Game Dev

New blog location

2011-02-11T10:59:00.003-05:00

All new blog posts will be at :

http://shinyogre.com/glenn

Fundamentals

2010-10-27T03:13:00.000-04:00

I've deduced that a game, at its most fundamental level is simply this:

A player, given an objective, faced with decisions.

Take away any of those things, and you cannot have a game.

Originally I had 'obstacle' in place of 'decisions' but after discussing this on Reddit with some very bright-minded individuals, I came to the conclusion that a decision was more fundamental to a game than an obstacle.

In this context a decision is the result of a consequential choice or problem being solved, where 'consequential' means to have a measurable amount of progression toward or away from the objective.

obstacles are therefore inherent in decisions.

Sidenote: I had a discussion with a fellow student (and future colleague) about the importance of 'fun' in a game. My friend opines that there is no point in making a game if fun is not part of the design, and that a game doesn't need to be anything more than simply fun. I disagree, kind of.

Many games are designed without fun in mind. Serious games are among them (training games), as are more abstract games like the stock market, police investigations, or scientific experiments. Fun for some these games may be, but fun was surely not part of the design.

The intellectual stimulation provided by fun is certainly influential (in fact, its essential for learning) and your game would likely be very weak in its appeal if it weren't fun, but fun is not a fundamental property of games in my opinion. Fun is intentionally woven into the extra layers of complexity that designers add on top of the fundamentals, but it is not a necessity.

My friend might argue that the entertainment value of a game is all that really matters. I vehemently disagree with that. After watching his most recent lecture, I'm in agreement with Johnathan Blow when he says games should speak to the human condition. To quote Alan Moore on this:

“Writers and people who had command of words were respected and feared as people who manipulated magic. In latter times I think that artists and writers have allowed themselves to be sold down the river. They have accepted the prevailing belief that art and writing are merely forms of entertainment. They're not seen as transformative forces that can change a human being, that can change a society. They are seen as simple entertainment -- things with which we can fill twenty minutes, half an hour, while we're waiting to die."

I think we can all agree that paintings, music, books, and movies can be transformative forces, so why not games? If you're going to sit there and argue that games are an artform just like any other, then you ought to extend to games the same transformative qualities. Or else you should start arguing that games are not art.

Blow's talk also gave me a little nugget of game design philosophy that I fully intend to explore further in the future, and that is: design the game so that it creates a space wherein the player feels respected and can have a deep and satisfying conversation with the gameplay. In a way, try to create a romance between the player and the game. Doing this will allow you to speak to the human condition.

Ludology

2010-10-04T15:37:00.000-04:00

I was reading this wikipedia page and I found this excerpt to be very nonsensical:

The narratological view is that games should be understood as novel forms of narrative and can thus be studied using theories of narrative (Murray, 1997; Atkins, 2003). The ludological position is that games should be understood on their own terms.

The first sentence is the one that doesn't make much sense. Games should be understood as novel forms of narrative? I feel like this kind of opinion is yet another unjustifiable attempt to legitimize the study of games by calling them more than what they are.

I was under the impression that games are in fact games.

Games don't require narrative to be considered games.

The ludologists have it right.

2010-09-15T20:04:00.000-04:00

What is Art?

The popular definition of “art” seems to be:

An idea expressed through creativity.

Where “creativity” means that something was created.

This definition is fine, but utterly useless to me. “Art” is too broad a term to be useful in any productive conversation. As an example: recall the catch-phrase “the art of X”, where X represents something that requires some insight to grasp. Just google “the art of” and you’ll see what I mean; here are some examples:

The Art of War

The Art of the Title

The Art of Shaving

The Art of Kissing

The Art of Eating

In the context of a humanities course, no one can reasonably call any of that art, but in general conversation (and perhaps in a philosophy course), all of those fit within the popular definition of art.

Now, one could argue that the definition of “art” depends entirely on its context, and that’s a reasonable stance to take, but it is not necessarily a less confusing stance. What would be the purpose of defining a word if its definition changes (even slightly) depending on its context?

I prefer to be specific when referring to art, and thus I try to avoid use of the term “art” entirely. Instead of calling the Mona Lisa an ‘artwork’, why not just call it a ‘painting’?

The term “painting” describes the medium used to produce the piece, and that the piece is of a visual nature, and the fact that the piece is an artwork is implied in the term “painting”.

Whereas “artwork” only describes that the piece creatively expresses an idea, and gives no allusion to the medium used to produce it, or even what kind of senses are required to experience it.

The Mona Lisa may be art, but it is useless to describe it as such (unless you enjoy vagueness).

My problem is not with art itself, but the term “art”. I enjoy paintings, drawings and other visual expressions. I also enjoy music, speech, ambiance, and other auditory expressions. Narrative, poetry, commentary, and other textual expressions also have my appreciation. But I don’t like using the term “art” to describe those things.

Art

2010-08-16T14:06:00.003-04:00

I've decided to make an honest attempt at avoiding the word "art" to describe any aspect of the game development process.

A lot of times game developers might use "art" to describe a portion of their team, a part of the development schedule, the visual aspects of their game, or even the overall style of their game.

I think that is a very abstract, and therefore anti-productive, way to develop a game. It causes assumptions to be made, and reinforces generalities in design that lead to an idea or concept that has too much room for interpretation.

An example: a game developer might want some sketches to flesh out an idea a bit more, and she might refer to these kinds of sketches as:

concept art

Well, we all understand what a concept is, but what kind of art is she asking for? If we accept that video games are art, than I guess she's asking for a video game right? A concept video game, a prototype; that's what she wants right? Okay, well I guess we'll get started on making a prototype.

Wait, wait, wait!

Art != Game

Oh, but isn't the opposite true? Video games are art because they creatively express ideas, so when the developer asks for concept art, doesn't she want a prototype game?

Now I sense that you, the reader, are beginning to understand why I don't like the term art.

Why don't we try rephrasing concept art into something a little more useful:

Character concept sketches

Environment concept sketches

Well, now we know precisely what the developer was asking for. "Sketches" implies rapid visualization, "concept" implies an initial idea, and the subjects of the phrases above tell us what kind of concept sketches we should do (Character and/or environment).

"Game"

2010-08-14T02:29:00.003-04:00

"I have a pet peeve when it comes to the fans, press, and developers of video and computer games. It's pedantic, but I don't care. The issue is this: so often they will refer to "gaming" as something that relates to the focus of their hobby alone. When you talk about gaming in such a manner, you are ignoring a rich tradition of culture, commercial games, and even sports, as if they were somehow of no account."

