Game Design 101

Thoughts and opinions about computer game design and the industry surrounding it. http://about.me/john.harvey

[tightning-blog]

Tomb Raider

Right, so I haven't played a proper adventure game in a while.  It's been even longer since I last played a Tomb Raider game; in fact it was 1997 when Tomb Raider 2 came out on the PlayStation.

So why come back?

Tomb Raider (2013) is a reboot to a series, as well as a prequel story for the now-cultural-icon Lara Croft.  It's following in the vein of most reboots since the mid 2000s: it's gritty and grimdark and other buzzwords that have been floating about.  I don't think it's a bad thing that these types of reboots exist, and its really the signature theme from the first decade of the new millennium.  It can't be worse than the hairstyles of the 90s, at least.

As far as reboots go, Tomb Raider is an interesting choice.  The original Lara Croft, accidentally disproportionate though she may be, has become a wholly recognizable character in the video game lineup, competing with Mario and Sonic as media-defining institution.  The decision to remake this character means at least partially shedding what has gone before to make Lara who she was, perhaps even moreso given that the game is also a prequel story.

So have Square-Enix made a good job of it?  The answer, maybe surprisingly, is yes.  The character is a bit more real than previous iterations, and not really just in terms of physique.  The journey she takes through the game is really one of suffering, and this is reflected well in the character, through her clothing that becomes more distressed as the game progresses and the vocal and facial cues that demonstrate without subtlety the anguish she faces.  At times, it borders on jarring to see and hear the pain Lara suffers through.

The sword here is double-edged, however, and Lara isn't averse to causing pain either.  Like fellow adventurer Nathan Drake (of Uncharted fame), Lara is more than handy with weapons, and you can expect her body count to be high over the course of the game.  The pain she seem to suffer is visited again on her enemies, with some especially brutal set-pieces for dispatching weakened foes in evidence.  It's curious to wonder if the execution moves are included to balance the shock factor of the hurt that Lara herself experiences, just from the other side of the coin.

Suffering aside, the gameplay of Tomb Raider is very enjoyable, with tight, refined controls - a blessing when the platforming elements of the game come to the fore. There is a distinct RPG element involved, with every action from foraging for food (either finding berries on bushes or taking on the local wildlife), to killing enemies, and on to finding artifacts and documents providing an amount of experience points.  These act as you would expect: after obtaining a set amount, Lara gains a skill point that can be put into one of 3 disciplines: Survivalist, Hunter and Brawler.  These equate to foraging and movement, ranged weapons and melee combat respectively, and each skill points will usually give an additional ability, such as being able to stun enemies with a melee attack or finding more ammo on defeated foes.

There isn't a set way that is better or worse with regards to where you allocate your skill points, and by the end of the game you will have picked up the majority of them.  Something else that fits the roleplay mechanic is the weapon modification system.  This works in a similar fashion to experience levels, with a collected resource forming the 'currency' through which weapon upgrades (faster fire rate, better accuracy, better damage) are purchased.  As with the skills, progressing through the game will net the majority of these by the time the end of the game comes round, so picking your preferred upgrade path will work out just as well as any 'build' that may be recommended.

All in all, Tomb Raider is a fun gaming experience that draws from a number of different sources, but ultimately makes each component its own. Although Lara may suffer throughout her adventure, as a player you're unlikely to.

[tightning-blog]

A book review? What?

Yeah, it's not really in keeping with this blog, but whatever. 

I've recently read The Casual Vacancy, J.K. Rowling's new novel, and figured I'd get my thoughts down somewhere.

Spoilers may appear below the break, but I'll try not to give away any major plot points.

The Casual Vacancy is Rowling's first foray into a world outside the Harry Potter series.  Right from the outset, the book seems to yearn to break the mold set forth by Harry Potter and break truly into the realm of the adult novel.  Thematically, the story moves to fill the magical, bright world sprinkled with despair that Harry Potter has provided us with a much darker view of the world.  Harry Potter had to deal with death, mostly; throughout the course of the Casual Vacancy a reader will see rape, paedophilia, hard drug use, racism, death of adults and children and self-mutilation.

Inserting darker themes, to me, doesn't automatically make a story more or less adult; as with the deaths of characters at the end of the Harry Potter series, some of these devices feel shoehorned into the novel in an effort to add a shock factor to the story.

The story itself centers on the rural village of Pagford and the political intrigue generated by the death of a parish council member, creating the namesake Casual Vacancy.  Following this defined start, however, the story splinters to points of view of multiple residents of the village, and the nearby town of Yarvil, and quickly loses a meaningful flow to the resolution of the issue laid out early on. There is no concrete ending or finale to the book per se; events from the latter quarter of the book could have occurred at just about any time after the first quarter.

