Design Idea Wk 6: Hardware driven game

Re: Design Idea Wk 6: Hardware driven game

A pair of sensor gloves would provide a lot of control about how you could use objects in the game compared to conventional input devices. For example, in real life you can aim and throw things in lots of different ways (overarm, underarm, adding spin etc), but in a game you can generally only grab, drop, push and pull. For example in Portal/Half Life 2 you can only lift a cube or drop it and it is difficult to place it precisely.

To take advantage of this I think it would be neat to make a superhero game. One where your character has super strength and can pick up huge things like cars and trucks using the gloves.

Design Idea wk5: Mechanic driven

Re: Design Idea wk5: Mechanic driven

My idea is for a game that involves the fluid dynamics of air instead of water. A game where you have to direct waves of butterflies to a goal on the screen, but they cannot fly through turbulence in the air. As they fly their wings create turbulence which makes it harder for the butterflies behind to reach the goal. This negative feedback mechanism makes the game harder as the player progresses towards the goal. Butterflies that hit bad turbulence are either trapped or pushed off the screen. The butterflies change colour as more reach the goal to indicate how many are remaining. They should be pretty because the player will expect them to look good because they’re butterflies.

As a reward the player gets to upgrade and weaponise their butterflies and unlock more of the story. Perhaps in later levels there will be competing butterflies that need to be killed. Upgraded butterflies may be able to fly in moderate turbulence, but weapons will be affected by turbulence and there’s a new puzzle about how to aim them. The contrast between the gentle butterflies, so easily affected by turbulence, and their burning desire to win the arms race might create an interesting dissonance.

Single story board of the butterfly game

Reflection Wk 4 – Is that all there is?

Re: Reflection Wk 4 – Is that all there is?

I agree with David Jaffe’s response that art games should not be made if they aren’t going to be fun, because games primary purpose is entertaining lots of people. If someone was to add a little more depth to a game it should not be at the expense of the fun. But to make a really fun game that also has depth would be hard to do. I think that games mirror other entertainment like TV and movies which are also made by large teams of people and a lot of things have to come together and work really well to create something fantastic.

I can see that it would be difficult to add rules for generating particular emotions in a game that are also fun. Games are harder to predict their effects because unlike any other medium they depend on the player’s interactions and the designer cannot control how the player will play the game.

Games need to be engaging for a much longer period of time than a movie or TV show, which is why they lend themselves well to action type games where the player runs around killing things. It’s not like you can fast forward over the dull bits in a game, you have to play through them to get to the next part.

Design idea wk 4 – Games for Mum

Re: Design idea wk 4 – Games for Mum

Scrabble-Rummikub Crossover

My mum doesn’t play video games, and a lot of the activities that she likes are ones that she can already do in real life, so there isn’t much point making a game about them. Also a game based on the books and TV shows she likes would have to be a video game, which she would never play. But she does play board games and card games. So I thought I’d combine her two of her favourites, Scrabble and Rummikub.

Rules

Each of the players gets some scrabble tiles at the start of the game and the rest of the tiles are shuffled and left face down in a pile. The scrabble tiles have letters and a colour, one of red, yellow, blue or black.

For each player’s turn they have to try and place their tiles out on the table, spelling words. Each word must be at least five letters long and consist of tiles of a single colour. Players can also place words like in Scrabble, vertically or horizontally to each other, using letters from the other words in the middle. Words that are at angles to each other have to be of the same colour. Players can rearrange and take the pieces from other words on the table to supplement their own new words, as long as there are still only valid words on the table.

If a player can’t play a word they can pick up a new tile. The first player to lose all their tiles wins. Each turn has a time limit of two minutes.

Tuning

If the words aren’t hard enough to make, players can put down their tiles too quickly and the game loses the puzzle. If they are too hard to make then the players will hoard their pieces and there will be too many passes, which is boring. This tends to happen in Rummikub a bit.

Why it would appeal to Mum

She likes word games like Scrabble and Boggle (and always beats me in them) and she likes puzzle games like Rummikub or gin rummy, and she really hates Monopoly. She also says she wants to try Speed Scrabble sometime. So I think I would stand a better chance at convincing her to try a game that’s similar to games that she’s already happy with.

