Arcade Berg aka. "Learning Game Design with Arcade Berg"

3Sep/090

Batman Arkham Asylum – Free Flow Combat

Posted by Arcade

I played through Batman: Arkham Asylum a couple of days ago and gosh darn it, it's good!

The overall execution of the game is great, but if you just wanna know whether it's good or not, read some reviews. What I'm gonna discuss a bit is its' combat system; the "Free Flow Combat" as it's called.

It's pure genius.

It basically works with you, the player (I'm Batman!) having to chain attacks together to built up combos. You can attack, move and counter. (You can also stun and use tools, but that's not its' core.) Attacking can be done at any time while countering is only possible if you time it correctly based on when the enemies attack.

If you need more info on how it works I recommend reading a review or watching a video explaining it.

There are two things I find absolutely astonoshing about this system:

  1. It's pretty much the definition of "easy to learn and difficult to master".
  2. It's incredibly adoptable.

The first one is pretty self-explanatory. From the first moment you're able to play and to fight, but as you get more time with it you start to realise that you're so much better than you were before. Period. It's not about unlocking new moves, finally being able to execute long or difficult combos, it's about planning, reacting and timing, three skills everybody can use and improve!

I really appreciate it calling to some of our basic abilities, instead of hardcore-restricted ones like a combo of 15 button presses.

The second point, about it being so adoptable is something that fascinates me even more! In the beginning of the game you face about 2-3 enemies at a time and it works great. You're really into it, kicking ass.

As you progress in the game, you start encounter more and more enemies per battle, sometimes up to about 15 and some with special abilities, like needing to be stunned before attacking or having to be attacked from behind. But even with this, the exact same system works just as perfect!

One enemy, 15 enemies, just normal grunts, special enemies, no matter what the combination is, the system holds its head up high! I don't know of any other fighting mechanic that does this so well. Usually it's more suitable for one kind of "situation".

For example, I don't think that Dynasty Warrior's system where you fight of hundres of enemies at once would work so will with a one on one combat.

With Batman they've nailed it with making use of patterns we can easily read and decode, making it more probable to get into the game thinking of what to do instead of how to do it. The most important thing for me.

I seriously hope a lot of other developers out there will take a really close look at this game. Not to copy it of course, but to see that simplicity can achieve greatness.

30Aug/090

Persona 4 – Brilliant!

Posted by Arcade

*Phew*!

I meant to do so some blogging a couple of days ago but it got postponed. I then meant to do it yesterday, but yet again, I didn't have the time.

But I have a really good reason. I was crunching Shin Megami Tensei: Persona 4!

I bought Batman: Arkham Asylum last friday but I decided not to play it untill I was done with Persona, as I felt I was closing in on the end after about 60h of play-time. Man... Was I wrong? For yet another 30h I felt like I was so close to the ending I could smell it. I was wrong.

91 hours and 51 minutes is what it took me to finish that beast of a game! And to be honst, the last 20h or so felt a tad annoying as I was longing for Batman.

Enough about me and more about the game. If you don't know the fundamentals I recommend doing a google about it. Rating over 9/10 on Metacritic and being the best JRPG I've played in many, many years it's something every designer with a huge amount of time to spend should look into.

How can 92h fit on one disc?

How can 92h fit on one disc?

I've never spent this much time with a Single Player Game before, and I don't see if happening again anytime soon. But what is the magic that holds the player for so long? Why can't you just say enough is enough and never look at the game again.

I think there are two main reasons for this:

  1. The constant passing of time making the player's progress in the game automatic.
  2. The continuing feeling of things progressing thanks to constant leveling and introduction of skills and Personas.

In short. Stuff always happens!

Just a little disclaimber-thingy. The game also has an exciting story, fun combat and fantastic characters. Of course just the two above mentioned reasons will not make for a great game by themself, but are indeed parts of a whole.

1.

Persona 4 is played by making choices of what to do each day. There's the daytime, after school and evening. This may vary depending on special circumstances.

Anyway, you then get to do one thing each part of the day. Some things doesn't affect time, like shopping. But stuff like increasing stats, progressing the story and increasing your Social Links (part of the stat-system in Persona) will use up one "time slot".

Once the evening is over, the game progresses into the next day on the calendar. Special events related to the game's story happens on specific dates so it's impossible to stand still in the game, just increasing stats or whatever. The game will progress, wether you want it to or not.

This is brilliant! Because of this I know that for each and every choice I make, even if it's something as simple as to eat at a restaurant I get closer and closer to the end. It's impossible to get stuck in the game, similar to a movie if you wish.