Despite the lack of a cohesive plot train, a compulsion is felt to keep reading, possibly only to see when the grand finale will actually occur.  Rowling's books all have this quality, the need to read just one more page.

Although the book uses a large number of adult plot devices, each is reasonable well handled individually, and tie in together quite well. Perhaps going into more depth in some areas and omitting others may have provided a more flowing story, but overall the solidity of the writing is evident.

It may be that I've been jaded by action films and stories that follow the defined 'work toward a grand finale' trope, but the whole read feels as though it's missing a driving point and a resolution.

One other point about the book is that I believe it would make a good TV adaptation.  Visualizing the events in the book and adding in the ability to cut between cast members would allow a better view of the overarching story.  It may well be that Rowling has learned how to write books for the screen, given the route that the Harry Potter media took through book and film.

While the book is well written, the devices used may not be for everyone, especially those who look to this book for a continuation of the writing style that Rowling showcased in the Harry Potter stories.

[tightning-blog]

Look how long it's been (blame Blizzard...)

Been a while, hasn't it?

Don't worry, I haven't forgotten about that "special something" that I was working on prior to my recent lapse in blogging, it's still a work-in-progress.  I have a few other ideas for things that I want to get out in the open as well, more to come on that in the near future.

As can be inferred from the title of this post, I've been playing a lot of Diablo 3 recently, and I have to say that I'm really impressed by the game that Blizzard have put out.  Even though there are a few kinks that the vocal part of the community have been quick and loud to talk about, the game remains a highly polished hack and slash experience.  Hopefully, with Blizzard's knowledge of content availability having expanded since Diablo 2, the game will remain fun to play for a long time to come yet.

Aside: Go check out the newest Game Music Bundle, and while you're at it (if you haven't already), play the games themselves (my personal favourite: Terraria)

[tightning-blog]

Something old, something new...

Sometimes, people come up with new ways of playing games that are already out.  This kind of rule manipulation started with the 'house rules' of board or card games, whereby individual households would alter the rules of a game slightly to increase the fun of a game.  One of the most famous example of this is the Free Parking kitty in Monopoly.  Pretty much everyone plays the rule that the taxation tile's payments are made to the centre of the board, to be picked up by the next lucky person to land on free parking.  The official use of free parking?  Nothing.  It's a tile where nothing good or bad can happen to you.  But adding the promise of cash removes this possibly dull tile from the board, and adds (in my opinion) a bit more fun to the game.

Skip forward to computer games and we get new kinds of house rules.  Play Counter-Strike for any amount of time, and you're likely to hear a suggestion of a knife round.  In the FPS, people eschew guns for a round in favour of their tactical knives.  Trying to enfoce the use of only the basic weapon is a bit harder as their is a reason for you to disobey, unlike monopoly - you can kill people from more than 3 feet away.  If you ignore the free money from free parking, you only put yourself at a disadvantage.  Of course, you might get banned from the Counter-Strike server, but to 99% of gamers that won't really matter.

Another common example appears in League of Legends.  At the character selection screen, people have been known to call out "all random all mid".  Essentially, this boils down to everyone picking a random character, and everyone going down the middle of the 3 paths the map has (top, middle, bottom).  Once there, a team fight occurrs.  First, a recap of the game, before I explain the positive / negative of the house rule and disobeying it:  League of Legends is a DOTA game that puts you in control of a single character on a team of 5, with everyone starting at level 1 each new game.  The map is divided into 3 lanes, the previously mentioned top, middle and bottom that join up at either teams main base.  Along each of these lanes are defense towers.  NPCs (friendly and hostile) will continually spawn from the start of the game and will trek along these lanes, fighting each other or attacking towers as necessary.  Killing enemy NPCs (minions) nets you cash to buy upgraded items, and experience to level you up, as does killing enemy players.  Gold is crucial, as your items are what can really make a character amazing or useless.  Your goal (and that of your team) is to fight up one or more lanes and destroy the enemy towers, eventually attacking their base to destroy it.  Smash their home and victory is yours.

So, when someone says all randome all mid you can see the downside: only one person pushing either top or bottom will get to kill all the enemy minions, netting good amounts of gold.  But there is also the downside of your team being a man down in the team fight.  In League of Legends, unless there is a massive gap in player ability, 4 players will lose against 5.  The middle lane will be pushed much faster without your character than you can push your own lane.

To work well, house rules must always have a balance of positive and negative, so that disobeying them would result in a loss of either fun or the game.  Finding such a balance is often hard, hence why people bring guns to knife fights in Counter-Strike. 

How can this affect single player gameplay then?  Can there be enough of a positive to adjust the rules for a game only you play?  Ive found a set of rules for a single player game that seem to work pretty well.

