Categorizing 2600 Play Mechanics: Movement Basics

[NovaXpress]

Random Terrain is working on a nice project aimed at categorizing the game play elements for 2600 games. I see high potential for historical value. Perhaps we can discover something unexpected about the progression of game design. I'm very interested in the idea of breaking video games down to basic categories because we might discove something about the nature of game psychology and structure in general. Or we're just killing more time before Xenu arrives to destroy us all. Either way, I'm all about it.

 

I'm thinking that games have multiple elements which must all be recognized to see what the game really offered. So we're out to identify the most basic categories. I see at least two which appear to be unavoidable and therefore essential to gameplay definition: Movement and Goal.

 

The way that the player-character moves is as basic as it gets. Here's a few possible categories of Movement:

FREE RANGE: The player can move in any direction desired. Combat, Asteroids, Defender, Berzerk. Yes, Berzerk is a free range game which includes walls as an obstruction, not a maze game.

RESTRICTED RANGE: The player is limited to two directions of movement, typically left/right as in Space Invaders or Kaboom but also up/down as in Planet Patrol. Air-Sea battle takes this to its roots.

PLATFORMER: the essential elements are obviously platforms which must be accessed through jumping or climbing. The 2600 offers Donkey Kong and Pitfall. I feel that Smurf Rescue is also a platformer with larger characters and a smaller playfield.

 

MAZE: Rather self-explanatory, but defined as any game which uses walls or borders to tightly restrict the player's path. Pac-Man, Amidar, Jawbreaker, etc.

 

FIRST-PERSON: A view from the eyes or starship window of course. Starmaster, Cryptys of Chaos, Robot Tank.

 

CONVENTIONAL GAMING: Any simulation of a standard tabletop game such as chess, blackjack or Othello.

 

SPORTS SIMULATION: Anything that emulates real-life athletic competition

 

There seems to be sub-categories which describe the method of delivering the basic Movement element. The three style basics would be CONTAINED (no movement off or of the screen: Pac-Man and Space Invaders), SCROLLING (the player stays in approximately the same place as the background advances: Defender, Jr.Pac-Man) and WARP (the background or player jumps when you move off the edge of the screen: Asteroids, Adventure).

 

Well, what do you kids think? I'm sure some of you geniuses can add some science or physics to this as well as debate which additional elements really are the most basic building blocks of a game. The ideal result to defining Movement basics would be ending up with categories which are so basic that no game contains more than one at a time.

[vdub_bobby]

What about unmoving/fixed and/or uncontrolled?

 

In Canyon Bomber your airplane moves but you have no control over how fast, which direction, or how high. You only control when it drops bombs.

 

OTOH, Artillery Duel doesn't allow any movement whatsoever, you can only shoot. Same with Commando Raid.

 

And is the distinction between Platformer and Maze a real one? In DK, for example, you can't see the "maze" walls but you are still tightly restricted about where you can go.

 

Also, IMO "First-Person" doesn't parallel the other categories, exactly. Many 1st-person games are maze games, or free-range, or whatever. Escape From the Mindmaster has more in common with Pac-Man than Star Fire or Battlezone, IMO.

Edited March 21, 2006 by vdub_bobby

[NovaXpress]

Platforms are different from mazes. mazes have TIGHT walls/borders and platformers have platforms and levels. There's plenty of free space in a platformer, you just have to jump or fall to use it.

 

Canyon Bomber would be Restricted Movement (warp) because that is your motion and you still control the firing.

 

Commando Raid is also restricted Movement (contained) because you can swing your cannon around.

 

Artillery Duel and Stellar track go in another category:

STRATEGY: where movement isn't an issue at all

 

I think you're right, First-Person is a style of Movement, not a basic. So Tunnel Runner would be Maze (first-person) while Star Fire would be Free range (first-person).

Edited March 21, 2006 by NovaXpress

[vdub_bobby]

Platforms are different from mazes. mazes have TIGHT walls/borders and platformers have platforms and levels. There's plenty of free space in a platformer, you just have to jump or fall to use it.