2.

In Persona you use magical powers with the help of "Personas". Think of them like Pokémons, because really, they're quite alike. You collect them by defeating enemies and by fusing together the ones you have. Each and everyone has different skills and looks. They each have their own level as well, just like your character.

The personas gain XP when used.

So when walking in a dungeon with four characters, three of which has one persona each and you, the main character with more than 10 personas. That's 8 enteties gaining XP per battle (4+4).

This means that there are not many fights apart when someone of them levels up, increasing stats and perhaps gaining a new ability.

In one hour, there's probably 5-10 level ups. This is a bit different from many games where you level up once every few hour. It makes you feel that you're constantly getting stronger in one way or another, increasing your chances in combat.

This along with the time that progress by itself, it's a race for you to "keep up", making a very interesting balance.

Fin.

There's a million other things the developers have made very wise decisions about as well, especially when it comes to context. But I'll leave that for another post perhaps. Right now, after beating it, I don't want anything more to do with it for a while.

Persona 4 is one of the most cleverly designed games I've played, ever.

10Aug/090

The purpose of a game demo?

Posted by Arcade

[I'm writing this the last, after reading my post. It suppose this post is just as much about allowing different approaches to challenges in games, like in Deus Ex or Fallout, as it is about what to think about when releasing a demo. Well, I still hope you can find something here of interest.]

A few days ago, a playable demo of the game Batman - Arkham Asylum was released. It is the best demo I've tried in a very long time.

I'm not saying that simply because I think it's fun, but partly because it makes me THINK the complete game is, without actually knowing.

In the commercial industry, a game demo has one purpose; to get people to buy the game. But for many indie developers, that's not necessarily true. I might be, but it's not a necessity.

An indie developer might release a demo to show the world how fun of a game he can make and leave it at that.

I'm wondering, what approach should one take when creating a demo. Should they differ between when trying to sell and when just trying to show your stuff?

  1. Should you show a lot or just a small part of what the game can offer regarding gameplay?
  2. Since it's a demo, should we tell the player "This is what you can do", or should we risk it and let them find it out by themselves?
  3. Should we try and deliver "the complete demo experience" with one play-through, or require several ones?

I don't know the answers for these questions, but I intend to discuss them. I'll discuss them one at a time to finally compare it to the Batman demo, trying to give an example where it works. And of course, these are just my opinions, so think of them as you wish.

1. Should you show a lot or just a small part of what the game can offer regarding gameplay?

Personally, I think, especially for commercial purposes that you shouldn't give it all away. It's hard, but it's better to give the player some tools to play with yet hint, that it's only a part of a grander plan that comes with the complete product.

An indie might feel differently, since it's perhaps not likely that "anyone" will buy the game (if sold) but the indie dev still wants to show the player a fantastic product.

All I "need" to experience in a demo is the basic gameplay and what kind of additional mechanics they add up on it. Are there power ups in the game? Then at least let me try one or two, but don't give them all away. Are there very different enemies in the game? Then let me try and fight at least a couple.

This is hard for indies and some industry companies, because one wants to show how clever one is.

2. Since it's a demo, should we tell the player "This is what you can do", or should we risk it and let them find it out by themselves?

This is a tough one. Players are likely to be willing to spend less time and effort with a free demo than with a complete game he paid money for. By clearly telling the player what's possible to do in the demo, we can be sure that all players get a chance to experience it. Experience the game "as good as it can be". However(!), the problem is that we lose the sense of achievement a player feels when discovering things. I'll discuss this exact example in Batman later.

I think this boils down to a risk vs. reward scenario actually. Do you dare to to risk the player not finding out some stuff that might have the player love the game. Things that if you tell the player about, he might not feel so excited about? The greater the risk, the greater the reward.

3. Should we try and deliver "the complete demo experience" with one play-through, or require several ones?

Since a demo is often short, it doesn't require much time from the player for him to play it once again. But, then again, why would the player spend that amount of time playing nothing but a demo after already having established an opinion towards the product? I think that if the first play-through is good, of course, the player is more willing to play it again.

How do you make the first play-through good and the second one even better? By "saving things" for the second run, don't you then make the first one less good? Not necessarily. I can't give a straight answer as to how to solve this, but I personally think it's about playing on the psychological parts of a player and not just quantifying the gameplay in a game.

batman_arkham_asylum_screen

What about Batman?

As I said, I think the Batman - Arkham Asylum demo was great.