I'd imagine that anyone aged 30 or below (and most parents as well, irrespective of age) will have had exposure to Pokémon.  The Japanese monster-collecting phenomenon has been around for more than 15 years now, and is all but a household name.  I'm going to assume you know what the games are about, but if not, feel free to check out the site.  I've recently been playing through a Pokémon game using a set of house rules called the Nuzlocke Rules.  There are essntialy 2 main rules that are obeyed, with a 3rd that is included pretty much all the time: 1 - You can only catch the first Pokémon you encounter in an an area.  make it faint by mistake or have no Pokéballs? Tough luck, no new friends for you here.  2 - If a Pokémon you're using faints, you have to release it (simulating the Pokémon passing away).  3 - You must give each Pokémon a unique nickname. 

These rules firstly serve to make the game a bit harder; Pokémon is a relatively easy game to begin with, mostly if you lose you only have to train another Pokémon for 15 minutes to conquer your foe.  Using Nuzlocke, if you lose that means all your Pokémon have fainted and must be released.  This might not be a game-ender (as you might have some additional Pokémon in storage), but it will almost certainly be crippling.

The second thing these rules do was a bit unexpected at first:  by naming your Pokémon and having to release them if they faint, you begin to feel for your Pokémon, and develop an emotional attachment to them.  You really worry when encountering a tough fight, because a single mistimes critical hit or miss can mean the difference between victory and removing a friend from your party for good.  The positive of these house rules, for me, more than make up for the negatives, as it brings a game that might be getting a git stale a fresh lease of life.

If you can play a Pokémon game, go give the Nuzlocke Rules a try, you might be surprised how you come to feel about some code and a few pixels.

Aside: there is a way to constantly provide only positive consequences for 'house rules': cheating.  When you cheat, you break the rules, or bend them, pretty much exactly the same way a house rule will bend or break another rule.  I don't really like cheating: in single-player games, you simply rob yourself of an element of the game.  Having infinite ammo eliminates the tension of running low on ammo, possibly changing the whole aesthetic of a game.  Cheating in multiplayer games gives you an unfair advantage.  You might win, but you'll always know that your advantage helped with that.  Would you have won without it?  Don't be afraid to lose a game.  If you lose legitimately, then you were playing someone better than you, and you don't improve at something unless you go out of your depth a bit.

[tightning-blog]

What do you think of Diablo 3?

So, I spent some time playing Diablo 3 over the weekend, and I'm pretty impressed.  At the moment, I can't tell if its the novelty factor, or nostalgia clouding my vision, but I feel the game is legitimately good, even with these factors counted in (fiar warning - possible spoilers ahead)

One of the tings I like most about the Beta (and hopefully the rest of the game as well) is in incidental detail that has been put into every environment, every character.  Most creatures have a lore entry, often narrated by one of a number of characters.  Honestly, I'm not sure that Deckard Cain's dulcet tones explaining the walking dead will ever get old.  Areas are littered with objects that can (and will) be destroyed, either intentionally or accidentally when fending off the swarms of enemies that the Diablo series is famous for (my record number of kills in a single blow so far: 29).

Further to all of this though, a pleasant surprise concerning the detail built into the game came on my second playthrough of the opening quests with a character that had previously completed the beta.  About 85% of the way through the beta, you may encounter a Templar warrior who will join you as a companion after you've helped him with his mission.  If you only play through the beta once, you'll have his company for maybe 20-30 minsutes or so, at most.  As you'd expect, he has a range of diagloue for this segment of the game.  Blizzard went one better: when you go back to the start of the beta with this companion in tow, he has a full range of dialogue from literally the first area of the game onwards.  This is pretty cool, and well thought-out.

"But wait", say Blizzard, "we don't stop at "pretty cool", it's "holy $*%~" or bust for us".  Go back to the area you found the Templar initially, and your companion Templar will start talking to the recently-found one.  They will claim that "evil will run in terror at the sight of two Templars".

I suppose that this level of details should come as no surprise (in fact, it may be mandatory, given that in Diablo 3 you will progress through the same areas 4 times for a complete run of the game [once for each difficulty setting]), but actually seeing the detail presented rather than talked about in a PR release or as a rumourl really sealed the deal for me; now it's all I can do to just wait for the full release (only 22 days to go!)

Aside: when not playing Diablo 3, I spent a lot of time on Trials Evolution.  The game is a massive step-up from the already brilliant and addictive original, adding in visual flair that departs hugely from the static warehouse of the first game.  The difficulty curve is similar as well, maening if you haven't played the original you can just jump right in.

Aside 2: if you've got an Xbox360, go try Escape Goat (free trial, the full game is only 80 MS points).  It's a beautiful retro platformer with puzzle elements, and the cost to fun ratio is fantastic; one of the best uses of MS points I've come across recently. 

