Tetris: Your New BFF

Bitmob is a website started by that 1up guy, Dan Hsu, which promotes community blogging about video games. The other day, I posted my Don't Look Back article, which was one of six featured in their weekly spotlight. Today, however, I've posted an article exclusive to Bitmob, because I simply don't like double posting. So, if you're interested in reading about my opinion on the fantastic Tetris Friends, then check it out, called Tetris: Your new BFF.

Enacting Experience Part 3: Don't Look Back

This is the third part and final part in a series on Enacting Experience. The first part, on It's a Nice Day Today, may be read here. The second part, on Don't Shoot the Puppy!, may be read here.

People debate whether or not video games are art. Honestly, it's a ridiculous question. I define art as anything that evokes emotion or provokes thought from the audience. Whether or not the creation of video games is an art form is equally debated. I believe that an art form is any medium in which artists, through inspiration, subconscious feeling, and a series of decisions, create works which can offer the evoking of emotion or provoking of thought from an audience.

As an aside, I will note that art is definitely not always intended to affect others; many people create things for themselves or at least lack any intent to evoke emotion/provoke thought. Art is also highly subjective. What may not affect one person may, to another, present a paradigm shift in life values. Who's to say? Artists can control the effect of their works only so much. Because of the inherent subjectivity of art, an artists intention with his or her work is difficult to define, excepting specific statement from the him or her. Art will be perceived as it will.

I think I've finally discovered the reason for all of the questioning behind the "are video games art" debate. There is an important distinction between what a medium does achieve and what it can achieve. Just because video games as they are commonly offered often do not evoke emotion does not mean the medium cannot evoke emotion.

The established ultimatum that games need to be fun has blinded us to the other emotions that games can evoke and the other qualities they can possess. So we look at games and ask, "on a scale of 1 to 10, how fun is this here video game?" And this question almost always comes first, before we ever ask "how is this game affecting me emotionally?" or "what is this game teaching me?"

It's a matter of status-quo. Publishers are trying to please the media and to make money, the media is trying to please the gamers, and the gamers are trying to please. . .themselves? What is for sure is that professional developers have a budget and have to please everyone, and if everyone thinks that fun and graphics are what makes a game "good" and what makes a game sell, then really, what choice do they have? With every layer of the video game strata preoccupied with pleasing the norms, not many have the luxury nor time to worry about the other potential emotional qualities of games, that is, save for the independent developers.

Terry Cavanagh of Distractionware brings us a beautiful game called Don't Look Back, a game that I feel is an ideal exemplifier of gameplay as a means of evoking emotion and, for that matter, provoking thought.

Before you read on, I highly recommended you play through the game, which can be played online or downloaded.

Like the brilliant You Have to Burn the Rope before it, or more similarly, Don't Shoot the Puppy!, Don't Look Back gives instruction in its title. If Metal Gear Solid is considered to be the cinema of video games, Don't Look Back must be its poetry. Titles in poetry are often pivotal to the understanding of a poem, even at the most basic level explaining the subject of the poem or cuing in readers on the setting or location. Neversoft's Gun is one example of an effective video game title that comes to mind . The title says it all, giving players a hint of not only the game's subject-matter but also what the gameplay might involve. Gun as a title may additionally imply the player-character's situation in the game world and the necessity of resorting to lethal action.

The title Don't Look Back has multiple meanings, explaining not only the game's rules but also, metaphorically, its messages. In an interview with GameCritics, Cavanagh explains that partial inspiration for Don't Look Back came from the greek mythological story of Orpheus, who traveled to the underworld to rescue and revive his deceased wife, Eurydice, but broke the rule of doing so and caused her to disappear forever by turning to look back at her before he was allowed. Similarly, once players retreive their wife in Don't Look Back, turning back will cause her to disappear. When players return to the grave, they find themselves already standing there, and both the player-character (who we'll call Orpheus for simplicity) and his wife disappear together.

To enact experience is to meld the content of something with the experiencing of it. The concept of "not looking back" functions in two ways: one, as a rule of the game, and two, metaphorically, a message about moving on. To me, the game symbolizes moving forward. Orpheus's descent into the abyss is a journey of mourning. As Cavanagh explains, Orpheus never physically leaves the grave, but has taken a fantastical journey, mentally and emotionally. His return trip to the grave, his wife following along, is a passage of reconcilement, of moving onward. The difficult descent, however, was first necessary to mourn his loss. When the player and the wife return to the grave, Orpheus's journey-self and his wife disappear, leaving the new Orpheus standing, having grieved and moved onward from his wife's passing. In this way, the game is a mourning process for Orpheus, allowing Orpheus to free his wife and to free himself.

