Player choices are a major contributor to a unique and exciting gameplay experience, as choices typically offer challenge (often in the form of a risk) and rewards (often gameplay affecting resources.) A near perfected example of embedding player decisions in play is apparent in the Hasbro classic, Monopoly. Because of the game’s heavy reliance on human interaction, there is always a unique element to player choice. The game provides players with constant feedback regarding their choices – if a player chooses to purchase a property from another player, tangible cards and resources are exchanged, giving all parties meaningful feedback.
This tangible feedback concept passes to the game’s reward system, as well. When a player completes a micro-goal, such as purchasing a specific property, they acquire a tangible object, affording player motivation to collect resources. In addition to the decision based rewards from human interaction, Monopoly is layered with both fixed and variable rewards. For example, the game offers fixed rewards for circumnavigating the game board, and variable rewards through the chance and community chest mechanic. These perpetual rewards ensure that play has a feel of continual progression.
In addition to the successful layering of rewards, Monopoly also ensures that gaining a reward is meaningful. When a player attains an a reward, the state of the game changes, allowing the rewarded player to access higher level goals, while making similar goals easier to attain. The presence of game-changing rewards ensures that opposing players are driven to compete for them. With such a challenging, rewarding feel of play, and the allowance of abstract human decisions, Monopoly has more than earned its place as a timeless classic.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Colossal Design Affect
Injecting emotive layers into games has been steadily gaining popularity, as narrative and the aesthetically spectacular increasingly collide. The idea of immersion, and giving players an experience, rather than just a game, is fast becoming a key aspect of player affecting design. Players must be drawn into the game, through any combination of strategy, narrative, and raw human emotion.
A shining example of designing for affect lies with the critically acclaimed Shadow of the Colossus, a game that has received many accolades for its simple, yet impacting use of both evoked and enacted narrative, it’s innovative take on player control, breathing aesthetics, and emotional development. Virtually every element of play shows design deliberation, with the intention of immersing players. For example, during the game’s epic battles with the imposing Colossi, players are forced to hold the shoulder buttons of the controller, mimicking the struggle that their avatar is facing, as it clambers up the gritty giants.
But bonding player and avatar is perhaps the least of Shadow of Colossus’ designed affect. The game takes place in a fictional, timeless world, devoid of civilisation. The player character, their loyal steed, and the twelve magnificent Colossi are all that inherit the vast environment. For the sake of the sleeping damsel, the player must hunt and fight against the intense roaming wonders. Every element of the game has been designed with the express intent of making the player feel.
A shining example of designing for affect lies with the critically acclaimed Shadow of the Colossus, a game that has received many accolades for its simple, yet impacting use of both evoked and enacted narrative, it’s innovative take on player control, breathing aesthetics, and emotional development. Virtually every element of play shows design deliberation, with the intention of immersing players. For example, during the game’s epic battles with the imposing Colossi, players are forced to hold the shoulder buttons of the controller, mimicking the struggle that their avatar is facing, as it clambers up the gritty giants.
But bonding player and avatar is perhaps the least of Shadow of Colossus’ designed affect. The game takes place in a fictional, timeless world, devoid of civilisation. The player character, their loyal steed, and the twelve magnificent Colossi are all that inherit the vast environment. For the sake of the sleeping damsel, the player must hunt and fight against the intense roaming wonders. Every element of the game has been designed with the express intent of making the player feel.
Blue Rats are Big Business
The year is 1991; Sega and Nintendo fight a raging battle. Nintendo is seldom releasing high quality software, while Sega continues to barrage the hardware front. Nintendo’s market share has been steadily dwindling, saved by its franchised cast of characters, Mario, Luigi, Yoshi, Kirby, Link and Donkey Kong. Sega is readying itself for ‘the final blow’ to Nintendo – its own mascot character – Sonic the Hedgehog is about to ship.
An 8bit version of Sonic the Hedgehog debuts in October, 1991, and quickly gains immense popularity among teenage youth, and consequently, their younger brothers. The game’s design itself is nothing out of the ordinary, following virtually all of the traditional platform genre’s conventions. All of the game’s mechanics had been heavily inspired by existing games, only marketed as ‘edgy.’ Someone decided that a slick, speedster Hedgehog should be painted blue, and made a mascot – and they were right.
Although Sega failed in its attempt to usurp Nintendo, Sonic the Hedgehog, as both a game, and a franchise, were highly successful. The fast paced play, coupled with proven mechanics and a blue rodent were so successful that Sega continue to develop the franchise (not that they have much else to develop these days.)