[tightning-blog]

Play Diablo 3 this weekend

Blizzard has opened the doors of DIablo 3 this weekend for an open beta session, inviting anyone with a Battle.Net account to play (and accounts are free as well!)

To play the game, head on over to Battle.Net (EU) or Battle.Net (US), download the Diablo 3 beta client and create a BattleTag (done from the account management page).

This open beta won't last long (in fact, only nutil Monday), but is a great chance to play the game prior to launch to see if it's something you fancy.  Personally, I've been looking forward to D3 for a long time, and have spent countless hours on Diablo 2.  From what I've played of the Beta so far (just a few hours worth, admittedly), the game is extremely solid, with improvements to pretty much every gameplay mechanic from Diablo 2, along with a few ideas that Blizzard have brought in from otehr titles, both their own brands and external influences.

In my opinion, this is going to be a game to play for 2012.

Aside: my BattleTag is Tightning#2511, feel free to add me.

[tightning-blog]

Quick post: Lean Startup Tactics (link)

Just a short one, yes I know I'm behind on my posts but I have something quite cool in the works, just hold on.

Take a look over at Gamasutra for a good article (with good resources) for game dev on a budget (time and monetary): link here.  The article is a good read, and the resources linked are really handy, not to mention free.  One of the early points in the article is also both very true and very interesting: that reuse of code / assets can occur to save time and money, without necessarily compromising quality.

The reason I like this article is that reusing code or assets is close to idea that I've previously mentioned, mainly along the lines of chanign only a single key element of a game or notion to create something new.  This kind of thinking is bolstered through reuse of assets.

Another, more complete post will hopefully follow this evening.

[tightning-blog]

Give Fez a try, you'll be surprised

Fez, a wonderful pixellated indie game from Polytron Corporation, was released two days ago on Xbox Live Arcade.  If you have the capacity to play this game I would recommend it as, although this game has seen some flack as a result of the developer being outspoken about certain issues, it reamins a truly charming and elegant game.

Fez has been in development for a long time in a world that has seen indie games conceptualised and released in months.  Since work began in 2007, Fez has been pushed back several times, resulting in the game slipping from its scehduled 2010 release.  But I don't mind the wait, and neither should you.

Fez, at first glance, looks like the type of indie game that pops up every now and then in an attempt to appeal to nostalgia (with pixellated graphics and / or chiptunes) and introduce something that was missing from similar games of days gone by.  Insert obligatory reference to Cave Story here, include strong recommendation to play, especially since it's on Steam.  Your first glance might not be too wrong, but take the time for a second glance, and see the world shift and a new pattern emerge.  Fez is actually a 3D game, but you can only see 2 of those Ds at any given time, though you can rotate around the Y-axis freely.

This key gameplay mechanic works to open the game up like a flower, shifting your perspective to reveal the solution to challenges, details you would otherwise miss and the progression for the befezed Gomez, protagonist.  It's not just in graphics and gameplay that the game seeks to enthrall either; the soundtrack is endearing and vibrant, perfectly pitched to the whimsy of the world that Phil Fish has crafted.

So, this Sunday if you've nothing else to do (in fact, even if you DO have something else to do) and can put up 800 MS points, give Fez a go.  It is a beautiful platfrom adventure that wholly manages to capture a revolutionary 3D world in a sublime 2D landscape.

[tightning-blog]

...and colour to my eyes

Short follow-up post (a short post is still a post!) about another single design aesthetic that can really alter the way a game feels and plays.  The colour pallette is something that most people will take for granted when playing a game because, mostly, the developers will use a full spectrum (or close to it) in their game. 

A Final Fantasy game would not feel the same without every colour of the reainbow represented, possibly just in the attire of the protagonists.  Other games take a more toned-down approach whilst maintaining the use of a full pallette; most modern FPS games (especially ultra-realistic, modern setting ones) will use a full pallette of earthy colours, as these are the colours most often associated with the setting of the games themselves (the middle east is an earthy-colour place, and designers feel they would do the setting no justice by including harsh or vibrant colours).

Variations in colour patterns also help the player to clearly envisage the area they're currently playing in, or to reinforce objectives or key elements of the level:  arctic levels will contain icy blue tones, forests will be full of lucious greens and browns, and deserts will be yellow and cream.  A game that was intentionally stark in its colour scheme in order to guide the player with vivid colours for clear recognition of progressions routes was Mirror's Edge: no player can really say they got lost in the world of Mirror's Edge, but the colours did more than just point the way to the next checkpoint: they added to the utilitarian and oppressive atmosphere that drove the story of the game.  Limbo is another example of the use of colour as more than just a visual marker.  Limbo's world is black, grey and white as the world of the game is stark and bleak, without the benefit of colour to light the way.

