To me play is any experience that is outside required activities. Play is when one is not working towards a concrete goal, like in a job, but can let go. It is an experience which anyone can partake and that has no real rules. Play is a means to reach the end point of enjoyment or fun. Children and adults play to have fun, to get away from the responsibilities of real life if only for a little bit. When ‘playing games,’ there are times I feel like I am not really playing. For example, repeating a part of God of War on the highest difficulty trying to complete it doesn’t feel like ‘playing,’ but more like work. When gaming, playing the game should be fun, not repetitive grinding.
I feel that my definition of play is closest to that of Sutton-Smith. I feel that play is a broad topic filled with many categories. The classification aspect, through the seven rhetorics, rather that a strict focus on the ‘rules’ or ‘qualifications’ of play appeals to me.
Sutton-Smith’s work varies from Huizinga’s in that it classifies different types of play. He freely admits that there can be profit from play, such as gambling. Bateson’s piece is focused on a duality of sorts. Play can be one thing but can also be the thing it is not. The actions of play can, if misinterpreted, can be construed as, say fighting.
Costikyan’s article brought up some great points about play. A game needs a goal or an objective. It also needs resources or tokens. This falls closely in line with what I believe a game needs. I prefer games with a strong narrative or story, so my goal is advancing the story, or seeing how the character’s ‘life’ plays out. This is one of the problems I find with sandbox games, even though there is a story to progress, often times I wander around aimlessly with no goal in mind.
Garfield’s article brought up great points about the continuity of a game series. You do not want to fracture the player base, but you do want to grow or expand the game. Additionally you need some body to form rules to take out some of the ‘unbeatable’ cards.
Questions:
1) How do you ensure that your game is played rather than being collected, or does that matter to you?
2) When releasing expansions, how do you go about bring enough subtle changes to keep the game interesting but not destroying what the established player base is used to?
3) When designing a card game do you need a check for every ‘element,’ or is it possible to keep a game balanced even if one ‘element,’ is seemingly strong against everything?
Naughty Dog is one of the most talented developers, and also one of my favorites. I decided to play through 3 of their PlayStation classics, Crash 2, Crash Warped, and Crash Team Racing. It is evident from the moment I started replaying Crash 2 that a lot of though goes into the level designs. There is obviously a path straight to the goal, but the player looking to go further can find certain risky jumps to cut down their level times. Adding more to the challenge are paths you can access only if you do not die in the level.
Moving on to Warped, the risk-reward element becomes more apparent. Since all levels have a time trial, one can either attempt them after getting the run upgrade, or have a greater challenge by attempting them without it. I opted for the latter option. When attempting this, again the level design is a prefect blend of tricky platforming and great enemy placement. The enemy placement prevents you from just breezing through levels and keeps the player on their feet. Unfortunately there seems to be a big emphasis on vehicles, which is nice for a change of pace, but tends to go overboard.
Crash Team Racing seems to be a bit on the easy, letting me down. Again the courses are well created, offering some challenging obstacles, and shortcuts for the more experienced players. Even though I enjoy the game, it is too easy in single player. I do enjoy the fact that drifting is not automated, like Mario Kart Wii for example. Perhaps I should take the idea from today’s article, and change the rules for the game. Not using drifting should level the playing field, but would take most skill out of the game, causing me to rely on items too much.
The readings on rules got me thinking about the ways me and my friends change the rules of games we play. Some are stupid and don’t work while others are crazy and shouldn’t work. One of the best was turning Twisted Metal into a sniping game. I do not remember how it started, but it ended with the use of long range weapons fired from hiding points. Normally Twisted Metal is thought of as fast paced, aggressive vehicular combat, but this slowed the game down. It turned from a twitch game to a game of precise calculations and relatively in-depth planning. The results were fun, and added some longevity to that play session. Another fun rule change, although this one quickly deteriorated, was in LBP. In a four player game we tried to creatively kill the other players, like grabbing them over a long jump and falling to our deaths, and solo running the level. As can be imagined, this rule change was for the worse. Eventually the last player would voluntarily kill their sackboy to end the game. In the end rule changes add to games, but the wrong changes can kill the fun.
Being inspired by a fellow classmate, I want to use this as a chance to praise some of the developers that care about their fans. One of the best examples of altruistic behavior from a developer is Criterion Games, creator of the Burnout Franchise. With the rise of consoles both with internal hdds and internet capabilities, downloadable content has increased in popularity this generation. Although some use this as a means of nickle and diming the customer-base, Criterion used this as an avenue to extend the life of their game, Burnout Paradise, considerably. Although paid content packs were released, a number of free packs, including a bike pack, were released to an eagerly awaiting fan base. This is one of the few examples of a developer supporting their product and their fans. Fans got an extended game and Criterion got some great press.