-John Harris, Gamasutra

"game" does not exclusively refer to "video game". A video game is not "better than" a regular game. Narrow minded, over-confident, egotistical, narcissistic game developers don't seem to realize that just about every aspect of life in the universe can be looked at as though it's a game, and can be designed to some extent. A game is this: an objective, an obstacle, and a player. Nothing more. To look at games as if they are anything more than that is to apply your subjective opinion to the definition.

I'm writing this to respond to a particular disrespect toward non-video games that I've noticed from a select few of my peers (or maybe just one).

Chess is a game just as much as Call of Doodoo is. The NYSE is just as much a game as Super Smash Brothers. We who have objectives will form a payoff matrix in our head to decide whether or not to wake up in the morning.

Why elevate video games to a special level by calling them art? Why elevate video games above games in general? Is it because we "gamers" are tired of being persecuted? More to the point, why do you feel that video games need to be something more than games? Do you feel the need to legitimize your interests? If so, why? It's because you're feeling guilty. You're feeling guilty because you aren't sure why you like games or why you like making games. You naturally defend against this uncertainty by attempting to justify your interests. "Oh, science has shown that games are healthy!", "Oh the game industry makes a ton money, so it must be good!", "Oh I'm better than you because my career is multi-discipline and requires skill!"

Shut up.

The first step (or maybe the fifth) toward being a more intelligent game designer is to abandon the practice of calling games "art". Arguing over the definition of "art", for the sole purpose of contorting it to fit your interests (game design) is about as useful as determining the cause before any effects show up. If you think art = a form of expression, then you need to admit that art is everything and nothing is art. In fact, I recommend avoiding the word "art" as a descriptor entirely. It's so incredibly vague and imprecise to call something "Art".

The Mona Lisa may be art in the sense that it expresses an idea in some creative way, but no one you say that to will understand what you're talking about. Instead of calling the Mona Lisa "art", why not call it a painting? Or better yet, a portrait painted by Leo Da Vinci. What do you think of when I say the word "art"? Not the same thing that anyone else thinks of. "Art" is a word that cannot possibly describe anything specific, and you need to realize this.

Abandoning the use of "art" as a descriptor for video games will help you realize that video games, while they are indeed a form of expression, do not need to be legitimized by a lousy attempt to equate them to the Mona Lisa. If you want to call them art, don't expect it to mean anything.

Are we video game developers special because video games require computer programming and board games do not? No. In fact, we should be jealous of a regular games lack of computer programming.

Regular games do require programming, but the syntax is a little less strict and much more nuanced than a computer language. The rules of the regular game is the programming, and English, or whatever other natural language, is the syntax. Those narrow-minded video game developers might not realize how much effort is expended to write rules that can be understood by us humans.

There is no need to elevate video games above just "games". Games are an integral part of everyones life, and if they cannot see that video games are just a more complicated game of Chess, then it's their fault for prejudging. Games do not need to be legitimized with labels like "art".

In my view, all games (video games, board games, sports, capitalism, etc...) are equal, it's just that some are more complex than others. To be a good designer of games, I think one needs to look at life as if it were a series of games.

Habits

2010-08-08T00:37:00.002-04:00

My gaming habits are the subject of some controversy among some of my friends. You see, I generally look for plenty of variety in my gaming experiences, and I usually complain if a game lacks at least a little something original, or uniquely creative. I'll give you an example:

A friend of mine, we'll call him Jack, goes to see Avatar. And likes it. That's okay, but I have a problem with Jack's reason for liking it. He says that it doesn't matter if the story is entirely unoriginal, because the plot structure it uses is sound and usually makes for a strong narrative. In otherwords, he is saying that originality is not necessarily a mark of quality, and from this he implies that being cliche is not bad, if the cliche is good.

This is why he enjoys playing Call of Duty. This is also why he doesn't demand very much from game sequels. It seems to me that Jack would be content playing Call of Duty 6: Better Grenade Sounds, because "Hey! It's a CoD game!".

I think a lot of people are like Jack. They enjoy playing the same types of games over and over again because they aren't studying them, they aren't asking the game to stimulate their intellect, and they certainly are not demanding that the game be unique. They play for fun.

But to me, fun is the study of the games, I do ask that the game stimulate my intellect, and I do wish to learn from playing these games.

If I play a game with nothing unique about it, than it's like attending the same lecture twice.

I was even snarlingly rebutted when I noticed some of the friends playing BlazBlu: Continuum Shift (or something like that) and I asked "What makes this one different from the first game?"

As if sequels were required to be different from their first iteration (aren't they?) It was upon receiving this reply that I realized how very different my perspective was regarding the playing of games. I realized right then that many of my friends still enjoyed video games like 8 year olds enjoy playing with action figures.

Physics

2010-05-04T23:15:00.002-04:00

Contrary to what seems to be a popular and persistent afterthought among my cohorts, I am generally not a fan of physics-centric games.

Why?
Because most of them are just guessing games that ask you to choose the best trajectory for whatever it is your moving around. Those games where you launch projectiles at buildings and watch the carnage: Seriously? That's hardly a game. Its as much a game as counting sheep with the goal of falling to sleep.

Exceptions
For those who like to take everything I say in an absolute way, I must take the time to point out that I do not despise physics games, I simply don't find them appealing. I also must point out that there are some physics games which manage to be clever enough for me to like. An example would be Red Remover, because its very puzzle-like, and the physics are fitted for each individual puzzle.

Habit

2010-05-02T22:19:00.002-04:00

I've noticed something about the way I play games. I find that as soon as I become familiar with the mechanics of the game, I almost immediately loose interest in playing the game. This is not because I find the mechanics of most games uninteresting; quite the contrary, it seems as though I play games solely to examine the mechanics, and once I understand the method and the meaning behind the mechanics, it's as though I'm done with the game.

It seems like as soon as I identify, through playing, what the central mechanics of a game are, I become much less interested in playing it. Almost like the rest of the game is just belabouring the point (did you catch that?). Of course, this observation doesn't diminish the value or quality of the game, only my interest in playing futher.

Exceptions occur very often however. If a game provides an engaging storyline (and I do mean "line", I'm not a fan of very many open-world games) than I'll set aside my observation of the mechanics, and progress, relying on the story to enjoy the game. Or if a game provides sufficient, and varied intellectual problem-solving within the scope of the mechanics, than I'll progress, relying on the variety and challenge of the problems (with variety being my predominant expectation).

