Tweaking of Exposed Variables?
Something that's been on my mind lately is the extra attention to the numbers when tweaking exposed variables. As in, values shown to the player.
Sometimes the "perfect" value when tweaking... Let's say the jump strength in a platformer is 4.56697. That's the value that makes the game feel just right, and if it's "hidden" as most variables are, then it's just fine.
But sometimes, in some games certain variables are shown to the player. Like the power of spells in a Role Playing Game or maybe the duration of a boost-skill?
Take Mass Effect 2 for example. In it you, the player, can read about the duration of skills for each level, the exact range and radius, the damage it does and even the percentage of another variable (weapon damage).
Right; 1.5 sec, 60%, 3.0 sec and 3 meters. Enough info for you, or do you need a chart?
When doing things like this, what I'm wondering about is how far should you go to make the variable values "pretty". How much of a compromise? Now, in many cases I'm sure we're only talking about rounding it to the closest decimal, but sometimes I think this can be a bother and something that's a pain for the designer.
The perfect duration for fantastic gameplay might be 57 seconds, but that's in no way as pretty as 60. But maybe 60 in reality is too much? Not worth arguing about some might say, but at the same time, isn't the micro tweaking what really makes a game great?
Also, when exposing the variables, you have to keep them simple enough for that particular audience to grasp. In Dungeon & Dragon-games for example, there's a lot more statistics than . can find in Mass Effect, and that's not a problem for the normal D&D-audience, because they're used to it and might in fact like it. Meanwhile, it scares me and I much more appreciate the Mass Effect 2 approach with "medium amount" of info.
But heck, you always have to cater to the specific audience regarding all subjects and not only numbers, I guess.
This post was finished at 22:54, but it might be wiser of me to say 23:00. Sounds better, don't ya think?
Uncanny Valley of Game Design?
When talking about uncanny valley in video games we usually refer to animations or 3D models being so close to reality that even the slightest difference makes us feel that something is "wrong".
But nowadays, isn't there an uncanny valley in gameplay?
The big studios spend a lot of resources on the writing, characters, dialogue, setting and environment, creating a very believable game world. And then when we encounter a very "video game:y" solution, like a very conveniently placed platform, lever or trigger we're smacked in the face.
It does at least ruin the experience somewhat for me. Overall I'm very good at accepting the premise in both movies and games, but I do often think "How convenient..." in games like Assassin's Creed and other realistic games. But I never think like that when I play Mario, because there it all makes perfect sense within the game world.
Reach the roof. Just climb the conveniently placed scaffold and jump to the conveniently placed sinks to finally reach the roof, on which you'll find a very conveniently positioned hang glider.
I think that when working with a believable setting, you have to think long and hard about the context for in which the gameplay takes place.
Yes, make design recommendations
I recently got a link from a friend:
http://johnnyholland.org/2010/01/06/my-recommendation-stop-making-design-recommendations/ (6/2/2010)
It basically says that one shouldn't make design recommendations, because it's likely that the product will turn out worse and/or they'll lose faith in you. Now, I think his arguments are sane and understand how he means, but I disagree. He says:
Making recommendations is an easy out. You say, “Do this. Change that.” then wipe your hands clean of it. If they don’t do it, they’re obviously idiots. If they do, you’re brilliant. The best case scenario is they follow your great recommendation and it improves the design. But it turns out, that only one out of four possible outcomes.
- Jared Spool (6/1/2010)
And then he shows this table:
Risky situation.
Now, his point is that there's only one result that's good for you, one neutral and two bad. Hence, you shouldn't make recommendations.
I disagree, because I think that's a cowardly way to act.
The way I see it is that there's a 50/50 chance that the design will turn out better, so there's nothing to stop you there. And hopefully, you actually think you're recommendation is good and it will turn out as in the green box. And since the only way to achieve the "good ending" is to actually come with a recommendation (assuming you have one you believe in), I think you should do it. Risk vs. reward.
But then again, you have to believe in your idea and that's what he discuss in the "Bet your salary"-section, but I think he's a bit to careful.