An 8bit version of Sonic the Hedgehog debuts in October, 1991, and quickly gains immense popularity among teenage youth, and consequently, their younger brothers. The game’s design itself is nothing out of the ordinary, following virtually all of the traditional platform genre’s conventions. All of the game’s mechanics had been heavily inspired by existing games, only marketed as ‘edgy.’ Someone decided that a slick, speedster Hedgehog should be painted blue, and made a mascot – and they were right.
Although Sega failed in its attempt to usurp Nintendo, Sonic the Hedgehog, as both a game, and a franchise, were highly successful. The fast paced play, coupled with proven mechanics and a blue rodent were so successful that Sega continue to develop the franchise (not that they have much else to develop these days.)
Blatant Fanboyism
Gameplay, the rudiment of a game, the essence of its being, the very foundation of fun, has no greater example than Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time. The game perfectly melds storytelling, role-playing and puzzle play into an action-adventure. Using little more than an edited version of the Super Mario 64 engine, (primitive software by modern standards,) Nintendo EAD developed a game widely regarded as the best game of all time.
The game follows the young or younger antagonist, Link, on his adventure through Hyrule. The 3D world, presented through a third-person view, gives the player a constant stream of information, allowing players to react to the constantly evolving gameplay decisions that must be made. Ocarina of Time offers players more than a game; it offers an interactive adventure, allowing players the freedom to explore and make decisions, while maintaining the premise of a critical path.
Unfortunately, it’s likely that a game with the same effect as Ocarina of Time will never be made again. The underlying technologies behind the game were a novelty at the time of the game’s launch, permanently ingraining itself in all of its loyal player’s minds, because it gave them a level of freedom that gamers have become so accustomed to, that now it’s expected. The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, has undeniably established itself as a key turn point in game history.
The game follows the young or younger antagonist, Link, on his adventure through Hyrule. The 3D world, presented through a third-person view, gives the player a constant stream of information, allowing players to react to the constantly evolving gameplay decisions that must be made. Ocarina of Time offers players more than a game; it offers an interactive adventure, allowing players the freedom to explore and make decisions, while maintaining the premise of a critical path.
Unfortunately, it’s likely that a game with the same effect as Ocarina of Time will never be made again. The underlying technologies behind the game were a novelty at the time of the game’s launch, permanently ingraining itself in all of its loyal player’s minds, because it gave them a level of freedom that gamers have become so accustomed to, that now it’s expected. The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, has undeniably established itself as a key turn point in game history.
Want hardcore? Call Capcom
When designing games, game designers need to ensure that they are meeting player expectations, rather than their own. If a person has reached such a level that they’re a game industry professional, it’s fair to assume that you’ve played a lot of games, and are not on par with the average gamer. Variable to your level of cynicism, Capcom is either guilty of this and extremely lucky, or incredibly in tune with player wants; they are responsible for developing one of the most ‘hardcore’ games ever conceived – Monster Hunter.
The mechanics of Monster Hunter are both numerous, and hidden to players. The game expends little effort explaining the highly layered combat mechanic that governs gameplay. In essence, they have developed a game that allows the player community to develop theories regarding the hidden rules and mechanics based on their play experiences. As if letting players learn through trial and error made things challenging enough, Monster Hunter matches players up against dramatically more powerful foes; large monsters that can kill you in seconds, when killing them can take a full hour.
Rational thought would have you believe that this is simply too testing for players and that it would be a tremendous failure, though in a twist of events, just the opposite occurred. Monster Hunter quickly became highly successful – apparently offering players a level of depth and challenge that had been long desired. Capcom has since developed the franchise so extensively, that Monster Hunter Freedom United is the best selling UMD format game of all time, and Monster Hunter Tri was given exclusive rights by Nintendo to distribute the first recoloured Wii console, bundled with the game. Regardless of whether or not Capcom’s Monster Hunter was a fluke, the franchise’s continually growing popularity serves as a reminder to the games industry of the power of catering to player expectations.
The mechanics of Monster Hunter are both numerous, and hidden to players. The game expends little effort explaining the highly layered combat mechanic that governs gameplay. In essence, they have developed a game that allows the player community to develop theories regarding the hidden rules and mechanics based on their play experiences. As if letting players learn through trial and error made things challenging enough, Monster Hunter matches players up against dramatically more powerful foes; large monsters that can kill you in seconds, when killing them can take a full hour.