Game theory attempted to explain the basic strategies of a 2 player one period game with symmetric information. Due to von Neumman’s discovery of the minimax theorem, it is possible to determine the outcome of such a game. Minimaxing is the assumption that a rational self-interested player will minimize their maximum loss, or minimax. The cake cutting example demonstrates this, it is best for the cutter to cut the cake closest to the center. This minimax theory can be extended to games of more than 2 players by finding the dominant strategy and breaking games into 2 or 3 person games until a solution is found. This can be applied to games or real world situations.
The article neglected a few things I was hoping a game theory article would include. I understand that this is introductory in nature, but only including vN-M and ignoring Nash seems like an oversight. Since the article focuses on minimaxing, I can understand, but when talking about n player games of n terms with asymmetric information, other advances in the field should have been included. The prisoner’s dilemma would help explaining self-interested actions and how payoffs can influence collusion. When talking about strategies, tit-for-tat and trigger situations are not mentioned, although for one period games they are less important.
The way I view interactivity affecting story is through user choices. The best analogy is a choose your own adventure book, and the best games at this are usually RPGs and interactive adventure games like Indigo Prophecy or Heavy Rain. When a user can influence the story, there is an added incentive to play the game and see what happens. Interactivity can add playability to games as users want to see what decisions can influence their outcome. Story driven games do not have to be interactive though, as Metal Gear Solid and Max Payne offer no choices to the user. They follow a linear path, while interactive stories resemble a tree. How many branches there are is limited by the developer or time constraints.
As laid out by Mateas, three elements are key to interaction; agency, immersion, and transformation. With games, immersion is incredible important. Immersion will drive a play to keep playing to advance the narrative. Transformation seems similar to variety and perspectives. The central theme though is agency. Agency is knowing ones actions affect the game world, again very important in games. Although the more agency is maximized, the more problems are presented. There can never be complete agency, due to constraints on developers. Complete agency would lead to full immersion and probably transformation. Games can also lack agency, like Candyland, which has a predetermined outcome. The right level of agency seems to be a blend of reasonable choices that a rational person can choose. As an example, in racing games it would be rational to assume I can race backwards crashing into other racers, but not get out of my car and enter another.
My favorite part of this essay was the need for uncertainty and inevitability in a game. The two are needed in combination for any game to be both playable and complete. Uncertainty is simply not knowing the outcome, while inevitability is knowing the game will end. Both are needed, I will not usually play a game that I could not conceivable win or that will never terminate. While both are needed, it is never really elaborated on the interplay between the two. Does inevitability only arise after uncertainty has been eliminated? Can the two interact before a game session has finished? Personally I do not think the two concepts can mingle, as they are conflicting concepts. It is hard for me to reconcile the two ideas. Also sandbox games may question the need for inevitability in games. GTA may have a story mode, but some players ignore that only to raise hell in the virtual world. Since the world will carry on infinitely, can there be an ending? With respect to dramatic tension, yes GTA does have an inevitable ending, but in general, there may be no end.
Playing Facade was an interesting experience. In response to furthering narratives, Facade allows for user interaction far beyond most games I’ve played. When faced with dialogue choices, most games offer 3 choices. Facade allows for greater immersion allowing the user to say whatever they want. It is almost like you are a part of the action. Non-character responses also enhance immersion. The couple responded realistically to certain phrases or actions. As an example, when I showed up at the door they were arguing about me showing up an hour early. I made my character say, “Sorry I’m late.” Trip was visibly upset at this and reluctantly invited me in. When combined with modern graphics, the ideas behind Facade could craft an entirely new gameplay experience. Ultimately I imagine Facade being morphed with something like Heavy Rain, giving the user complete control over a narrative that unfolds in front of them.
The article on the development of Half-Life was very interesting. Through many business courses I’ve learned about cross-functional team, and Valve provided a real world example of this. These kind of teams allow for new ideas, instead of perhaps the designers always coming up with ideas. The cabals allow for a free exchange of ideas. In the latter stages of the cabal cycle, an important trend emerged. Ideas would not be accepted or implemented as freely. This indicates a cost benefit analysis, one of the cornerstones of economics. Valve, which may not be seen as a tradition business like Xerox, incorporated many new and traditional ideas into the development of Half-Life.
The second article was not that clear to me. Basically there are 4 types of narratives, but I got little else from the article. Hopefully class today will expand on what I may have missed.
