Jump to content

Photo

Need some help thinking


46 replies to this topic

#26 jrok OFFLINE  

jrok

    Stargunner

  • 1,155 posts

Posted Tue Jun 15, 2010 7:30 PM

Anybody think that Passage or Gravitation follow the rules?


From "Passage"

The rewards in Passage come in the form of points added to your score, and you have two options for scoring points: treasure chests, which give 100 points for each hit, and exploration, which gives double-points if you walk with your spouse. There's a pretty tight balance between these two options---there's no optimal choice between the two.


The explanation, however, is one of the more angst-ridden ones I've ever seen, and perhaps qualifies as a phenomenal art project on the subject of death.


"Gravitation" sounds like another art project (on a very somber subject), although the mechanics aren't really described in enough detail to really tell if it complies. Perhaps some playtesting is in order.

Actually come to think of it, there's no way to tell if either game complies with all (or any) the guidelines listed above without a proper playtest. For instance, "Passage" describes a maze that is impossible to explore in one try, but does the maze itself or the location of the treasure chests change with successive plays?

Edited by jrok, Tue Jun 15, 2010 7:31 PM.


#27 RevEng OFFLINE  

RevEng

    River Patroller

  • 4,722 posts
  • Bitnik
  • Location:Canada

Posted Tue Jun 15, 2010 7:38 PM

...Actually come to think of it, there's no way to tell if either game complies with all (or any) the guidelines listed above without a proper playtest. For instance, "Passage" describes a maze that is impossible to explore in one try, but does the maze itself or the location of the treasure chests change with successive plays?

Yup, the blocks in the maze of Passage do change.

Not really sure about randomness in Gravitation. If it isn't already there, randomizing the stars would be a trivial change.

#28 jrok OFFLINE  

jrok

    Stargunner

  • 1,155 posts

Posted Tue Jun 15, 2010 7:51 PM

Anybody think that Passage or Gravitation follow the rules?


I just tried both. They are very intriguing and interesting, and would qualify as works of digital art.

Alas, my reptiloid overlords insist I mention that I scored "540" on my first game of Passage. :P I will see if I can beat that on the next play. ;)

#29 jrok OFFLINE  

jrok

    Stargunner

  • 1,155 posts

Posted Tue Jun 15, 2010 8:59 PM

Anybody think that Passage or Gravitation follow the rules?


I just tried both. They are very intriguing and interesting, and would qualify as works of digital art.

Alas, my reptiloid overlords insist I mention that I scored "540" on my first game of Passage. :P I will see if I can beat that on the next play. ;)


Okay, I scored "779" on the second try of Passage, simply by holding the right arrow down for the entire time. It's possible that 779 or 780 is the pacer. It's also seems likely that it's impossible to beat this score, based on the scoring metric described.

So, this is art, but not necessarily a game. Sort of like Shadow of the Beast, except even less like a game. Still, it is an interesting bit of interactive art, much like some of Ian Bogost's VCS experiments.

Edited by jrok, Tue Jun 15, 2010 8:59 PM.


#30 yuppicide OFFLINE  

yuppicide

    I am the Black Knight. Give me your money!

  • 6,933 posts
  • Location:New Jersey

Posted Tue Jun 15, 2010 9:28 PM

I don't know what the "scoring metric" is, but pressing right takes forever.

If you go down and right, there's things to run over. Within like 30 seconds or so you'll have almost 900 points.. I had 859.

While, I like the art of it, I didn't feel like playing and quit.

Okay, I scored "779" on the second try of Passage, simply by holding the right arrow down for the entire time. It's possible that 779 or 780 is the pacer. It's also seems likely that it's impossible to beat this score, based on the scoring metric described.

So, this is art, but not necessarily a game. Sort of like Shadow of the Beast, except even less like a game. Still, it is an interesting bit of interactive art, much like some of Ian Bogost's VCS experiments.


Edited by yuppicide, Tue Jun 15, 2010 9:29 PM.


#31 jrok OFFLINE  

jrok

    Stargunner

  • 1,155 posts

Posted Tue Jun 15, 2010 9:29 PM

I don't know what the "scoring metric" is, but pressing right takes forever.

If you go down and right, there's things to run over. Within like 30 or 40 seconds you'll have almost 900 points.. I had 859.


Okay, I scored "779" on the second try of Passage, simply by holding the right arrow down for the entire time. It's possible that 779 or 780 is the pacer. It's also seems likely that it's impossible to beat this score, based on the scoring metric described.

So, this is art, but not necessarily a game. Sort of like Shadow of the Beast, except even less like a game. Still, it is an interesting bit of interactive art, much like some of Ian Bogost's VCS experiments.


Nice. Well, I shall give it another try then... and beat you!