I'm not seeing the distinction here other than just how it looks.

 

What about Climber 5? Platformer or Maze?

 

And what about Montezuma's Revenge? Platformer or Free-Range (with obstacles)?

Canyon Bomber would be Restricted Movement (warp) because that is your motion and you still control the firing.

 

Commando Raid is also restricted Movement (contained) because you can swing your cannon around.

So motion also includes the direction that the player-controlled whatever is facing? So, then...is Defender in a different class than Gravitar (for example), because, while each are free-roaming, in Defender your firing direction is restricted to two directions while in Gravitar it is restricted to 16?

[NovaXpress]

I'm not seeing the distinction here other than just how it looks.

I'd call Climber and Montezuma platformers. I guess the key difference is gravity and height as a factor.

So, then...is Defender in a different class than Gravitar (for example), because, while each are free-roaming, in Defender your firing direction is restricted to two directions while in Gravitar it is restricted to 16?

I'm thinking that would be splitting hairs.

[vdub_bobby]

I'm not seeing the distinction here other than just how it looks.

I'd call Climber and Montezuma platformers. I guess the key difference is gravity and height as a factor.

But Climber 5 has no gravity (you can neither fall nor jump). Climber 5 is closer to Jawbreaker than Pitfall, IMO. And height is all visual; is the maze in Dark Cavern a tall one? Or is it a top-down view with no height?

I'm thinking that would be splitting hairs.

Edited March 21, 2006 by vdub_bobby

[NovaXpress]

Dark Cavern isn't a maze game, it's free-range. A maze game must have walls/borders which completely enclose the player.

 

I'm agreeing that Climber 5 would be a maze game because there's no actual gravity. The use of ladders is an illusion. Reimagine a maze instead of ladders and "platforms" and the game mechanic remains the same. Good call.

 

Where the hell is RT?

[NovaXpress]

Breaking it down in order:

Air-Sea Battle (restricted-contained)

Basic Math (strategy-contained) is this even a game?

Blackjack (conventional-contained)

Indy 500 (free range-contained)

Starship (free range-first person)

Street Racer (restricted-scrolling)

Surround (free range-contained) only 4-directional movement but you can move anywhere

Video Olympics (restricted-contained) not a sports simulation but a game which can be loosely interpreted as such

Edited March 22, 2006 by NovaXpress

[supercat]

Also, IMO "First-Person" doesn't parallel the other categories, exactly. Many 1st-person games are maze games, or free-range, or whatever. Escape From the Mindmaster has more in common with Pac-Man than Star Fire or Battlezone, IMO.

 

I agree that first-person is a rather vague description, but there are some types of movement in first-person games that are lacking in others. They can be full-3d, free 2d (one axis perpendicular to screen), free 2d (both axes on screen, e.g. StarFire), restricted 2d, etc.

 

Also, it should be noted that while some games allow smooth control of motion while others allow only stepwise-control.

[+Random Terrain]

I'm going through the games and putting them in obvious categories, some games in more than one category or subcategory, but I'm not going nuts trying to make sure every game is put in every category it should be in at this time. I'm still at the point where I can make up categories and subcategories as I go along, so I'll go back through when the whole thing has more of a definite shape.

 

Although I'm using many categories/subcategories, I never planned to go microscopic with it. I mostly wanted a fairly detailed list for those times when I'm in the mood to play a certain kind of game. I'll be able to look at the list and quickly see what is available.

 

When I am done with the first draft, some categories and subcategories will probably need to be renamed. And if people want more detail, I can go back and add it.

[+Random Terrain]

Also, IMO "First-Person" doesn't parallel the other categories, exactly. Many 1st-person games are maze games, or free-range, or whatever. Escape From the Mindmaster has more in common with Pac-Man than Star Fire or Battlezone, IMO.

Remember that games will be listed in more than one category/subcategory. As I said in my other post, I don't want to get microscopic and go insane getting caught up in some kind of never ending Russian nesting doll situation, but I do want more than most lists have such as "shoot 'em up" and "action." As far as I know, every game has action unless it's a brick simulation.