This habit is the reason I played Little King's Story for five minutes, and then promptly returned it. The game offered very simplistic mechanics that I had seen before (in Pikmin), and almost nothing in the way of story, or problem-solving.

Dawn of Discovery on the other hand, I played for a considerable time during the few months that I kept it. The game offered complex mechanics, presented in a simple way, and a progression that was linear yet gave the player a sufficient amount of freedom as to how to progress. Problems were various, and the mechanics for solving them were concise and easy to implement in a variety of ways.

The Fall of the House of Usher - DnD session

2009-11-02T19:18:00.003-05:00

For halloween 2009, I attempted a scary session based on Edgar Allen Poe's The Fall of the House of Usher.

My goal was to scare the players in the same way Poe scares the narrator in the story. I decided from the beginning that a traditional combat encounter is difficult to make scary, so that was not the focus. Instead, the players would act as investigators walking into the story.

Hook
An approaching storm forces the caravan to stop, and Garrus sends the party to investigate an alternate route leading off the main road. There is a stone pillar next to the path, usually indicating a nearby safe house or temple.

The day is dull, dark and soundless. The clouds hang oppressively low in the heavens. A storm approaches.

Garrus spoke with a peculiar iciness, as if an unredeemed dreariness of thought had pervaded his mind:

"I need you all to look into finding shelter for the caravan. That road we passed a few minutes ago in the heldig valley looked like it led to some shelter, go check it out. And hurry, this storm is not going to be friendly."

Approaching the house

The intersection is flanked by dying grass, and decaying trees. Atop a hewned stone pillar is the ancient statue of an elderly gentlemen, the scuplter for whatever reason portrays the man in a depressing, lamentable fashion. He looks toward the ground, his eyes wide open, but heavy; the grip on his book is loose. The base of the pillar is covered in leaves and dirt.

DC 15 History check and ability to speak Elvish required to read the dedication.

It's written in an ancient elven script:

Translation into common: "In Memory of Ethelred the Great , House of Usher"

Beyond the tree line is a residence, perhaps as ancient as this statue.

Approaching the house

The peculiar arrangement of the features of this domain lend to a sense of dreadful familiarity--a dread far beyond natural considerations. The causeway winds around the precipitous brink of a black and lurid tarn that lay unruffled, as a mirror, by the dwelling. Decaying trees, their trunks a ghastly white, flank the causeway all the way to it's end.

About the whole mansion there hangs an atmosphere which has no affinity for the air of the heavens, but which reeks up from the decayed trees, and the gray walls and the silent tarn--a pestilent and mystic vapor, dull, sluggish, faintly discernable, and leaden-hued.

The excessive antiquity of the mansion seems to be it's principle feature, the discoloration of the ages has been great. Minute fungi over-spreads the whole exterior, hanging in a fine web-work from the eaves. Yet All this is apart from any extraordinary dilapidation. No portion of the masonry has fallen; there appears to be a wild inconsistency bewteen its still perfect adaption of parts, and the crumbling condition of the individual stones. Beyond the extensive decay, there is little indication of instability.

A perception/dungeoneering/nature check of DC 15 or higher will reveal this:

There is a barely perceptible fissure, which extends from the roof of the mansion and makes its way down, in a zig-zag direction, until it becomes lost in the waters of the tarn.

Through the Pale door - Foyer
There is but faint traces of light feebly seaping through the narrow windows of the foyer.
The carved ceiling high above you, the sombre tapestries of the walls, the ebon blackness of the floors, and the ancient armorial trophies in the vicinity, leave only a sorrowful impression. Carefully designed into the dark floor is a golden dragon posed on its hind legs with it's wings spread taught and it's snout open to a roar.

A DC 15 perception check will reveal the faint sound of a piano being struck. A DC 20 perception check will reveal a blotch of some kind of strange liquid that leads up the stairwell. A DC 20 nature/arcana check will reveal that the strange liquid is a type of embalming fluid (DC 25: the embalming liquid is made out of mercury and antimony salts). A DC 20 nature/dungeoneering check will reveal the trail to a fuller extent.

Dining Room
Two Pillars flank the stairwell, partitioning the dining room away from the entrance. darkness besets this room, you'll need a kind of light to see at all.

The center of the area is occupied by a large polished oak dining table. At the head of the table is a broken chair, and beside it a chair that has fallen over. Dark draperies shroud a long, narrow, and pointed window. A torn stationary lie on the table, opposite the seating.

"A letter, however, had lately reached me in a distant part of the world--a letter from him--which, in its wildly importunate nature, had admitted of no other than a personal reply. The MS gave evidence of nervous agitation. The writer spoke of acute bodily illness--of a mental disorder which opressed him--and of an earnest desire to see me, as his best, and indeed his only personal friend..."

Every two rooms, do this:

(Roll against Will now; the house has a +6 modifier)

For those who fail:

There are combinations of very simple natural objects which have the power to torture the imagination, and you have trouble grappling with these shadowy fancies that crowd upon you.

Take a -1 to your Will defense.

Kitchen
A large stone table occupies all but the edges of this area, it appears as though a meal was being prepared, but it was never finished. The rotted food has aged beyond odor, instead it only serves as an artifact of the events that lead to there being no inhabitants of this house.

A perception check DC 20 will find a clue:

An ironcast pot lies tipped over on the floor amongst a collection utensils that may have been at one point finely crafted, there is some kind of stain on the bottom of the pot, as well as on the cold stone corner of the table.

A nature check DC 20 will define the clue:

The stain is human blood that has long been exposed to the elements, giving it a light brown hue.

An Insight check will describe the clue:

There was a struggle here, it was no accident. Someone, likely whoever had been cooking this meal, was attacked.

War Room
(door locked; DC 25 to unlock)
This room boasts a kind of cleanliness unfound any where else in the house thus far. A tall, thin and slender table is encircled by chairs which carry the same characteristics, hung on the wall opposite the door is an ornate shield, bearing the crest of the Usher race, there is some kind of message on the shield, written in a similar fashion to the statue found at the entrance.

(DC 15 history check, and ability to speak draconic required to translate the message)

translated into common:

Who entereth herein, a conqueror hath been;
Who slayeth the dragon, the shield he shall win;

Upon reading this message:

From some very remote portion of the mansion, there came, indistinctly a sundering crack and ripping of dry and hollow sounding wood. The noise reverberated through the floor and tingled at your feet.