No pain, no gain?
Listening to Feedback
Just a quick post.
I'm currently playing Assassin's Creed 2 after having played through the first one a couple of days ago. The first one was a decent game while the second one so far has been superb.
But the thing I wanted to comment on is how well the developers have listened to the feedback from the players. If you want to know what's better in #2 you can read a review, but there's one thing I'll mention.
In Assassin's Creed, you use the X-button (PS3) to "Blend", which is to walk even slower than normal walking to blend in amongst people and raise less suspicion. I found this boring as hell, as normal walking was slow enough and I don't really want to pretend to be a snail-assassin.
In Assassin's Creed 2, you use the X-button to "Fast Walk" which is to keep all the perks from walking, but doing a little bit faster and being able to pick pocket while doing it.
Voila! They did a complete 180 and did the exact opposite which made the game a whole lot more fun. Thank you for listening!
He always takes his job with him at home. Get it!?
Other games, like Deus Ex didn't have that luxury. The first game is excellent, being one of my all time favorite games while I don't like the second one very much at all. The developers themselves even admitted, although much later, that they kind of screwed up there because they listened too much on what people didn't like with the first one to fix that, but they missed on listening to what we DID like with the first one. One of the designers tells you this in Warren Spector's Master Class of game design. I don't have a link for it at hand right now, but I'll be sure to get it and post a link sometimes. It's G R E A T!
Feedback when killing
I've been lucky enough to have a couple of posts from AboutGameDesign.com to repost here so I could continue with some intense gaming, but I'm all out now, so I guess I'll have to actually write one this time.
There's been some FPS:ing going on for me with MAG and Killzone 2 so I thought I'd dedicate this post to the importance of feedback when killing stuff.
I can't stress it enough, how extremely importance feedback is in a game. Any game, feedback for everything!
In games, such as shooters, where there's lots of stuff going on and several enemies at once, it's important to know two things (well, a whole bunch of things, but I'll focus on two):
- Am I hitting my target?
- Is it dead yet?
Some games fail on giving me, the player adequate information on this topic, but let's talk about the ones that don't.
Am I hitting my target?
Since MAG (Open Beta) and Killzone 2 (friggin' awesome!) are two of the most recent played games, I'll talk about them.
In MAG, if you hit an enemy when firing, your cross-hair change form into something bigger and goes red. Since the cross-hair is the point of the screen where you'll be spending most of your time and concentration, it works great. But I've noticed one very interesting thing when using a Sniper Rifle.
If you're far away from an enemy and you're using you're scope to zoom in. If you then manage to hit your enemy, not only does the cross-hair change but you'll also hear a fleshy impact sound. The funny thing is that even if you're a mile away, you'll still hear the sound like if it was just and arm reach away. Strange? Perhaps. But it actually works! It doesn't throw me off game with a big WTF; instead I get a clear audible cue that I hit my target!
MAG (Massive Action Game, I'm not making it up.)
In Killzone 2, you get a red cross hair once your aim is on a living (or activated, if it's a machine) enemy but it doesn't change whether you hit or not. The spread of the bullets can cause you to miss. However, Killzone 2 is so insanely driven with the help of it's animations and effects, so while no extra HUD-help is there you'll still know when you hit thanks to the blood/sparks and the impact animation played by the enemy.
So while MAG has more of a HUD-based system, much because it's online so you can't start having players to cripple once hit, Killzone 2 has a more in-game approach. They both work fine and one should see to the needs, tools and possibilities when deciding what to implement. But there MUST be some kind of feedback.
Is it dead yet?
The reason why it's important to know when something is dead is pretty obvious, I want to know when I can start shooting something else!
Once again, I'll start of with MAG. When you kill someone in MAG, you get experience points, so that's pretty much the easiest way to know. When the text "5 XP" pops up over the enemy's head; he's dead. Simple as that.
