He going for the Loss...

Letting the Player Lose
When's the last time you played a game where, no matter how hard you tried, you lost? This question is the basis for designer Ben Schneider's article recently featured on Gamasutra, entitled Losing For the Win: Defeat and Failure in Gaming. Schneider poses an argument that losing is games is good. Not making the game impossible to beat, but, designing a game so that the player has no control over winning a situation. He says this is good for two reasons: One, it can be used to drive a story forward. And two, it can make winning later on all that much more satisfying. Schneider makes an excellent argument, this article is well worth reading, and the concept even more worth pondering.
Schneider does not think this is easy to pull off however. He thinks incurring regret in players is the greatest potential pitfall of designing a game where the player loses. He makes one statement in particular which is really quite profound:

Books and movies have a huge advantage in not incurring regret in their audience. Their “players” have no agency; as much as they may dislike a twist in the plot, it’s not their fault. As game designers, we must reckon with regret. Our players have to do more than like the story; they have to accept each turn of events and roll with them, and never wonder if they should have gone back to get it right.

THIS is the beauty of video games. The power to involve people. Players are a part of the game; more then a participant, they are the core that all else revolves around. A cliche perhaps? "With great power comes great responsibility." As game designers, we are able to exert from complete to little control over a player's actions. Sometimes one way serves players better, other times the opposite-we must discern the benefits of each for individual situations. Players understand winning as a means to a game's completion. Schneider wants them to understand losing as serving this function as well: for games to be designed in such a way that losing both advances and enhances the story, and also has an effect upon the player.

Thinking of Loss
In what whays would losing in a game be better then winning?
What types of ways can a player lose (eg. automatic cutscene)?
Which do you prefer and why?

Small Arms-Viral Achievements

Xbox 360 Achievements are hot these days. Everybody loves them. Small Arms, developed by Gastronaught Games, has achievements of its own. One of them, called "six degrees of small arms" is viral. It works like this. Four developers at Gastronaught started out with the achievement, every person they play automatically gains the achievement as well. Every person they play gets it too, and so on and so forth. I think this is a very cool system that I'm sure has been a ton of fun for players. Its also very different from the norm. Its a creative approach that offers further incentive and reward for online play. I wonder how many people have the achievement by now?
If you were to create a 360 game, what type of Achievements would you give? More broadly, what kinds of fun creative incentives tat fit your game can be offered to players? I just wanted to let you guys know, wanted to get you thinking about possibilites.

Peace.

Player Fun Creation

Game Informer Online (again) has posted up a little article on all the fun two players can have with Crackdown for the 360. The article can be found here. The co-op feature (with complementary videos), talks about how two players can create they're own fun in Crackdown once the game has been beaten. Free-roam and Co-op were a match made in heaven, it seems, or at least Pacific City. Two players with powers that rival Kal-El, an open world, limitless possiblities. The developers at Realtime Worlds must have known this when creating Crackdown.


Look Ma! I can fly! (From IGN.com)

Its an interesting design method. Rather than set the player on a linear path to clear through, give them a smattering of toys to blow themselves up with. The same results were found in Mercenaries and even Animal Crossing DS, multiplayer free-roam leads to inventive gameplay.
Inventive Gameplay. Its really quite fascinating: Design a game in such a way that the players create their own fun. The trick, I suppose, is designing the game well. I haven't played Crackdown, I cannot testify to its quality, but clearly others see it as succesful in offering up inventive gameplay.

Games can teach us things. Thats the point of this blog, to look at other games analytically and take note of their pitfalls and fine points, to see what methods they use to achieve certain ends. Then, after storing these lessons in our bank of knowledge, we apply them to our own games. We want to look at games from multiple angles, from a player's perspective, from an architects, an artists. We don't want to look at games in any narrow defined manner, we want to see them as whole pieces that can be disected in many different ways. Games offer so much for us to find and discover, we just need to stop and look.

What does inventive gameplay offer for players? How does it effect them (what can they learn)?
What theories, tools, themes, or aspects are necessary to create successful inventive gameplay?
Why is inventive gameplay fun (the answer is more obvious then you might think)?

Please post any thoughts you have in comments. Also, if you have played Crackdown, tell us some cool minigames you've come up with.

Todd Howard-Shivering Isles Interview

Gameinformer Online has interviewed Elder Scrolls IV Executive Producer, Todd Howard, on Oblivion's expansion, Shivering Isles. One particulary interesting quip from Mr. Howard was this.

GI: Are there any particular monsters that you’re excited about?

Howard: I like the Grummites, because they seem to be more than monsters—they seem to inhabit this world. They have a little bit—as much as you can for guys who come out and attack you—it seems like they have some culture. They seem like they live there. They’re more believable in the environment, as opposed to Joe Creature who just pops up. Even though they’re all rooted in the environment, those, more than the others, feel like they live there, which always makes it feel a little more believable for me.