(Roll against Will now; the house has a +6 modifier)

For those who fail:

The unsettling noise tosses your mind in a thousand directions at once, wonder, and extreme terror strip away your sanity a little more.

Take a -1 to your Will defense.

The adjacent wall is broken in some way, revealing a small, dark closet on the other side.

A dungeoneering/insight check DC 15: The stones of this wall appear somewhat newer than the others, and it's not actually broken, but rather it was never finished. There is a chair and some frayed rope on the other side.

Catacombs Entrance
(shut tight until the players explore the studio)

If the door is closed, it will take a thievery check DC 20 to unlock, then a DC 15 strength check to open.

The door has been so long unopened that your torches are half-smothered by the oppressive atmosphere. A thick darkness lurks upon the gray stone of the walls and the ceiling, and seems to wrap around the curvature of this portal. (Arcana check DC 14 reveals that it is not natural shadow).

Physician's Quarters
The room lies lower than the black tile of the foyer, and the floor in here is a hardwood. The bed's outfitting has been degraded by vermin, but the desk opposite it seems to be in working order.

Perception check DC 20:

Sitting on the desk is a small wooden box, it's latch rusted away. (upon opening the box) There is an assortment tools and clothes. (DC 25+ there are trace amounts of a mysterious herb, too decayed to identify without proper skill). There is also a torn piece of stationary lying facedown between a gap in the wood of the desk.

"I am perplexed by Madeline's illness. I can only think to blame a settled apathetic spirit, the gradual wasting away of her person, and the transient affections of her character, for her worsening state. I have found no real answer to this infliction, and I fear it will end her within days."

Perception check DC 25:

Droplets of oxidized blood have stained the floor beneath the desk.

Insight check DC 20:

It's likely that this room belonged to the family physician, who, judging by the contents of the note, was frustrated by an unknown illness afflicting Madeline, who was likely a member of the Usher family.

Valet's Quarters
There doesn't seem to be anything particularly interesting about this room, aside from the damaged flooring in the far corner.

If the players explore this room adequately, they'll find a key beneath the wood scrapings of the damaged floor.

Main Hall (second floor)
(if the players have explored most of the first floor, put wraith encounter in the main hall.)
The darkness seems to move with you.

After encounter: The main hall of the house of Usher contains no family heirlooms, no portraits, and no trophies. It's walls are anonymous, and carry along their route a dullness that perhaps relfected the sentiments of its last proprietar.

Perception check DC 20: There is an old book lying facedown on the floor near the stairwell. The title is written in common:

"Mad Trist, By Sir Launcelot Canning"

The text of the book is faded and unreadable, but tucked into it's spine is a torn piece of stationary, seperate in quality from the book. It read thus:

"He admitted, however, although with hesitation, that much of the peculiar gloom which thus afflicted him could be traced to a more natural and far more palpable origin--to the severe and long-continued illness--indeed to the evidently approaching dissolution--of a tenderly beloved sister--his sole companion for long years--his last and only relative in the world--"

A Nature check DC 10 can pick up the blood trail, which leads through a door.

Roderick's Studio
(locked DC 30 to unlock)
The room is very large and lofty. The windows were long, narrow, and pointed, and at so vast a distance from the black oaken floor as to be altogether inaccessible from within. Feeble gleams of encrimsoned light made their way through the tresilled panes, and served to render sufficiently distinct the more prominent objects around; the the remoter angles of the chamber and the recesses of the vaulted and fretted ceiling were bathed in shadow. Dark draperies hung upon the walls. The general furniture was profuse, comfortless, antique, and tattered. Many books and musical instruments lay scattered about, but failed to give any vitality to the scene. An air of stern, deep, and irredeemable gloom hung over and pervaded all.

A torn piece of stationary bears some writing:

"I shall perish--I must perish in this depolorable folly. Thus, thus, and not otherwise, shall I be lost. I dread the events of the future, not in themselves, but in their results. I shudder at the thought of any, even the most trivial, incident, which may operate upon this intolerable agitation of the soul. I have, indeed, no abhorrence of danger, except in its absolute effect--in terror."

A perception check DC 20 will find a clue:

A small painting sits atop an easel

A dungeoneering/insight check DC 15 will define the clue:

The painting is likely one of the few phatasmagoric conceptions of the late proprieter, depicting the interior of an immensely long and rectangular vault or tunnel, with low walls, smooth, white, and without interruption or device. Certain accessory points of the design serve well to convey the idea that this excavation lay at an exceeding depth below the surface of the world. No outlet is observable in any portion of its vast extent, and no torch, or other artificial source of light is discernable; yet a flood of intense rays rolled throughout, and bathed the whole in a ghastly and inappropriate splendor.

Another dungeoneering check DC 15 will reveal:

This may be a depiction of the catacombs that lie beneath the house.

An insight check DC 15 will reveal:

The painting has a distinct quality of abstraction, as if the image was lashed onto the canvas. Whomever painted this image could have been in a state of hypochondria or close to it.

A note next to the painting reads:

"We have put her living in the tomb! Said I not that my senses were acute?"

When the players are done exploring the studio this happens:

A quake suddenly shatters the glass window toward the front of the studio. The impetuous fury of the entering gust nearly lifts you from your feet. (upon looking trough the now open window) It is, indeed, a tempestuous yet sternly beautiful night, and one wildly singular in its terror and its beauty. A whirlwind has apparently collected its force in our vicinity; for there were frequent and violent alterations in the direction of the wind; and exceeding density of the clouds, which hung low enough to press upon the turrets of the house, did not prevent our perceiving the life-like velocity with which they flew careering from all points against each other, without passing away into the distance. There is no glimpse of the moon or of the stars, nor can you detect any flashing forth of the lightning. But the under-surfaces of the huge masses of agitated vapor, as well as all terrestrial objects immediately around us, were glowing in the unnatural light of a faintly luminous and distinctly visible gaseous exhalation which hung about and enshrouded the mansion.

A low and distant, but harsh, protracted, and most unusual screaming or grating sound manifests from an undicernable direction. It is a shriek so horrid and harsh, and withal so piercing, that it brings to submission you mental faculty.

(Roll against Will now; the house has a +6 modifier)

For those who fail:

A fearful idea now suddenly drives the blood in torrents upon your heart, and for a brief period, you relapse into insensibility, trembling convusively in every fiber.

Take a -1 to your Will defense.

Those that are subject to three will attacks (not including the encounters) permanently take a -1 to Will and Fortitude.

Guest Room
The darkness in this room is not so thick, The bedding is intact mostly, as is the desk, which, in defiance of time, still has its polish.