Colours, as with music, can really make or break the atmosphere of a game.  Consider them carefully, be aware of the impact they can generate or the feelings they're capable of evoking, but remember to stick to the context of your creation.

Aside: colours can actually be used as the focal point of gameplay itself, and often are in a pattern- or symbol-matching format. Examples of this are recent casual puzzle games such as Bejewelled, but also Guitar Hero and Rock Band.

[tightning-blog]

Music to my ears...

Muisc in games has come a long way from the simple bleeps of Pong, with the budget for a modern blockbuster's score hitting millions and including full licensed tracks from chart-topping groups or individuals.  Of course, some games are entirely about their music track, such as Rock Band or Singstar.  Other games make stong use of licensed soundtracks, such as the Grand Theft Auto series.  Finally (at least in modern games) we have games that use a bespoke soundtrack composed specifically for the game (most games fall into this category, but as one of the finest examples see the Final Fantasy series).

Notice anything about the examples listed above?  They're all hugely popular games, not just with fans, but with critics as well.  The games listed are fantastic, but try to imagine playing them without the music.  The result? Games would go from sombre at best, to impossible at worst, in the case of Rock Band / Singstar.  Music is hugely important both to the "feel" of the game and also to drawing the player into the universe the creators have envisioned, and it should always be on the mind of developers as they construc a game.  You can bet that when a designer is putting a level together they have a soundtrack playing in thier head, an idea of the final level and how it should sound.

The trick is, of course, always having the correct music for the scene.  Fast scenes and battles will have a different tempo to romantic scenes, and a different composition to suspensful scenes.  Getting this correct can really set a game up for greatness.  Often I mention innovation as something that should be observed and sought, and this holds true for music as well:  an innovative soundtrack can push the boundaries of a games potential to the same degree as any other aspect of the game design process.

Aside: consider also a musical juxtaposition, whereby the soundtrack is engineered to be at odds with the scene laid out for the player.  This cliche is still a relatively rare occurrence in modern gaming (less prolific than in the film industry for example), but can be a very powerful and emotive way of presenting a setting.  A good example of this is the Gears of War trailer, playing the image of a lone gunner fending off an alien swarm to a peaceful and melodic tune (Gary Jules - Mad World) that would otherwise have found a good place in a sombre setting.

Aside 2: not really an issue anymore, as the available space developers have to work with for a game is no longer really limited as it has been in the past, but take a moment to think about the limitations that were placed on developers in earlier generations of gaming platform, and marvel at what they managed to squeeze out of their sound chips and capacity limits.  One of my favourites? Secert of Mana on the SNES (listen here).

[tightning-blog]

A post every day

Yeah, I'm sorry but I don't have a real post for today as I've been ill. That's what I get for not having a stack of pre-written posts ready. I will try to make up for it with a double post tomorrow. In the meantime, some food for thought: why are remakes so popular at the moment? Is nostalgia to blame or are companies really stretched for new ideas that they have to retread the same ground? Aside: I'd never be so crass as to claim that the companies that are churning out remakes are lazy; even if everything else was in place (HD graphics, updated controls and options etc) and the rest of the game was the same as the original, there is still the issue of getting the games to run correctly on modern hardware - emulation in other words. Getting emulation to work correctly isn't easy; consider what you know about the Super Nintendo, then consider that only recently have emulators been released that really mimic the original hardware, and that these emulators are really quite (PC) hardware demanding. If you're still grasping for straws with what I'm on about, search for BSNES (or go here: http://byuu.org/bsnes/ ). Apologies for not hyper linking, I'm too tired to figure out how to do it on my phone...

[tightning-blog]

Making (good) games doesn't have to be hard

Really. It doesn't.

When computer gaming first came to light, we had to program in assembler.  In fact, some people never chose to use anything else.  Intermediate- and high-level programming languages made things a bit easier, as the absraction from the nuts and bolts of low-level programming helped make the languages (and the creation of games) more accessible.  Now, we have applications and languages specifically written for the purpose of not only creating games, but bringing the ability to create to a wider audience than ever before.

Some of these applications are of course better than others.  I have previously mentioned Unity, and would recommend this program to anyone. In fact, have a read of someone who is learning to use Unity right now (Zombiebearz).  Other widely-known programs include RPG Maker and Game Maker, and there are some really good games available (for free at that) that have been created using these tools.

Add on to this the rise of C# and XNA that has made development for Windows (and Xbox) hugely easier, and sites such as Kickstarter that can be used to provide the financial drive to get a project working / completed, and you have a sector that is more dynamic and diverse than ever for the material it produces.  Much like iTunes, MySpace and YouTube have done for musical artists without a record lable, these programs, sites and concepts are affording more people not only to make a game people want to play, but to let the people play the game as well.