What is so beautiful about this game is that its title, rules, and meaning all function as a single whole, each point reinforcing the others. Only in a video game does a person or audience have the opportunity to look back, and not only look back, but have that action support a message and theme of moving onward. The game's message is strong and impactful via the very simple gameplay rule mirroring it.

Enacting Experience Part 2: Don't Shoot the Puppy!

This is the second article in my three part series on Enacting Experience. Read the first article, on It's a Nice Day Today, here.

Don't Shoot the Puppy!, by Aragagg, is an exercise in either frustration or patience, depending upon your temperament. Fifteen levels of puppy-hopping molasses await players in their quest to not shoot the puppy. With its twitch-triggered Anti-Air Cannon and myriad of trickery, Don't Shoot the Puppy! aims to test players' patience and maybe show them something a little different of game design as well.

The gameplay concept of "non-interaction" isn't entirely new; not to mention others, the brilliant Warcraft III mod, Don't Move the Tauren, had previously explored this "do nothing" reversal of gameplay, albeit in a psychologically-driven multiplayer setting. Regardless, Aragagg experiments admirably with non-interactivity. By employing clever (evil) tricks and toying with the patience of players, Aragagg creates an interesting emotional experience.

Players have two options in Don't Shoot the Puppy!:

1. Shoot the Puppy.
2. Don't Shoot the Puppy.

Shooting the Puppy is the easier of the two by far. But since the game's title explicitly tells players one rule, and the game is governed by that sole rule, the adherence to which is necessary for completion, players are driven towards not shooting the puppy; it's a challenge. There is also something to be said for the humor of the game; the utter ridiculousness of the situation is an additional force compelling players to endure the puppy's harsh challenges. And endure players must. Assuming they're actually paying attention to the game, which I believe the humor goes a long way towards capturing, players are forced to sit, watch, and wait. The slightest budge of the mouse, the simplest tap of a key, and the puppy is disintegrated. Often, this is a mistake. Therefore, not only must players not shoot the puppy, they must specifically strive to not shoot it.

Caution and patience are the name of the game. Which is interesting when you think about it. Perhaps non-interactivity is a mislabel. Though players do not interact physically using controls (except when they do shoot the puppy), they are required to interact mentally and emotionally. The game responds to their patience via the reward of completion.

Aside from simply waiting, Don't Shoot the Puppy! tries several tricks on players to get them to lose. Each time the puppy is shot, players are returned to the first level. One of my favorite levels is 5, where the normally smiley-face marked signpost now reads "Eternal Suffering," pointing to the left in the direction the puppy is walking. This psychological trick is extremely simple, not to mention hilarious, but it also has great potential for actual emotional impact. What's more important: yhat you win the game, or that you save the puppy from endless turmoil?

 Levels 3 and 12 trick players in another way: logically. In level 3, when players click play, an Ad pops-up, covering the game. Naturally, players move their mouse to the big X button to close the Ad, only to found they've been duped. Or at least I did. It was a good laugh, too. Level 12 is even more devious. After players press play, the level delays starting for a good while. Worst of all, the play button remains, leaving players to believe they either missed the button or something glitched. They thought wrong.

Restarting the game from the beginning can be trying. Don't Shoot the Puppy! is an opportunity for either patience or aggression. In this way, the game emulates life, offering the practice of a real and necessary life skill, waiting, and a real emotion, patience. It is up to players to decide how they're going to react to the game. Like a consequence-less microcosm for life events, players can either become angry or they can remain calm. The game shows how easy it can be to twitch-react according to frustration, like snapping your fingers, revealing to players just how quickly they can become angry. For those of you who own dogs, this may sound familiar.

Oppositely, players may wait. They may wait and watch and be patient with the puppy. It's not the puppy's fault it has narcolepsy. The game does go to lengths to aggravate players, attempting to trick them several times aside from simply waiting for the puppy to leave the screen. But all this does is push the point further; how patient can you be?