Perception check DC 20 will find a clue:

There are shards of broken glass all over the floor, a tattered black journal lies on the desk, and the oaken floor is stained in many places with some kind of fluid. The window provides a view of the causeway that is lined with decaying trees.

Nature check DC 20 will find:

The black substance is quill ink, it has soaked into the wood and has dried since. The broken glass was probably a vial or a few that housed the ink.

Insight check DC 20 will find:

The journal is missing much of its paper, this must have been the source of the notes you've found so far.

Madeline's Room
(Locked, DC 25 to unlock)
(upon at least two characters entering the room)
A hideous vapor begins to saturate the air in the room, its luminescent quality pierces your eyes. The bland taste of it upon your tongue chokes you. The door swings shut and locks.

(Roll against Fortitude now; the house has a +6 modifier)

For those who fail:

Your suffocated from the poison, you're having trouble standing! (1d6 +3 damage)

Take a -1 to your Fortitude defense.

For every minute the player are in the room, take 1d6+3 damage and -1 to their fortitude.

Catacombs
The permeating darkness fills the entire catacomb, a presense in the darkness creeps on the edges of your torchlight.

DC 20 perception check:

Chains attached to the stone walls suggest that this room was once used as a dungeon. A black dust is ingrained into pockmarks on the walls, this place was used to house gun powder and explosives at one point. The arched hallway is patched in places with copper, and at the end of the hallway is a massive iron door.

DC 25 listen check at the door:
There is some kind of pendulum swinging on the other side of the barrier.

Here are the encounters:

Main Hall encounter

1x Shadow

The darkness is host to some kind of conscious radiation, an agitated shadow in the darkness. Invisible beyond the light of your torch, but something is aware of your presence.

+8 initiative
HP 54 Bloodied 27
AC 18 Fort 15 Ref 18 Will 17
Resistance: Wraith is insubstancial (attacks against it deal half-damage)
Vulnerable: 5 radiant damage will disable aura until the end of Wraiths next turn
Speed 6; phasing
Weapons
    Touch of Madness +8 vs. Will; 2d10 +5 psychic damage; target takes -2 penalty to will defense (save ends)

    Touch of Chaos (2d6 recharge) +9 vs. Will; 2d6 +4 psychic damage; target moves up to its speed and makes a basic attack against its nearest ally, as a free action.

   Destroy Light (1d4 round recharge) destroys the lightsource of the closest target.

4x Corrupted Perceptions

The corrupted perceptions of a deteriorating mind form from the darkness. The physicality of these hallucinatory products was entirely convincing, for the very knowledge of their presence haunted the imagination.

+4 Initiative
HP 90 Bloodied 45
AC 16 Fort 18 Ref 14 Will 14
Speed 6
Weapons
    Claws +9 vs AC; 1d10+5 damage

    Slam (bloodied target only; minor action) +8 vs AC; 1d8 +5 damage

    Carnage the carnage demon gains +1 bonus to melee attacks if it has one or more allies adjacent to its target (+3 if one of these allies is another carnage demon). This bonus stacks.

   Haunt (standard; encounter) the Corrupted perception can tackle it's target and reduce all the target's defenses by 1 while dealing 1d10+5 claw damage.

15 minutes into the encounter, stop it mid round, let the players determine whether it's safe to move freely again.

Final Encounter

1x Madeline

+7 Initiative
HP 62 Bloodied 31
AC 19 Fort 18 Ref 17 Will 16
Immune to disease and poison Vulnerable 5 radiant
Speed 7
Weapons
    Claw +10 vs AC; 1d6 +4 necrotic damage, the target loses 1 healing surg, and Madeline shifts 3 squares

2x Shadows

The darkness is host to some kind of conscious radiation, an agitated shadow in the darkness. Invisible beyond the light of your torch, but something is aware of your presence.

+8 initiative
HP 54 Bloodied 27
AC 18 Fort 15 Ref 18 Will 17
Resistance: Wraith is insubstancial (attacks against it deal half-damage)
Vulnerable: 5 radiant damage will disable aura until the end of Wraiths next turn
Speed 6; phasing
Weapons
    Touch of Madness +8 vs. Will; 2d10 +5 psychic damage; target takes -2 penalty to will defense (save ends)

    Touch of Chaos (2d6 recharge) +9 vs. Will; 2d6 +4 psychic damage; target moves up to its speed and makes a basic attack against its nearest ally, as a free action.

   Destroy Light (1d4 round recharge) destroys the lightsource of the closest target.

2x Corrupted Perceptions

The corrupted perceptions of a deteriorating mind form from the darkness. The physicality of these hallucinatory products was entirely convincing, for the very knowledge of their presence haunted the imagination.

+4 Initiative
HP 90 Bloodied 45
AC 16 Fort 18 Ref 14 Will 14
Speed 6
Weapons
    Claws +9 vs AC; 1d10+5 damage

    Slam (bloodied target only; minor action) +8 vs AC; 1d8 +5 damage

    Carnage the carnage demon gains +1 bonus to melee attacks if it has one or more allies adjacent to its target (+3 if one of these allies is another carnage demon). This bonus stacks.

   Haunt (standard; encounter) the Corrupted perception can tackle it's target and reduce all the target's defenses by 1 while dealing 1d10+5 claw damage.

With the monsters, I didn't want the players to have an idea about what they were fighting, so although I used prefab monsters, I made the descriptions vague. I used Koyannisqatsi as the background music, and a piano version of Weber's Last Waltz in once scene. I also used Earthquake audio for when the storm starts.

Picky

2009-10-06T13:08:00.004-04:00

It seems like the lack of good games on the wii has made wii gamers a little less picky. From my perspective, Wii gamers have lower standards for what a good game is on the Wii versus one on the PS3, Xbox 360, or PC.

I think that's why so many Wii fans love The Conduit despite the overwhelming amount of average scores that reviewers have given it.

The lower bar might be the reason that No More Heroes and MadWorld sold well and were called "good games", and are always cited as being an example of mature games on the Wii.

I bought more game cube games to play on my Wii than I have Wii games. I've purchased more Wiiware games than retail games on the Wii.

"Game"

2009-09-21T00:26:00.003-04:00

I've met quite a few people who would rather label video games as "interactive art" or something similar. They find the term "game" does not properly represent the hard work and skill that goes into making the "work of art". "Game" may also not be a fitting description of the experiences of "interacting with the work of art" (playing).