Why does he like Grummites? Because they're more integrated then other creatures. Integration is one of the most important aspects of a game, I believe. Integration of gameplay, story, environment, everything. I am currently working on an article about integration that I'll be posting up soon, look for it.

Read the whole article here

Will Wright Popular Science Interview

D.I.C.E 2007 is currently taking place in Vegas, which for us means we get to see the big bosses come out and tell us about their games or share their opinions. Popular Science has intereviewed Will Wright recently, asking eight pages of questions. I know, I know, it seems daunting, but really, its quite educational. Plus, its Will Wright, how can you pass on that?

Some choice quotes:

Yeah, there's small to large in scale, but there's also the distant past to the distant future in time, so in some sense it's a map as much of space and scale but of time as well, but life is kind of like the portrait we're putting into this frame. We’re looking at life from the very small to the very large and from the distant past to the distant future.

Do you see Spore, or the rest of your games for that matter, as being educational?
I think in a deep way yeah – that's kind of why I do them. But not in a curriculum-based, 'I'm gong to teach you facts' kind of way. I think more in terms of deep lessons of things like problem-solving, or just creativity – creativity is a fundamental of education that's not really taught so much. But giving people tools… what it means to be human is to learn to use tools to basically expand your abilities. And I think computer games are in some sense a fundamental tool for our imagination. If we can let players create these elaborate worlds, there's a lot of thought, design thought, problem solving, expression that goes into what you're going to create. You know, I think of the world of hobbies, which isn't what it used to be. When I was a kid, you know, people that were into trains had a big train set and they spent a lot of time sculpting mountains and building villages, or they might have been into slot cars or dollhouses or whatever, but these hobbies involved skill, involved creativity, and at some point involved socialization. Finding other people and joining the model train club, comparing and contrasting our skills, our approaches. And I think a lot of computer gaming has kind of supplanted those activities, they have a lot of the aspects of hobbies. Especially the games that allow the player to be creative and to share that creativity and form a community around it. I think just in general, play is about problem-solving, about interacting with things in an unstructured way to get a sense of it and what the rules are.

But if you could predict exactly what would happen as a result of your actions, there would be no entertainment there. So it's exactly the fact that when I do something I want to stop and see what's going to happen, I have to actually watch it play out, as opposed to automatically know the future…

Check it out.
Popular Science-Will Wright Interview

Rock Paper Scissors - A Method for Competitive Game Play Design

Gamasutra, a fantastic resource for game design enthusiasts, has recently featured an article written by Victor Chelaru and entitled Rock Paper Scissors - A Method for Competitive Game Play Design.

The article discusses creating an effective competitive multiplayer gaming system. How does one achieve this? Chelaru argues that the game should be balanced according to a signals and reactions. All attacks should be preceded by a signal, generally in the form of a character's animation. A defender should be able to read the signal and counter. Chelaru goes much deeper, eventually describing "fakes" and multiple signals.

Here is a good excerpt from the piece:

The presence of obvious, well-timed signals can greatly enrich the play experience. Keep in mind that for a signal to be effective in enriching the play experience, the player must be aware of the RPS relationship between the attacks. There are three criteria which must be present at this point:

1. Each attack must have a known and effective defense or counter attack.

2. Each attack must present a signal that is detectable.

3. Each attack must occur after the signal at a time interval which allows the defender to react.

The read is rather enlightening. It discusses things we've always known, but defines them and disects them to a microscopic level. Read Away, and come back with any comments you may have on the article.

Shmup Design

Hello readers, this article is a follow up to the previous post, This is how we Shmup. Go ahead and check that out if you havent already, and then please continue with this post. Thankyou kindly and enjoy.

Ray-Hound: Indirect Interaction
Defining Ray-Hound as a shmup, for some gamers, may be pushing the boundaries of the genre. You see, while the Ray-Hound can fly around by moving the mouse, it doesn't have a gun. Instead, the game features an alternative mechanic. Normally, enemy fire will only damage Ray-Hound, not enemy cannons. Click and holding the mouse button, however, will activate a magnetic field of sorts switches enemy shots, allowing the Ray-Hound to take control of them. Holding the mouse button will magnetically cause the shots to draw towards the Ray-Hound and swarm around it. When the button is released, the magnet will power down and the shots will fire away according to Newton's First Law. If you've ever played Warcraft III, it looks very similar to the Warden's Avatar of Vengeance ability. An oft used strategy is to activate the magnet as a shot draws forward, and release it as it comes back to Ray-Hound, sending it flying towards the enemy from which it was shot. The player can also fly around while holding the button, dragging the shots behind the ship and flying them straight into enemy cannons.

What is so great about this design? A few things. Firstly, the control is fantastic. Second, the physics are perfect, really. After playing long enough, the player can direct enemy shots with ease; the magnetization is spot-on. Most importantly, however, Ray-Hounds gameplay is indirect. This is very near and dear to me. Direct gameplay is what we normally play, and can be found in Galaga, Warning-Forever, and most other games in existence; this is where the player directly creates gameplay, basically by shooting. Indirect gameplay is where the player interacts with the game indirectly. Ray-Hound (game, not ship) creates substance for the player to interact with, as opposed to the player creating substance him or herself. You see? Ray-Hound is truly a model example of this.

