16
Jul
![Wiltshire asked the panel about the differences in function between buildings in games, which are generally there to provide mood or direction for the player, and real-life buildings, which have more utilitarian purposes. Antonov was unsure of the distinction. “The city’s a theatre and a spectacle in itself,” he opined. “I don’t think the differences are so great; we shouldn’t be snobbish about real architecture’s function. It’s there for public fun. After all, you see it first and use it second.” Olcayto agreed that, as with many real-life developments, buildings in games are primarily about creating and framing an atmosphere. The difference is that architecture in games has “a strange dream logic that stems from it being explicitly built for psychological mood creation to serve the narrative.” Antonov pointed out that there are three different types of places that exist in architecture: Capitals, Villages and Colonies. “It’s important to understand which one you’re working on and why when building a game world,” he advised. “Capitals are hub icons of success and prosperity. Villages are often less structured, more freeform and communicate a different ambiance, while colonies have usually been designed in a strict, formatted way.” Contrast Paris, he suggested, with its experiential journey from monument to monument with Marrakesh, which is organic and very easy to get disorientated and lost in. Knowing what you are aiming for, and how that relates to the game’s narrative theme is crucial. Wiltshire concluded by challenging attendees to consider the way both video games and architecture are germinated with a grand idea and a sprinkle of available technology before the practicalities take over. “It’s time to stop thinking so much about the cosmetic similarities between games and film,” he argued, “and look to architecture instead.”
[Develop Brighton 2009 panel on “Architecture and Games”]
Gamasutra | Simon Parkin](http://25.media.tumblr.com/4TTqdMWvvpz7r4i2tgPPamzTo1_400.jpg)
Wiltshire asked the panel about the differences in function between buildings in games, which are generally there to provide mood or direction for the player, and real-life buildings, which have more utilitarian purposes.
Antonov was unsure of the distinction. “The city’s a theatre and a spectacle in itself,” he opined. “I don’t think the differences are so great; we shouldn’t be snobbish about real architecture’s function. It’s there for public fun. After all, you see it first and use it second.”
Olcayto agreed that, as with many real-life developments, buildings in games are primarily about creating and framing an atmosphere. The difference is that architecture in games has “a strange dream logic that stems from it being explicitly built for psychological mood creation to serve the narrative.”
Antonov pointed out that there are three different types of places that exist in architecture: Capitals, Villages and Colonies. “It’s important to understand which one you’re working on and why when building a game world,” he advised.
“Capitals are hub icons of success and prosperity. Villages are often less structured, more freeform and communicate a different ambiance, while colonies have usually been designed in a strict, formatted way.”
Contrast Paris, he suggested, with its experiential journey from monument to monument with Marrakesh, which is organic and very easy to get disorientated and lost in. Knowing what you are aiming for, and how that relates to the game’s narrative theme is crucial.
Wiltshire concluded by challenging attendees to consider the way both video games and architecture are germinated with a grand idea and a sprinkle of available technology before the practicalities take over. “It’s time to stop thinking so much about the cosmetic similarities between games and film,” he argued, “and look to architecture instead.”
[Develop Brighton 2009 panel on “Architecture and Games”]
Gamasutra | Simon Parkin