Edited by jrok, Tue Jun 15, 2010 10:53 PM.


#32 yuppicide OFFLINE  

yuppicide

    I am the Black Knight. Give me your money!

  • 6,933 posts
  • Location:New Jersey

Posted Tue Jun 15, 2010 9:30 PM

No! Please don't make me want to play again!

Nice. Well, I shall give it another try than... and beat you!



#33 yuppicide OFFLINE  

yuppicide

    I am the Black Knight. Give me your money!

  • 6,933 posts
  • Location:New Jersey

Posted Tue Jun 15, 2010 9:36 PM

965 is my new score. Seems all the cool stuff hangs around towards the bottom.. they give you 100 points per if you run them over.

Here's a tip.. don't get the girl up top.. marriage will only tie you down. :) In the game you won't be able to maneuver the bottom if you have the excess baggage along with you.

But reading the website, high score isn't what the game is about. Everyone has their own interpretation. So, while I may boast I have a higher score, maybe you can say "But you lived life a lonely old man and died." and then I can try to beat your score while getting the girl as well. Fun game.

Edited by yuppicide, Tue Jun 15, 2010 9:38 PM.


#34 jrok OFFLINE  

jrok

    Stargunner

  • 1,155 posts

Posted Tue Jun 15, 2010 9:41 PM

I don't know what the "scoring metric" is, but pressing right takes forever.

If you go down and right, there's things to run over. Within like 30 seconds or so you'll have almost 900 points.. I had 859.


I just got 1577, with a mixture of running and exploring.

Edited by jrok, Tue Jun 15, 2010 9:41 PM.


#35 jrok OFFLINE  

jrok

    Stargunner

  • 1,155 posts

Posted Tue Jun 15, 2010 9:44 PM

Here's a tip.. don't get the girl up top.. marriage will only tie you down. :) In the game you won't be able to maneuver the bottom if you have the excess baggage along with you.


Yeah, I got my 1577 living a swinging bachelor life. At first I wondered if getting hitched gave you a special multiplier or allowed access to special bonuses, but it doesn't seem like it does... the ol' ball and chain just slows you down. This could be a philosophy course taught by Rodney Dangerfield.

Edited by jrok, Tue Jun 15, 2010 9:44 PM.


#36 yuppicide OFFLINE  

yuppicide

    I am the Black Knight. Give me your money!

  • 6,933 posts
  • Location:New Jersey

Posted Tue Jun 15, 2010 9:45 PM

Here you go:

screenshot.jpg

1061

EDIT: Aww, crap. Good job. You beat me before I posted my screenie.

Edited by yuppicide, Tue Jun 15, 2010 9:46 PM.


#37 jrok OFFLINE  

jrok

    Stargunner

  • 1,155 posts

Posted Tue Jun 15, 2010 9:55 PM

Here you go:

screenshot.jpg

1061

EDIT: Aww, crap. Good job. You beat me before I posted my screenie.


I tried to screenshot, but I must have just missed it. It was 1577.

Looking back on it, it seems you get "double points" for running with a spouse, but I'm unsure if this counts for treasure as well as just running forward. I'll give it a try.

*EDIT: Nah. The wife stinks. You don't get double score for treasures you pick up, and also she can't pick up treasure herself (no working women in this life sim, I guess). This is especially "Irritating and Frustrating" because you can't even "phase into" the treasure with the passage of time to pick up the loot. So basically, any treasure that is only accessible from the front spousal-side is inaccessible. And you get trapped and hung up on walls far too much for the double-score to be worth a damn.

Sorry you romantic types... single is the way to go.

Edited by jrok, Tue Jun 15, 2010 10:09 PM.


#38 yuppicide OFFLINE  

yuppicide

    I am the Black Knight. Give me your money!

  • 6,933 posts
  • Location:New Jersey

Posted Tue Jun 15, 2010 10:16 PM

Some of the discussion others have about the game is good reading. I enjoyed this one:

http://www.rockpaper...7/time-goes-by/

One guy posted a funny response to that article:

"
I played it, but had some weird graphic issues for most parts of the game and could only guess at what was going on. Anyway, I think the inclusion of enemies like ninjas, robots, arabs od nazis could have made the game better. Oh and you really should be able to ride in some kind of vehicle. And some minigames too. Come to think of it, a crafting system would have been a nice touch. And it definitely needs online multiplayer. With a coop story campaign. And achievements.

Also, you need a dog. Every game is much better if you have a dog. It could be your interface. Or something."


Edited by yuppicide, Tue Jun 15, 2010 10:17 PM.


