Average Gamer

[an-average-gamer-blog]

Hearthstone: Excellence in Targeted Design

Hearthstone is a digital card game developed by Blizzard Entertainment. Officially released just this past year, Hearthstone was in development for the better part of five years. The result of a slow and iterative release, the final product is an incredibly polished and well-designed game. It's been my favorite game for over a year. Honestly, I play almost every day. And I'm not alone, Hearthstone boasts an average of over 20 million players. It's typically one of the top most streamed games on Twitch. And it's pro-scene seems to be growing exponentially. It's pretty easy to tell Blizzard has another massive hit on their hands. But why is Hearthstone so successful? What about it's design allows for such a captivating experience? Well, the answer is extremely complicated. So instead on all the aspects, I'd like to focus on the most interesting one. How Hearthstone's purposeful design for the digital medium enabled it to flourish.

The Potential of a Digital Card Game

Card games have been around for over a millennium. That's 1000 years of exploring potential game designs for physical card games. In comparison, digital card games have been around for a decade. And even then, most digital card games are just ports of established physical games. Pure digital card games are few and far between. That is, games that are designed specifically for the digital medium. These games explore the possibility space of the genre in new ways. Hearthstone is one of these such games. It uses the possibilities of the medium to create a unique and compelling experience. Hearthstone's intelligent design sets it apart. By targeting the digital medium specifically it isn’t just good, it's an overwhelming success.

Persistent Damage

One of the most interesting and unique mechanics in Hearthstone is persistent damage. What might seem like a very simply decision, persistent damage is only possible in a digital medium. Playing with damage counters in a physical game would result in a board cluttered with beads, coins or dice. In the physical medium, persistent damage would make deciphering a board state extremely complicated. Because Hearthstone is digital it's able to update the numbers on cards themselves. The result is a clean and simple representation of a very complicated board. This approach to damage also opens up the game to some unique mechanics. The Priest Class for example is able to heal it's damaged minions. An interaction made possible because of persistent damage. And persistent damage is made possible because of the game's design for a digital medium.

Created Cards

Cards that materialize out of thin air are cool. Created cards simply could not be implemented in a physical card game. The same effect could be achieved physically with extra decks. But even then a physical deck has implications, such as finite size and shifting probabilities, that a digital game doesn't. Hearthstone's most recent expansion introduced players to "Spare Parts". These cards are created during gameplay, and although not very powerful, they are insanely fun. They've brought about new board states, interesting strategies and innovative deck building. But by far the most note-worthy use of this mechanic is the Priest card "Thoughtsteal". Thoughtsteal grants the priest player 2 cards copied from their opponents deck. It offers card advantage, information and complicated sequencing all in one simple interaction. The best part though, is it's an interaction unique to digital card games.

High Degree of RNG

Hearthstone features many mechanics and interactions that are reliant on randomness. The hearthstone team believes that this randomness is crucial in creating fun story-worthy gameplay experiences. The randomness also adds another level of skill to making the correct play. Being prepared for all possible outcomes takes experience, intelligence and foresight. Many RNG-based mechanics that take place in Hearthstone would be down-right tedious to calculate in a physical game. Rolling dice, flipping coins, or shuffling cards would become a long and arduous process. But because of Hearthstone's digital medium it's able to quickly and effectively compute random outcomes. With the power of a random number generator Hearthstone can create elaborate and skill-intensive board states. It can also create hilarious scenarios that are worth recording and talking about. The high degree of RNG positively adds to the overall experience and it's made possible by the digital nature of the game.

Automation

There are many aspects and interactions in Hearthstone that are incredibly complex. These interactions include turn phases, resource tracking and simultaneous card effects. Yet, despite all of these complex rules, Hearthstone is seen as a fairly simple game. This is because of automation. Automation is the implementation of complicated interactions that Hearthstone handles automatically. Implementing these complex rules in a physical version would likely require a judge, but Hearthstone is able to automatically resolve these issues for players. Automation also allows other game systems to function cleanly. Effects that would require a deck reshuffling in a physical game can happen quickly and without delay. Timed turns can be implemented without the need for some external turn tracking system. The list goes on and on, but what's important is that Hearthstone has used it's digital medium to it's advantage. The Hearthstone team designed the game with the platform in mind, playing off it's strengths. Ultimately, after several iterations, we're left with an innovative and powerful experience.

The Constraints of a Digital Card Game

Games that are designed well explore a medium's design space. Games that are designed exceptionally turn a medium's weaknesses into strengths. Hearthstone is the latter. It expertly crafts the limitations of the digital medium into it's strengths. It turns these constraints into powerful gameplay mechanics . And when that's not possible, it designs around them. Hearthstone is a game that is extremely self-aware. It dodges pitfalls that trap other digital card games, and even more than that, it hides these constraints in compelling gameplay.

No Discard Pile

Most card games feature a discard pile. It's a necessity in physical games, the cards need somewhere to go when they're not in play. It also opens up a lot of potential design space. It's another game location that can be interacted with, thus adding an extra layer to depth of play. However, when imagining a discard pile on a digital platform, one also has to imagine an intuitive way of interacting with it. Because of the limited resolution of mobile devices, a simple UI for discard pile browsing is all but impossible. A complicated UI coupled with the limited board space means a discard pile is a heavy investment. Hearthstone made the tough decision to omit an intractable discard and much to it's overall success.

Server Response Time

Hearthstone is a game intended to be played online against real opponents. However, several issues can arise because these opponents are not at the same table. It can take a long time for information to get from one player to another. This makes syncing actions, action responses and turn times difficult to implement. Hearthstone's basic game design understands these constraints and simply designs around them. In Hearthstone, your turn is your own. There are no responses that can interrupt it and no decisions to be made by the other player. The server may respond to your actions but it will never involve the other player. Issues arising from network latency are a severe constraint to any online game. Hearthstone simply accepts these constraints and tries to create an engaging experience around them.

Attacker Selected Targets

During combat the attacker selects both the attacking minion and it's target. This is in stark contrast to other card games such as Magic where combat is a very back-and-forth affair. The attacker-chooses model is used in Hearthstone to eliminate the need for opponent responses. Instead of a multi-phased combat system the attacker is the only one to make the decisions. Automated effects and responses are handled on the server so the attackers turn never needs to be interrupted. Like other constraints Hearthstone has come up with interesting ways to make this interaction feel different. Mechanics like Stealth (Minion cannot be attacked) and Taunt (Minion must be attacked first) were created as a result of attacker-chooses targeting. This combat system is something that makes Hearthstone different, intuitive and engaging. But most importantly, it eliminates the need for back-and-forth responses during combat. The end result is fun combat that doesn't open itself up to long waits or server collisions.