Let's mix things up a bit and discuss some more games. In Uncharted 2 (online at least, I haven't played single player yet) what happens when you kill someone is that you get a really distinct sound effect that goes like "Ding!" that really stands out. The only bad thing with this is that you have to learn what the sound means, as "Ding!" doesn't come naturally as "You killed that mother f*cker!", but once you get that, it's smooth sailing!
Killzone 2 doesn't give any "extra" information as to when someone is dead, so what I did was to keep looking at the cross-hair. Since it turns red when I'm aiming at someone, it goes back to white once he's dead. I guess it's feedback in its own way, but not very explicit.
The problem is that sometimes enemies can take a while to fall to the ground because of long "Oh, I'm dying, the pain, oh, the pain..."-animations before.
Another game where I found that to be an extremely big problem is in the recently released Alien Breed to XBLA. You're meeting these huge Zerg-like creatures, several at a time and once they're dead they take forever to stop moving, so I can never distinguish the live ones from the ones already dead. One could argue that's part of the design but personally, I just find it frustrating!
Alien Breed. I hope you know it's originally a retro classic.
So there you have it. A few thoughts on feedback when shooting stuff.
Okay, I've done my deed. It's time to got back to Assassin's Creed 2 now!
Less is more – iPhone games
I haven't been home where my PS3 and 360 is for over a week now, so I've had to make due with my DS and the iPhone, so I thought I'd write a short post about what I consider to be some of the great iPhone games I've been playing and what they make right. I've chosen only to include games that have one thing in common; less is more. And just to make clear, this isn't a list of the best games ever for the iPhone.
Doodle Jump
Doodle Jump is a success both in sales and when it comes to reviews. You control it by simply tilting the device left and right and you can fire at enemies by touching the screen where you want to shoot. It's very simple and even people that can barely be called "casual gamers" can master is. A session takes anywhere from couple to 10 minutes, depending on how well you play. My longest game was about 6 minutes.
Addictive to say the least
Rat On a Scooter XL
Yeah, that's what it's called. You're a rat on a scooter out to score by grinding and getting cheese. The entire game is played by touching anywhere on the screen to jump. The strength varies depending on for how long you press it. A game takes a couple of minutes. It's one of many brilliant extremly simple games from Donut Games.
My current highscore in the standard mode is 142.
Hook Champ
One of my favorite games I've ever played on the iPhone. You're a little dude swinging through levels with a grappling hook. You just touch where you want the hook to latch on and a level takes a couple of minutes to complete.
He's a swinger
Dance Dance Revolution S
DDR for the iPhone is just like the DDR-games for consoles and a dance pad but you touch pads on the screen instead. Arrows fly across the screen and you gotta get the timing down for hitting the right direction out of four. "Easy to learn, difficult to master." One song takes a few minutes to finish.
Dance my puppets, dance!
Dark Nebula
It's a puzzle/action game if you can call it that in which you control a ball by simply tilting the device. The controls are extremly good and very exact and the level design is very interesting. Outbreak Studios is developing the sequel. A few days ago I had my girlfriend, her sister and the sister's fiance try out the game, and all of a sudden they were all playing it at the same time, loving it. One level takes a few minutes to finish.
On several top lists on the web
Now, there are many more games I like but these are a few of them. As you probably noticed, two things are shared among all of them.
They're extremly easy to control and more importantly the game is over after a few minutes, which result in people having an easy time to play just "once more" a million more times.
I like games like Rolando and Asphalt too, but I rarely play them because they feel like they "require" me to invest more time and effort into them. I can play a song in DDR any time. Yesterday when I was out with my girlfriend and she started trying out clothes in a store, I played some Doodle Jump and Rat On a Scooter. 'nough Said.
I think many developers get that part wrong.
Special Effects
I'm pretty much all about the gameplay, but I can't deny that it's all that matters in a game. There are many more aspects of a game that needs to be done right for a great gaming experience. Graphics, Audio, etc.
After all, what a game is, isn't a box of gameplay, but an experience to be had.
I played the Bayonetta demo yesterday. I had absolutely no expecations for it, but I must admit that I loved it. It's over the top in every way, estetic, extreme effects, blood, gore, extreme violence and japanese soft porn, all at once!
