PixelVixen707

The boys at Introversion sound upset. They released this nice indie title named Multiwinia, and nobody’s playing it. This after the awards and hype for Darwinia and DEFCON: how dare the industry blow them off? How much cred must they stack before everything they produce gets instant fawning love?

Introversion screwed up bad. I know it’s vital to be indie-friendly nowadays, to give as much love to the little guys as the AAA-titles and publically traded publishers. But this was October, and we’ve had just a few 20-40 hour masterpieces to contend with. I’ve seen just a third of the multi-layered apocalyptia of Fallout 3. And you’ve got … stick figures?

Now that I’ve gotten that rant out of the way, I have something vitally important to tell you all: Multiwinia is a hoot! Play it now!

Here’s my perspective. I slept on Introversion’s other games. And strategy games, especially real-time strategy, are not my favorite. Real-time micromanagement drives me batty: can’t all the little men just figure out what to do themselves? And when they act on their own, why do they always screw up? I hate the genre so profoundly that I don’t even know what people do in a game like Command & Conquer 3. Can you shoot anything? There’s lots of mining? It sounds dire.

But Introversion’s games are simpler and speedier. Multiwinia moves at a fast clip: you can finish a game during the load screen on Far Cry 2. in ten minutes, your little stick figures have to swarm the map, capture the spawn points and overwhelm the enemy, maybe working in some other objectives like moving a statue or capturing a hill, or maybe just moving in formation and shooting to kill. Simple strategies instantly suggest themselves, leading to shrieky digital mayhem as the coolest death cries you’ve ever heard pierce your ear drums. This instant gratification gives way to additional complications: crate drop dangerous, sometimes game-changing accessories, like nuclear bombs, swarms of ants, or squads of supertroopers.  I haven’t decided if the crates are spurious and disruptive, or fun and fair, but every time we’re deadlocked they manage to resolve it.

And now the inevitable tie to what’s going on tonight: it’s Election Night.  I’m typing this in front of the TV.  I’ve kept a casual eye on this election - I work at a newspaper, after all - and I’ll admit, I got suckered into the thrills as the trends broke for Clinton or Obama, as the Palin pick disrupted the election and as cool-hand Obama pulled the race back his way.  When those first red swing states veered to McCain tonight around 7:40?  I felt a pit in my gut.  But at the top of the hour it looks like Hopey has a lock.

So forgive me another noob moment of real-time strategy gaming, but I see what people like about this: the macro-level view.  The fact that you can’t control every little soldier and every single firefight, but you can watch the wide view, the progress of many columns of soldiers, and the moment when you catch that crucial objective and the tide goes your way.   Or not.  Sometimes I get beaten back, a few crates go the wrong way - an infection?  Why me? - and those sudden, Paulson bailout-sized setbacks add up until suddenly I’m futzing around with a losing position and wondering why I bother to finish.

But when I win?  I get farther and farther and hold on as the enemy looks for an opening, a way to turn that tide back - and they don’t.  My victories have not been safe or total, but they’ve all been satisfying, a mighty heave to the end.  It’s not a victory for me: it’s a victory for the mobs, and for the map.  My map.  I will shape those little green maniacs in my own image.

And so will Barack Obama.  Congratulations Mr. President!  Now quit making fun of our video games.