Secrets

The ability to respond to opponent's actions is a big part of physical card games. In games like Magic this gives the other player the chance to pull combat tricks, counter spells and be generally tricky. But this system cannot be converted to a digital medium without being incredibly cumbersome. In physical card games all that's needed to continue from these response segments is a verbal "Okay". In a digital game that same process takes the server contacting the other play, allowing a set amount of response time, and then communicating that response back. Although not a considerably long process, if this happens multiple times per turn, it quickly becomes a drag. In Hearthstone instead of requiring player input, the team simply designed Secret cards. Secrets are spells you cast on your turn that are triggered by opponents actions on their turn. Essentially, it's an automation to the action response system in other card games. When a player casts a secret it's information is put on the server. That way when a player commits an action that procs the secret it's just the server responding not the other player. Secrets not only avoid opponent response systems, they also add depth to the game. When a secret is cast, the event but not the card is known to both players. Knowing what secret your opponents deck plays and playing around it is one of the hardest parts of the game. Secrets turn the pit-falls of an opponent-based response system into one of the deepest and hardest parts of Hearthstone.

Hearthstone is an exceptionally designed game. Unlike most digital card games it strives to re-invent the genre. It intelligently explores the possibility space of the digital medium with new gameplay mechanics and interactions. It also avoids common pitfalls of the genre and turns the medium's constraints into it's strengths. It's targeted design makes it one of my favorites. That being said, there are tons of other aspects that made Hearthstone so successful. I would definitely recommend it to anyone who hasn't already played. And for those who have, try analyzing it's design to figure out what makes it tick.

[an-average-gamer-blog]

The Vanishing of Ethan Carter and In-Game Interface

The Vanishing of Ethan Carter is a first person adventure game from The Astronauts. You play as Paul Prospero, a supernatural detective tasked with investigating the disappearance of a young boy. As you dig deeper you find there is more to the story than meets the eye, and that this small town has some dark secrets to hide. The game features well-designed puzzles, surreal moments and breathtaking visuals. But most impressive of all is how it uses it's In-Game Interface. Text is placed into the game world to signify the main characters thoughts. On the surface, this interface may just seem like text in the 3D world, but in practice it immerses the player, adds depth to the main character and delivers important gameplay information.

Because of it's 3D nature, the In-Game Interface matters spatially. The text is not always propped above the center of the item it describes. It can be used to convey a larger meaning than just a label. For example, the text displays "Rectangle Shape" in the four corners of a odd patch of dis-colored grass. This display tells the player more than just "Look here and read this", it lets the player see the shape by reading the interface. Helping them judge the size and more importantly the possible correlation to the story. The In-Game Interface also benefits from motion. "Trail of blood" is displayed as it floats down a river of red. The player reads this as his eyes follow down the trail, just as the main character would be doing. The spatial nature of the In-Game Interface allows the player to focus on what the main character is focusing on and in doing so the game is more immersive.

The In-Game Interface also allows the game to convey the main characters thought progression. Obviously, depending on the order of text this is possible, but what this text uniquely allows for is branching thought progressions. This is something that is fairly unique to The Vanishing of Ethan Carter. Other Industry solutions for character thoughts, such as character monologues or note taking, would have a hard time conveying branching thoughts. As the 3D text progresses it will split up into smaller, branching ideas. For example, "Cause of Death?" will then display "Blunt force trauma?" and "Blood loss?". But these subsequent ideas are smaller than the original "Cause of Death?" text and they're moving away from each other. So we know they are less important ideas than the broad "Cause of Death?" and that they are divergent and different thought paths. Again, this aspect of the interface allows us to get inside the head of the main character making for a more immersive experience. It also delivers an interesting and complicated thought progression in a simple and compelling way.

Perhaps the best use of the interface is how the game uses it to direct the player. First, the name of an important object will pop up onto the screen in front of the player. For example, in an early level the player needs to find a "Crank". The words appear larger than any other text to signify it's importance. It then breaks into many copies of itself and they begin to swirl all around the screen. This motion demonstrates how this item is now consuming the main characters thoughts, but it also encourages the player to look around. And as the player does they will eventually notice the random movement of the words is not random at all. When looking in a specific direction the words calm down and collect into a single word. In this way the game uses the interface as a dowsing rod to direct the player to the important item. The player becomes more immersed  and gets the crucial information of where to go all at the same time.

The In-Game Interface used in The Vanishing of Ethan Carter may not be something entirely new and different but it is something that is done very well. Through 3D text the game is able to convey a myriad of things. The motion and placement of the text can be used to immerse the player into the world and into the main characters head easily. The diverging thought paths help reinforce the main characters purpose while also making the player think critically about the crime scene themselves. And the dowsing rod effect immerses the player and conveys key information in a simple and interactive way. This interface serves The Vanishing of Ethan Carer well and I'd really like to see it explored more.

[an-average-gamer-blog]

Neverending Nightmares and Immersion-Breaking Kickstarter Rewards

Kickstarter and other crowd funding sites are changing the way we make games. They're changing the way we market them, develop them and even design them. As more and more games are kickstarted, we're learning more and more about how this funding model can help us, and how it can hurt us. Neverending Nightmares by Matt Gilgenbach is a 2D psychological horror game that was successfully brought to life by kickstarter. However, kickstarter funding and specifically it's reward system ultimately hurt the game's design.

Neverending Nightmares is a 2D, mostly black and white, psychological horror game. The main gameplay consists of walking from point A to B, interacting with specific objects, and not getting killed by some fear-inducing monsters. The story is intriguing, the gameplay compelling and the atmosphere is immersive. But what inevitably and regrettably broke my immersion was the implementation of kickstarter rewards. Part of one of the pricier tiers, kickstarter backers could be forever immortalized in the game as part of a portrait painting to appear on the wall.  Although incredibly logical and harmless at surface value I think I've nailed down the three reasons why this implementation hurt my gameplay experience.

1. The portrait paintings didn't fit the theme of the game.

Neverending Nightmares calls itself a psychological horror game and it truly delivers on some terrifying and wtf-inducing moments. The art is full of striking colors, creepy subliminal messages and  unsettling imagery. Sometimes the aesthetic truly feels like the ravings of a lunatic and it drives home the theme perfectly. One of my favorite moments involved walking down a hallway that had a painting of two feet perched on a stool. Later, when I walked back down the same hallway, the feet were dangling and the stool had tipped over. It was those small touches to the art aesthetic that I really appreciated. Unfortunately, the portrait paintings ended up not fitting this theme. Detailed pictures of people smirking at the player, standing by a fireplace or drinking a glass of wine didn't drive home the horror feel. Some of the portraits even had an opposite effect, calming me down or providing a reprieve from the otherwise unsettling gameplay.

2. Interacting with the portraits was meaningless and flow breaking

Neverending Nightmares is a game that enjoys keeping the player in the dark. In that vein it can keep the plot twisting and turning and keep delivering horrifying wtf moments. This also has the added bonus of making sure the player is always deeply in-tune with their surroundings. Players will strive to pick up on details and solve the story puzzle given to them. Unfortunately, introducing a bunch of meaningless interactable portraits will throw players off. All other interactables have meaning in some way or another. Whether it's to foreshadow some plot, help the player jump to conclusions, or even set the theme more concretely, they give the player clues to uncover the plot. The kickstarter portraits have no meaning other than to fulfill a backer reward. And even worse, they are presented in such a way that makes them seem equal in meaning to all other interactables.

