. So, instead of
buying, say, three ships for a quarter, you're buying time
on the machine . And you become a participant in this
battle in the game, whether it's a war in outer space or
what have you. You buy the right to be on the screen with
all those other people. And this is a whole different aspect
because you have to learn the personalities and ten-
dencies of the individual players involved in this game .
And maybe you have to combine with other forces that
are on your side and become part of a team. And you can
work collectively to beat a common enemy.
That's a whole different aspect of games which I
think has a tremendous future, but the cost of setting it up
is enormous. But I see the day when you11 be able to sit
down and rent time at the terminal and be tied in on a
massive network that could have literally hundreds of
players involved. And still it could have the integrity and
a lot of fun for the individual player. In fact, such a game,
with protentially hundreds of other players, may have
more appeal because it generates a mass hysteria .
Something to realize is the next generation of games
will emphasize the decision making process, not just with
physical dexterity, but with strategy and intelligence .
That's where it's at, with video games, at least.
Actually, what's missing from a lot of these games
right now is they don't have that good time feeling.
They're just a test of manual dexterity. And weve got to
remember what we're selling is entertainment, not a test.
Also, all the games that are out there are trying to satisfy
an existing audience. I want to create games that not only
satisfy the existing audience but also bring in new players.
Instead of bringing in new players like Pac-Man did, we
merely went from the old game to the new game and
didn't bring in any new people. Only a few games ever
achieved that. Pac-Man, Dragon's Lair, but the problem
was everybody else just copied what they were doing, and
they burned it out, instead of coming up with something
different.
PLAY METER: And what about pin balls?
KIRK: That's my "Next Evolution in Pinball." Pinball
has a tremendous future for a number of reasons that
may not seem so obvious. One, you're not likely to have a
home version of the game ; so you're not likely to burn out
on your home Atari pinball game. There's a social struc-
ture to the game . People can rotate in and out with a four-
player game, for example . It's not as intense as a video
game which demands all your attention. It's more like a
pool game or darts in that respect . It can be played more
casually. You can even walk away from it for a few
mintues and come back to it, and that's important for
pinball's future.
•
The next generation of games will emphasize
strategy and intelligence.
72
PLAY METER. June 1, 1985
When operators started discounting tokens, they allowed
players to burn out on the games quicker.
want, whenever they want. There is no denial, and that's a
big part of marketing.
PLAY METER: Recently weve heard comments from
certain members of the manufacturing establishment
where they have pronounced in the mass media that the
coin-operated amusement industry will never again
achieve its past greatness. From a design point of view,
would you agree with that?
KIRK: That's a helluva poor attitude, a self-serving atti-
tude by manufacturing administrators. It's an alibi so
they don't have to explain their own inability to produce
good games. You can alibi anything by saying the busi-
ness is over, and that way you don't look so bad. Or you
can do something about it.
You want my opinion. 111 tell you. The potential for
games is greater, much greater than we had even during
the video game boom, but it's going to have to come from
creative people. It's not going to come from administra-
tors. The coin-op amusement industry is no longer going
to be an administrative business. Manufacturers have to
be controlled by creative people; and, when they are,
you're going to see the next boom in games. The types of
games may be entirely different. For instance, in the
video game business-and I've presented this proposition
over a period of five or six years but still haven't met
anyone who believed strongly enough in it to put up
money on it-in the video game business, you're going to
see the video game by remote location.
PLAY METER: Could you explain that?
KIRK: We're getting back to the social aspect of games
again, of people playing against people, rather than
against machines . Let's say, for instance, we set up a
video game on a network where you go in and buy time at
a terminal. And that terminal connects in with other
terminals, be they across town, across the state, or across
the nation. But the games are all tied in. And you can
jump into the game as one of many people. So, instead of
buying, say, three ships for a quarter, you're buying time
on the machine . And you become a participant in this
battle in the game, whether it's a war in outer space or
what have you. You buy the right to be on the screen with
all those other people. And this is a whole different aspect
because you have to learn the personalities and ten-
dencies of the individual players involved in this game .
And maybe you have to combine with other forces that
are on your side and become part of a team. And you can
work collectively to beat a common enemy.
That's a whole different aspect of games which I
think has a tremendous future, but the cost of setting it up
is enormous. But I see the day when you11 be able to sit
down and rent time at the terminal and be tied in on a
massive network that could have literally hundreds of
players involved. And still it could have the integrity and
a lot of fun for the individual player. In fact, such a game,
with protentially hundreds of other players, may have
more appeal because it generates a mass hysteria .
Something to realize is the next generation of games
will emphasize the decision making process, not just with
physical dexterity, but with strategy and intelligence .
That's where it's at, with video games, at least.
Actually, what's missing from a lot of these games
right now is they don't have that good time feeling.
They're just a test of manual dexterity. And weve got to
remember what we're selling is entertainment, not a test.
Also, all the games that are out there are trying to satisfy
an existing audience. I want to create games that not only
satisfy the existing audience but also bring in new players.
Instead of bringing in new players like Pac-Man did, we
merely went from the old game to the new game and
didn't bring in any new people. Only a few games ever
achieved that. Pac-Man, Dragon's Lair, but the problem
was everybody else just copied what they were doing, and
they burned it out, instead of coming up with something
different.
PLAY METER: And what about pin balls?
KIRK: That's my "Next Evolution in Pinball." Pinball
has a tremendous future for a number of reasons that
may not seem so obvious. One, you're not likely to have a
home version of the game ; so you're not likely to burn out
on your home Atari pinball game. There's a social struc-
ture to the game . People can rotate in and out with a four-
player game, for example . It's not as intense as a video
game which demands all your attention. It's more like a
pool game or darts in that respect . It can be played more
casually. You can even walk away from it for a few
mintues and come back to it, and that's important for
pinball's future.
•
The next generation of games will emphasize
strategy and intelligence.
72
PLAY METER. June 1, 1985
Future scanning projects are planned by the International Arcade Museum Library (IAML).