Bioshock creates a unique narrative and an immersible experience. The player is exposed to the character through the brief dialog that he will do something special. This immediately draws the player into the game. The use of lighting going down the steps to the elevator drew my intrigue. They act to draw the player forward. After being introduced to Rapture through a short cutscene the player is free to move along. I enjoyed the illusion to America being a welfare state, USSR as a communist state and the Vatican as a subservient state. The aspect of Bioshock’s narrative that drew me in the most was the appeal to emotions. The player is told to help save Atlas’ family. An emotional connect is being formed between the player and Atlas, which can later be manipulated to advance the narrative.
Sniderman’s “Unwritten Rules” implies that there are explicit and implicit rules to games. Explicit are the rules that govern a game, the rules one pictures when thinking about a game. Implicit are the rules that one does not think about, they are numerous or perhaps infinite. Writing down all the rules of a game for every circumstance is impossible.
I agree that there are many rules to games, and many rules governing those rules. I do not agree that those rules need to be explicitly stated, or even thought about. This essay seems to be written from the angle of a sore loser. Someone who will either not take their turn to prevent losing or other childish actions. When all participants are good sports, those implicit rules are never thought about. I know my opponent will take his turn and not try to cheat.
I had some problems with Black and White 2, it would crash at a certain point when I played it (roughly after selecting followers to chop down trees). What I could ascertain is that B&W 2 is a god game. There was not a great deal of interaction in the brief bit of the game I played. One thing I did get to do outside of the designated tasks was that I broke a rock. This caused the followers around the rock to be crushed, causing my population to drop. I had to look around for followers to complete the tasks assigned, like farming. What I gather from this is that I am curious and have little regard for consequences. In real world instances I know I am cautiously curious, I would never put others lives in danger to see the outcome of an action. Ultimately what I do in games can be drastically different than real life, because in games the stakes aren’t as high.
Since we had no readings and no prompt, I will just ramble on about playing Super Mario 64 this weekend. It was my first time playing, me and another player decided to do a 120 star run. The game is basically devoid of narrative, save the princess and defeat Bowser, simple enough. Unfortunately for me, I was playing this when free floating cameras are standard and controls have been, if not perfected, more precise. At times and camera and controls gave the game an artificial challenge, ruining immersion. A game is not fun when you do the same thing, but a flaw in the game design makes it harder. Other problems arose in coding.
The two reading for today offered two unique ideas. The first reading was about rooie’s rule. It allowed for nice play during foursquare and the hiding or shrugging off of mean play. When people outside their play group joined the game, the rules started to become corrupted. Fallacies in rule enforcement and rule changes abounded. Eventually their foursquare game became a dystopian state. Incorporating new players into a steady state equilibrium requires through explanation of the rules. Care has to be take to introduce new players, and perhaps most importantly, the new players have to be accepting of the framework that the game is operating within.
The second reading talked about games as play spaces. Due to urbanization, kids today do not have the open fields and wooded areas to play in that their parents did. Video games can make up for this deficiency. A video game world allows kids an escape, one that is free from adult moderation. Ultimately these play spaces can be altered for either boys or girls. Care must be taken when crafting game worlds, and it is possible to appeal to both boys and girls with the same game. Games also level the playing field a bit with regards to competition. Reflexes are still important, but athleticism and strength take a back seat.
The essay for today brought up a few valid points. The first is that we tailor our perception of the main character in a game to be the hero. In games like GTA, the main character is far from a hero, but during the course of the game, we associate them as the good guy. Shadow of the Colossus is one of the few games that challenged this idea for me. At the beginning Wander is set out as the good guy trying to save his love interest’s life. Without spoiling anything, at the end he is easily portrayed as the bad guy. Another interesting idea is the two kinds of war games. Most use a more lighthearted approach to war, the one man army. Strategic or tactical games punish players trying to go in like Rambo and reward following directions and using tactics. Realistic war games paint a clear picture of the confusion and chaos that occur in battle instead of glamorizing a one man show. In comparison, these two types of war games form the ideals people hold about war. In the future, game designers could play with these ideas and create new, exciting experiences.
What does creating a serious game entail?
How is the process different than creating a for-fun game?
How do you decide upon what constraints to place on a player?
Can a scenario have multiple win-states or only one?
If only one, how accurately does that model real world scenarios, or how can it be changed to better reflect real world scenarios?
Is bug testing more important in serious games?
Do serious games have any mainstream appeal, like adding tension to a standard run and gun action game?
What are some of your favorite games and have they influenced your development of serious games?