Not only because it was fun to play, but because it makes me think that the entire game is even more fun!

It started out, giving me the basics of fighting using swift strikes and counters. Before the demo had ended, the game had also taught me some other moves like gliding in the air, sneaking and beating downed enemies. This all by itself was a lot of fun.

I got to try out the Batarang, a piece of special equipment and I got to use a grappling hook.

So, all in all I got to try out an array of moves and equipments, but I still know there are way more to go. I can't imagine all the cool stuff Batman got in his Bat-belt and I really want to try them out! They could have given me so much more, but there was no need and I guess the developers thought so too.

Now, for the what the game tells you. As I said, the game taught me a handful of moves and tips, and that's pretty much what I used for my first play-through, using a quite brutish strategy to finish of the enemies in the last room of the demo. I glide kicked, swung around, jumping down and beating the enemies. It worked fine, but it really lacked finesse. Still, I enjoyed it, thanks to gameplay.

But while playing, even if the game told me to glide kick, I noticed I could just hang from the gargoyle I was sitting on. Instead of sneaking up on enemies, I noticed I could stun them with my (awesome!) Batarang. The game didn't tell me this, but I figured it out anyway.

What's good about this is, that even without discovering some of these things, there's still enough to do for you to be greatly entertained. Hence, I think they struck a good balance between how much they shoved up my face, and how much they'd let me find out.

Afterwards I shut the game down and this is when the interesting stuff happened. I started thinking about how I've handled the scenarios in the game. I got a set of tools (moves, items, abilities, environment) and the game offers a set of obstacles. I started thinking, what if I'd used some other "tools". What if this, what if that. Maybe I could have, and maybe it'd be cool to.

It kept popping up at the back of my mind, so the next day I started the demo again. And let me tell you, I enjoyed the game even more this time!

Last time, as I said, in the final room, I just used brute force to beat it. But this time, being more familiar with my tools.

What happened:

I snuck up on the first enemy from behind, performing a silent take-down. Afterwards I swung up to a gargoyle, making it to the other side of the room without being noticed. From there I swung down from my gargoyle, grabbing an enemy, taking him up with me again, releasing him making him fall down a great height, while being tied to a rope.

I then immediately swung to another gargoyle while two other enemies ran towards to hanging one, to help him out. Once they'd arrived I stunned one of them with a Batarang-throw, immediately followed by a glide kick from high up on the other one. After this I quickly followed up with two take down moves, beating them both unconscious before they even saw me.

Once I'd taken care of those three, I could easily ambush the last one, since he had no one to help him out.

This play-through, I WAS Batman!

This, for one shows that I like the game, but more importantly, it shows how it's layered and how a short demo, only lasting a few minutes, can show off such a big part of the game.

Conclusion

It's a very long text for a very short conclusion. Great care should be put into creating a game demo. It's not just about taking a piece of the full version and having it as a stand alone. Love is required.

Of course, for a demo to be great, the chance of that happening is greatly increased if the full game actual is too.

3Jul/0916

Terminator Salvation – Game Design Analysis

Posted by Arcade

Getting less than great reviews, the Terminator Salvation video game doesn't seem to be a favorite amongst the reviewers out there.

Reviewers tend to write subjectively about their experience with the game, as should they. I decided to write an analysis of the game, looking at different aspects of the game and comparing them to basic game design and simple cognitive psychology. It discusses both bad and good things alike, even though it might be leaning more towards one of them.

Since it's pretty big with around 4500 words, I've decided not to copy-paste it into the blog as I doubt you'd have the patience to read it. Therefore I offer you three ways to do it:

  1. PDF-download: http://arcadeberg.com/files/arcade_berg-terminator_salvation_gd_analysis.pdf (29/6/09)
  2. Issuu-link: http://issuu.com/Kizo/docs/arcade_berg-terminator_salvation_gd_analysis (29/6/09)
  3. Read it here, embedded from Issuu!

And please, leave a comment letting me know what you think. I'd greatly appreciate it.

20Apr/090

Good Design – Dialogue Selection

Posted by Arcade

Once again; Suikoden Tierkreis shows some clever design choice. Konami's JRPG to the DS.

A very, very common problem with any games containing dialogue and dialogue options are that when you skip some lines you accidently make a selection of what to say in that conversation as well.

You know what I mean, you keep pressing A to skip the talk, either because you've heard/read it before or because it's just crap, but then all of a sudden you're presented with a number of options for you to choose among. By the time you realise this, you've already selected the first option, with no way to change that except for loading from an earlier save.