#39 jrok OFFLINE  

jrok

    Stargunner

  • 1,155 posts

Posted Tue Jun 15, 2010 10:38 PM

One guy posted a funny response to that article:

"I played it, but had some weird graphic issues for most parts of the game and could only guess at what was going on. Anyway, I think the inclusion of enemies like ninjas, robots, arabs od nazis could have made the game better. Oh and you really should be able to ride in some kind of vehicle. And some minigames too. Come to think of it, a crafting system would have been a nice touch. And it definitely needs online multiplayer. With a coop story campaign. And achievements.

Also, you need a dog. Every game is much better if you have a dog. It could be your interface. Or something."


My favorite response:

"Yes! I beat the end boss!!"


:ROFL:

#40 Random Terrain OFFLINE  

Random Terrain

    Visual batari Basic User

  • Topic Starter
  • 28,307 posts
  • Controlled Randomness
    Replay Value
    Nonlinear
  • Location:North Carolina (USA)

Posted Wed Jun 16, 2010 2:27 AM

Not to offend, but why are you over-analyzing gameplay mechanics in the abstract versus actually creating games and tweaking them until they feel "right"?

Seems like a bit of veiled procrastination to me...

I'm a professional procrastinator, but in this case, there's kind of a good reason. I'm trying to figure out how much of my 'mission statement' I should to stick with. It seemed like we were going with "remember they are only guidelines, so you are free to mix in your favorite parts of mainstream games." But now it seems my mission is supposed to be to try to make at least one fun game that that helps people relieve stress, relax, and feel like they are the blanket.




Look, none of this is meant to be personal. Some of my best friends are dirty, pot-smoking hippies! But certainly, if social (or religious, or political) activism of any kind comes to the forefront of a game's design, chances are what you will wind up with isn't a "game" but rather a piece of preachy propaganda dressed up in game-like clothes. I have nothing specifically against the Bible, but have you ever see any of these Bible-themed games? Most of them are pathetically bad. Worse, they are usually given to kids who are already inundated with this stuff by their parents and other adults on a daily basis. So whether its the "Woodcraft Folk" vegans with their exciting "Identify Tree Game" up there or Wisdom Tree's "Bible Adventures", trying to teach morality through a video game feels unnecessary and stapled-on. Really, there doesn't appear to be much difference between "let's get rid of competition and winning in games" and Jack Thompson's crusade against sex and violence in video games. Personally I don't care if a game has violence, sex, Mormons or grown men hugging trees. It just ought to be fun and engaging.

You seem to be focusing on one group that is into cooperative games. There are others. Anyway, I also think that cheesy games that have a tacked on religious or political message suck. The games I'm talking about don't need to have a message, they are the message.




Getting back to the rules, I'm not sure a gaming session can generate the kind of prolonged stress that may have adverse health effects.

Besides any quotes about the subject that you can collect, I've seen some controller throwers with my own eyes, especially during the NES years, who did not feel better when they beat a game. They might feel relived that it's over, but the hours of fight or flight has left them feeling irritable, anxious, and possibly depressed with a chance of mood swings.




Whenever there is a goal, competition will naturally arise. And if there's no goal, it's not a game. It's a toy. It could be a great and entertaining toy, but it's not a game.

The goal should be to have fun and feel relaxed. A lot of things you'd consider to be games aren't games. They're static action puzzles. Enemies or obstacles start in the same positions every time and usually perform a prearranged set of moves that never seem to change when the game is replayed. There is no replay value. You solve the 'puzzle' or memorize all of the 'dance steps' and your work is done. And that's exactly what it is, work, not play.

When it comes to having fun and truly playing, we might want to create some video toys instead of video games if the word 'game' must always be tied to competition and winning in your mind. When you look up 'game' in the dictionary, it can also simply mean "amusement or pastime," so that's something we might want to remember when creating new games.


Thanks again to everybody who posted in this thread. It really is helping me to think and bring things into focus.

Edited by Random Terrain, Wed Jun 16, 2010 2:47 AM.


#41 jrok OFFLINE  

jrok

    Stargunner

  • 1,155 posts

Posted Wed Jun 16, 2010 8:14 AM

When it comes to having fun and truly playing, we might want to create some video toys instead of video games if the word 'game' must always be tied to competition and winning in your mind. When you look up 'game' in the dictionary, it can also simply mean "amusement or pastime," so that's something we might want to remember when creating new games.