This is where enacting experience comes in. The gameplay mechanics, one being shooting the puppy, the other being not, match the emotions derived from the experience. To beat the game, players must wait, act upon nothing. But to lose, players must only tap the mouse. There is an implicit message that Don't Shoot the Puppy! is sending: it is better to be patient, to practice waiting, than it is to act violently.

Enacting Experience Part 1: It's a Nice Day Today

This is the first part of a three part article series about the use of "enacting experience" as exampled in three Flash games. The concept of enacting experience comes from the world of poetry and describes how the experience of something matches it's content.

This may be the most revelatory game you've ever played. The title is God Damn It's a Nice Fucking Day Today. And let me tell you, it's a tapestry of pure genius.

Indie games, and, in particular, Flash games, are in a very unique position in the game industry. Flash games hold their own little plane of existence in game design. Because Flash is a relatively accessible way to create games, and games that have potential for mass audiences, many independent designers are taking advantage of the software to create some truly incredible games. More so, often unburdened by the weight of publishing financing, Flash developers have a beautiful opportunity to freely explore a game's design. Whereas mass-industry developers are bound by the limitations of delivering mind-blowing graphics, staying under-budget, meeting milestones, and everything else that comes with the fish basket, Flash developers have the freedom to experiment with their design, experiment with those things unsuitable for the finicky market and experiment with what matters most in video games: the experience (thank you Jesse Schell).

I'm not going to enter a long exposition on the game industry right now, but I will say a few words about a game from Scottmale24 and conceived by Prguitarman, It's a Nice Day Today. Naturally, please play the game first, or go outside. It's good for you.

It's a Nice Day Today excels, specifically, as a video game. After playing for 30 seconds, a message comes on screen: "Why aren't you outside? Go outside or the sun will fucking rape your shit." This is paired with a Newgrounds Medal: "Failure to Communicate." This is convention-breaking awesome on so many levels, just like a chocolate layered cake. It's a Nice Day Today straight-up Falcon-knees the idea that Achievements, Trophies, Medals, pick your lingo, have to be used as rewards for good behavior or skill. Quite oppositely, the message overlay and medal blatantly tell players that they fail at life. By continuing to play the game, players are just. not. getting. it.

The gameplay, angrily sun-laser-nuking every house in sight, perfectly matches the agressive message of the game. It's called "enacting experience." A concept I learned from studying the writing of poetry, enacting experience is a technique used to match the content of a poem with its message and/or meaning: you enact the experience. Rhyme, rhythm, sytanx, line breaks, consoance, and more elusively definable aspects of poetry can be used in concordance with the meaning of a poem to emphasize its overall effect, and ultimately, the reader's experience.

It's a Nice Day Today is functioning with the same technique. It's not a very nice day at all, not any more; it's an angry day, an angry, angry day. You play the sun with the sole objective (and capability) to violently burn every house to the ground, exposing stick-figures to the glory of your wrath (or, what could have been your brilliance). Where enacting experience comes in is the style of message. The game's author could have easily left out the message, left out the medal, providing the gameplay alone and not its meta counter-part. However, what players are given is a blatant, threatening message, telling players that their continuing of play is in direct opposition to the game's intentions. This message of pure gundanium not only matches the aggressive gameplay, but rockets the player experience astro-fucking-nomically. It's like "with our forces combined" creating Captain Planet. It's like when two sounds waves of equal frequency meet to form a single wave louder than both simply added. The result is greater than the sum of its parts.

As a video game, It's a Nice Day Today uses several techniques to be super-effective. Players are the ones who expose the message in the first place and who personally experience it. Scottmale24 and Prguitarman are the ones who created the game (because they had a point to prove), but players are the ones in control. They are able to exit their browser, stand up from their computers, and walk outdoors. Really, that counts as control. It's a Nice Day Today breaks the fourth wall in the hopes that players might actually listen. What is interesting is that It's a Nice Day Today makes no attempt to positively motivate nor positively inspire players to go outdoors; its means are command and fear. An alternative game could have showed the sun in all its splendor, showed a happy picnic or swim at the ocean. But would that have been as effective? It's impossible to say, but what we can say is that It's a Nice Day Today tries its darndest to inspire people to go outside, using their own lack of concern and lazyness against them, with the message, as a second gut-punch. Rather than show, the game tells players: your current actions are preventing you from enjoying the nice outside.

There's the genius, right there. It's a game. You're the one still playing the game. You're the one not outside. Your specific action of playing the game, so chastised by that very game, is the simultaneous inaction of being outside.