I had problems playing crosser. After trying both Opera and Firefox browsers, I am left with the conclusion that the game is lagged by about 5 seconds. Crosser is a frogger clone, with the goal of getting the VISA on the other side. I do not see this as propaganda, it is not advancing the cause of a group. It could be fun, but I am not a frogger fan. I also am not sure if it is effective, most people know about immigration problems. It does not seem self serving, as the purpose is to raise immigration awareness. The creator had already immigrated many years prior.
Darfur is Dying has the goal of keeping the camp running for seven days. To do this you need to collect water. You can do nothing but collect water when roaming, and punishment results in the character being caught. I see this as propaganda, as it is advancing the cause of a certain group and is political in nature, even if the cause is worthwhile. Personally I did not find the game fun, as it was depressing. The game effectively gets its message across. The purpose is to educate people about the suboptimal situation in Africa. The game can be seen as self serving, but it aims to support a disadvantaged group.
I feel like this essay brought up a good point or two. His main goal of proving that games are not pointless is a good idea. Unfortunately getting there required lots of wordy descriptions and otherwise pointless rhetoric. I like his defense of games and the ability to learn, perhaps learning critical thinking skills through a strategy game. Also I appreciate him chewing out the learning experience at the beginning of the essay. Learning the facts is pointless if you cannot practically apply them. It is disheartening seeing someone who is book smart stumble when critical thinking or perhaps street smarts are required.
Position – no
Reasons – There are many games which require the player to think critically. A common gameplay element is puzzles. Although some puzzles require no thought, some challenge the player and may require some indepth thinking. Ico is a great example of a puzzle game, one that the player cannot breeze through without some thought. We must also define what games we are talking about and what dumb means?
Support – Puzzle games such as Ico, Braid, or Portal. What in this world doesn’t make someone dumb, tv and movies take up lots of freetime. How many people read more than they watch tv or browse the internet.
Counter – Videogames are pointless; they create virtual worlds for player to explore
All you do is mash buttons; some games incorporate puzzles requiring more than mashing buttons
Video games are not widely regarded as art because of the mediums lifespan. Video games reached mainstream appeal in the 1980’s, while painting or architecture have been around for millennia. With a longer time horizon, I feel like games could be considered as art. Also when influential figures like Roger Ebert repeatedly say games are not art, people tend to adopt that sentiment.
At its basic level, art should provoke emotions or make the viewer feel something. Paintings and music do this, but video games can to, either through visual or story. Many times I play a game and some emotion is provoked. More artistic games like flOw and flower provoke emotions through very simplistic, immersive experiences. I view video games as art, a kind of interactive art as opposed to more traditional forms.
The use of minimalism, with respect to narrative and gameplay, in Shadow of the Colossus, creates a unique experience. In this instance, the less that is known about the main character, the more immersive the game is. Since this is an open world game, limiting the players options creates a focused experience. Minimalism is a unique design element in games, and when employed can make a truly memorable game.
Since journals are due tomorrow, i missed three entries since midterm, so i will post three entries responding to something:
Mar 29th: This day involved group time for our game. One thing I learned is that constraints placed upon creativity makes it very hard to come up with an idea. Brainstorming is easy when given free range, as in class, but actually creating with respect to constraints is infinitely harder. The game we created was not that great, but it was the best idea we had. Given more time I doubt we would have lucked into a better idea. The project was fun, but I cannot just turn on the creativity faucet.
Mar 31st: Presentations showed a good mix of game ideas, and some that really sounded fun. Unfortunately I felt that our game was a bit weak compared to others. It was interesting seeing what ideologies groups wanted to test. After this I feel like deciding upon what ideology to question and then creating the game around that would have been the best procedure. It is inspiring that someone like Luke can take an idea with the corporate constraints placed upon it and come up with decent ideas.
Apr 12th: After the interview, I am left to wonder where serious games fit into the gaming sphere. Often times they are, to me, not fun. Some are only reskins of other ideas, trying to make the player thing about something. My main purpose of gaming is to have fun, and serious games don’t allow me to do that. Serious messages can be in games and not be detrimental to the experience, but when the message is the experience, I feel like the game lacks. Video games are not like books, where a serious message can be convey and the experience does not suffer. As an aside, simulations do serve a purpose, but are probably not that fun for those uninterested in the subject matter.
I am kinda worried about where vr may go. I enjoy games that are immersive, but I like the disconnect form the game world. For simulations this would be the logical step, but for enjoyment, I really don’t know what to say. Ultimately it depends upon how compelling the experience is. Since the wii is the only experience I have with motion controls, I feel like the technology is still way out on the horizon. As long as gameplay doesn’t suffer, I am open to any new ways the medium can get across to me though.