[NovaXpress]

Also, IMO "First-Person" doesn't parallel the other categories, exactly. Many 1st-person games are maze games, or free-range, or whatever. Escape From the Mindmaster has more in common with Pac-Man than Star Fire or Battlezone, IMO.

 

I agree that first-person is a rather vague description, but there are some types of movement in first-person games that are lacking in others. They can be full-3d, free 2d (one axis perpendicular to screen), free 2d (both axes on screen, e.g. StarFire), restricted 2d, etc.

 

Also, it should be noted that while some games allow smooth control of motion while others allow only stepwise-control.

I think that's all covered by the basic Movement categories, restricted or free range, etc.

 

I think we'd be splitting hairs to divide this up any deeper as far as motion goes. The less categories the better. Right now I think we're looking at seven Movement categories (Free Range-Restricted-Maze-Platform-Conventional-Sports-Strategy) with four stylistic sub-categories (Contained-Warp-Scroll-First Person). Anything deeper than that might just be the individual flavor of a certain game.

[NovaXpress]

I'm going through the games and putting them in obvious categories, some games in more than one category or subcategory, but I'm not going nuts trying to make sure every game is put in every category it should be in at this time. I'm still at the point where I can make up categories and subcategories as I go along, so I'll go back through when the whole thing has more of a definite shape.

 

Although I'm using many categories/subcategories, I never planned to go microscopic with it. I mostly wanted a fairly detailed list for those times when I'm in the mood to play a certain kind of game. I'll be able to look at the list and quickly see what is available.

 

When I am done with the first draft, some categories and subcategories will probably need to be renamed. And if people want more detail, I can go back and add it.

I guess I'm thinking of something different. Your goal is an understanding for players while mine is an understanding for hsitorians. I never thought about the difference. I'm fascinated by the idea that there might be only four or five total microscopic elements which make up the DNA of every video game. The rest is just genetic mutations.

[A.J. Franzman]

Surround (free range-contained) only 4-directional movement but you can move anywhere

Variations 5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12 and 14 allow diagonal movement. It's even possible for players to cross paths on the diagonals without colliding.

[NovaXpress]

I don't think I ever played anything other than game 1 and spent very little time on that.

 

I'm thinking that I've got the formula, all games make use of only one Movement category and one sub-category at a time (stuff like the Breakout screen in Major Havoc is of course two separate games smashed together, so you know what I mean). I don't see any game then or now which doesn't follow. I figured that sports and board games are just following the other rules so I struck those categories.

 

MAIN MOVEMENT CATEGORIES

Free Range: player moves freely

Restricted: player is limited to two directions

Maze: player moves freely but on a restricted path

Platform: player must ascend/descend levels under the restriction of gravity

Static: no action at all, only entering of choices or data

 

STYLISTIC SUB-CATEGORIES

Contained: all action is limited within the borders of the screen

Warp: player can move off the edge of the screen to reappear on the other side

Scroll: player remains within the borders of the screen as the background moves past

First Person: view from the "eyes" of the player-character

[vdub_bobby]

Dark Cavern isn't a maze game, it's free-range. A maze game must have walls/borders which completely enclose the player.

I think you're thinking of Dark Chambers (ugh).

 

Dark Cavern:

Dark Chambers:

My point is that, since Dark Cavern portrays everything as a side view (like most platformers), there is the illusion of "height", despite the lack of gravity.

I'm agreeing that Climber 5 would be a maze game because there's no actual gravity. The use of ladders is an illusion. Reimagine a maze instead of ladders and "platforms" and the game mechanic remains the same. Good call.

I think that categorizing things as "platformers" is a little too vague. Especially when, as far as I can tell, your defining characteristics of platformers are: gravity and the visual appearance of height. That only refers to "movement basics" very indirectly! And would also include Thrust+ and Gravitar.