3. The interactable portraits encompassed approximately 50% of all unique interactables.

This percentage is way too high. Neverending Nightmares is a game where interactables are few and far between. This scarcity of interactables isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it does mean that the interactables that do exist should be very significant. It doesn't seem right that a very relevant story object have the same significance of backer portraits. And given the points I've made above, approximately 50% of the unique interactables are off-theme, meaningless and flow breaking. This basically ensures that players who are incredibly immersed in the game will have their immersion broken at the expense of kickstarter rewards.

Neverending Nightmares isn't a bad game. It's trying to do something new and different with the horror genre and it's a refreshing change of pace. But it is an example of how fulfilling kickstarter rewards can end up hurting the game overall. So when devising or implementing kickstarter rewards just remember a few things. Make sure your rewards fit the theme of your game. Do not draw more attention to the rewards than other game elements - they should exist as an easter egg for the backers. And make sure fulfilling kickstater rewards doesn't overpower your gameplay experience. Kickstarter gives developers an opportunity to create different and interesting games, don't let your game's design falter because of it.

[an-average-gamer-blog]

Ether One and Mechanics as Metaphor

Dementia is a serious and emotional topic that is only becoming more common as our life expectancy increases. Ether One, a recent adventure game from White Paper Games, bases it's design around the issue. In Ether One you play a restorer, virtually placed in the memories of a dementia patient. It is your task to help them remember what they've forgotten. In order to do so you must investigate the world, learn their past and recreate their memories. It truly is a powerful game. The plot, the characters and the world come together to bring the game's theme to life. But past beneath the surface, the mechanics of the game have more to say.

Ether One is one of the hardest adventure games I've ever played. The world, the puzzles and the clues ask a great deal of the player. But the game is designed to be tough, and it gives the player systems to help them through. At any point hitting a button will let you travel to your base of operations. The base contains old notes you may have seen, old memories you restored and pictures you have taken. In addition, the home base contains a shelving unit for every area you will explore. Instead of having an inventory in Ether One, you are only allowed to carry one item at a time. So returning to your home base to drop off a precious or unique item is something the you'll do frequently. But even past these in-game systems, I found myself relying on taking notes to make it through the tougher sections of the game. My own notes were complete with family tree diagrams, dates of prominent events and written memories.

Ether One's game mechanics are a metaphor for living with Dementia. At any point in the game you can retract from the world, into your own head, to review your memories and items that have significance to you. But even then, digging deep into your own memory is often times not enough. And this is where all the notes come in. Notes describing memories, family members and prominent events littered my desk as I played Ether One. Just as these notes would litter someone's room who is trying to hold on to their memories. I even got to a point where I was asking others for help to solve the hardest puzzles. Just like Dementia patients inevitably have to do.

Ether One is a game with a powerful message. It relies on a beautiful world, incredible story and brilliant mechanics to broadcast it. It's worth a play if you're into adventure games, exploration or intelligent game design.

http://ether-game.com/

[an-average-gamer-blog]

Kentucky Route 0 and Thematic Dialogue Choices

Kentucky Route 0 is a breath-taking game. The art is beautiful, the story is poetic and the gameplay is unique. Seriously, if you haven't played this game, you should play this game. That being said, the most interesting part of Kentucky Route 0 doesn't lie in the art, the story or the core gameplay. It might not even be apparent at first, but that's part of it's brilliance.

By now, we are all familiar with dialogue choice games. Telltales games in particular, along with the Mass Effect series, are clear examples of the genre. And due to their enormous success, it's clear that we as players love creating our own stories, crafting our own characters and putting ourselves in moral dilemmas. The dialogue decisions in these games matter because of their impact on the story, the characters and outcome of the game. We feel anxiety, pressure and immersion when making life or death decisions. We have to weigh and evaluate our own morals based on the situation. And then once we make our decisions, we get to experience the consequences. These games have somewhat dominated the adventure game market. It's to the point where dialogue decisions and a branching storyline are one in the same What other purpose could dialogue decisions serve? This is where Kentucky Route 0 comes in.

Kentucky Route 0 does offer the player the occasional story branching dialogue decision. And often times the branches that are created are presented in innovative ways that will surprise you. But it's not these dialogue decisions that truly captivated me as I was playing. In addition to narrative dialogue decisions the game also offers players thematic dialogue decisions. One such decision took place when I was in a mine underground. I had to test the PA system to see if it was operational and I was instructed to breathe into the microphone. The dialogue choices were as follows -

1. Breathes, and thinks about the road

2. Breathes, and thinks about resting

Breathe in, Breathe out

1. Breathes, and remembers a moment earlier in the day

2. Breathes and remembers a moment when he was younger

These thematic dialogue choices are new, they're different and they're powerful. Of course picking one over the other doesn't change the outcome of events. You still whistle into the microphone and set off the chain of events that are about to occur. But these choices make you evaluate your decision in new ways than you're accustomed to. Instead of thinking consequentially, they make you think tonally, poetically and thematically. It's nothing short of beautiful. You are establishing the tone of the situation, the theme of your actions. In contrast with making consequential life or death decisions, Kentucky Route 0 asks the player to give meaning to their decisions, to set the tone of their character. It's a powerful concept, and one that Kentucky Route 0 executes flawlessly. I'm not even ashamed to admit that I probably pondered the above decision longer than I pondered killing someone in The Walking Dead. And maybe that's something that Kentucky Route 0 is trying to say. Always thinking consequentially makes us calloused, it makes us calculated and logical. Picking a tone instead exercises our creativity, enriches us, makes us more in tune with our emotions. Eh - or maybe I'm reading too much into it, regardless, you should play this game.

[an-average-gamer-blog]

No Escape - Resource Management

I was wrong! I'll admit it, I'm not infallible. One of the most important things to remember in Game Design is that your initial ideas are never great. They might be good, they might have potential, but simply creating something that exists in your head isn't enough. Games are a medium that is reliant on the player, and the player will always find ways to surprise you.

The importance of play-testing your game cannot be said enough. It is only through play-testing that you're able to see your games flaws, find unexpected bugs, and gauge player reactions. Recently, through play-testing my game No Escape, I was able to uncover a glaring flaw in it's design. I thought that my design was sound, that it's elements drew on examples of good design and stayed away from bad design, but I was wrong.