DCOM 386: Video Games 
To me play is any experience that is outside required activities. Play is when one is not working towards a concrete goal, like in a job, but can let go. It is an experience which anyone can partake and that has no real rules. Play is a means to reach the end point of enjoyment or fun. Children and adults play to have fun, to get away from the responsibilities of real life if only for a little bit. When ‘playing games,’ there are times I feel like I am not really playing. For example, repeating a part of God of War on the highest difficulty trying to complete it doesn’t feel like ‘playing,’ but more like work. When gaming, playing the game should be fun, not repetitive grinding.
W2D1:
I feel that my definition of play is closest to that of Sutton-Smith. I feel that play is a broad topic filled with many categories. The classification aspect, through the seven rhetorics, rather that a strict focus on the ‘rules’ or ‘qualifications’ of play appeals to me.
Sutton-Smith’s work varies from Huizinga’s in that it classifies different types of play. He freely admits that there can be profit from play, such as gambling. Bateson’s piece is focused on a duality of sorts. Play can be one thing but can also be the thing it is not. The actions of play can, if misinterpreted, can be construed as, say fighting.
W2D2
Costikyan’s article brought up some great points about play. A game needs a goal or an objective. It also needs resources or tokens. This falls closely in line with what I believe a game needs. I prefer games with a strong narrative or story, so my goal is advancing the story, or seeing how the character’s ‘life’ plays out. This is one of the problems I find with sandbox games, even though there is a story to progress, often times I wander around aimlessly with no goal in mind.
Garfield’s article brought up great points about the continuity of a game series. You do not want to fracture the player base, but you do want to grow or expand the game. Additionally you need some body to form rules to take out some of the ‘unbeatable’ cards.
Questions:
1) How do you ensure that your game is played rather than being collected, or does that matter to you?
2) When releasing expansions, how do you go about bring enough subtle changes to keep the game interesting but not destroying what the established player base is used to?
3) When designing a card game do you need a check for every ‘element,’ or is it possible to keep a game balanced even if one ‘element,’ is seemingly strong against everything?
Naughty Dog is one of the most talented developers, and also one of my favorites. I decided to play through 3 of their PlayStation classics, Crash 2, Crash Warped, and Crash Team Racing. It is evident from the moment I started replaying Crash 2 that a lot of though goes into the level designs. There is obviously a path straight to the goal, but the player looking to go further can find certain risky jumps to cut down their level times. Adding more to the challenge are paths you can access only if you do not die in the level.
Moving on to Warped, the risk-reward element becomes more apparent. Since all levels have a time trial, one can either attempt them after getting the run upgrade, or have a greater challenge by attempting them without it. I opted for the latter option. When attempting this, again the level design is a prefect blend of tricky platforming and great enemy placement. The enemy placement prevents you from just breezing through levels and keeps the player on their feet. Unfortunately there seems to be a big emphasis on vehicles, which is nice for a change of pace, but tends to go overboard.
Crash Team Racing seems to be a bit on the easy, letting me down. Again the courses are well created, offering some challenging obstacles, and shortcuts for the more experienced players. Even though I enjoy the game, it is too easy in single player. I do enjoy the fact that drifting is not automated, like Mario Kart Wii for example. Perhaps I should take the idea from today’s article, and change the rules for the game. Not using drifting should level the playing field, but would take most skill out of the game, causing me to rely on items too much.
The readings on rules got me thinking about the ways me and my friends change the rules of games we play. Some are stupid and don’t work while others are crazy and shouldn’t work. One of the best was turning Twisted Metal into a sniping game. I do not remember how it started, but it ended with the use of long range weapons fired from hiding points. Normally Twisted Metal is thought of as fast paced, aggressive vehicular combat, but this slowed the game down. It turned from a twitch game to a game of precise calculations and relatively in-depth planning. The results were fun, and added some longevity to that play session. Another fun rule change, although this one quickly deteriorated, was in LBP. In a four player game we tried to creatively kill the other players, like grabbing them over a long jump and falling to our deaths, and solo running the level. As can be imagined, this rule change was for the worse. Eventually the last player would voluntarily kill their sackboy to end the game. In the end rule changes add to games, but the wrong changes can kill the fun.
Being inspired by a fellow classmate, I want to use this as a chance to praise some of the developers that care about their fans. One of the best examples of altruistic behavior from a developer is Criterion Games, creator of the Burnout Franchise. With the rise of consoles both with internal hdds and internet capabilities, downloadable content has increased in popularity this generation. Although some use this as a means of nickle and diming the customer-base, Criterion used this as an avenue to extend the life of their game, Burnout Paradise, considerably. Although paid content packs were released, a number of free packs, including a bike pack, were released to an eagerly awaiting fan base. This is one of the few examples of a developer supporting their product and their fans. Fans got an extended game and Criterion got some great press.