Design Idea Wk 3 – Design a Toy

Re: Design Idea Wk 3 – Design a Toy

You are an undead warlord with an undead skeleton army. With supreme power and near immortality you can do pretty much whatever you want. You can command them to do whatever you feel like and they have to obey. The army members can be commanded in groups or addressed singly. You have full control of what they wear, where they live and what they do because they only want to do what you say. You could command them to invade countries, or create a peace loving society that has mandatory line-dancing on Tuesdays.

The player could also give their skeletons personalities and habits so that they can manipulate them into loving or hating you. It could be fun if you teach them to behave in a certain way and then then decide to force them to do stuff they do not like. This could make them begin plotting against you. You could also customise their clothes or rearrange their bones so they form different creatures and give them different behaviours, maybe just instincts.

You can change any of their attributes in-game, including their personalities and bone structure and left alone they will carry out how they have been told to behave.

This is a toy and not a game because the player can come up with any story or goals they want, it’s supposed to be like playing with a toy army that moves by itself. The fun is in the self expression available with having a complete control over the behaviours of a large group, down to it’s individual members.

Reflection Week 3 – Emergence

Re: Reflection Week 3 – Emergence

Gish

The demo for Gish had a steeper learning curve compared to other games. I spent ages trying to make Gish jump high enough to get up a ledge only to work out a way of sticking up the wall instead because the jumping was so much more difficult. I suppose that’s a sort of emergence in itself, but not really the good sort. But after you get going there’s a lot more you can do. So there’s a trade-off between shallow controls, which are easy to use, and deep controls, which give more flexibility.

It’s interesting that in David Rosen’s design tour he mentioned the annoying physics bugs in Gish, because a lot of emergence in other games results from players taking advantage of physics bugs.

—-

Constellation

I’m not sure putting random things in a game is a good thing. This could mislead the player into thinking there’s something there and then they become frustrated when they investigate further and find nothing. They might have fun investigating, but at the end there is cruel disappointment. It could also teach the player to mistrust the game and ignore things that were real clues. This is different to Easter eggs because they have been put there deliberately and the player understands what they are. If the player understands they are not important then they could add to the game, for example leaving a piece of the plot unexplained means that they could have fun speculating about what would have happened.

Design idea wk2 – Ball game

Re: Design idea wk2 – Ball game

In tuts this week we will be analysing the ball game we played in the first lecture. Your design task this week is to come up with an idea for a computer game that incorporates some of the dynamics of the ball game, but in a new setting. So your game cannot just be “multiplayer a first person shooter in which you throw coloured balls around the room”.

Justify why the dynamics you carry over make sense in your new setting.

Game Idea – Hypno Pool

–

New Setting

The game is set with a pool table with 4 different coloured holes, one in each corner. There are 4 different coloured balls that can only be sunk into their appropriate holes. The balls appear on the table and bounce in patterns, but they do not bounce high enough to go over and under each other.

–

Goal

To hit the coloured balls into their holes.

Each ball that is sunk in its hole scores a point and the ball does not return.

Justification:

Player can see how well they are doing by how many balls are left.

Player can collect high scores.

–

Challenge

If a ball hits any other object except it’s own hole then it will explode and reappear after a small time. The balls bounce in patterns where they cross in front of each other so the player needs to try and pick out when to hit them.

–

Further Mechanics

–

The player clicks a ball with the mouse the ball will then be sent in a straight line towards its hole.

Justification:

Simple input, no need to aim because each ball has only one goal and the player should be focusing on the patterns.

Eliminates balls bouncing off walls around obstacles.

Puzzle results from looking for a gap to hit the ball through and aiming would slow down getting the balls through the gaps.

–

There is a time limit that runs out if the player is not fast enough.

Justification:

Game needs some way to end.

Player can see how well they are doing by how much time is left.

Creates drama as time runs out.

–

The less balls that are left to be sunk, the faster they move in a pattern and the more difficult they are to hit as the time runs out.

Justification:

Creates a dramatic arc towards the end of the level.

–

When all of the balls are sunk, the game moves to the next level with a new pattern, there is a time extension, a score bonus and the balls move slower again.

Justification:

Game should only finish when time runs out.