One last thing I want to mention is balance. The scoring system in Ray-Hound works like this. The players score per hit is multiplied by 4 for each hit delivered with the same magnetic activation. The game awards the player for hitting more cannons per magnetic activation (by point multiplication) then if the player were simply to tap away at the magnet. The goal is to hit as many cannons as possible with a single sweep of shots. However, the player is also pressured by time. Time is constantly ticking down in Ray-Hound. At the end of each level the player is awarded with more time to play with. As the levels progress, the player must balance time with waiting for a great volley of shots with which to turn on the enemies. In the end, it all comes down to skill and knowing when to activate the magnet and when not to.

Warning Forever: Adaptation
Warning Forever is slightly more traditional than Ray-Hound. However, it does bring a few palatable dishes to the table. For one, each stage consists of a single boss fight, and thats all. Unlike Ray-Hound, which has a more calm methodical gameplay atmosphere, the boss system makes for a rather exhilarating rush as you zoom from stage to stage. In addition, you never quite know what your going to get on the next level. Each boss is symmetrically weighted, and built of a variety of different parts around a central heart. The goal is to take out the heart of each boss. How you attack each boss though, will determine what types of bosses you fight in future stages. The bosses will evolve based upon the way you destroy them and they destroy you. If you just kill the front plating over and over, that body section will expand and grow stronger. The game runs algorithms that adapt to your style of play.

Fortunately, Warning Forever allows players to tackle bosses pretty much any way they want to. The ship is controlled with the arrow keys, and can be moved at a slower speed by holding the X key. To fire hold Z. The real skill factor comes in with the fire cone. By pressing D, the ship will activate a cone of fire that will automatically move with the ship. Move right and the cone moves left, up and the cone aims down, etc. Also, the cone gets thinner the further the ship gets from the center of the screen, and wider as you near the center. The fire will be spread out over the entirety of the cone, so a smaller cone makes for a more focused shot, a wider cone for a larger target area. The player must maneuver around the boss and decide the best course of action while avoiding being shot.

Warning Forever design is awesome for two mirrored reasons. One, the game evolves to meet your play style. It will throw bosses at you that rival your latest strategies. However, the beauty of being human is that we can evolve as well. This creates a constantly ebbing and flowing challenge as the player and game compete to out strategize each other.

Shmup Em Up
These shooters are fun, a lot of fun. Why? They employ fantastic design. Ray-Hound features gameplay indirectly manipulated, Warning Forever adapts to meet the players shooting style. Simple, but oh so effective. In what other games feature similar elements to these? What other uses can these elements be put to?

This is how we Shmup

Wow! I am simply amazed, I must say.
Two of the greatest Shmup's (overhead shooter) ever just landed on my laptop.
The first shooter in question was recommended via a 1up article today.
Entitled 101 Free Games, the article features awesome games that are free to download and play, and begins with shooters. Possibly the best on the list is Ray-Hound.

Ray-Hound
Ray-Hound is unquestionably one of the most innovative shooters ever. It can be surmized however as a little bit of Ikaruga and a little bit of Geomotry Wars. Designed and coded by Hikoza Ohkubo under the studio of Hikware, the game was released on January 1st. Before I go on to explain the game, allow me to impart a philosophy. I believe games are meant to be intuitively understood and experienced. This is one reason I like indie games so much, they are designed around this principle. These types of games, and indeed, many triple A titles as well, are much more fun when experienced without prior knowledge or know-how. Instead of me explaining the game and its mechanics, I truly believe that you will be significantly more satisfied by downloading the game and experiencing it first-hand. Its more fun to learn and discover how to play a game then to know the ins and outs entering it, I think. Afterwards, you are more then welcome to come back here and post your impressions. Ray-Hound is absolutely amazing from both a design and gamer perspective (and arent they the same thing anyway? for good design equals good gameplay). One thing to note about Ray-Hound is that there is no background music or sound effects. It could be that my download is broken or that my computer runs it improperly. In place I listened to The Trance Album from Project Majestix Mix. If you do notice any sound or music then please let me know. Thanks. Ray-Hound Get!

Warning Forever
The other shooter is Warning Forever. A cool website that focuses on independent games called Jay is Games tipped me off to it. This shmup was also designed by Hikoza Ohkubo, but was initially released far prior to Ray-Hound in May of 2004. Warning Forever is a vertical scrolling shooter, like Galga, but brings a few very fun and strategic factors into its gameplay. Shmup It!

Tomorrow I will discuss the design of both of these games, so enjoy these games today and come on back tommorrow to check out the designdiscussion. Also, any thoughts you have on these games or shmups in general please post them in comments.

Sources:
1up.com
Jay Is Games