Does anyone else think Pet Simulators are underrated?

[dedalusdedalus]

Sorry about the length, guys. I'm an English Writing Major, so it can be kind of difficult to go back to more relaxed styles of writing. That probably shows in the way I tend to write on these boards. I'll try and trim it down a bit -- it's an interesting topic, I'd like to make it easier for discussion on the actual subject matter to take place instead of just how verbose I can be.

For what it's worth, I read your entire post. I took English as one of my majors, and the cardinal rule of writing is to know your audience's expectations. Obviously, a post on an internet forum --even one as intelligent as Racketboy -- does not require a thesis statement, supporting paragraphs, and a conclusion. Keep your sentences punchy!

I agree with how humans have an innate desire to create things in their image. The best example of this is how people created god in their own image.

More to the point regarding virtual pets though, the strongest emotional connection I've ever felt to a video game character is in Pokemon Red/Blue (I shit you not). I felt responsible for the well-being of my pokemon team -- leveling them, teaching them moves, taking them to the Pokecenter when they were hurt. It cut into me when my Charmander fainted in the Viridian Forest because I was pushing it too hard to level up for Brock, thinking I could get in just one last fight before retreating to the Poke-center.

[Erik_Twice]

I don't think your post is too long, it's just five paragraphs. I wouldn't trim anything.

I think that they can be good games. Heck, Nintendogs was good. It may not have any interesting mechanics but it was very polished and fun to play for a while.


BTW, the Petz series that flood every console right now was made by the same guys as Ballz and had Ballzy animalz.

[J T]

I predict that the future will be just like the Harlan Ellison short story "I Have No Mouth and I Must Scream," except that the malevolent A.I. entity that destroys humanity and tortures the protagonists will be a sentient virtual pet instead of a supercomputer programmed to wage atomic war.

When Nintendogs Attack!

[noiseredux]

I read the whole OP, because it was interesting and thoughtful. I've not put much time into life sims of any sort really. Seaman is on my want-list, though. Generally, I think any genre can be interesting if approached the right way.

BTW, OriginalName, have you thought about keeping a blog?

[J T]

On the main point, I've never played much of a true sim pet game. I tried to play Creatures, but I couldn't figure out what the hell I was supposed to do, nor could I be bothered to take the time to do it.

There are some pets that I have really enjoyed in games though. I love the blob in A Boy and His Blob, Agro the horse from Shadow of the Colossus, and Huey the dog from Haunting Ground.

A Boy and His Blob
The blob felt like a childhood companion... like a digital realization of an imaginary friend. That game has a wondeful child-like quality to it because the blob has a lot of the abilities that a boy would want and would imagine himself to have when playing.

Shadow of the Colossus
Agro was a really interesting video game horse because you didn't really have complete control over him. His A.I. would take over. Sometimes this would help you and sometimes it would make him difficult to tame. Compare this to other games like Ocarina of Time where the horse is basically just an extension of the player and completely bends to your will, as if you were riding a vehicle. It was important for Shadow of the Colossus that the horse feel like a distinct entity from the player because he was your only companion on that long and lonely journey. By the end, you feel a sort of bond with the creature and feel bad when he is injured.

Haunting Ground
Huey, the dog in Haunting Ground, is another example of a pet that you don't have control over. In this game it is also important that Huey be a separate entity from the player, but this is because it adds to the horror element of the game. Fiona (the main character) is weak and relies on Huey to protect her, but Huey is not a weapon that the player can wield and control. You give him commands and you hope to God that he helps you out. The AI even works on behavioral reinforcement principles wherein you can train him to better obey your commands over time by providing reinforcement when he does what you want and punishment when he disobeys. You just have to hope that this training holds when you encounter an enemy because Fiona's only talents are running away and hiding, and she's not even very good at either.

[noiseredux]

Shadow of the Colossus
Agro was a really interesting video game horse because you didn't really have complete control over him. His A.I. would take over. Sometimes this would help you and sometimes it would make him difficult to tame. Compare this to other games like Ocarina of Time where the horse is basically just an extension of the player and completely bends to your will, as if you were riding a vehicle. It was important for Shadow of the Colossus that the horse feel like a distinct entity from the player because he was your only companion on that long and lonely journey. By the end, you feel a sort of bond with the creature and feel bad when he is injured.

agreed. Such a brilliant game.

[Key-Glyph]

I do think they're underrated, because I'm aware that whether or not they're "even real games" is considered debatable by some people. I dislike the tendency to label games lacking in clear linear objectives as "not real games." Dogz 4 is just as much a video game as SimCity is -- and SimCity was met with much of the same skepticism, before it was deemed revolutionary.

I love what you said about narrative, Original_Name. One of the beauties of simulators is that players extend the stories beyond the scope of the games without even realizing it. I love the Petz series, and I thought of everything I observed and acted on in context of a narrative. I wrote notes about my Dogz' personalities in their profiles, created couples that seemed "right" for one another, considered reasons why certain siblings didn't get along, and constructed complicated family trees. There's a reason why Petz fansites offering "Adoptionz" frowned on proliferating copies of an individual Pet, would often require interested players to complete applications with questions like "In what ways will you be a good parent?" on them, and made owners promise they'd turn in their unwanted Petz files instead of just deleting them. There was a real impulse to suspend one's disbelief and blur the line between machine and living creature as much as possible. It was srs bsns!

But the Tamagotchi was fascinating because it traveled with you. Dogz came out to play only after you opened the computer program, making you dependent on a middleman, your CPU. But the Tamagotchi was your companion, period. You could project all sorts of things on this creature because it was "experiencing" your day with you just as much as it was always on your mind and shaping your day. Its simple background (electronic alien who needs nurturing, living in a portable nest) was enough to explain the possibility of a pet in your pocket. In recent years Tamagotchi seem to be getting away from that feeling, though, making the egg more like a portal into a different dimension (Tama Town) than a physical home to the creatures themselves. You can watch a Tamagotchi in the Connection line go off to school or work, for example, which completely ruins the illusion the original toy was striving for.

Anyway. I love these games/toys because I love those sorts of illusions. They're even more enjoyable now that I'm an adult and can appreciate how they're achieved.