When I was checking up on the game earlier today online, I found a really interesting blog post from their effect designer; Kudo.
He makes a really good point on how important effects are for a game.
Bayonetta’s weapons, the impact of the hits, the enemy attacks, the smoke flowing out in the background, etc… When you have effects on, I think you can see that things seem more exhilarating, enemy attacks are easier to understand, and the atmosphere is played up more, amongst other things.
- Kudo, PlatinumGames
He also presents two videos with basically the same content, expect that one is with effects and one is without.
I'll embedd them here. The first one is without effects, the second one is with the effects included.
One cannot look at both videos and deny that there's more to a game than just gameplay. In fact, in the case with Bayonetta, I'd say the effect design is a huge part of the game. More so than in many other games.
If you want to read the original post, head over here:
http://blogs.ign.com/SEGA_Bayonetta/2009/12/15/134195/ (20/12/2009)
Heck, before playing the game I wasn't a fan of the character (visual) design at all, but after playing it, I even like that. It all fits together and the way she's extreme in everyway is just right. It all adds up to a gaming experience!
Girls are scary.
A Classic Recipe
Yesterday, I made a Chocolate Flavoured Sponge Cake. It wasn't all that hard, because I was following a recipe, telling me what ingredients to use and how much of each. It even told me in what order to implement them.
I knew somewhat what I was getting, even before it was done. I expected a sweet, smooth taste and it was what I got. After all, it was a Sponge Cake and after all, I was following a recipe.
There's a new Zelda game out; The Legend of Zelda: Spirit Tracks. I'm expecting a boomerang, bombs and a bow. After all, it's a Zelda game and after all, it's following a recipe.
The Legend of Zelda: The Trainee (Get it?!)
I haven't played Spirit Tracks yet, but I've played a bunch of the previous titles on the NES, SNES, GB, GBC, NGC, N64 and the Wii. (No, I haven't played the CD-I.) And it's a fact that the Zelda games are all cooked using the same tried and proved recipe each time. Sure, there are variations in the spicing and and presentation, but overall, it's always the same amount of eggs, exploration, salt, bombs, sugar, chests and baking powder.
I'm not in any way saying this is a bad thing. Heck, it obviously works and based on the reception of each game, people still love it.
But what I'm thinking is this: How much is gained and lost when using an old and expected recipe for a game?
I don't know, but it's something I've been thinking about for a few days now. Let's continue with Zelda as our subject. At the moment, I'm playing Phantom Hourglass, because I haven't finished it yet and I don't think I should start playing Spirit Tracks before I have.
Even at the beginning of the game, I "knew" I was gonna get the boomerang. When I saw open eyes in the walls, I realised I would probably need a bow and arrow to shoot it, before the game had actually told me that such a thing exist. This is because it's nearly always the case in Zelda. Whenever I see a crack in the wall, I know I'll need bombs and I'll now I'm gonna get them eventually per default.
Again, this isn't a bad thing, per se. It makes me excited and makes me wanna keep on playing so I can break those walls. It makes me feel comfortable and enjoyed while playing.
But a lot of the "Wow-factor" is gone when I get these items. I'm not thinking "Wow, bombs! Awesome!, I'm thinking "The bombs... Finally.". Not to say that I'm not happy when I get them, I'm just so much more happy when I get something new for the Zelda franchise.
Zelda isn't the only game. Of course not. I heard a new Mario game is out on the Wii. Does it have a fire flower? I thought so. I wonder if there will be huge enemies, chests with magical orbs and quick time events God of War 3? So, played Metroid recently, how about those missiles? And let's not forget the morph ball.
I realise you can't change a game completely when making a sequel, of course developers should keep what's good and of course they shouldn't mess with the foundation.
But I can't help but to wonder what is lost when doing this?
Best Level Design
If you apply for a job within the game industry, it's very likely that you'll get a question at the interview asking what game impresses you the most regarding the area you want to work with.