Aside: Play a good game made with:

Game Maker: Jumper Redux - Wonderful old-school platformer throwback that is viciously hard in places.  Jumper is fantastically designed, with each level crafted to perfection to be hard enough to make your squirm, but rewarding enough to keep you coming back for more.

C#: Terraria - Mentioned a long time ago here, Terraria is an open-ended 2D exploration / adventure / crafting games.  Go where you want, where you want and build everywhere.  Joyous 16-bit style graphics accompany the game far more stylishly than modern graphics could.

Unity: Unearthed: Trial of Ibn Battuta - Gorgeous 3D adventure game in the vein of the Uncharted and Tomb Raider titles.  A wonderful example of the calibre of game that it's possible to create using Unity's highly adaptable engine.

RPG Maker: Alter A.I.L.A. Genesis - If you've used RPG Maker before, you know how the game looks at first glance.  A quick glance at Alter A.I.L.A. Genesis will show you whats possible with it's engine when customized to the extreme.  Savour taking a bit of time to eke out the perfect party composition to take down a boss.

[tightning-blog]

Something for the weekend

I'm going to restrict full posts to weekdays unless it's important, weekend posts will be short and sweet enough for you to glance at over your breakfast. Check out the Indie Royale April Fools Bundle - you've got 3 days left to buy, and (at time of writing), the minimum is only £2.86.  These deals are fantastic, as you're supporting indie devs directly and getting multiple good games at a massively discounted price.  Check out the games after the break.

Explodemon - Explodemon is a frantic platformer that, in the words of Indie Royale, is "homage to SNES-era platformers mixed with a modern physics-puzzle twist".  That explains it pretty well, and the game is reminiscent of the platform games of yore, bumped up with vibrant 3D graphics and dazzling particle effects.

Astro Tripper - An upgrade to the classic shoot-em-up, Astro Tripper is, as Explodemon before it, a game with its roots well grounded but the graphics turned right the way to modern.  Stunning visuals, huge numbers of bullets and a single ship to guide through it all.

Pay more than the minimum and you get a bonus as well: a funky Japanese chiptune album from Sexy-Synthesizer.  As with the other items in the bundle, this alone is worth more than the minimum price for the whole deal.  Go ahead, give these games a shot, they represent more evolution in a stagnating market than the big name publishers will take a risk on, and they're all the more fun becasue of it.

Aside: another bundle to watch out for (though not currently active) is the Humble Bundle; the same premise, but another shot to get amazing games in bulk for discounted prices.

[tightning-blog]

Bite-sized gaming

We've been over certain games becoming more casual and accessible to everyone, and the movement of the industry away from hardcore marathons of gaming. The world of today is different from the world of 10 and even 5 years ago.  The planet is getting smaller as travel becomes cheaper (relatively) and communication speeds increase, and as such people are less tied down than they ever have been.

This sort of society gravitates toward quick fixes, and this is apparent in every single aspect of our lives, from fast food to home grocery delivery and on to automatic garage doors and the ability to turn your lights off with a smartphone.  Gaming is no exception to this, hence the rise of the casual gamer; people with limited free time that still look to electronic entertainment without the requirement to sit in front of a TV or PC for 4 hours at a time to accomplish anything.

Certain game types cater to this crowd of people, some knowingly and some more subtly. Classic example ore games that are built specificaly with casual play in mine. Angry Birds and Peggle spring immediately to mind.  These are both games where an individual level can be completed in a matter of minutes, but they also have another less obvious advantage for the casual gamer: they're essentially turn-based.  You lose nothing by putting Angry Birds down after firing a single squaking avian to carry on with another task, whether it's taking a dish out of the oven or getting off the bus.

Brilliantly, some games from classically time-consuming genres emply tactics to improve playability by casual gamers.  In  the MMORPG EVE Online, you play as the pilot of a spaceship, or fleet thereof.  EVE is a bit different from it's contemporaries as skills for your character are learned in real time, without any interaction required from the player other than to actually select the skill to learn.  Of course, you can choose to do and run missions, trade or head off to an asteroid cluster to mine during this time, but you're equally free to log off until the skill training is complete.  Thus, getting a large amount of skills (and to fly the best starcruisers a lot of skill points are required), needn't take a huge amount of time in-game.  In this respect, EVE is a fantastically casual MMORPG.

Stepping back in time a bit, we have the Sega Dreamcast.  The memory card for the Dreamcast was a miniature console in it's own right, known as a VMU (Visual Memory Unit).  Certain games allowed data to be accessed and used from just the VMU, alloing some measure of play to be afforded even whilst away from home and the console itself; Sonic Adventure included a minigame for raising and caring for Chaos (singular: Chao), the data for which could be used on the VMU in a Tamagotchi-like game. 