Resource management is a crucial aspect to any Survival Horror game. In my initial design of No Escape there were two types of resources, keys and batteries. Keys allow the player to unlock doors and progress from level to level. They are very scarce and because of that the player doesn't feel compelled to search every room for them. Batteries are the limited resource that players need to manage. They need to make the most of the battery currently in their flashlight  and while it's dying search for a replacement. And with this design I thought the resource system was good. Keys control the players movement from level to level and are the key resource the player needs to find. Batteries on the other hand give something for the player to look for in every nook and cranny of the game. They are the resource that controls the players flow inside a level, how they move about the halls and the rooms. But through play-testing I realized my mistake.

There is no gratification in finding another battery. As the player, you need to find batteries in order to survive, but that doesn't make finding them fun. When you find a battery it simply feels like you've postponed your inevitable death. So what was I doing wrong? I looked back to tried and true horror games like Amnesia and Slender, what did they have that my game didn't? And then it dawned on me, they had progressive resources. Resources that moved the level forward, that made the player feel like they were accomplishing something instead of simply living. Amnesia does it with puzzle elements and written notes, Slender's core gameplay revolves around progressive resources.

So we added a new resource, notes! Notes give the player the feeling of progression that can help propel them through the level. Unlike batteries and keys, notes are not an essential resource, finding them or not won't impact whether you can complete the level. This is powerful, when the player picks up their first note and sees the 1/6 indicator in the bottom right they are motivated to complete the set. Also, notes are not dynamically placed like Keys and Batteries. Their placement is purely random so there can be no best method to searching, the player simply has to look in all rooms. Now instead of searching rooms to just keep searching rooms, the player is searching for a unique resource that gives them something more then just perpetuation of the game.

Notes also give us a way of delivering our game's narrative. In each level there are 6 notes and if you find all per level, in the next level you will move on to the next set of notes. And if you find all the sets of notes you can answer all the questions that No Escape's narrative asks. The ability to reward the player with narrative is something the game previously lacked. The note's screen is also comforting and can give the player some time to break from the horror gameplay.

Before No Escape had a resource system and level flow that made progression tedious and predictable. But now, due to the addition of notes, players can be rewarded for their meticulousness. The level flow is much more enjoyable and much more compelling. And, the notes give us the opportunity to provide the player with narrative, hopefully in turn compelling them to keep playing. That's the importance of play-testing and the importance of iterating on your ideas.

No Escape Alpha comes out next week! Stay tuned.

[an-average-gamer-blog]

Fract OSC - Review

You awake in a desolate place, devoid of all color and sound. You see a terminal, once vibrant and now forgotten. In the past it was used to pilot a massive machine, but now without power it sits in silence. You find an elevator and descend into the depths of the machine with the task of turning it back on and restoring color and music to the world. This is Fract OSC.

Fract OSC is a music exploration and puzzle game. The love-child of Tron, Boards of Canada, and neon paint, Fracts soundtrack and aesthetics are just breath-taking. Exploring Fract is a visceral experience, with colossal structures bathed in neon jutting up out of the landscape. Puzzles are fun and intelligently designed while still remaining heavily inspired by synthesizers. All of this aside, Fract is not a perfect game. It falls prey to complications with it's overall design and although systems have been put in place to help they are not ultimately enough.

Good Things

Fract is a really compelling and inspiring game. Admittedly, I am a sucker for anything drenched in neon and spitting out electronic music, but the use of color and music in the game is nothing short of beautiful. The world that Fract builds is one that makes players want to explore it's nooks and crannies. Through exploration we see new things, hear new sounds and understand the machine all the more. To break up the exploration we encounter musically driven puzzles that are intelligently designed and incredibly compelling. The harmony between puzzles and exploration is one of Fract's biggest strengths.

Environment

The art and music of Fract are just beautiful. Walking around the environment and simply experiencing what Fract has to offer is riveting. The structures and architectural pieces are huge and complex. The cave system is expansive and offers a ton of unique areas that can be found and explored, some that have nothing to do with the overall task of fixing the machine. Plus, the whole environment is reactive to the player. Hallways assemble themselves, particles rise out of the ground and the world reacts musically and physically as the player gets nears. And the best part about Fract is that you can explore it all. All movement in Fract is physics based, there are no invisible level walls or insta-death zones that constrain player movement. Better yet, there are no loading walls throughout the entire machine. Players are simply let loose on the world. The order they choose to solve puzzles in, or explore areas in, it all comes out organically. Exploration is crucial to Fract's game design and the environment does an incredible job of eliciting this feeling from players.

Puzzles

Intuitive and compelling, the puzzles in Fract are just awesome. All puzzles consist of two portions, each unique to the area you're in. Most puzzles fit into the world that Fract builds very well. The puzzles tie directly back into the music that is being outputted as you solve the puzzle. For example, in the above puzzle lighting up different elements will change different notes that are played every beat. Furthermore, altering the effects levels on the stream of light will change the sound of the synth that is playing those notes. This process makes for feedback in the form of a song that is compelling and visceral. On top of that, the secondary puzzle in each area makes use of a sequencer for interaction. Individual notes are programmed on a screen to react with the world and also compose a song at the same time. These puzzles are designed very well and intelligently so that producing something that sound goods is also something that solves the puzzle. Unfortunately, in the primary puzzles, the correlation between puzzle and music is not as immediately clear as in the secondary puzzles. And Fract suffers a little bit from this.

Bad Things

Fract's game design is incredible when it works. Unfortunately, setting up such a loose design to afford player exploration may have ended up hurting Fract in the end. Having little to no constraints on the player ends up with the inevitable issues of a physics based environment. And with such an expansive world to explore getting anywhere quickly is just impossible. On top of these movement issues, the minimal design of the interaction system in Fract can also provide for a bit of a headache. To say that Fract wasn't aware of these issues is incorrect. But, the real question is were the systems put in place to counteract these issues successful.

Locomotion

Exploring in Fract is just awesome. The world is vast and interesting. All movement is physics based meaning you can walk or fall onto pretty much any surface. You can also fall, get stuck or clip into many surfaces too. The problem with physics based movement that isn't constrained is that a lot of the time players will most assuredly get stuck. In one level I was unfortunate enough to get stuck beneath an elevator. In another, I fell and landed on an area I shouldn't have been able to get to, there was no exit from this area either. Thankfully Fract has addressed this problem by having periodic checkpoints called stations and a respawn at last checkpoint option in the pause menu. Which, although a catch all solution, isn't very elegant. These same checkpoints make up the fast travel system in Fract. Fast travel in this game is necessary because simply walking around a world this expansive is a chore. The problem is although nice looking and aesthetically pleasing the fast travel system isn't really fast. Don't get me wrong, it's cool and pleasing, buzzing by your old completed puzzles making noises and spewing neon is an awesome feeling, but not after 50 or so times. Plus, some of the checkpoints are placed slightly away from the puzzles and it's possible to miss them, making for some very weird fast traveling.