Game theory attempted to explain the basic strategies of a 2 player one period game with symmetric information. Due to von Neumman’s discovery of the minimax theorem, it is possible to determine the outcome of such a game. Minimaxing is the assumption that a rational self-interested player will minimize their maximum loss, or minimax. The cake cutting example demonstrates this, it is best for the cutter to cut the cake closest to the center. This minimax theory can be extended to games of more than 2 players by finding the dominant strategy and breaking games into 2 or 3 person games until a solution is found. This can be applied to games or real world situations.
The article neglected a few things I was hoping a game theory article would include. I understand that this is introductory in nature, but only including vN-M and ignoring Nash seems like an oversight. Since the article focuses on minimaxing, I can understand, but when talking about n player games of n terms with asymmetric information, other advances in the field should have been included. The prisoner’s dilemma would help explaining self-interested actions and how payoffs can influence collusion. When talking about strategies, tit-for-tat and trigger situations are not mentioned, although for one period games they are less important.
The way I view interactivity affecting story is through user choices. The best analogy is a choose your own adventure book, and the best games at this are usually RPGs and interactive adventure games like Indigo Prophecy or Heavy Rain. When a user can influence the story, there is an added incentive to play the game and see what happens. Interactivity can add playability to games as users want to see what decisions can influence their outcome. Story driven games do not have to be interactive though, as Metal Gear Solid and Max Payne offer no choices to the user. They follow a linear path, while interactive stories resemble a tree. How many branches there are is limited by the developer or time constraints.
As laid out by Mateas, three elements are key to interaction; agency, immersion, and transformation. With games, immersion is incredible important. Immersion will drive a play to keep playing to advance the narrative. Transformation seems similar to variety and perspectives. The central theme though is agency. Agency is knowing ones actions affect the game world, again very important in games. Although the more agency is maximized, the more problems are presented. There can never be complete agency, due to constraints on developers. Complete agency would lead to full immersion and probably transformation. Games can also lack agency, like Candyland, which has a predetermined outcome. The right level of agency seems to be a blend of reasonable choices that a rational person can choose. As an example, in racing games it would be rational to assume I can race backwards crashing into other racers, but not get out of my car and enter another.
My favorite part of this essay was the need for uncertainty and inevitability in a game. The two are needed in combination for any game to be both playable and complete. Uncertainty is simply not knowing the outcome, while inevitability is knowing the game will end. Both are needed, I will not usually play a game that I could not conceivable win or that will never terminate. While both are needed, it is never really elaborated on the interplay between the two. Does inevitability only arise after uncertainty has been eliminated? Can the two interact before a game session has finished? Personally I do not think the two concepts can mingle, as they are conflicting concepts. It is hard for me to reconcile the two ideas. Also sandbox games may question the need for inevitability in games. GTA may have a story mode, but some players ignore that only to raise hell in the virtual world. Since the world will carry on infinitely, can there be an ending? With respect to dramatic tension, yes GTA does have an inevitable ending, but in general, there may be no end.
Playing Facade was an interesting experience. In response to furthering narratives, Facade allows for user interaction far beyond most games I’ve played. When faced with dialogue choices, most games offer 3 choices. Facade allows for greater immersion allowing the user to say whatever they want. It is almost like you are a part of the action. Non-character responses also enhance immersion. The couple responded realistically to certain phrases or actions. As an example, when I showed up at the door they were arguing about me showing up an hour early. I made my character say, “Sorry I’m late.” Trip was visibly upset at this and reluctantly invited me in. When combined with modern graphics, the ideas behind Facade could craft an entirely new gameplay experience. Ultimately I imagine Facade being morphed with something like Heavy Rain, giving the user complete control over a narrative that unfolds in front of them.
The article on the development of Half-Life was very interesting. Through many business courses I’ve learned about cross-functional team, and Valve provided a real world example of this. These kind of teams allow for new ideas, instead of perhaps the designers always coming up with ideas. The cabals allow for a free exchange of ideas. In the latter stages of the cabal cycle, an important trend emerged. Ideas would not be accepted or implemented as freely. This indicates a cost benefit analysis, one of the cornerstones of economics. Valve, which may not be seen as a tradition business like Xerox, incorporated many new and traditional ideas into the development of Half-Life.
The second article was not that clear to me. Basically there are 4 types of narratives, but I got little else from the article. Hopefully class today will expand on what I may have missed.