Recently, Skylanders: Spyro's Adventure has taken this idea and run with it: each character you can play as in the game is represented by a real-wolrd figurine.  To play as another character, you need the real-world equivalent.  Each figurine stores the data for progression made with that character, allowing cross-platform contiunation of a game.  Start a game on your Wii, take your character (just the 3-inch tall figure) to a friend's house and play with your own caracter on their Xbox 360.  On the move or going on holiday?  Not a problem, you can use the same figure to continue playing on your Nintendo DS as well.

Hardcore gaming is not dead, far from it in fact. Games like Dark Souls all but require lengthy play sessions, if only because getting past a boss will take you 3 hours.  Casual games are becoming more prevailent though, and it will not do any harm to consider the ways that games can be played in bite-sized chunks or on the move.

Aside:  So, these subtly casual games?  Racing games are done race by race, normally 5 minute or less per game.  Modern FPS games auto checkpointed into managable segments for this very reason.  The Nintendo DS can be paused at any time during any game by simply clsoing the lid.  Casualness truly is everywhere, and this truly isn't a bad thing.

[tightning-blog]

I've forgotten something...

Late night posts still count as 'today' because I haven't gone to bed yet, right?

It's interesting to me how mods grown and evolve to become games themselves.  Counterstrike could not exist without Half Life.  This is a simple fact, and though another game similar to Counterstrike may have been created at some point in the alternate dimension where Half Life was never released, it wouldn't really BE Counterstrike.  The Half Life engine feels like it's built for modding, and the massive range of games that have been created using it is testament to this.  Racing games, football games and of course innumerable First Person Shooters, all created from one single fantastic ancestor. The real gem amongst the idea of modding is the creation of something unique from a progenitor game.  DOTA (Defense of the Ancients) started out as a mod for Warcraft 3, as a spiritual successor to the Tower Defense gametypes, with a few RPG elements thrown in.  DOTA has now become a genre of it's own, with multiple versions of the game made by various companies (League of Legends, DOTA and Heroes of Newerth are the current contenders, but watch out for DOTA 2 and Blizzard DOTA on the horizon). There are games that have sufficiently powerful engines and modification tools to allows this sort of creativity.  Starcraft 2 is massively customisable, and a number of different gametypes have already come to light.  Some of these, such as an attempt to recreate Blizzard's own massively multiplayer experience World of Warcraft, were hitting so close to the mark that they were asked to be halted.  A platform such as this can help people develop ideas without worrying about the necessity of delving deep into programming languages.  By expanding knowledge to include the ability to program, these engines truly become multi-faceted powerhouses, limited only by imagination (or RAM, whichever ends first). The sort of creativity that looks to emulate existing games, genres and settings might be seen as unoriginal by some commentators, but, as I stated in my last post, there are a large number of games that are different only by setting or a genre.  Small increments will eventually lead to a distinct product, a refined idea that will push all the correct buttons and become defining in it's own right.

[tightning-blog]

Alternating Dimensions

Previously, I have touched on the idea of taking 2 genres and mashing them together to make something new, as well as the idea of expanding an existing genre to make something totally new.  How about taking something that exists already and adding a single spin to it?  A game I was enamoured by earlier, Terraria, is at heart a 2-dimensional version of Minecraft (of course, Terraria is a lot more than simply taking Minecraft and dropping the z-axis, in the same way that Minecraft is far more than adding that third dimension back to Terraria). So, what if we take a different dimension, the y-axis, away from Minecraft?  It becomes a top-down building simulator (quite close, in fact, to Dungeon Keeper or Dwarf Fortress, except that you'd have more direct control over the creation of structures). Removing the x-axis will result in the same transition as Minecraft -> Terraria, as those axes are on the same plane. This transition isn't always such an easy one to pinpoint, as most genres started life as 2D games before making the leap to 3D.  Remove the z-axis from Super Mario 64 and you get Super Mario World.  A transition that is becoming increasingly popular is the top-down shoot 'em up, the side-scrolling shooter apparently having been done to death during the 16-bit era.  But what about one that hasn't yet happened?  Perhaps a top-down beat 'em up wouldn't work so well (I challenge someone to come up with a good one of these!), but I would definitely give a side-scrolling racing game or hack and slash game a try.

In a similar vein, think about how a change in the genre (setting) of a game can result in something completely different.  Put Grand Theft Auto in the wild West and you get Red Dead Redemption.  Put Neverwinter Nights in space and you get Mass Effect, then put it back to fantasy and you get Dragon Age: Origins.  What would happen if you put a racing game in a fantasy setting? Or if you take an RPG and put it in a zombie apolcalypse setting? In fact, scratch the side-scrolling racer, I want to play Zombiecraft.