Interface

The way players interact with puzzles and interfaces in the world of Fract is really cool. Right clicking brings up an interface where camera movement is locked and the cursor is free to move around the screen. This interaction system is actually really cool and intuitive, in practice it works very well. But Fract takes it another step further in hiding interfaces when the player isn't in this mode. This is also pretty cool because switching to this alternate view to reveal hidden buttons and knobs is a really fun mechanic. However, the problem comes from not always knowing where these interfaces are. When stuck in a puzzle or area this usually distills down to players walking around trying to look at everything in this alternate view to make sure they're not missing anything. Maybe having some kind of recurring symbol to signify a hidden interface would help this system a lot. But, as it stands, looking around and searching for interfaces that aren't immediately apparent isn't very fun. It's a really awesome interaction system but maybe providing a distinction to where it's needed would do wonders.

Final Rating…………………………………………………………………………..B

If you like electronic music, neon lights, or exploring interesting worlds this games for you. If you're just into puzzles maybe this game won't do it for you, it's more about the overall experience than the individual puzzles. But overall, I would recommend this game to people interested in it, it's worth full price.

Fract OSC is truly a great game. The setting is so beautiful, the music is nothing short of incredible, and the gameplay is very fun and compelling. Although it does have some issues that were addressed, albeit not successfully, one can easily look past these problems. It also helps knowing that this game was made by a group of very passionate indies. I had the chance to meet and talk with them at PAX and they were just awesome. So go ahead, treat yourself to the neon soaked Fract and support some awesome indies in the process.

[an-average-gamer-blog]

No Escape - Design Space in Horror Games

Design Space - a fancy word for the specific genre space your game exists in. Why is it important? Well, comparing your game to past titles and established genres is a great way to test the originality of your idea. Truly great games will live in a design space that hasn't been explored yet. Yes, your game may be in the broad genre of Horror for example, but maybe it's a combination of mechanics and ideas that's never been done before. Currently my friends and I are making a survival horror game that exists in a really unique design space, it's working title is No Escape.

Survival Horror games have seen a resurgence in the past couple years. They've certainly adapted since their humble roots in the Silent Hill and Resident Evil series. But in recent years we've seen genre-defining games such Amnesia: The Dark Descent and Outlast. We've also seen games that have brought Survival Horror to a new demographic of players like Slender and, to an extent, The Last of Us. What does this mean for Design Space? There is a lot of room right now in Survival Horror to design and come up with something original and compelling. And even more importantly there is a market ready to consume Horror games like there never was before.

With No Escape we really wanted to do something original and different but while still maintaining a fun and modern Survival Horror experience. So we did our research and came up with a model of modern Horror games. Amnesia, for example, features a linear First-Person experience with resource management and basic puzzles. It's major draw however is it's dynamic AI monsters that add a randomness to the gameplay and an intelligence to the horror system. In the same vein, Slender features a dynamic AI monster and a resource gathering mechanic. However, Slender really affords quick gameplay sessions whereas Amnesia, being a full length game, really doesn't. And this is the aspect of Slender that I believe let it latch on to a larger demographic. I mean, people were playing Slender on big screens at Halloween parties. The quick gameplay sessions and simple interaction really let it reach a lot of casual gamers.

No Escape is a rehashing of the formula with a few elements added and taken away. Personally, I've always been drawn to paranormal scares as opposed to gore and monster scares. And it helps that paranormal scares in games can be made so much more compelling than any other medium. The player and the main character have a connectedness in games that is hard to achieve anywhere else. On top of that games offer the unique ability to be able to represent impossible geometry and dynamic content that can react to the player. If you've ever played Antichamber you know what I mean when I say that games can mindfuck a player more than any other medium. So we set out to make a game with the replayability of Slender and the gameplay of Amnesia, but a game that focused on the paranormal with no AI monsters.

With only a 15 minute run time our game had to push replayability to it's limit. Not using dynamic AI we needed to get our randomness from elsewhere. Instead, our game features procedurally generated levels with dynamic content. Essentially you could replay the game over and over again and never have the same play through twice. Add to this a branching mutually exclusive choice system and multiple endings and our game has an incredible amount of replayability. At the start of the game the main character wakes up not knowing who he is or where he is so we can have completely different story arches depending on the content that was generated. Players feel the need to replay the game to explore content they didn't see and find endings that they haven't yet experienced.

As far as gameplay, we really wanted to push resource management and exploration. There are batteries strewn about the abandoned hospital you play in, and in order to keep from being left in the dark the player needs to find them. This means the player will have the drive to explore rooms and interact with objects. letting us as designers funnel them into scares a lot easier. Each room, hallway and area has the potential to scare the player. But with all this procedural generation we needed to make an intelligent game manager to appropriately pace the environment around the player. At first this seemed like a daunting task but through playtesting I think we've arrived at a system that crescendos up to big scares perfectly. Currently in development No Escape is still undergoing testing, content creation and gameplay iteration. But a demo should be available soon. Stay tuned!

[an-average-gamer-blog]

Actual Sunlight - Review

Actual Sunlight is a game about love, depression and suicide. It is one of the most emotionally rich games I've ever played. It deals strongly with topics of loneliness, regret and self-hate. Beautifully written and meticulously designed, it delivers an emotional impact that is far too often not seen in games. It's a game about agency, contemporary life and the finality of suicide.

Actual Sunlight is a 2D isometric game that follows main character Evan Winter. Made using RPG Maker it can be easily compared to other emotionally charged games such as To The Moon. But while To The Moon relies on puzzles, setting and events to tell the story, Actual Sunlight relies on prose. The game is quite literally walls upon walls of text. But that's fine because the quality of the text is amazing. The game's creator notes that when creating Actual Sunlight he was a writer first, and a game developer second. If you don't mind text-based games, and are looking for something that will have a lasting impact, you should definitely pick up Actual Sunlight.

Good Things

Although a text based game, Actual Sunlight is still most certainly a game. If written simply as a novel it would not carry as much weight as it does in an interactive medium. It uses cliches to create commentary on the story and it's interactive nature allows player to connect with the main character on a much deeper level. Although primarily walls of text, the game has very sound gameplay mechanics, all of which afford it's overall design. The creator noted that he was a writer first and game developer second, but I would argue that it is the interactive portions of the game that are the most powerful and memorable. Actual Sunlight is a game that could not thrive in any other medium.

Writing

The writing in Actual Sunlight is just amazing. The many essays the player encounters are direct thoughts coming from the main character. In this way, the player can really begin to understand and to connect with Evan Winter. Most pieces may be depressing or pessimistic, but there is enough humor and sentiment that shines through to keep the player going. And the game needs that, it needs the player-character connection to be strong to enforce it's ending. Even players who have never experienced depression will find a piece of themselves in Evan. And although that's a terrifying thought, it should be noted that this game is not meant to be therapeutic. But it's thanks to the writing that players can feel this connection to Evan and really begin to understand him. This game is big on story and it presents complex characters in a way that truly does them justice.