Edited March 22, 2006 by vdub_bobby

[A.J. Franzman]

I would remove First-person from the movement category altogether and have it as a separate Point-of-View category. The full list:

Overhead/abstract (tank and jet games in Combat, Pac-Man)

Side (biplane games in Combat, Pitfall!, Donkey Kong)

Oblique (Crystal Castles, Q-Bert, Congo Bongo)

First-person (Skeleton, Night Driver, Battlezone, Star Raiders)

Follow-camera (Pole Position, Enduro)

 

This may seem redundant, since in most cases the movement category is tied to one or two particular points-of-view (i.e., I can't think of any overhead view platformers, nor why anyone would want to make one.) I suppose both this and NovaXpress's "STYLISTIC SUB-CATEGORIES" allow to distinguish between first-person maze games (Maze movement), first-person tank games (2-D free range), and first-person space/flight games (3-D movement, usually with restriction on the vertical axis), but this added category just seems more logical to me. The reason is that First-person view games can also be "warp" or "scroll" style. First-person maze games are usually "warp" style - when turning 90 degrees, you instantly snap to the new direction, rather than rotating to it in a realistic way. Most other first-person games smoothly scroll the screen around as you change direction.

Edited March 22, 2006 by A.J. Franzman

[Inky]

This almost seems to me to be an obsession with minuitae...

 

I have my ideas on how to do some categorizing, but I can't flesh them out right now..

[A.J. Franzman]

Dark Cavern isn't a maze game, it's free-range. A maze game must have walls/borders which completely enclose the player.

I think you're thinking of Dark Chambers (ugh).

<snip images>

My point is that, since Dark Cavern portrays everything as a side view (like most platformers), there is the illusion of "height", despite the lack of gravity.

I'm agreeing that Climber 5 would be a maze game because there's no actual gravity. The use of ladders is an illusion. Reimagine a maze instead of ladders and "platforms" and the game mechanic remains the same. Good call.

I think that categorizing things as "platformers" is a little too vague. Especially when, as far as I can tell, your defining characteristics of platformers are: gravity and the visual appearance of height. That only refers to "movement basics" very indirectly! And would also include Thrust+ and Gravitar.

In line with my previous post, I would put both Dark Cavern and Dark Chambers (along with Adventure, Berzerk, River Raid and many similar games) in the "overhead/abstract" view category - it seems to me that the playfield is shown in overhead perspective, but sprites are drawn as side views just to make them more easily identified and prettier. This makes these games abstract (or perhaps cubist ) in perspective. Only a few 2600 games use a purely overhead perspective, such as Boxing, Grand Prix and Spy Hunter.

Edited February 17, 2007 by A.J. Franzman

[A.J. Franzman]

Artillery Duel and Stellar track go in another category:

STRATEGY: where movement isn't an issue at all

I think that needs editing - there is "movement" in Stellar Track; most of it just isn't depicted graphically on-screen.

 

Perhaps "STRATEGY: movement is not relevant or not depicted as motion of graphics."

Edited February 17, 2007 by A.J. Franzman

[+Random Terrain]

Does anyone know what category Dragonfire would go under? It has the jumping and ducking of a platform game, but there are no platforms. I made up the category Jump and Ducker for a place to put it until someone has a better idea.

[A.J. Franzman]

Does anyone know what category Dragonfire would go under? It has the jumping and ducking of a platform game, but there are no platforms. I made up the category Jump and Ducker for a place to put it until someone has a better idea.

I would make it a combination of Platform and Free-range (contained), with warping between the two.

 

If anyone cares, the Platform screens would be Side view and the Free-range screens would be Abstract.

Edited March 22, 2006 by A.J. Franzman

[StanJr]

Is Private Eye a platformer? you can travel in all 3 dimensions, and you do jump, but there are no platforms per se.

[A.J. Franzman]

Is Private Eye a platformer? you can travel in all 3 dimensions, and you do jump, but there are no platforms per se.

I would consider it as a minimal platformer, there being only one "platform": the ground.

[vdub_bobby]

This is why I don't like "platformer" as a basic "movements" category: it describes how it *looks*, rather than how it behaves.

 

 

 

[Take that, horse!]