Showing posts with label interaction. Show all posts
Showing posts with label interaction. Show all posts

Saturday, May 10

Fable 2: In Real Life

Cooperative gaming is all the rage these days. In fact, there has been a huge surge of coop games this past year. Co-op is, in a way, the medium's zeitgeist. Not only do players love the new focus, but designers as well, who are enamored with the challenges of co-op game design. From Army of Two to Schizoid, designers are experimenting with the boundaries of co-op and learning about its possibilities and limitations. Co-op is far from new, just look at Gauntlet, but as a style of gameplay it has recently received a jolt of attention.

Among those games lavishing in co-op is Fable 2. Peter Molyneux isn't one to rest on his laurels, let alone those of others. He and the team at Lion Head are pushing the limits of what games can achieve with co-op. Other co-op games up until now have focused on cooperative gameplay, which is fantastic in and of itself. However, Fable 2 is trying to offer something else altogether: co-op narrative.

Co-op gameplay in Fable 2 is excellent design in its own right. A second player, known as the "henchman," can jump into the host player's world at any time simply by pushing start. Experience and gold can be divided howsoever the players chose by allotting percentages of each when the henchman joins. Henchmen will retain their gold and experience when they return to their own games. Combat, likewise, is adjusted when playing co-op, as players must work together to fight most effectively. But these features aren't what set Fable 2 apart from the herd. What does is the game's transgression into reality.A henchman in Fable 2 has the power to permanently affect the host player's world. Henchmen have all the freedoms of the host player. In fact, the henchman has equal power, or perhaps even greater power, than does the host player. In Fable 2, a player cannot kill his or her spouse. Spousal-murder simply is not possibly. Personally, I'm a fan of this limitation. Lion Head, while advocating freedom as one of the main themes of Fable 2, it seems does not want to support, or even allow, such atrocious immorality. Actually, I think this is a much, much bigger issue than immediately apparent, but thats for another article. However, while players cannot murder their own spouse, henchmen can. Henchmen can walk into the host player's house, pull out a gun, and shoot the player's husband or wife. And the character will never come back. The spouse is dead for all time and forever and ever.

This initially bothered me. "Griefing" comes to mind as I consider the potential ruin and sadness that could be affected upon a person. I would be extremely upset with anyone who killed my spouse in-game. And then I realized, that is the whole point. Allowing such freedom in co-op gameplay is more than just characters interacting with characters; it is about people interacting with people through the game, and the game interacting with people through their actions and decisions. This level of co-op interaction transcends the television screen, and the game becomes something else altogether.Suddenly, co-op is less so about working together and more so about the relationship between two people. Now, cooperative gameplay is about trust. Not that it wasn't before either. Working together to take down monsters or ships certainly does involve trust, but Fable 2 employs trust on a completely different level, a level of morality and friendship. How two people play Fable 2 together is symbolic of their friendship. The game becomes a sharing experience. What players do in the game, even outside of murdering or not murdering spouses, is an interaction between two people, not two characters. Playing is like dancing: when two people dance with one another, they are interacting and representing their individual emotions. This is what Fable 2 is trying to achieve. The game relates to the players, offering a means of interaction, an outlet for sharing an experience. How the players engage that world and engage one another speaks to their relationship as people. Who you play with is a sign of trust. Can you trust your friend. Can you trust that your friend won't kill your spouse? What does this say about your relationship with that person. Furthermore, how will your interactions in the game affect your relationship. If your best friend murders your spouse, how does that affect your freidnship; what is your friend trying to tell you (and I don't mean he or she hates your spouse in real life, but maybe)?

Then the game becomes an exchange between player and character. The players actions affect the world, the world reacts to the character, and subsequently the player is affected by the worlds reactions. Fable 2 fuses character and player; the game creates a bond between the two. The character is a representation of the player, the person in a polygonal form. Therefore, when two players interact in a game, they are truly interacting as humans.

Images from Lion Head

Monday, July 2

Masq

Yestarday, 4 color rebellion pointed out a really cool indie game called Masq. Masq is a free game for download from the official game site. In fact, even how you download the game is cool. Masq was created by development studio Alteraction in 2002. The game has no sound and little animation. But the game is so compelling, that I've played through it about eight times now. Why? Because Masq is an interactive story. Players take the role of themselves from first person. A slew of characters, interesting settings and an intriguing plot make for an awesome experience. The game is essentially an interactive version of Choose Your Own Adventure (which have been scientifically proven as awesome). But unlike the popular book series, Masq is certainly not for children. The game is adult to the core. From compex themes to language to nudity, Masq stops at nothing to present an interesting comic-style graphic adventure. Here is an excerpt from Alteraction's website:
Many names in the industry argue that stories and games do not mix, that they are completely different animals. This comes from the lack of deep understanding of how stories work. Stories have always been interactive. Interactivity is not about the number of times per second you click, it is about the active involvement of the audience's mind contributing to the experience they live.
Masq has a ton of replay value because there are so many options and branching storylines. You really never know what you're going to get, especially when you select completely different options from previous play throughs. As a game, Masq also accomplishes something that books cannot, the passing of time. Books aren't going to change no matter how long readers waits to continue. Masq, however, has a timer that is moving as players read and try to make decisions. Just like in real life, if players wait to long to take action, the game will take action itself and respond to the player "doing nothing." This usually means the characters getting angry with the player for not responding. What time adds to the game is tension, and pressure on the player to act. The characters aren't gonna wait forever for a response. I recommend this game to all, unless you are put off by explicit content. Play Masq. Also, the Masq Blog that give a couple of hints to endings you will probably never find.

Saturday, March 31

Itagaki-Interaction

Ninja Gaiden: Dragon Sword was recently announced for the Nintendo DS. In development by Team Ninja, the game is in full 3D and played mostly from a top-down perspective. It is also real-time and as action oriented as any other Ninja Gaiden game. Most importantly, though, Dragon Sword is controlled almost exclusively via the touchscreen with a stylus. Itagaki is an amazing game designer, one of the very best. In addition to Ninja Gaiden, he created the Dead or Alive franchise. In an interview with 1up, he says the following on Dragon Sword and game design (bold effect is mine).
As I am sure you know, when I create a game I place the utmost importance on interactivity and responsiveness. Why does Ryu Hayabusa accept every input the player makes, without fail, and move exactly the way you want him to? Why do all of the game elements in DOA react instantly to player control in all situations and give instant feedback on the screen? This is because I take the primary raison d'ĂȘtre of video games, interactivity, and give it the highest priority during the development of my games.
Itagaki understands the primary purpose of video games: interaction. He also understands that
control is critical to gameplay. As he says, interactivity is given the highest priority in game development. According to Itagaki, Ryu Hayabusa will be able to perform all of the action-heavy maneuvers as in previous games, and with as quick a response. Thats pretty impressive for the dual-screened handheld that could.
It is unkown weather or not Dragon Sword will use the dead zone. This screen suggests it will not, however. This makes sense for an action-heavy game, as the player will need to be aware of all enemies at all times.

Interact
Why is interaction important to video games?
Why is responsive controls important to video games?