Gameplay

The biggest puzzle in Actual Sunlight is trying to figure out where to sit on a crowded bus that won't illicit some kind of social interaction. And while not a huge puzzle it's a gameplay mechanic that reinforces the games overall purpose. Other mechanics include choosing the floor in an elevator or deciding what to buy out of boredom. These mechanics tie in directly to the story and are used masterfully to exemplify the main character's life. And while the gameplay of interacting with the world is essential to Actual Sunlight, the majority of gameplay will be spent reading prose. Just like the majority of the main characters time is spent within his own head. But even in walls of text, there is still gameplay elements. Text fills the screen on button presses, giving lines and words their own punctuation and meter by way of gameplay. How each piece is presented, slowly or quickly to the player, or how each piece uses the negative black space around it, is very important to the experience. So for those who say that the game isn't truly a game because of the amount of text, I think that's absolutely ridiculous. The text is presented in a way that only an interactive experience could permit. And it makes the game and experience stronger as a result.

Agency

A fancy word for player choice, Agency is a major factor in Actual Sunlight. I don't want to spoil any major plot points in the story, but agency is incredibly important to the overall story arch. For people considering suicide, sometimes it seems like it is their only way out of their current state. The game will at points reflect this by diminishing agency and making the player feel like they have no choice but to follow through with certain actions. This parallel from character to player is incredibly profound and compelling to experience. It's a parallel that can only be done in games. The overall game design of Actual Sunlight is just beautiful. It's use of mechanics and cliches just empower the story to a level of art not often seen in games.

Bad Things

Although an amazing game, Actual Sunlight is not meant for all gamers. If you're someone who really wants an entirely interactive experience then it might not be for you. Or if you're someone who really detests reading long expansive text in games then I wouldn't suggest picking up a copy. Actual Sunlight does a lot of things right, but it's not a perfect game. It is very much a linear experience, albeit a great one, and players looking for choice or diverging plot may be frustrated with that. But it's worth noting that the game design of Actual Sunlight seriously reinforces it's purpose. I don't think it could have been done in any other way. It is a great game and if it's not for you then that's okay, but it is definitely worth giving it a try. There are some profound things that it has to say about depression, contemporary life and video games themselves.

Art

One slight problem I have with Actual Sunlight is the art used in the game. The main character, and several secondary characters have custom sprites made for them. However, many bystanders are still using RPG Maker art. And while the art picked out for them is perfect for who they are as a character, there is a slight disconnect from the art of the main cast versus the art of everyone else. Although this might have something to say in regards to how the main character views people he knows against random people he has to interact with, it's probably just a product of the game being independently created. While just a small issue, it does impede on the immersion of the player.

Final Rating………………………………………………………………………….B+

If you don't mind reading in games I would definitely recommend picking this game up, it is worth it's full price.

Actual Sunlight is a profound and compelling game that has a lot to say. It won't leave you crying at the end, but it will deliver serious emotional blows that will stick with you. It's thought provoking and will present you with a unique perspective on life, love and sadness. It's a testament to good game design and the power of an interactive medium. I would recommend this game to anyone who has the patience to sit through some text. And even if you don't think you do, I'd give Actual Sunlight a try. You may just learn something about yourself in regard to games, and in regard to life.

[an-average-gamer-blog]

No Escape - Interaction System in Horror Games

I can remember all too well my first play-through of Amnesia: The Dark Descent. The sweaty palms, the muted screams, and the hours and hours of anxiety. But how did this game do Horror so well and so differently? And how did they make the atmosphere so compelling and immersive? Let's look specifically at the interaction system.

I was a fan of horror even before I knew horror games existed. I have fond memories of staying up late, typically sometime around halloween, and getting the shit scared out of me by some movie on TV. Horror has always resonated with me for whatever reason and once introduced to horror games I couldn't stop playing. So as a final project here at RIT a few friends and I are building a horror game. As the project lead it is up to me to program and design the overall gameplay. We had decided on a FPS game with survival horror elements and a major focus on dynamic content. The first thing I really wanted to focus on was getting the interaction system right. So naturally I started to do some research into well-known horror games and some more obscure titles.

I've played Dead Space and Alan Wake and both have very similar interaction systems. Doors and objects have a button prompt to use them. Then the door opens on it's own or after a small animation. While these games are good, this interaction doesn't reply apply to our game. As designing a game in 3rd-Person is very different from 1st-Person.

I then looked at some lesser known free horror games made in Unity. Something closer to what I would be producing as opposed to a AAA game. Now most of the games that I played still had the same interaction system as Dead Space or Alan Wake. Walk up to a door or an item, click it, and it will play an animation of the door opening or the item being used. Now this seemed either lazy or careless to me. It's different for a 3rd-person game to use this mechanic than a 1st-person game. What does this mechanic do for a 1st person game? It doesn't facilitate immersion and it certainly doesn't imply realism. That's when I looked at what I think to be the king of all FPS horror, Amnesia: The Dark Descent.

Now there's a lot of good design we can learn from the original Amnesia. And a lot of bad design we can learn from it's sequel. But let's specifically look at it's interactions. Now if you can fondly remember those anxiety ridden nights playing Amnesia, in the game you can interact with physics-enabled objects. What this means is you can pick up chairs, throw rocks and basically be an unruly teenager. But why did Amnesia make this decision? Because it serves their overall game design. It makes for a much more immersive game. A game where you can literally reach out and touch your surroundings. Okay, so we give the player the ability to enact forces on physics-enabled objects. Then we give those objects a force towards the center of the player's screen. That way the player can pick stuff up, toss stuff around, and more or less interact with their environment. But, there's a problem.

Doors. Think about it. You pick up a glass of water, you're holding it, you walk around, look up, look down, you're still holding that glass of water. Now think about how you physically interact with doors. You walk up to the door, you grab the handle, turn and.. move your arm. No walking and no looking around to pull the door to the center of your vision. Amnesia solves this problem by having an entirely different interaction system for doors and drawers. When you begin interacting with the door your vision freezes, you can't look up and down or left and right. Instead, moving the mouse down and up pushes and pulls the door, as well as moving the mouse left and right. The user can also grab the door and walk backwards or forwards to close or open the door without even moving the mouse. These are all real interactions that you do in everyday life. Again the design of these mechanics reinforce the overall purpose of Amnesia. To immerse the player in a terrifying atmosphere and scare the shit out of them.

So what do we do for our game. We implement an Amnesia like interaction system where physics-enabled objects can be interacted with, and doors and drawers have a separate interaction system. We playtest and interate on the system, playtest again and iterate some more. What we find out is the system isn't all that intuitive at first. The player really needs to get the hang of it. But once the player understands how to interact with the environment they start really exploring the game. Not only because they can become immersed in the atmosphere, but because new things have to be tested. Can I open this drawer? Is there anything inside? Can I pick up that book? What happens if I turn on this switch? This is a majorly good thing for our game. Immersion brings better chances to scare the player and the desire for exploration means we can corner the player and design around them more effectively. It's really a powerful thing and it's all because of the interaction system.

