Originality in video games is overrated. I see no better proof of that today than Shadow of Mordor. The game shamelessly borrows its combat from the Batman: Arkham series, to give one example. But it also introduced the ânemesis system,â which is one of the most provocative and original ideas Iâve seen in a long time.
Would Shadow of Mordor be such a resounding success if it didnât copy-paste elements from the Arkham and Assassinâs Creed games quite so liberally? Maybe. But invoking well-worn motifs from similar pieces of work also grants gamers something comfortably familiar to latch onto. As I noted in my review, doing this gives Mordorâs best parts time and space to take shape, and ultimately add up to something that feels truly groundbreaking. So if the price of admission for Shadow of Mordor is playing something that feels a lot like Arkham City, then thatâs a price Iâm willing to pay. Plus: we have to consider what Mordorâs peers will do now that gamers have taken to the nemesis system so eagerlyâwhich is all the more impressive considering that they donât (completely) understand how it works yet.
Mike Bithell, an indie developer best known for his 2012 platformer Thomas Was Alone, touched on this last point recently in a smart essay encouraging other game makers to rip off Mordorâs nemesis system in the future. Like me, Bithell feels that Mordor has a lot in common with other open-world gamesâin good way:
I bloody loved this game. What it stole, it improved upon, be it ACâs openworld design rhythms, or Batmanâs combat system. Crucially, they did a brilliant job of bringing freshness to the game via their Nemesis system and adjoining mission structure. Much has been made of it, both by the marketing campaign and by players. And itâs great, but I think I like it for different reasons to most gamers.
I recommend giving the whole piece a close read, because he insightfully picks apart many aspects of Mordor in a way I donât really need to keep revisitingâconsidering how much time Iâve spent gushing about the game already. The point that stands out to me comes towards the end, when he suggests that other game developers could start to build out nemesis systems of their own, and do so cheaply and efficiently:
This [the nemesis system] is a great system. Pretty damn repeatable too, no reason that an indie game couldnât do this on a text level. Arguably many do similar (FTL comes to mind as an example of a game Iâve built similar relationships within). There will of course be a whole heap of clones of this system, directly as a way of giving NPCs character, but itâs worth thinking beyond that. If the lesson is âmake players care about locations, characters and events through randomisation, persistence, reaction to player actions and implied actions off screenâ then one can see similar stat based meta stories occurring far more diversely
Itâs one thing for me as a gamer-turned-critic to think excitedly about what future Grand Theft Auto, Assassinâs Creed, ArkhamâŚheck even Far Cry games might look like if they introduce dynamic nemesis system-like infrastructures into their open worlds. Itâs something else entirely to hear a one-man game development army say that the nemesis system isnât just a âgreatâ idea, but a âpretty damn repeatableâ one too. Something much more exciting, if you ask me. And a little odd, since it doesnât sit all that comfortably with Mordor developer Monolithâs explanation for why the nemesis system might not be soâŚrobust when it comes to the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3.
All I have to do is skip on over toDestructoid to see that some other gamers are just as interested in the idea of applying the nemesis system to a sim game as I am, to give one silly example of how excited gamers are. So let me ask you: whatâs the ideal game that youâd like to see enhanced by stealing some of Shadow of Mordorâs best ideas?
Read Bithellâs piece here
via Polygon
To contact the author of this post, write to [email protected] or find him on Twitter at @YannickLeJacq