Bioshock creates a unique narrative and an immersible experience. The player is exposed to the character through the brief dialog that he will do something special. This immediately draws the player into the game. The use of lighting going down the steps to the elevator drew my intrigue. They act to draw the player forward. After being introduced to Rapture through a short cutscene the player is free to move along. I enjoyed the illusion to America being a welfare state, USSR as a communist state and the Vatican as a subservient state. The aspect of Bioshock’s narrative that drew me in the most was the appeal to emotions. The player is told to help save Atlas’ family. An emotional connect is being formed between the player and Atlas, which can later be manipulated to advance the narrative.
W9D1:
Sniderman’s “Unwritten Rules” implies that there are explicit and implicit rules to games. Explicit are the rules that govern a game, the rules one pictures when thinking about a game. Implicit are the rules that one does not think about, they are numerous or perhaps infinite. Writing down all the rules of a game for every circumstance is impossible.
I agree that there are many rules to games, and many rules governing those rules. I do not agree that those rules need to be explicitly stated, or even thought about. This essay seems to be written from the angle of a sore loser. Someone who will either not take their turn to prevent losing or other childish actions. When all participants are good sports, those implicit rules are never thought about. I know my opponent will take his turn and not try to cheat.
Kyle
I think you misread the article. The author claims that it is impossible to state every rule.
w9d2:
I had some problems with Black and White 2, it would crash at a certain point when I played it (roughly after selecting followers to chop down trees). What I could ascertain is that B&W 2 is a god game. There was not a great deal of interaction in the brief bit of the game I played. One thing I did get to do outside of the designated tasks was that I broke a rock. This caused the followers around the rock to be crushed, causing my population to drop. I had to look around for followers to complete the tasks assigned, like farming. What I gather from this is that I am curious and have little regard for consequences. In real world instances I know I am cautiously curious, I would never put others lives in danger to see the outcome of an action. Ultimately what I do in games can be drastically different than real life, because in games the stakes aren’t as high.
Since we had no readings and no prompt, I will just ramble on about playing Super Mario 64 this weekend. It was my first time playing, me and another player decided to do a 120 star run. The game is basically devoid of narrative, save the princess and defeat Bowser, simple enough. Unfortunately for me, I was playing this when free floating cameras are standard and controls have been, if not perfected, more precise. At times and camera and controls gave the game an artificial challenge, ruining immersion. A game is not fun when you do the same thing, but a flaw in the game design makes it harder. Other problems arose in coding.
The two reading for today offered two unique ideas. The first reading was about rooie’s rule. It allowed for nice play during foursquare and the hiding or shrugging off of mean play. When people outside their play group joined the game, the rules started to become corrupted. Fallacies in rule enforcement and rule changes abounded. Eventually their foursquare game became a dystopian state. Incorporating new players into a steady state equilibrium requires through explanation of the rules. Care has to be take to introduce new players, and perhaps most importantly, the new players have to be accepting of the framework that the game is operating within.
The second reading talked about games as play spaces. Due to urbanization, kids today do not have the open fields and wooded areas to play in that their parents did. Video games can make up for this deficiency. A video game world allows kids an escape, one that is free from adult moderation. Ultimately these play spaces can be altered for either boys or girls. Care must be taken when crafting game worlds, and it is possible to appeal to both boys and girls with the same game. Games also level the playing field a bit with regards to competition. Reflexes are still important, but athleticism and strength take a back seat.
W12D1
The essay for today brought up a few valid points. The first is that we tailor our perception of the main character in a game to be the hero. In games like GTA, the main character is far from a hero, but during the course of the game, we associate them as the good guy. Shadow of the Colossus is one of the few games that challenged this idea for me. At the beginning Wander is set out as the good guy trying to save his love interest’s life. Without spoiling anything, at the end he is easily portrayed as the bad guy. Another interesting idea is the two kinds of war games. Most use a more lighthearted approach to war, the one man army. Strategic or tactical games punish players trying to go in like Rambo and reward following directions and using tactics. Realistic war games paint a clear picture of the confusion and chaos that occur in battle instead of glamorizing a one man show. In comparison, these two types of war games form the ideals people hold about war. In the future, game designers could play with these ideas and create new, exciting experiences.
w12d2
What does creating a serious game entail?
How is the process different than creating a for-fun game?
How do you decide upon what constraints to place on a player?
Can a scenario have multiple win-states or only one?
If only one, how accurately does that model real world scenarios, or how can it be changed to better reflect real world scenarios?
Is bug testing more important in serious games?
Do serious games have any mainstream appeal, like adding tension to a standard run and gun action game?
What are some of your favorite games and have they influenced your development of serious games?