One thing we did change slightly, and I mean very slightly, was the locking of the players camera when interacting with doors. When moving the mouse left/right it really makes sense that the player is turning as well. Although not incredibly noticeable unless the player is standing completely parallel with a door, we turn the player because in real life you would turn too. Thus adding to the immersion and also letting the player never lose track of the object they're interacting with.

[an-average-gamer-blog]

The Walking Dead Season Two - Review

The Walking Dead Season Two is Telltale's follow-up to the critically acclaimed Season One. The worlds most adorable character named after a fruit, Clementine, is back as this season's playable character. So far only episodes one and two have been released but the full picture is beginning to come into view, and honestly, it's a bit underwhelming.

The Walking Dead was one of the stand out games of 2012. Putting players in the shoes of Lee, a man struggling with his past while trying to reunite a sweet young girl with her parents. Oh yeah, and there are zombies, and lots of them. Along with the zombies comes a setting where moral values are constantly being tried and uncomfortable decisions need to be made constantly. Enter the player. The Walking Dead gives players the unique experience of not only being able to live in this setting, but also the privilege and burden of making these hard decisions. It was a great game and really helped to breath life into the adventure game genre. Season Two is the Walking Dead's sequel and while the setting and characters may be similar there are minor differences in design and direction.

Good Things

The game follows closely in the footsteps of it's predecessor. There's hard decisions to be made, dialogue choices, branching story-lines and violence against the undead! The only difference is that this time Telltale is coming off a very successful game so Season Two presumably had a bigger budget. And thankfully, it really shows. The music for this season is really spot on, the sequences are more cinematic and action-packed, and it's much more polished than Season One.

Improved Graphics

The above comparison might not do it justice but the difference in graphics from Season One to Season Two is actually quite striking. It is most-likely a product of a larger budget but the new graphics are really stunning. The comic book lines and hard blacks really shine in the new season. And Telltale uses the new graphics to full effect with a more cinematic approach to sequence than in Season One. The whole game really looks amazing. On top of the overall graphics the UI has been completely reworked and it is much sleeker. Menu's seem inviting and appear well at all resolutions. Even the interaction system's icons are new and fancily colored to really show off the new UI. The Second Season's graphics are just stunning.

Story Weaving

Season Two actually has some really impressive divergent story-lines. Replaying the game again and choosing different decisions can actually land you in drastically different circumstances. Of course, there is a main story that will trudge along no matter what choices you make, but really that's okay. Your choices actually do matter enough in the short term for really unique outcomes to occur. Honestly, after replaying Episode Two I was very surprised at how changing my major choice in Episode One affected the story. Whole other settings, dialogue and action sequences were available to me. That being said, Telltale was no dummy when it came to weaving stories. Dialogue and interactions are reused in multiple story arches, mostly because if the game wants the player to experience something they should experience it, but also because majorly different story arches cost a lot of time for little value.

Bad Things

Although the overall gameplay is the same as Season One, Telltale has definitely made some minor modifications, and sometimes not for the better. As a result, for those that loved the original, Season Two will most likely feel a little underwhelming. Now of course Season One left the series with some big shoes to fill. Players wanted a game that played like Season One, they wanted a game that tried their morals, made them make uncomfortable decisions, and delivered a wide range of emotions. They wanted a game that focused on Clementine and the mysterious death of Kenny, one that had bigger and better plot twists than the first season, one with improved interaction and combat. In short, players wanted a lot. Telltale tries to deliver with Season Two but they certainly made some wrong decisions.

UI

I mentioned the UI above in good things so how can a sleeker better looking UI be a bad thing? Well, it's not so much the UI's appearance as the specific interaction. The above screen will look familiar to anyone who played Season One on a touchscreen, but for people playing on PC we will remember the stacked 1-4 dialogue options list. The one where you could use your mouse but simply pressing 1-4 on the keyboard was a much faster and intuitive way to interact with the options. Season Two does away with the list and instead presents the user with a 2by2 grid that they must mouse over and click to pick an option. This may seem nit-picky but in doing so this increases the amount of time it takes to make a decision and the amount of filtering one's brain has to do to convert intent to action. As a result, it seems decision time is increased, making hard decisions easier to process and come to a conclusion on. One of the most striking aspects of the original Walking Dead was the quick decisions times. It really meant that decisions were coming from the players heart. In addition, the new UI really hinders immersion. Before it was decision->button, but now it's decision->find mouse->move mouse->click. The mouse interaction really helps solidify that you are playing a game. If you were lost in the atmosphere which The Walking Dead painstakingly builds, you are pulled right out.

Adventure Game Aspects

One of my favorite things about Season One was that section of the game where things got really adventure gamey. When you'd come to a new location or stuff would die down and you'd have that time to walk around, check the place out, talk to whoever you want and complete some objective. Like when Lee was put in charge of distributing food at the motel. You could walk around, get input from people you cared about, and eventually hand out all the rations. Unfortunately, Season Two has given up a lot of these vast adventure game moments for a more targeted, objective-based approach to play. It seems like they've done this to make way for more segments of cinematic action and quick-time events. Which only serve to lengthen sequences where the player does little to nothing. While the adventure game aspects are there, the segments seem more shallow and linear than those in Season One. While this choice hurts immersion and fun, it also has the unintended consequence of lowering the running time of the game. Season Two episodes have been consistently about an hour and a half for me, while in Season One episodes were more two to three hours of gameplay.

Character/Story

So it seems like Clementine as the only playable character was the logical direction to go in for a second season, right? Firstly, she's the player's favorite character. The ending of Season One leaves us on a cliffhanger about how she fares. And there is the beautiful passing the torch of player control from Lee to Clementine at the end of the first season. But the real problem is that for all of Season One we play a character who is capable, whose decisions matter and who has a purpose (Clementine). Lee's character design affords the Walking Dead's overall game design.

Transitioning to Season Two we play as Clementine, a young girl, who although capable, is never left to decide anything. Furthermore, Clementine has no purpose other than herself. Now there may be some interesting realms to explore with the idea of being an overlooked child and growing up in a world where there is no real purpose to life. But unfortunately for the first two episodes we haven't really explored those realms. And it's really counter intuitive to play as a character whose decisions don't matter in a game about making decisions. Now from before, you'll remember that there are very divergent story arches in Season Two, and your decisions as Clementine actually do matter. However, without replaying the game, players won't know how their choices affected the story. And the impact of their decisions is truly not what's important. What's important is how the player feels when making the decisions. Do they feel empowered, do they feel like their choices matter, or do they feel like a child who isn't being listened to? This is the ultimate fault of Season Two. Maybe this will change by the end of the season, we'll see, but I'm not holding my breath.

Final Rating………………………………………………………………………….C+

If you are interested in the genre or it’s on sale you could pick up this game, but I wouldn't personally recommend it.

In a vacuum Clementine's character is actually really compelling to play as. But the story that Telltale builds around her is one that gives her little power and pushes the "you're a child" theme. There is hope that this will turn around come the new episodes. But for right now, Season Two is very underwhelming and I wouldn't recommend it.