Rational thought would have you believe that this is simply too testing for players and that it would be a tremendous failure, though in a twist of events, just the opposite occurred. Monster Hunter quickly became highly successful – apparently offering players a level of depth and challenge that had been long desired. Capcom has since developed the franchise so extensively, that Monster Hunter Freedom United is the best selling UMD format game of all time, and Monster Hunter Tri was given exclusive rights by Nintendo to distribute the first recoloured Wii console, bundled with the game. Regardless of whether or not Capcom’s Monster Hunter was a fluke, the franchise’s continually growing popularity serves as a reminder to the games industry of the power of catering to player expectations.
Without players, a chessboard is ornamental
When evidencing that games are dynamic systems, there’s no greater example than chess. For centuries, chess has been renowned as a game with a highly formal structure, with many objects that are assigned set attributes, and a very straightforward environment. This affords the premise of the evidence; that chess contains a formal system. However, a game of chess requires more than the formal bindings of play.
Players are an intrinsic component of chess, adding an experimental system to the brew. When looking at chess as an experimental system, the objects of the system change from the rigid board pieces, becoming players, while the attributes of objects becomes the player control. However, chess is far more abstract a system than an experimental system – chess has been defined by culture. Over centuries of play, chess has embedded itself within culture, so much so that culture around the game has developed, and the rules and methods of play have evolved over time.
Chess can be played in a number of different ways. It can be played in a formal setting, or an informal setting. If played in a formal setting, the rules are typically altered to include a timer, and more complex piece movements are legal. However, when played in a less formal setting, such as a player’s home environment, the system transmutes – the timed element of formal chess is typically abolished, and the more complex rules, such as castling as a king move, en passant, and pawn promotion, are generally seldom used.
Chess is not just the board and pieces lying on the table. The board is only a small part of a much greater system. Without the presence of abstract and cultural layers, chess is not a game.
Players are an intrinsic component of chess, adding an experimental system to the brew. When looking at chess as an experimental system, the objects of the system change from the rigid board pieces, becoming players, while the attributes of objects becomes the player control. However, chess is far more abstract a system than an experimental system – chess has been defined by culture. Over centuries of play, chess has embedded itself within culture, so much so that culture around the game has developed, and the rules and methods of play have evolved over time.
Chess can be played in a number of different ways. It can be played in a formal setting, or an informal setting. If played in a formal setting, the rules are typically altered to include a timer, and more complex piece movements are legal. However, when played in a less formal setting, such as a player’s home environment, the system transmutes – the timed element of formal chess is typically abolished, and the more complex rules, such as castling as a king move, en passant, and pawn promotion, are generally seldom used.
Chess is not just the board and pieces lying on the table. The board is only a small part of a much greater system. Without the presence of abstract and cultural layers, chess is not a game.
Gods are OP
Balancing games is an incredibly challenging and demanding process, requiring extensive playtesting, data analysis, and lateral thinking. Any game that allows players to take control of statistically differing forces will undoubtedly have balancing issues – this rule is so engrained in gaming culture that many gamers accept that balance is impossible, and that ‘balanced balance’ is the real issue. There are numerous games that are credited as being poorly balanced, though Gas Powered Games’ 2009 release Demigod is commonly sighted as one of the worst among new releases. At release, the game featured eight heroes, each with differing skill sets, skill trees and available items.
Resources dramatically change the way that gameplay progresses, and is a large factor of the game’s poor balance. The most profitable way to obtain resources is by killing other Demigods, which four of the eight Demigods are designed to be more efficient at (a major balance issue in itself). Inevitably, the Demigod slaying Demigods will be richer than their swarm focused counterparts, allowing them to purchase an excessive arsenal of power-ups and remove any semblance of challenge. While this balance issue is arguably a result of strategy employment, the game’s underlying mechanics do nothing but encourage this type of play. Demigod has failed to recognize that the key to balance is offering players the ability to make strategic decisions on an equal playing field.
Resources dramatically change the way that gameplay progresses, and is a large factor of the game’s poor balance. The most profitable way to obtain resources is by killing other Demigods, which four of the eight Demigods are designed to be more efficient at (a major balance issue in itself). Inevitably, the Demigod slaying Demigods will be richer than their swarm focused counterparts, allowing them to purchase an excessive arsenal of power-ups and remove any semblance of challenge. While this balance issue is arguably a result of strategy employment, the game’s underlying mechanics do nothing but encourage this type of play. Demigod has failed to recognize that the key to balance is offering players the ability to make strategic decisions on an equal playing field.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)