This sort of reminds of some things I've read about H.P. Lovecraft. While I suppose most people remember him as the father of Gothic Tentacle Horror, he is also widely regarded as one of the founding fathers of modern wargaming. What I found fascinating about the account of this side of his life was the way his obsession started as just playing "toy soldiers" with his sons. There were no rules in the beginning. They just moved the little soldiers and horsies around - regular, old "bang-bang you're dead" playtime-type stuff. Then, over time, they began to get a bit more sporting about it. So it was the old "bang-bang your're dead" versus the inevitable "No, I'm not! You can't hit me from there!" The game mechanics more or less began to evolve organically from this seed, from line-of-sight to tree cover to rules about cavalry movement. Eventually, they had designed a game together, and when his friends visited and saw their elaborate setups of terrain and armies, they got interested and wanted to play. Soon enough, they were having grand, imaginary wars that sprawled all over the house, and from the descriptions of these events, great fun was had by all.

Eventually this activity would morph into some of the terrifyingly complex rules of modern tabletop miniature wargames (and the soulless, masochistic grognards who love them). While the kernel was about playtime and imagination, and the rules made it more sporting, rules and regulations can pile up until it feels like what you are doing is "work" not "play."

Then a few years ago, I discovered this, and my faith in humanity was restored...
Posted Image

A game with competition can be a good game. A game with cooperation can be a good game. But a game without fun isn't a game at all.

Edited by jrok, Wed Jun 16, 2010 8:45 AM.


#42 Kripto OFFLINE  

Kripto

    Stargunner

  • 1,339 posts
  • -Visible Invaders-
  • Location:NYC

Posted Wed Jun 16, 2010 9:59 AM

Here's another game which is FAR outside of traditional design ideas.

The GraveYard

Game Description-

The Graveyard is a very short computer game designed by Auriea Harvey and Micha�l Samyn. You play an old lady who visits a graveyard. You walk around, sit on a bench and listen to a song.

It's more like an explorable painting than an actual game. An experiment with realtime poetry, with storytelling without words. Anyone can try it!

Note: Buying the full version of The Graveyard adds only one feature, the possibility of death. The full version of the game is exactly the same as the trial, except, every time you play she may die.

#43 jrok OFFLINE  

jrok

    Stargunner

  • 1,155 posts

Posted Wed Jun 16, 2010 12:12 PM

Note: Buying the full version of The Graveyard adds only one feature, the possibility of death. The full version of the game is exactly the same as the trial, except, every time you play she may die.


Yet another grim and angst-ridden experimental game.

Is it, at least, the "possibility of zombie-related death?"

#44 yuppicide OFFLINE  

yuppicide

    I am the Black Knight. Give me your money!

  • 6,933 posts
  • Location:New Jersey

Posted Thu Jun 17, 2010 6:12 PM

Interesting, but it's quite boring. That lady moves way too slow! Doesn't seem to be much to explore.. I walk to the sides and the screen pulls back far so the lady is smaller.. then finally she's out of view.

#45 Kripto OFFLINE  

Kripto

    Stargunner

  • 1,339 posts
  • -Visible Invaders-
  • Location:NYC

Posted Thu Jun 17, 2010 9:16 PM

Yeah, I think the super-slow boring aspect of GraveYard is part of it being an death's door, old lady simulator. Wouldn't GTA suck if your character was in his early 90s and moved as such?

#46 RevEng OFFLINE  

RevEng

    River Patroller

  • 4,722 posts
  • Bitnik
  • Location:Canada

Posted Fri Jun 18, 2010 3:32 PM

It has a few flaws, but I think these could be addressed with some small changes:
  • give the lady an uzi.
  • distribute a "hot coffee" patch

There are a lot of things that have been brought up in this thread that I'd like to touch on...

what is a game? Does it have to be fun?

I agree with RT that what some call interactive artwork should be considered games.

Fun is a subjective term, and to me "interesting" or "moving" is a fun experience.
Is playing against an AI character competition, even if they have different goals than you? i.e. Are you competing against the dragon in Adventure?

Competitiveness literally means the drive to go after the same desired thing/resource as others.

I think that you are competing against Rhindle when he's guarding the chalice (the resource being the chalice) and even when he's just attacking out of the blue. (your flesh being the resource)

Also, I'd like to put forth a "rule" of my own... Originality.

if you make the same game that we've all seen 1000 times before you'll bore us all to tears.

If you must recreate your favorite game, play a bit of "what if", and change things around, and more than just cosmetically. Add new ways to interact with the game! Mix two games together!

#47 Random Terrain OFFLINE  

Random Terrain

    Visual batari Basic User

  • Topic Starter
  • 28,307 posts
  • Controlled Randomness
    Replay Value
    Nonlinear
  • Location:North Carolina (USA)

Posted Fri Jun 18, 2010 3:51 PM

If you must recreate your favorite game, play a bit of "what if", and change things around, and more than just cosmetically. Add new ways to interact with the game! Mix two games together!

I have a page about that and a possible cure for SOS Syndrome near the bottom:

http://www.randomter...s-syndrome.html




0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users