Achievement Unlocked

John, head of game development for Armor Games has created a truly spectacular Flash game: Achievement Unlocked. The game tries to be pointless, but ultimately fails. Or does it? You see, Achievement Unlocked is a fun, addictive game. I beat it twice, almost. So maybe I was wrong. Because the game proves full well that unlocking achievements is addictive as all get out.

Source: Kotaku [via n0wak]

Mirror's Edge 2D!

Mirror's Edge is now in 2D! Or at least in beta. The game comes courtesy of Borne Games, most famous for their flash phenomenon, Fancy Pants Adventure. The project is also described as "a collaboration" between Borne Games and EA, meaning its officially sanctioned. But enough babble; this game freaking rocks. Its just pure fun. And the screenshots can't possibly do the awesomeness justice. The animation is impactful, fluid, and invigorating. Playing this game makes you feel cool. Jumping feels and animates perfectly, particularly when you hit the peak and do this mid-air feet plant and start arcing back down.

The music wasn't working in game for me; maybe its true for everyone, I don't know. But I set the Mirror's Edge Remix album in the background and it jived quite well. Something else: I was half-way through the level before I realized that I was playing Mirror's Edge in third-person. Unfortunately, I haven't had a chance to play DICE's Mirror's Edge yet, seeing as how I'm in Italy. But obviously one of the selling points of the feeling of Mirror's Edge is its first-person view, which I applaud whole-heartedly. But Borne Games has adapted ME's gameplay amazingly well in not only third-person but also 2D. The gameplay reminds me of the original Prince of Persia. One more thing, notice how the art design clearly represents to players what is runnable and what is not. I'll be writing up a more thorough impressions of the game once it releases. Be sure toe let me know what you think of Mirror's Edge 2D in the comments.

I Wish You Were The Moon

Pixels, hearts, the moon, and photography? This game was basically made for me.

I wish you were the moon by Daniel Benmergui

Neo Tetris

Tetris is a classic, it can't be denied. It has spawned a variety of sequals and imitators, some good, others probably not so good. New variants of Tetris will continue to exist with every generation, the game is just that good. I've got a few new Tetris games for you today, they're all pretty nifty.

The first is unnamed, but we'll call it Java Blocks. I call it such because, A, the game is made with Java, not Flash. And, B, its not exactly Tetris, more like "Negatris," or something. You'll see what I mean when you play the game. The game is by one Gary Haran, a guy that mainly deals with coding and the interwebs. You can read about the game at his blog.

The second game is Tetrical. It's Insane! Think Tetris in three dimensions. The game is basically impossible to play unless your some spatially reasoning genius. Still, the design is pretty interesting and the game is really solid. Check it out. Tetrical is by Digitial Machina.

Which brings me to the last game of the day, Cubical, also by Digital Machina. Cubical is like a simpler version of Tetrical, and arguably a better game. While the design of Tetrical is more novel, an homage, Cubical actually sports some solid gameplay. Players are tasked with stacking various box sizes into a three-dimensional pit. Once you grasp the controls the game boils down to accuracy of block placement. It's pretty fun.

Source

Puzzles, Learning, Shifting Gameplay Dynamics, and Design Limitations

Do you like Half-Life 2: Portal? Of course you do; you'd be crazy not to. The team at Armor Games loved it so much they created a flash version, for all of you who don't have computers good enough to run the real deal. Obviously the flash game was created as a port of sorts of the first-person-shooter. Even so, Portal: The Flash Version stands on its own as a fantastic game. You should definitely play it.

Another awesome flash puzzle game is Launchball. Launchball almost has an edutainment feel, it teaches players about physics and power sources and all sorts of cool stuff. The goal is to get a ball from its launch point to the goal in a series of levels. Players must use a specifc palette of blocks to achieve this goal. The blocks come in the form of springs, wind turbines, batteries, and any number of other forms. Whats cool is that all the blocks interact in realistic ways, some having to due with force, others with power. The game is seriously fun.

