New Wine in New Skins - Game Sound Technology and Player Interaction: Concepts and Developments - page 387

There is no “real” set where the action takes place
and that could serve as point of orientation for
establishing verisimilitude (Grimshaw, 2007). It
has been noted that games constitute a “cinematic
realism” rather than an “objective” one (Collins,
2008, p. 134), re-creating a sense of immersion
and believability within a fantasy world by means
already established in film.
This leads to the other dominating ideal of aes-
thetics in current computer game sound discourse
which is achieving a more “filmic” soundtrack.
Despite essential (theoretical) differences (I will
discuss these in the last section in more detail) the
discourse about the state of the art and the possible
future of mainstream game sound design often
resorts to “Hollywood” and film sound design as a
point of reference. In many cases, the production
and technology of games and film are also very
similar (for example, Collins, 2008; Grimshaw,
2007). On Gamasutra, Rob Bridgett (2006) argues
that game sound has progressed “both towards and
away from it's [sic] antecedent of film sound” (p.
5). While the movement away from film sound is
mainly concerned with a need to produce event-
based, interactive sound, the movement towards
film sound has strong aesthetic implications.
However, not everybody is satisfied with this
situation. A cursory glance at articles within rel-
evant online and offline game magazines reveals
that, due to the arrival of the so-called “Next
Generation” consoles (Microsoft XBox 360, Sony
Playstation 3, and, to a certain extent because of
technical limitations, the Nintendo Wii), a small
but significant number of publications are dealing
with aesthetic challenges and the vast unexplored
potential lurking in this still relatively new me-
dium. Inspired by Randy Thom's (1999) article
“Designing a Movie for Sound”, Bridgett (2007a)
calls for designing games for sound: A game's
design should be created with sound in mind,
from the very beginning, to allow the soundtrack
to fulfil its potential. Some authors express their
frustration with an aesthetic “dead end”. Peter
Drescher (2006a) states on his blog:

Here we have these outrageously powerful desktop
machines, easily producing many more channels
of audio than were available to $100,000 mixing
consoles just a few years ago -- and THIS is the
best we can come up with!? tired, recycled 50's
gladiator movie soundtracks? the Matrix again
and again? heavy metal guitar cliche after cliche
... ach! my ears!! gimme the volume control ...

In searching for innovative game sound con-
cepts, I shall further develop upon the following
two areas: technology that could drive innova-
tion, and innovation that eventually could drive
technology or just change the way we see (or
hear!) things.

technological Opportunities

Interactive Mixing and Digital
Signal Processing

The sophistication of game sound has been greatly
facilitated by several technological advances in the
last 10-15 years, both in hardware (DSP chips on
soundcards, affordable multichannel output or 3D
virtualization technologies for loudspeakers and
headphones, distribution on DVDs, and massive
increase of memory) and in software technologies
(standardized, dynamic audio APIs like OpenAL,
powerful sound design middleware like FMOD
or Wwise). Two important techniques that have
emerged are adaptive (or interactive) mixing and
DSP. In some of the more recent postings in the
audio thread at Gamasutra.com, Rob Bridgett
reflects on his experiences mixing titles like
Scarface: The World Is Yours (Vivendi, 2006), and
LittleBigPlanet (Sony, 2008). He puts forward the
idea of interactive mixing as a key strategy for
advancing game sound and proposes a combina-
tion of both film standards (such as grouping,
auxiliary channels, automation including mixer
snapshots and standardization) with game-specific
mixing features. Such features include fall-off
management, passive (for instance, auto-ducking)