Some consider the term "video games" to be childish, and/or obsolete or not useful any more. But I'm not one who thinks that.

I am proud to call video games "games", and I do enjoy "playing" them. Is it art? yes. But I believe the art of a video game is in the gameplay more so than anything else.

From Wikipedia:
Key components of games are goals, rules, challenge, and interaction. Games generally involve mental or physical stimulation, and often both. Many games help develop practical skills, serve as a form of exercise, or otherwise perform an educational, simulational or psychological role.

That's from the wikipedia definition of "Game". This is what wikipedia says about art:

Art is the process or product of deliberately arranging elements in a way that appeals to the senses or emotions. It encompasses a diverse range of human activities, creations, and modes of expression, including music, literature, film, sculpture, and paintings.

I think video games fit much better into the definition of "game", though almost any game, video game or not, will take advantage of some kind of art to increase a persons immersion and enjoyment.

There is nothing shameful about designing "games". In fact, I think a game designer could impact society in much grander ways than an "interactive art" designer, because games test your mind in a much more obvious way than art.

Wii Games

2009-08-18T23:35:00.002-04:00

99.9999% of wii games are absolute trash.

Only a few third party games are even worth mentioning on the Wii.

No More Heroes
Mad World

uhh....I can't think of any others. And besides, it's not like those games are as heavy hitting as Halo or Final Fantasy.

Even Wiiware is chalk full of awful games, with only a few exceptions.

And of the exceptions on the Wii, none of them truly break ground. Wii games are like the Epsilon citizens in the video game industry.

I have only played one game that utilized motion controlls effectively, and it most certainly was not a third party game.

The wii is a terrible game console in my opinion. The only reason I'm keeping it:

Nintendo offerings
Silent Hill: Shattered Memories

The motion controls have a way of deminishing the game as an immersive experience, and replacing that with a constant disconnect between the player and the art.

it makes me angry that so many terrible games can so easily find their home on the Wii.

Experiment

2009-08-11T22:49:00.004-04:00

I've come up with a strategy for developing the games I've been thinking about, and this strategy will allow me the experimental freedom that I crave. Over the past few weeks I've compiled a list of "themes" that a game could be developed around. When I say theme, I don't mean story, I mean gameplay. Through the gameplay, the theme will be revealed.

I will pick a theme from the list, and make a simple game based on it. After a few games, I'll have a good workflow, and more experience with Flash (the medium for most of these games).

Here is that list:

Desperation
Curiosity
Exploration
Companionship
Anxiety
Ego
Loss
Imitation
Rhythm
Spatial scale
Time scale
Confusion
Control
Solitude
Ambiguity

Addiction

Death

Life

Absolute zero

Metagaming

Memory
Hunger

Momentum

Chemistry

Relativity
love

hate

I'll add to the list, take away from it, and refine the games as I get more experienced. I should end up with a healthy ludography of works to show potential employers.

My first theme game is love. The gameplay will tell the story. Here is some art:

Good Design

2009-08-04T23:38:00.004-04:00

This post will be a list. But before I get to that, I want to get two points out of the way.

First point: the best games I've played this year are Flash-based or 2D. I'm loosing interest in much of the commercial offerings, instead opting for the experimental or unique games.

Second point: It seems like many designers are stuck behind the wall of conventions. Unable to think outside the box. They reference the tried and true mechanics of their overly important "genres" of games, and can't seem to shake things up. As a student pursuing a career in game design, this worries me. It worries me when certain talented individuals dismiss experimental concepts simply because they don't make for an hour long experience that involves shooting things or jumping on platforms. There seems to be a nearly universal adherence to conventions, especially in the conceptualization stage. I hate it when an idea is forwarded and then immediately shot down with the almost instinctive remark: "That wouldn't make a very good game!". How do you know? Surely you haven't studied every possible way to apply the idea between it's introduction and your criticism. To me, a designer, particularly a team of designers, needs to examine an interesting concept and experiment with it before coming to the conclusion that it wouldn't work. And even then, it might be our own fault that the concept didn't work, and someone else may find the right way to apply it. Personally I don't like to hold back any concepts, especially not on the basis that it "wouldn't make a good game". For cryin' out loud. Creative thinkers need to think creatively, and stop sticking to conventions like they're a holy text, criticizing new and unique concepts that break the mold.

I'm not in this field to make money. I'd design games for free. And frankly, My dream job is one that allows me the freedom to design what I want, how I want, when I want, and release it on my own terms. Maybe that's why commercial games are losing their appeal to me, maybe that's why I am tired of conventions.

Maybe you'd call me a 'casual gamer' because I'm not a huge fan of very many games. But I don't think a casual gamer would be concerned about design, much less pursue a career in the field.

You might hold the positions that one of the flaws in experimental games is their lack of scale or the usually short time it takes to finish them. I don't really mind that at all, and I understand your criticism in that regard. But I say, if that's your biggest problem, then you should try to fix it. You are after all a designer whose suppose to be able to think of solutions to these issues.

I've thought about why I'm becoming very picky about my games, and for a while I thought I was suffering from a short attention span due to the time I spend on the Internet, at work, and lots of other places. But I don't think that's the problem.

When you eat enough spicy food, you get use to the spicy after a while and you build up tolerance to even spicier foods, until you've reach a point where you can handle almost any amount of spiciness. I think I've reached that point with conventional game genres, and now I'm craving a different kind of taste.

Some of the mechanics I'm tired of dealing with:

shooting guns
meaningless violence
jumping on platforms
collecting resources
cut scenes
open worlds (no game has gotten it right, except for a few Nintendo offerings)
side quests (no game has gotten it right, except for a few Nintendo offerings)

Now, am I completely against the above mechanics? no. And I don't like it when people assume that I hate all shooters, or all platformers. No one on the planet is absolute in their opinion, and I am not a dogmatic opponent of these mechanics. There are exceptions to every rule, and there are exceptions to my dislike of the above mechanics.

Here's a list of games that I played recently that do well to demonstrate my interests:

Mirrors Edge - An action platformer. You play as Faith, a "runner" who delivers sensitive packages to sensitive people that need to avoid the authoritarian regime of the city. The game has you jumping from roof top to roof top, sprinting, sliding, jumping, tumbling and punching your way through the vertigo-inducing city environments. The game's color scheme, clean-crisp graphics, animated cut scenes, uplifting music, and intense platforming makes for a uniquely compelling experience that will leave you on the edge of your seat (that sub way tunnel scene, holy crap!) almost all of the time. Here's a game that experimented with an innovative concept, and succeeded.