It happens to me all the time, most notable in Mass Effect.

It's a common problem, but really, it's not that difficult to solve.

The solution seen in Suikoden is that if you skip the talk with the action-button, once you arrive to a dialogue option screen, the game won't accept your input untill you've changed option at least once.

Let's say you're presented with two different options:

- Yes.
- No.

To answer No, you'll of course first have to press down once on the D-pad, then the action-button. To answer Yes, you'll have to first press down once to "activate" the option-marker, then up once to select Yes, followed by the action-button.

It might not be the sweatness of awesomeness, since it's three button presses to select the top option in which most games would have only required one. However, I have not once accidently chosen the wrong line! It's so worth it!

If you're skipping the conversation and making selections with the stylus on the touch screen, you're obligated to press twice in succession.

18Apr/090

Good Design – Towns in JRPG

Posted by Arcade

I was a big fan of Japanese RPG's during the SNES and Playstation-era, and somewhat during the last generation of consoles.

Today I don't nearly play them enough, mainly because I don't have the energy to invest that amount of time into one single game.

I was a Huge Suikoden and Suikoden II-fan. Suikoden II being one of my favorite games of all time. Therefore I've made sure to try out the new Suikoden game for the Nintendo DS; Suikoden Tierkreis.

An overall, what seems to be, good game. This far I've invested about 5 hours into it and I'm not bored yet.

One thing I greatly appreciate with this game is how it handles navigating in the cities. With menus! "Yuck", you might say. But I'm very pleased.

I hate running around in cities, villages and whatnot in games. The places where there's never any action. Sure, I admit that the very first time you visit a new town it can be exciting to run around in it and explore, but after that novelty wears off, it's just a plain bother to run around there, looking for the local weapon shop, inn and key-NPC.

In Tierkreis I just have a menu, with different choices depending on town and where you are in the story: Inn, Store, Alley, Town Hall, Exit Town, etc.

I say: Thank you!

This saves me both time and temper!

 

Suikoden Tierkreis (Konami)

Suikoden Tierkreis (Konami)

14Apr/091

Bad Design – MMORPG Information Overload!

Posted by Arcade

I've played some MMORPG's. I was, like everyone else, a World of Warcraft-player at its release, after being part of three betas and playing on a cracked server (oh, shame on me!) and I loved it. The game, not the cracked server.

I played some City of Heroes, a little bit of Anarchy Online, a tad of EVE Online as well as a bunch of Free To Play ones, like Maple Story and ROSE.

Last weekend I spent quite a lot of time playing the open Beta of Ether Saga Online:
http://eso.perfectworld.com/ (14/4/09) 

World of Warcraft was and is aimed at the masses. "Everyone" (read: a lot of people) should be able to play it but some gaming experience is a plus, while Ether Saga is focused on younger audiences (read: n00bs) and girls (read: n00bs).

I enjoy them both, but they both suffer from the same problem that every single MMORPG suffers from.

INFORMATION OVERLOAD! 

In all games of the genre, but especially the ones trying to be user-friendly for rookies, this is just horrible! I'm an avid gamer but that doesn't mean I like it.

Unfortunately I don't know how to solve it if we're to tell the player of all this information that is shown; HP, MP, Lvl, Target, Skills, Buffs, Cast time, Enemy HP, Hit-damage, Cooldowns, Orders, Chats, Potions and so on... And so on...

Maybe we don't even need to keep the player up to date with all this, all the time?

Anyhow, it's a problem I think it's really about time for some MMO-Studio to try and solve.

I mean, just look at this!

 

Ether Saga Online, like any other MMORPG

Ether Saga Online, like any other MMORPG

5Mar/090

Wanted demo out on Xbox Live today

Posted by Arcade

Wanted demo out on Xbox Live today.
Be sure to download and spread the news to all your friends…

This of course being a big deal because it's made by GRIN.

Wanted

Wanted

3Mar/091

Resident Evil 4 finished, just in time!

Posted by Arcade

Okay, so maybe I'm four years behind, but I finally finished Resident Evil 4 just now. Just in time for the release of numeric entry number 5.

Anyhow, I have some stuff I wanna discuss about the game but I'll save that for another day, it's 2:44am here at the moment.

Before I go; two things:

1. Great game! Some really smart game design decisions.
2. To my friend who said it takes about 22 hours to finish if you're a slow player who likes to explore, like me. Screw you! ...

22 hours?

22 hours?

I now qualify to play Resident Evil 5.

I now qualify to play Resident Evil 5.