I had problems playing crosser. After trying both Opera and Firefox browsers, I am left with the conclusion that the game is lagged by about 5 seconds. Crosser is a frogger clone, with the goal of getting the VISA on the other side. I do not see this as propaganda, it is not advancing the cause of a group. It could be fun, but I am not a frogger fan. I also am not sure if it is effective, most people know about immigration problems. It does not seem self serving, as the purpose is to raise immigration awareness. The creator had already immigrated many years prior.
Darfur is Dying has the goal of keeping the camp running for seven days. To do this you need to collect water. You can do nothing but collect water when roaming, and punishment results in the character being caught. I see this as propaganda, as it is advancing the cause of a certain group and is political in nature, even if the cause is worthwhile. Personally I did not find the game fun, as it was depressing. The game effectively gets its message across. The purpose is to educate people about the suboptimal situation in Africa. The game can be seen as self serving, but it aims to support a disadvantaged group.
w14d1:
I feel like this essay brought up a good point or two. His main goal of proving that games are not pointless is a good idea. Unfortunately getting there required lots of wordy descriptions and otherwise pointless rhetoric. I like his defense of games and the ability to learn, perhaps learning critical thinking skills through a strategy game. Also I appreciate him chewing out the learning experience at the beginning of the essay. Learning the facts is pointless if you cannot practically apply them. It is disheartening seeing someone who is book smart stumble when critical thinking or perhaps street smarts are required.
w14d2:
Are video games making us dumb?
Position – no
Reasons – There are many games which require the player to think critically. A common gameplay element is puzzles. Although some puzzles require no thought, some challenge the player and may require some indepth thinking. Ico is a great example of a puzzle game, one that the player cannot breeze through without some thought. We must also define what games we are talking about and what dumb means?
Support – Puzzle games such as Ico, Braid, or Portal. What in this world doesn’t make someone dumb, tv and movies take up lots of freetime. How many people read more than they watch tv or browse the internet.
Counter – Videogames are pointless; they create virtual worlds for player to explore
All you do is mash buttons; some games incorporate puzzles requiring more than mashing buttons
w15d1:
Video games are not widely regarded as art because of the mediums lifespan. Video games reached mainstream appeal in the 1980’s, while painting or architecture have been around for millennia. With a longer time horizon, I feel like games could be considered as art. Also when influential figures like Roger Ebert repeatedly say games are not art, people tend to adopt that sentiment.
At its basic level, art should provoke emotions or make the viewer feel something. Paintings and music do this, but video games can to, either through visual or story. Many times I play a game and some emotion is provoked. More artistic games like flOw and flower provoke emotions through very simplistic, immersive experiences. I view video games as art, a kind of interactive art as opposed to more traditional forms.
The use of minimalism, with respect to narrative and gameplay, in Shadow of the Colossus, creates a unique experience. In this instance, the less that is known about the main character, the more immersive the game is. Since this is an open world game, limiting the players options creates a focused experience. Minimalism is a unique design element in games, and when employed can make a truly memorable game.
Since journals are due tomorrow, i missed three entries since midterm, so i will post three entries responding to something:
Mar 29th: This day involved group time for our game. One thing I learned is that constraints placed upon creativity makes it very hard to come up with an idea. Brainstorming is easy when given free range, as in class, but actually creating with respect to constraints is infinitely harder. The game we created was not that great, but it was the best idea we had. Given more time I doubt we would have lucked into a better idea. The project was fun, but I cannot just turn on the creativity faucet.
Mar 31st: Presentations showed a good mix of game ideas, and some that really sounded fun. Unfortunately I felt that our game was a bit weak compared to others. It was interesting seeing what ideologies groups wanted to test. After this I feel like deciding upon what ideology to question and then creating the game around that would have been the best procedure. It is inspiring that someone like Luke can take an idea with the corporate constraints placed upon it and come up with decent ideas.
Apr 12th: After the interview, I am left to wonder where serious games fit into the gaming sphere. Often times they are, to me, not fun. Some are only reskins of other ideas, trying to make the player thing about something. My main purpose of gaming is to have fun, and serious games don’t allow me to do that. Serious messages can be in games and not be detrimental to the experience, but when the message is the experience, I feel like the game lacks. Video games are not like books, where a serious message can be convey and the experience does not suffer. As an aside, simulations do serve a purpose, but are probably not that fun for those uninterested in the subject matter.
last entry:
I am kinda worried about where vr may go. I enjoy games that are immersive, but I like the disconnect form the game world. For simulations this would be the logical step, but for enjoyment, I really don’t know what to say. Ultimately it depends upon how compelling the experience is. Since the wii is the only experience I have with motion controls, I feel like the technology is still way out on the horizon. As long as gameplay doesn’t suffer, I am open to any new ways the medium can get across to me though.