Today I Die - A puzzle game. From Daniel Benmergui, who, in my opinion is a genius when it comes to defying genres. He describes Today I Die: "It’s about the daily choice of waking up in the morning." I would consider it much deeper than that, but you need to play it to know how great it is.

I Fell in Love with the Majesty of Colors - A puzzle game by Gregory Weir, heavily inspired by the works of Daniel Benmergui. It's based on a dream Weir had, and has multiple endings. "You control a cthulhu-esque tentacle in the bottom of Gregory’s unconscious sea and you can grab stuff in an attempt to discover every ending that you can reach...". When the game switched to color, chills went down my back. You'll need to play it to understand.

Rosemary - A point-and-click adventure game based on memory, by MIT Gambit Game Lab. You play as Rosemary, a young lady trying to remember her past as she returns to her home town that hasn't aged well. Rosemary remembers names and events when you find certain artifacts or accomplish small tasks, and you then fill out her journal with the newly remembers memories. I stumbled on Gambit when I was researching game theory, and I knew I'd found a gold mine of experimental gameplay when I saw the MIT name on the header and realized that Rosemary was a product of Gambit (I had heard of the game before this, but I didn't know who made it). The game properly has a serene, peaceful feel to it that does a great job of capturing a feeling of longing for the past.

Fraking awesome sites that you need to bookmark:

http://www.ludomancy.com/blog/

http://www.kongregate.com/games

http://gambit.mit.edu/

http://ludusnovus.net/

Third Person games and the player

2009-07-07T15:49:00.004-04:00

First person games have a huge advantage when it comes to presenting immersive experiences that make the player feel like they are the main character rather than simply playing as the main character. That is, that first person games don't show the character, instead, the player is looking through the eyes of the character.

A lot of times, third person games, by there very nature, can't make the player feel like they are a character. Most third person games don't aim for that either. But it can be done, and has been done.

In Max Payne, you knew the story was being told to you, and you knew that you were not a character in that story.

But in Assassins Creed, when you'd walk down a crowded street toward your objective, weaving through the crowd and sneaking around guards, you some how felt like you were Altair. It was your choice as to how and when to kill the target, and it was you not the character of Altair, that was responsible for killing the target.

It's easy to see that the developers of Assassins Creed wanted the player to feel as if they are part of the story, whereas, the developers of Max Payne wanted to tell a story to the player.

But what design differences allowed Assassins Creed to achieve that immersion?

I can't speak for the developers, but I'll point out at least two mechanics that contributed to the immersion.

Firstly, you never saw Altair's face. The face is sort of a conduit of emotion, so when you see a character smile or frown or wink, then you have some idea of how that character feels. Think about this: When you're in public, and you see a stranger who looks angry, does that make you feel angry? No, it generally doesn't, because you know that the emotions you observed are part of someone else. It's the same way when you see facial expressions in video games.

By not showing the face, you can dump the events of the story onto the main character, and the player will react, rather than the character. Telling a story is for movies, experiencing a story is for video games.

The second mechanic that allows Assassins Creed to immerse the player so well is it's sandbox style, or at least a small aspect of that.

You get to choose your own route to the target, when to make the kill, and where to make the kill. That's a lot of power.

Along with that, is the knowledge that the choices you make effect the progression of the plot in small ways, and that your actions effect the games provided world and the npc's that occupy it. The sandbox style in Assassins creed has a curious way of making the player feel self-conscious about a fake world. I'm not a huge fan of sandbox gameplay, mostly because so many games get it so wrong, but Assassins creed does a decent job with it (nowhere near perfect, or even great, but decent).

I'll be using Assassins Creed as an example in the future, when i decide to write about Murder in games.

Lessons Learned from last session

2009-07-06T00:03:00.003-04:00

I'm going to start having players reroll initiative every round, with the lowest 2 players getting a +2 bonus on the next initiative roll.

That way, players aren't always waiting so long for their turn, and so that low scoring players have less chance of rolling low a second time.

Monster initiative will be static throughout the encounter though, so that I don't get confused.

Belated Review: Mass Effect

2009-06-23T15:41:00.000-04:00

The game world
The ME universe is huge, detailed, and most interestingly, it's a plausible universe. Earth is overcrowded and humans are only a recent addition to the collection of alien species. The level of detail that went into this
game is comparable only to the Knights of the Old Republic universe. The biggest problem I had with the game world were the conversations. They all seemed very simplistic. Every time I talked to an alien, it felt like I was stuck in one of those awkwardly boring conversations you have with a new coworker or the lab partner you've never met before. It was just a very 2D experience. It was the lack of emotion in their voices, coupled with the static camera and the lack of body language from my characters as well as the npc.

The gameplay
There isn't much to say about gameplay outside of combat, because there isn't much to it. Most of the time spent on the colonies and at the citadel consisted of fetch quests, and finding stuff. But the combat is where the game shines the most. Each weapon feels very satisfying when you use it, the grenades are fun to use because there is no arc on the throw, and you can decide when to detonate it. The Biotic powers are excellently done, and drastically improve your odds of survival in combat. Combat does have a few drawbacks. Your AI sqaud seems to be afraid of the trigger. They don't fire their weapons very much at all, and they'll let an enemy run right pass them, they won't fire on them or punch them. The combat is far from tactical, and that's a let down for me. Commanding your squad is almost pointless because if you send them into the fray, they'll just let the enemy mow them down. If squad tactics were anything like a Brother in Arms game or Freedom Fighters, it would work better. If the AI actually did what you told them, then the pause mode (spacebar) would be extremely nice, no issues otherwise.

I've read about some of the PC versions (my review) improvements over the Xbox 360 version, and I'm really glad I didn't get the 360 version. From Gamespot:

"The inventory system is much easier to manage with a mouse and keyboard, and long lists of items won't reset to the top every time you sell something near the bottom. The Mako vehicle sequences are easier to manage thanks to the implementation of dedicated forward and reverse buttons in place of the 360 version's viewpoint-dependent controls. A new hacking and decrypting minigame, in place of the old button-matching one, is both more interesting and more suited to the game: You must move a small arrow through concentric circles to reach the core while avoiding stationary and rotating barriers. It's generally easy to accomplish once you get the hang of it, but the time limit and tricky perspective shifting help keep it entertaining. Keyboard hotkeys allow quick access to the map and squad upgrade screens, and the quicksave button is a great way to ensure you won't have to do too much backtracking. They aren't big changes, but the aggregate benefit is definitely noticeable."

