An abbreviated history of gaming, Rovio edition
Wired’s Ryan Rigney on Rovio. This is a very strange article, pretty much suggesting that Rovio has spent the last few years essentially iterating on its own version of Crush the Castle (which is fair enough), but seemingly ignoring the dozens of games the company made prior to Angry Birds. (What, you don’t fondly remember Sumea Ski Jump?) And then the company gets praise for Bad Piggies, which
doesn’t feel like anything else on the market
Bad Piggies is a good game, and it certainly avoids much of the randomness that I found utterly infuriating with Angry Birds after the initial excitement of flinging avians at ramshackle buildings wore off. But it’s not like build-your-own physics puzzlers are something new.
This isn’t a criticism of Rovio, however. For once, I actually have some faith in the company, purely on the basis that it has done something different to what it has been milking for years now. Also, the execution of Rovio’s new game is solid and impressive. But it is curious to see a lot of writers these days offering very abbreviated takes on the games industry.
So a spin-off featuring recycled graphics and someone else’s idea (Banjo Kazooie Nuts & Bolts) is completely original?
The truth is, Rovio is all about marketing. It would have made good ground in the early 1980s when cloning arcade games was a way of life for many successful publishers. Some would argue history is repeating itself. Those that actually know their video game history, which does not seem to include Ryan Rigney.
Only some of the randomness too.
Unfortunately Bad Piggies, despite being otherwise pretty brilliant commits the single biggest crime a physics puzzler can. You can do the same thing twice with two different outcomes.
Pick any level where you don’t need to control the vehicle, run it 5 times different things will happen, often affecting the number of stars you get.