Both of these games are fun, worthwhile investments of one's time. What makes them so fun, like all good puzzle games, is that genuine, powerful feeling of accomplishment you receive as a player as you work your way through the levels. Good puzzle games are, at their core, about learning. And learning is fun. Portal gives you a basic explanation of the portal gun's functions. Launchball gives you basic explanations of each block type. Its up to the player to figure out everything else. I will always argue that experimental learning is the best type of learning. From experimental learning is derived the greatest sense of satisfaction. In Portal players learn the properties of momentum and how concepts like right and up have to be percieved in a completely new way. In Launchball players learn how all the block types are interconnected, how they effect one another; then they must apply this knowledge to judge the placement of each block.

This is the beauty of these games. The process of learning. The games are fun for those "aha!" moments, when you figure out exactly how to use your knoweldge, and you think, "I'm a Friggen' Genius!" And you are. Good puzzle games make geniuses out of all of us. And thats an amazing feeling.

Before I let you while the hours away playing awesomeness, there one more thing I want to say about each game. Critiques, if you will.

Keep in mind I am discussing the flash version of Portal throughout this article, not Half-Life 2: Portal. As the levels progress in Portal (I'm on level 28, currently), a new gameplay dimension is introduced, requiring another set of skills on part of the player aside from critical thinking and problem solving. Later levels of Portal require timing and dexterity. This gameplay addition is interesting for a couple reasons. One, by the time you get to these speed required levels, you have mastered everything else the game has to offer. If mapped out, the game difficulty would look something like a snake curve: there are peaks of difficulty, then dips of simplicity. These valleys in difficulty result from players having already learned the concepts needed applying to the levels. Eventually, the game has taught players, or rather, players have taught themselves, everything they need to know about velocity and gravity and portal jumping. When the levels requiring problem solving alone reach their peak in difficulty, Portal introduces another dimension of gameplay, dexterity.

This design decision makes sense. The game has nothing new to offer, nothing new with wich to challenge the player. So, when critical thinking has already been mastered, the next obvious design choice is dexterity and timing. Players must now time their portal jumps to coincide with the flow of electrical fields and react quickly enough to avoid spiked walls. These physical challenges become more nad more difficult as the levels progress. My issue with this gameplay addition is that, once it hits, we're playing a completely different game. The challenge now is not to figure out how to solve the level's puzzles, you've already got that down; the new challenge is to portal jump quickly enough and at the right time, and to make sure you land on platforms correctly. What was once a game of learning mechanics and using them to solve each puzzle, is now a game that requires players to pass through the hole at the right time, and to jump and run the right distance quickly enough. You no longer have fun figuring out how to solve a puzzle. Now, you may or may not have fun trying to time a jump correctly. Regardless, the game really isn't the same anymore. I feel like this change completely alters the gameplay so much, that its really not even the same game anymore. Is this a good thing? A bad thing? Or is it neither? The game could have potentially thrown more criticial thinking problems at the player and then finished. But what the game did instead is to offer the palyer a new challenge. Weather or not you like this new face of Portal is, perhaps, a personal thing.

Launchball's gameplay does not change throughout the game, like Portal does. But Launchball has its own entirely different issues. The problem is that each block has a specific function, a very specific function, and usually a single function. Not only that, but the function is explicitly explained to players. Furthermore, the level layout sometimes lends itself to fairly obvious solutions. If there's a gap inbetween blocks you pretty much know where to put your spare blocks. Though the blocks are all interconnected, each only functions in a specific way, so if you have a wind generator you know you need to blow a wind turbine on it to work. Essentially,what makes the game so unique and fun, also limits its challenge. I think the game is awesome for its educational elements, and for its experimental learning. But sometimes the learning is hampered by the blocks functioning in such obvious ways. These games are awesome, but as a blog about game design, we want to look at how the games function, why certain things work, and why others don't. And then we need to learn from playing these games, learn what makes them successful, or otherwise, and apply them to our games.

But don't let me get you down. I've had so much fun, so much fun playing these games the last few days. I have no doubts that you will also. Open up some tabs and tear away at Portal and Launchball.

Source: Kotaku

Flash Puzzle Games: Nodes and StarShine

There are a couple of interesting puzzle games over at Newgrounds today. One is Nodes, the other is StarShine. StarShine is nice graphically, and the radial control is also quite cool. But I think the game suffers in design because it is difficult to actually plan out each puzzle and therefore levels divulge into random guess work that will net you the win within a few trys. Nodes is better. As you play you begin to discover geometrical strategies for solving each puzzle. As the levels progress you can see patterns and almost intuitively move the lines where they should be. Check them out and let me know what you think.

"Come on and meet your maker."

