Wednesday, May 09, 2007

The 3rd place.

What is it about the number three that just seems to entrance designers so? Is there some magic trilogy thing going on (actually, it seems quite common in books and movies to have trilogies too - what's that all about?)

So much stuff seems to be set up in threes, once you start looking for it - Just Cause has missions where you have to destroy three targets, or plant three satellite beacons. Most games have three difficulty levels. Rainbow Six Vegas had three people in a team. There are three modern Prince of Persia games. Command and Conquer Three has three factions in it. The Playstation Three. The Xbox Three-sixty (yeah okay, bit tenuous that one).

How many times have other designers put threes into their games? How many times have they caught themselves doing it and changed their design. The answer to all of these questions is most likely not three, thankfully.

To all designers out there who read this update (probably just me, then) I urge you - join with me and make the number three history in games from now on.

Besides, four is way more next-gen, baby.


Anonymous said...

The cars in most racing games have four wheels, all of this year's EA sports titles are divisible by four (i.e. 2008), the horses in Barbie Horse Adventures had four legs, there have been four Silent Hill games. FOUR IS FOR LOSERS, LOSER!

JC Barnett said...

Oh, the first post on your blog that made me sigh with actual disagreement. Shame!

It's amazing how many numbers 3 there are in games when you start looking for number 3s. You'll be amazed how many 2s there are if you look for 2s. Or 4s. Or 5. Or the letter A. Or the colour blue.

I always noticed how games always use controllers. Go on, think of a console game. I bet you it uses a controller. Designers can't think of anything better? Also, have you noticed how many games come in boxes these days?

Bez said...

1 establishes precedent.
2 establishes pattern.
3+ re-inforce the pattern.