Allows player to relax for a bit after the last level was becoming intense.

It motivates the player to want to sink the last balls even more.

–

Extra Mechanics (add if desired)

–

Black balls that do not have holes and cannot be hit by the player. They can be exploded by being hit by other balls and they reappear more slowly.

Justification:

Creates more challenging patterns to solve.

Creates problems where the player needs to sacrifice more balls to finish the game.

–

White balls can be burst by clicking them for a time extension.

Time extensions from hitting lots of balls in a row, maybe combo-ing ones of the same colours.

Justification:

Game is not limited by time as much.

Time extensions make the game go longer which allows for larger high scores.

Creates more drama as time runs out, but there is a hope of gaining an extension.

–

Comparison to the original ball game

–

From the original

Chaos dynamic, where there are many small colourful balls that can’t possibly be watched all at once. The patterns of coloured balls should look good and be fun to watch while still being hard to solve.

Anticipation dynamic from time limit is turned into an anticipation of when to hit the balls when they come around in the pattern.

Trying to get coloured balls into the corners of the playing field.

–

Lost from the original

Competition from playing against each other, perhaps some competition is kept from the high score system but it is not the same as directly playing against another person.

Fellowship from playing in a team, the puzzle is for one player only.

Movement from aiming and throwing the balls.

–

New

Immersion (hopefully) results from the game, just like playing tetris, when the time limit is not pressing then it should be sort of relaxing to play.

Puzzle challenge, more planning is needed due to the balls moving in patterns.

–

Why

The dynamics that are carried over from the original are there because they lend themselves more to a puzzle/strategy type game, where the original was more of a social game. The coloured balls and the four corners also keep the same look of the original game. The time limit is a good way of making the game end and producing tension as it runs out. If the game ended when the player sunk all of the balls then the game would become more boring towards the end as there are less balls to watch and the chaos dynamic is reduced. This way as the chaos reduces the tension should be rising as there are less balls, but there is also much less time.

Journal wk2 – digital vs non-digital games

Re: Journal wk2 – digital vs non-digital games

Your reflection topic for this week: What are the differences between table-top board/card/roleplaying games, computer games and sports/live action games? What does abilities and constraints does each kind offer you as a player or as a designer? How might the same game change from one medium to another?

Reflection

Table-top games are often turn based, and slow paced and there is more tension developed from chance such as rolling a die rather than from the timing from the game. They also need lots of little pieces that need to be set up and can get lost. This limits the designer to what can be put onto the table. The player can come up with their own rules, for example playing Monopoly with “home rules” where the players agree that they can have extra money at the start.

Sports are limited by the physical ability of the player and they need lots of rules that do not add to the gameplay but make sure that no one gets hurt. They are also affected by the environment and weather and they can require special grounds and equipment. Sports can also be played faster than table-top games, but they can also have gambles and strategy. This limits the designers to rules that people can physically do without hurting anyone. The players can also agree to add their own rules.

You can translate almost anything into computer games, but they may not play exactly the same. They can also have impossible things as they do not have many of the physical constraints of the other games. This gives the designer more flexibility. However there are things like limited input devices, it’s hard keep the same gameplay as a physical game with only a mouse and a keyboard. It also limits the player to whatever has been put in the game by someone else. The player cannot simply decide that they would like a particular rule better and add it in immediately.

A point made by Malcolm in the tutorial was that computer games don’t let you cheat, if it’s programmed into the game it’s allowed. There is a thing called “emergent gameplay” where players find that they can play the game in a way that it wasn’t designed to be played, eg. finding out that you can run and jump at the same time to move faster (bunny hopping) or using a rocket launcher to jump really high (rocket jumping). But I don’t think this counts as “cheating” because a good computer game should allow you to be creative with how you play it, there is no real way to break the rules in a computer game because the game consists of the rules without any of the extra things you can do in a physical game.

Links

Wikipedia article on emergent gameplay

Design Idea Wk 1: Dogma Manifesto

Re: Design Idea Wk 1: Dogma Manifesto

Dogma 2001: A Challenge to Game Designers

I agree that there is a certain amount of safety in not being too creative when making a game, you want to have an estimate of how much money you can get back for your investment. I do the same sort of things when choosing a game to buy. I don’t tend to want to spend my money on a game I might like when there is a sequel in a series I’ve already played before.