Kotaku pointed out today a web game called game, game, game, and again game. The game is by Jason Nelson over at Secret Technology. Its really pretty interesting. The about section says the game is basically a rebellion against cultural beliefs and norms as well as the popular "clean" look if the internet and video games. I should also mention that the art style is really cool, featuring mostly hand drawn everything along with home video clips probably from the 70's. Check it out and then let us know what you think in the comments section. He has a bunch of other games it seems, as well, so I'll be looking at those this week too.

Castle Draw and Defend Atlantis

Chris Kohler over at GameLife tipped me off to an interesting little game called Castle Draw by Free World Group. In Castle Draw you draw rocks of varying sizes to stop stick figures from climbing up your castle walls. The game reminded me of anoter flash game I played a while back called Defend Atlantis, by Super Flash Bros. Defend Atlantis plays similarly but not exactly the same. In this flash game you also draw circles, this time to create bubbles. Both games are pretty interesting, give them a try.

It rhymes. Their both verbs. Its awesome.

Orisinal Games: Cats

Ferry Halim is like the Robert Frost of video games. His games are about nature and beauty and, cute things. Orisinal games are very soothing. Lets talk about one of my favorite Orisinal games, Cats. If you have not played Cats, please do so now.

What is so awesome about Cats? Well, lots of things. The game is very simple, you must order every cat to copy the leader cat, which is either sitting or standing. The cats could be walking either left or right, and sitting or standing. Aesthetically, Cats is very simple and pleasing. White Cats against a black background walking on white lines. Thats it. All Orisinal games have a single repeating song. Each is charming while somehow never becoming annoying. There are two things in particular, though, that are really very cool about Cats. One is the simple but demanding gameplay. The second aspect is that of randomness. If you played long enough, you'll notice that more and more levels of cats show up for you to deal with. And darn it, they just won't do what you ask for more than three seconds. I tell you what, this game is addictive. There is something very satisfying about ordering your cats to sit or walk, then watching as they obey. That is, until one misbehaves. "Sit!" These cats have massive ADHD if you ask me. The gameplay is very intuitive and also flawless. If a cat is walking, scroll the mouse and it shall sit. Need a cat to get off its tail, lo and behold it will with a simple touch of the mouse. The randomness of Cats is what makes it so captivating. "OK, all my cats are walking. 34,35,36. What the? Get up lazy." Then the leader cat will switch suddenly and you will be all over the screen ordering the cats to follow their newly appointed leader. Its great.
The last thing I wanted to discuss was the concept of endless games. Pretty much all of Orisinal games are built on endurance. It only takes moments for players to learn the skills required to play a given game. Then, therefore, gameplay boils down to just how long players can keep it up. Why does this work? What is appealing about doing the same thing over and over. I've pondered a couple of reasons. One is that they aren't entirely endurance based. The gameplay is simple, sure, but players strive to truly master the skill it takes to play the game well. Secondly, endurance itself is a skill. Why do you think players engage in thousand mile races in Gran Turismo (auto-driving aside)? Endurance is a show of prowess. Playing for a long time says, "Hey, I just scored a xillion points in this game without breaking a sweat." Because of its unpredictability and more skill based gameplay, however, Cats is somewhat of an exception.

Sit...Stand...Sit...etcetera.
Do you like Cats? Why or why not? are you an anti-animal robot!
What do you think of endurance based gameplay as opposed to skill based?
What other Orisinal games do you like? Why?

Orisinal

There is something to be said for style and aesthetics. A website called Orisinal features only stylistic flash games. Ferry Halim is the creator of the website and every game on it. Every flash game on Orisinal has several unifying themes. They are simple, peaceful, intuitive, and pretty. Every game is simple to learn, yet complex enough that there is great joy in discovering what each game is about and how each plays. Then you start figuring out strategies to play better. And you want to keep on playing because you know you can do better. Not all flash games can make this claim. But Halim's games are immediately understandable and enjoyable, yet oh so addictive. I played Cats for at least an hour straight. Also, many of the games are fantastical like things we'd dream of or like playing childhood fairytales. They're really quite awesome. I will be discussing specific games in further detail in the near future. But for now, go have fun experimenting with the games. Be sure to play Cats , Winterbells , and It Takes Two.

Orisinal
You can also find a description of every game at Milk and Cookies.
Though, I recommend you simply play and explore.
Enjoy!