In my previous post I copped a lot of criticism for saying that just because something was simple, it wasn't necessarily dumb. So I decided to delve into gaming history and pull out some examples of games with amazingly simple controls which were anything but "easy" or "dumb".

But then I got distracted by a cockroach.

How many gamers here have actually played the game Bad Mojo, or the "Redux" version which I am now enjoying? Not many I bet. I remember overlooking it myself back in 1996 and indeed, until the Redux edition was released and I found it more to my tastes. It was a critics darling, but never sold well. Let's face it, the box art wasn't especially appealing and the actual concept sounds pretty damn odd.

For those not in the know, you can read the 1996 review of the game. You play as a cockroach trying to regain your humanity following an odd and magical event. The game opens with some really quite well produced and acted FMV, which continues to develop the really quite intricate and by turns sad, intriguing and heart-warming story throughout the game.

But in this game you had but 4 controls. No "interact" button, no jump button, no action button, no fire button or anything like that. You could simply crawl forward or back and turn left or right.

And I got to thinking - could a game like this get made today?

We see the effects of the commercialisation of the game industry everywhere - from the cookie-cutter approach to design, through to the issues with publishers throwing a whammy whenever someone tells them the truth (more on that later).

So how would a game with a really different concept, some genuinely creepy design and a mature story get published today? It may turn up on PSN or XBLA - but this is a bit more high concept and not nearly as family friendly as Flow or Undertow. Valve would almost certainly host it on Steam for the PC - but what about getting the money to develop in the first place?

The issues involved with obtaining financing for games have been well documented by people more informed than I, but I cannot help but imagine a modern version of Bad Mojo ending up being financed by JoWood who then demand that it be an MMO featuring a variety of insects armed with guns fighting Nazi Zombie Bugbears in Afghanistan. And then cancelling it a few weeks prior to release.

A game about a cockroach crawling around a dingy apartment block certainly is never going to knock Call of Duty 4 of the best seller list, no matter how good the reviews are. But if you have the chance to get a copy of Bad Mojo - do so, and play it. It is one of the oft-overlooked experiences of a time when games could afford to innovate.

And finally, in the wake of yet another departure from Gamespot (rats, sinking and ship are three words that come to mind) and Ubisoft's temper tantrum at Ziff Davis media I need to get something off my chest.

Attention: Activision, EA, Eidos, Ubisoft et al.

Re: Your BS

Turns out that occassionally you make shoddy games. Sometimes even bad games. And it doesn't matter how much money you throw at marketing, at least some people are going to be willing to call it like it is. So don't shoot the kid who has the balls to say: "The Emperor is naked!", instead take that marketing money and shove it back into development and make sure that your games don't suck.

In conclusion: Don't be petulant children.

Yours sincerely,

The world.