[an-average-gamer-blog]

Titanfall - Review

What is Titanfall? Well, it's a game where you run around and shoot things for hours on end. A game where huge mechs fall from the sky and you pilot them to victory. A game where you can double-jump, wall-run and fly across the battlefield. In short - this game is fun.

Titanfall is a recent multiplayer FPS from Respawn Entertainment. Players run around, parkour all over buildings, get kills with future weapons, and pilot Titans. Everything else, well, it doesn't really matter. This game is fun, and that's all it's trying to be. There is no deeper meaning, the story and characters are forgettable and all the player does is run around killing things. But that's fine, because this game knows that, and it focus's purely on player experience. The gameplay is fast-paced, exhilarating and immersive. I could sit down and easily play this game for hours on end and not be bored for a second. It's also geared to be incredibly casual. A new player picking up the game can have just as much fun as an experienced player. While this mean's you probably won't ever see it being played competitively, it all ties back to this game just being about pure fun.

Good Things

This game is Casual-As-Fuck. Inexperienced players will have just as much fun as experienced players. But this isn't inherently a bad thing. Everyone has fun in a game of Titanfall. The winning team, the losing team, the best player, the worst player, everyone has fun. It's something the developers were really striving for. And it really shines through in their design of the game. Everyone will call in titans during a match. No matter how badly you do, you will always get a chance to call in a Titan. Good play decreases time between titan calldowns, but it's not like killstreaks in CoD, you can go 0-20 and Titanfall won't punish you for it. In fact, Titanfall will never punish you for bad play. This is it's biggest strength. No matter if you win or lose, you still have fun during a match, and that's a huge thing for an online multiplayer FPS.

Parkour

Titanfall's movement system is easily paralleled to the movement system in Brink. (Except well, that it doesn't suck). Like Brink, Titanfall allows players to wall-run, wall-hang and basically fly across the battlefield. So why is Titanfall's parkour more fun than Brink's? Well, Titanfall's movement system is at least interactive. You have to jump when you want to jump, direct the camera so the game knows where you want to go, and plan a route accordingly. (If you don't quite remember, in Brink all of that could be done by simply looking in a direction and sprinting.) In addition, Titanfall is incredibly forgiving. Every player has a jetpack, so naturally, everyone can double jump. This means if you didn't quite execute correctly, you will still most likely do that badass thing you wanted to do. And all the maps are designed so that you can do some really badass stuff.

Minions

Games of Titanfall are maxed out at 6v6. However, there are still up to 50  combatants on the field at once. The extra enemies are in the form of minions, who are AI characters that spawn on either side throughout the game. Players, or Pilots, get points for killing enemy minions, although minion kills are not comparable to Pilot or Titan kills. What this means is a new player, or a bad player, who has a 2-10 Pilot Kill-Death Ratio, can still contribute to the team by killing AI enemies. Most importantly these players can still have fun even if they're doing badly. Hell, they might not even know they're doing badly at all. Players can even be MVP's of their team if they rack up enough minion kills. Also, this sets the game up for some epic scenes, as you and 20+ teammates rush into battle. The servers win by having a more controlled environment and the players win by having easy fodder for their bullets. Also, Pilots are seen as the most powerful soldier in the game. This gives players that boost of being good at the game innately. And in multiplayer play, the boost can really help mitigate the adverse effects of doing terribly.

Smart-Pistol

I won't go too much into this one, but it basically reiterates my main point. The Smart-Pistol is a gun designed for players not experienced with multiplayer FPS's. Because Titanfall can be so fast-paced and player movement is so easy, the Smart-Pistol gives players the option to use a slow locked-on pistol that gives a one shot kill. Players inexperienced to twitchy or knee-jerk reactions that a lot of shooters reward can use this gun as an alternative. It also annihilates minions. The gun is of course balanced, the lock on time differs from minion to pilot and getting pilot kills with the weapon can be relatively difficult. Still though, it's a great option again for more casual players.

Bad Things

So far, all I've done is praise this game for being insanely fun. But it's important to note I'm only talking about the actual match gameplay. And while that's a huge part of the game, that is not the whole package. FPS players nowadays expect more than just a fun game to play. Titanfall is a full AAA game, it costs $60. Players expect a game that is both captivating and addicting, one that never gets old even after months of play. A game that features an extensive set of unlockables, player customization and a progression system. Unfortunately, this is where Titanfall fails to deliver.

Customization

Titanfall has little to no player customization. Literally the only option that can change your player cosmetically is whether your model is male or female. While that's nice to see, not being able to customize anything else is a little frustrating. There are no weapon skins, no custom banners or custom icons. There aren't even clan tags. While this game isn't about players customization, it feels like for a $60 game you deserve some cosmetic options. Look at the CoD franchise, custom weapon skins have been around forever. It would at least provide a large amount of unlockables that could used by the challenge system, which falls short of expectations.

Challenges

The challenges in Titanfall are underwhelming at best. I don't know whether it's a product of a bad UI for navigating challenges, a product of there not being enough unlockables or a product of the challenges themselves being shitty. But regardless of the cause, the challenge system is not a fun mechanic. Every weapon has challenges and there are challenges for accomplishing specific feats during gameplay. But the challenges seem really shallow and cookiecutter. There's even a challenge that tracks gameplay time using a certain gun, the max level of which is 2.5 hours. This just seems lazy and doesn't reward good players by helping them level up any quicker. On top of that, the rewards for completing challenges are abysmal. You either get some xp, which you never really feel does anything, or you get a burn card. Burn cards themselves are incredibly problematic.

Burn Cards

Burn Cards are cards you get in Titanfall that can be used during one life in a match. They all do different things, buffing your speed, weapons, titan downtime, or some other unique effect. The main problem is there are way too many of them. The max deck size that is allowed is 30 cards and you will always have 30 cards. Even if you use 3 a game until the end of time you will never run out. This devalues all of the burn cards because there are so many to choose from. This means that as a challenge reward they are consistently overlooked. Oh, this challenge gives me an amped Smart Pistol? Well, I already have 5 of those cards so that's just great.. Also, the system for using burn cards is unintuitive. During your respawn you have to enter a sub-menu and select the cards you want to use for your next life. The problem is Titanfall is such a high velocity game taking the time to equip a burn card during respawn is a chore. Players just want to keep playing the game. Maybe if burn cards lasted a whole match instead of just one life, and maybe if they were valued higher I could see them being a fun mechanic. But right now they just seem like something you have to remember to use and manage.

Final Rating.....................................................................................C

If you are interested in the genre or it’s on sale you should pick up this game.

Although the game is an insane amount of fun the metagame is just not strong enough to keep a player interested for months on end. You should really consider trying to pick it up on sale because it's not worth $60. Playing it for an hour at a friends house should be enough to tide you over until the price drops.