Aside: Even if the games are similar (Grand Theft Horse = Red Dead Redemption), good writing can make up a differnce so great that people will want both games regardless.  Consider remakes of games, sometimes without even strong graphical updates: games that are so well designed and written in the first instance that they can be re-released and players will still get the same game on multiple platforms just because of it's inherent playability.

[tightning-blog]

Do social games need to be social?

The main core of an MMOG is always going to be the people.  A game can have wonderful or terrible gameplay, fantastic or abysmal graphics, but without a playerbase, these concepts are moot.  In that palyerbase, is interaction required, recommended or redundant?

When I started playing MMOGs, the core point of these games (for me at least) was the capacity to work with others to complete a common goal or goals; one person's goal of killing a boss would coincide with another person's goal of getting a loot upgrade.  This was prevalent throughout all multiplayer games.  In World of Warcraft, I would work with others to kill raid bosses, both for the sense of accomplishment but also to improve my character.  In Call of Duty, I would work with my team to kill the opposition. In both of these games though, the social interaction was as important to me as the goals themselves. Then I started to change.  I became less focused on interacting with people as the sense of accomplishment began to outweigh the desire to socially interact.  I haven't become a more antisocial person, in fact I spend more time with friends than I used to.  The change came about as computer gaming became less secular.  When computer games had a limited audience, it was a good bet that the majority of the people you were playing with were of a similar disposition; people who had played games for a long time ("gamers", so to speak).  As gaming became more mainstream, the relative ratio of these "gamers" to everyone else decreased.  The people I played with would have less in common with me, on average.  I don't condemn these people or the industry, gaming was always going to have to be taken to a wider audience to succeed truly, but it did bring about the idea of this post: social games don't need to be social in order to be fun or succeed. MMORPGs will be the focus of this topic, as these games are central to the social gaming experience.  Blizzard has taken great strides in making their juggernaut acceptable socially and to a wider range of people.  In the 7 years since World of Warcraft was released, it has gone from being squarely in the remit of secular games to a huge multinational audience.  Improvements have been constantly made to the game in every sense, and will continue to do so, with a 4th expansion on the way.  These improvements have brought "casual gaming" to the forefront of the design process.  Rather than having to spend 16 hours a week playing to get the best gear, you can now play for 3 hours a week and be just as advanced.  Tools have been introduced that allow any player to click a button and be transported to a group activity, ready to go.  No searching for people is required, no checking roles to make sure you have enough healing classes to live.  The tools have removed the responsibility for putting together a group (though a leader is still designated automatically).  This allows people to come online and jump immediately into content, a fantastic move that allows the maximum number of people to see the maximum amount of in-game content. What effect did this have on the way we interact during the game?  Quite often, groups will form, complete the content and disband without a single word passed between party members.  When you play like this, it's eerily similar to playing with AI-controlled automatons.  You can now play the game with other people, without speaking to any of them, from start to finish (and in fact, you can get to the maximum level easily without entering any group content at all). Bioware/EA have taken this concept on board for their recently-released MMORPG The Old Republic.  TOR is a much more story-driven game than WoW, with most of the dialogue presented by NPC fully voice acted.  TOR has content for groups for all levels, but reduces the requirement for interaction even further by allowing a single AI-controlled NPC to accompany you, making it possible to ‘solo’ most group content found in the world (outside of dungeon instances).  I personally ended up playing TOR as a sequel to Bioware’s previous games in the same universe, Knights of the Old Republic.  As a Star Wars fan, playing the game this way was worth the cost of the game and subscription, and a number of other players of the game feel the same way.  A MMORPG without the MM?  More common than you might think. But where does all this exposition lead us?  Social games don’t have to be social at all.  Sure, include everything required for social interaction between players.  Put in the ability to chat in different channels, add in emotes to let people know how you’re feeling.  Make certain that people can update a status for other players to see.  Go the extra step and create social hubs in the game, where you can go to do nothing but chat.  Just don’t be surprised if players either don’t use these functions, or sit idle in the social hubs, not speaking to anyone.  More over, don’t neglect these functions in any game, as the backlash will surely be greater than putting the functions in but having no-one use them. When people want to be social they will be, and with the correct environment available to them they will praise the efforts that have been made by the few, for the few, ignoring the many. Aside: bear in mind that many of the best examples of social gaming come as background data, for example the race times of friends in games such as Trials HD and Need For Speed: Hot Pursuit.  These aren’t forced upon the player, and don’t actually involve direct social interaction, but will provide a goal to work towards.  They are a seamless combination of the 2 ideals described at the top of this article, goals and sociability. Aside 2: http://greedygoblin.blogspot.com – Gevlon has a blog about being anti-social in a social environment, and the advantages of such an outlook.  Starting with WoW and recently moving to EVE Online, Gevlon explains tactics for being successful whilst not bowing to social pressure (in his words, ‘not having to deal with morons and slackers’) and why these tactics work.