I actually don't remember if I got that question when I had my interview before getting a job as Level Designer at GRIN, and if I did, I don't remember the answer anyway.
However, if I were to get that question today I know exactly what I'd answer and I think it'd be a shocker.
The game I think has the most impressive level design is Valkyria Chronicles.
Not a FPS, Third Person Shooter or a Platformer, but a strategy game!
I'm a bit behind on some games so I didn't get Valkyria until a few months ago, but after beating it, I can't say I'm anything but amazed of how fantastic the execution of each level is.
Once again, it's a strategy game! A genre that has never had me raise an eyebrow because of its level design before.
I think it has somewhere around 20 missions (levels, maps, whatever) in the main campaign and what's so interesting is that each and everyone really is unique. It's often a line on the back of the cover with little to no meaning, but in this case it would be perfectly true.
There is no "one tactics" that always work on each level. You're encouraged to play different missions in different manners and they're extremely varied while at the same time never going astray from its core. They never feel weird, out of place or "forced".
Every now and then they present one new level feature. That's what I choose to call it. It can be stuff like trenches, mortar attacks (explosions covering a large area of the level), train carts you can ride, etc. The new level feature open up new possibilities for the level design and they take full advantage of it. And as you progress, there are more and more features and tools to combine to create great levels, different from the previous once, but still familiar enough for you to be able to play right away.
Putting story aside, each level make me very committed to finish it and I feel very involved. Of course, gameplay and presentation are huge parts of this as well, and it's pretty much impossible to ever differentiate game and level design to a great extent but each of the three really merge into something great.
Well, enough rambling for now. My point is, I think you should really have a look at Valkyria because of it's great level design. It's a game that shows that even genres like this can stand out in areas such as that and I think techniques they use can be of great inspiration for any kind of level design. With that, I mean how they use a little to make a lot and the respect of the game's core while introducing new features.
A perfect object for an in-depth analysis if you have the time.
I have boob platings, you don't!
Employers and Affiliates
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Follow me online
Tweets
- @fohx Hey, I'm just going by the numbers. :P
- Running around as a barbarian with a dagger and pink shoulder pads. Not how I envisioned it, but I'm having fun regardless! #Diablo3
- The Imagination Engine: Why Next-Gen Video Games Will Rock Your World | Game|Life | http://t.co/9jgLbHEH http://t.co/cuVhoi2k
- @Kappische Probably an Australian. Due to them being on the other (wrong) side of the equator, it's correct there.
- ' @adrianchm How come I have to write two additional design documents, for you to get that and I still get nothing? :P
Fresh out of the oven
- PCF Blog!
- Game Over
- The “Designing Producer”
- PowerPoint Games
- Bulletstorm Videos
- The Humble Indie Bundle
- Are we allowed to skew the trailers?
- The acceptance of Video Games
- Teh importance of spelling
- Cleaning Game?
- When Epic met PCF
- I’m gonna be an Epic Game Designer
- Looks the same, plays different
- Spectator Game?
- Play while installing
Categories
- Causerie (138)
- Game specific (30)
- Misc. (53)
- projects (27)
- web (29)
Latest comments
- chris on Bad Design – MMORPG Information Overload!
- Fantastic Video Games For Everybody | Maxnds | Max NDS on Lovable Character Design?
- billy on How I start writing a GDD
- HCG Levels in Early Pregnancy on In what ways can we NOT apprehend games?
- HCG Levels in Early Pregnancy on Feedback when killing
Tags
Archives
- November 2010 (1)
- May 2010 (7)
- April 2010 (10)
- March 2010 (13)
- February 2010 (10)
- January 2010 (11)
- December 2009 (10)
- November 2009 (12)
- October 2009 (15)
- September 2009 (16)
- August 2009 (12)
- July 2009 (14)
- June 2009 (16)
- May 2009 (10)
- April 2009 (16)
- March 2009 (13)
- February 2009 (3)
- January 2009 (11)
- December 2008 (19)
- November 2008 (14)
- October 2008 (8)