community

When I think of the couple games to whom I owe the most of my wasted youth, Dirt Bike 3D (Released 2000ish) is high in the mix (download here Mac or PC).

Dirt Bike 3D brought three great things to the table: Uber-simplicity, a dynamic mouse control that was both rare and innovative (and controversial) for its kind, and a strong track editor.


Many of these old games would qualify today as “casual games,” and it’s such a misnomer. Jon Radoff of GamerDNA had some concise thoughts I couldn’t agree with more: engagement and depth of gameplay are not at all correlated to the size or length of the game. Dirt Bike 3D was a great example of a simple game that delivered a very deep engagement. The 2nd and 3rd points are my speculation at the reason why:

The mouse control did something that we’ve been talking about around the office a fair bit lately. It allowed you to understand the controls very quickly (up/down=throttle, right/left=turning), but gave you a superfine tolerance and thus a constant avenue of improvement over time. I spent so many hours running the same tracks because each lap was a new attempt to nail that jump, or shave a few seconds off my time by cutting a corner at just the right speed. There weren’t a million variables to concern myself with, no powerups or other game additives, it was just one thing - controlling the fluid bike against the rigid track. That said, a lot of people really hated the mouse control, and declared so on the forums. No doubt it took a few tries to master the basics, but I think over time it served the player a lot more, and the feedback was overwhelmingly positive.

The other thing was the track editor, which greatly extended the replay value of the game. It had the same mark of simplicity as the controls - a testament to its creator Brad Quick. With these few variables in hand you could totally change the dynamic of the game, from a conservative casual game, to an intense skill game, to a relaxed big-air bonanza. After spending too much time in each subcategory I would tire, but just switching amongst them offered a refresh to the game.

I think it was also aided by the fact that I didn’t have the full version for some time. When I finally did unlock it, the “rules” that had been set for me in the demo maps (small jumps, tricky turns) were suddenly blown wide open, and with the track editor it was like I was given the keys to the theme park. Which sort-of illuminates why good sequels don’t bother me so much. Certainly a rehashing of the same material is nothing to write home about (see Call of Duty 1-5) - really its just an expansion pack - but a sequel that changes the angle of the game, allows you to play from a different perspective (say instead of playing the Yeti in Extreme Sledding, you could be the polar bear?) - completely changes the “rules” and allows you to peek into your own imagination - that’s a sequel worth making.

Update > Just read: Chris Kohler covers a similar notion of the intrinsic reward to mixing up in-game roles & perspectives over at Wired Game | Life