The Dogma Manifesto is a nice activity to do for brainstorming game ideas, but I do not agree that you should actually produce a game using these rules.

I completely disagree with the following:

2. The use of hardware 3D acceleration of any sort is forbidden.

Games should look good – that’s part of the fun. Hardware acceleration makes your game run faster so you can put more gameplay stuff in, spawn more items etc. Having only a 2D games also limits your gameplay options.

3. Only the following input devices are allowed: on a console machine, the controller which normally ships with it.

This is wrong too. There are good games that use different controllers, I have happy memories of playing Point Blank and Time Crisis with a light gun. Maybe this rule should be more like “the quality of gameplay should be greatly improved by adding a new controller.”

6. All cinematics, cut-scenes, and other non-interactive movies are forbidden.

I like cut scenes. What I really hate is games that force the story on you while you’re trying to do something else. Like in GTA4 where you’re in the middle of a gun fight but can’t hang up the phone or you’ll miss the story and there’s no option to pause or hear it later. Or games that have radio systems that end up with multiple characters talking at the same time. You can usually skip cut scenes if you don’t want to see them, so you should be able to skip in-game story stuff and watch it later if you want. Also in the game you don’t see the characters’ faces/emotions as clearly and it can reduce the quality of the story telling.

A Game inspired by the Dogma Manifesto

Uni Student Distraction

It is the day before a large and incredibly important assignment is due and your pet uni student becoming distracted very easily.

Game is set with a single view of the room. The uni student sits in the corner at the computer currently working. Things happen in the room to distract the uni student. The player can do anything with the objects in the room to make the distraction go away. For example the TV remote can be used to turn off the TV and then thrown at the cat that is also being distracting. Or the player can use the objects in the room to build a Rube Goldberg machine that delivers 2 minute noodles to the uni student when it gets hungry. There is a health gauge and a grade gauge which move inversely to each other. The student starts the game in good health with a credit average, the game is lost when the grade gauge falls below pass level or the student dies from poor health. The grade when the assignment is handed in is the high score.

Modes

Timed mode – player wins when uni student hands in assignment before deadline.

Unlimited mode – player needs to use the objects in the room to construct a perpetual motion machine the keeps the uni student perpetually working because assignments always feel like they take forever (may violate the laws of physics, but it’s not like the uni student bothered studying that).

Possible sequels

Uni Student Transport – See how many uni students can be packed onto the bus with no empty spaces. Gameplay is just like tetris, but with uni students squished into the shapes of the blocks.

Journal Wk 1: Why am I here?

Re: Journal Wk 1: Why are you here?

• Why are you doing this subject? What interests you about games? What kinds of games would you like to play? To make? What do you hope to learn?

I’m doing this subject because I like video games and I’d like to make a game sometime. Games are interesting because they’re fun to play and they also look like fun to make.

Some of my favourite games of all time are: Spyro 2/3, Ratchet & Clank 2/3, MediEvil, Final Fantasy 7/8/Tactics, The Sims, GTA 3/Vice City/4, Saints Row 2, InFamous, Discworld MUD. The Discworld MUD is an online text-based game that I just happen to like and it’s strangely addictive. I like a lot of sequels to games because they add new features to the gameplay that make them more fun, but the sequels to sequels can get a bit tired.

I’d like to make a sims spinoff game sometime, maybe like a sims whodunnit or a sims sitcom or something. That or an action game of some sort. In this course I hope to learn about how to make games and get some experience programming gameplay.

• Think about the question: Why do so many games involve guns?

I suppose guns are easy to control with a keyboard or game controller, all you need to do is move/cover, aim and shoot and you can add strategy to this. When you play something like a fighting game you have to control the fighters arms and legs using a just a few buttons and the detailed movement is done automatically, you can think up new moves but not be able to add them to the fight.

They’re versatile because they can be used by the characters in the game or used from vehicles, you can’t really do that with swords or other types of weapons where you need to be close to use them.

If you’re making an action game set in the present, future or recent past then guns would be the weapon of choice for the setting.