Fatal Flaw
For me anyway, it seems like Bioware's formula is fatally flawed. Mass Effect wants to tell a grand story while incorporating fun, progressive gameplay, but the two goals don't feel like they fit together in Mass Effect, for a couple of reasons.

Firstly, giving the player dialogue options doesn't help the immersiveness of the story. In my opinion it
dehumanizes Shepard, by making him quite literally a puppet for the player. And one might argue that dialogue options are an attempt to make the player feel like they are the character, but there is no getting around the fact that players know that to be false. It's programmed into a gamers head, that if the game is third person, then they are controlling a character, rather than being a character. The game may have turned out better if there were no dialogue options. One could argue that dialogue options leave no room for character development either.

Secondly, when the character is solely responsible for stopping the Geth, Sarin, and a species of ancient cybernetic beings from destroying all life in the galaxy, a distracting sidequest better be really really important. But in Mass Effect, most of the side quests are completely irrelevant to the main quest, and that fact severely damages the story. No, I don't want to scan 21 keepers when there is a traiterous alien trying to destroy all life in the galaxy. It seems like the main quest just waits for the player in Mass Effect.

My experience as a DM has taught me this lesson. If you want a main quest, then focus solely on the main quest, ensure that all the side quests progress the plot of the main quest, and ensure that the players ignore distracting quests (by not creating them). If you want an expansive game, then don't have a main quest.

Overall, I give Mass Effect an 8/10

Famous Quotes

2009-06-21T21:30:00.000-04:00

"13 plus 6 is 22!"

-Andrew

Ryan Gets Angry (i.e. Deli Sliced Goblin)

2009-06-07T21:50:00.001-04:00

2009-06-07T17:25:00.000-04:00

Famous Quote

2009-06-07T17:21:00.002-04:00

"Eldritch blast doesnt just burn you it burns you with INTENT."
CN

"Turn into a whale and I will teleport inside of you... Thats what she said?"
AC - MC

My City Escape skill challenge

2009-05-24T21:50:00.002-04:00

I loved how this turned out. It's basically an expansion of the sample found in the DMG. I thought the DMG sample was very inadequate, but it got the concept down (which is really all it was meant for). Here's mine:

Complexity: 4S before 2F

Primary skills: Athletics(low DC), Acrobatics(med DC), Streetwise(high DC)
Bonus skills: Perception (DC 20)(+2 to skill checks)

Players, pick a skill

Low DC = 12 or below
Medium DC = 13-19
High DC = 20 or above

Event Descriptions:

Athletics
(first check) You begin running as fast as you can, lifting dust from the cracks in the cobblestone as your feet tap the ground. Up ahead is a market, it's crowded with people, a few gaurds as well.

(second check) You keep up your pace, weaving through the crowd like a mad man, a few people get in your way and you have to shove them, the guards observe this, and yell into the crowd: STOP THAT MAN! The crowd suddenly becomes more dense.

(third check) But you're able to break through, and lose the gaurds. One problem though, the gate that leads to the docks, is closing. If you run fast enough you may be able to slip under it without being impaled.

(fourth check) You make it, and the Vengeance is the largest ship in the docks, it's unmistakable.

Acrobatics
You jump onto a fruit cart, swing onto the roof of a building, and start running across the roof tops toward your goal, jumping from building to building. Up ahead, dotting the rooftops of the city, several scouts have their bows trained on you.

You swing around a flagpole, and scale the taller buildings with incredible dexterity, the guards have trouble keeping up, but you've run out of roofs to traverse. Your only option: a 100 foot dive onto a city street, it's not looking good.

Conveniently, down on the street an old man is taking a breather next to his wagon full of grain. You take the dive, aiming for the wagon, the wind against your face is chilling, the wagon is getting bigger an bigger every second. Just before you hit the grain, you adjust to land on your back. It was not a comfortable landing, and you've got an old man extremely pissed at you. He's waving to the guards down the street.

You run the opposite way of the guards, take a left, another left, and you jump through the gate to the docks just before it closes.

Streetwise
You find an empty basket next to the fruit cart here, so you fill it up with fruit, and make your way to the market down the street, walking as nonchalantly as you can.

You enter the market, crowded with a variety of people. Pretending to be interested in "Enic's magical soup! Gauranteed to instantly heal all your wounds, serious or minor!".

You slowly make your way to the other side of the market, gaurds are scanning the area. An old man with but a few teeth, trudges up to you begging for food. "PLEASE help me! Please!"

You deal with the old man, and pretend to read a pamphlet you picked up as you walk out of the crowd. The gate to the docks is wide open, and the Vengeance is the largest ship here, its unmistakable.

Explanation
Each player completes there skill challenge separately, in initiative order. If a player fails the challenge, a small combat encounter between the player and his pursuers begins, this doesn't mean the player won't make it to the 'finish line' though.

Each player picked a skill to use based on their experience in that skill, and the DC of the check (Athletics was a popular choice). Upon each skill check, I read a description of their progress until the fourth one, when they made it to the docks, assuming they succeeded on the fourth check.

I completely made up some of the descriptions, because I ran out of written ones to say (I'm not going to spend tons of time mapping all the variables, some improv is necessary), but other than that, it worked extremely well. I read the descriptions in a fast-paced way and everyone seemed excited. One of the players compared this scene to Assassins Creed. I took it as a compliment.

You'll need to adjust the DC of the skill checks according to your party's level. I think I had mine too low.

dnd XP alt party

2009-05-24T16:15:00.001-04:00

Matt - 8250

Chasten - 7800

Drew - 8765

Joe - 7800

Gabby - 8000

plot and presentation in video games

2009-05-12T13:40:00.006-04:00

This will be the first part in a three part series covering approaches to game design.

immersion
When you watch a movie, are you thinking about what you're going to do next? Or are you thinking about what the characters on screen are going to do next?
Or are you even thinking? Maybe you're feeling what the on screen characters are feeling.

A movie tries to immerse it's viewers with a complex plot, complex characters and it tries to be presented in a way that makes viewers feel like they are part of the story. All movies have a goal of immersing the viewer, even the crappy ones. It's the nature of film. If you can't pull viewers into your story, then you won't have a good movie.

I would argue that the same idea applies to video games that strive to immerse players into a complex plot, with complex characters. If indeed you want to tell a story to a person holding a controller, then you need to immerse them into the story. Any element of the game that takes away from that immersion, also takes away from the game as a whole.

If you try to make the player think about what they will do next, you've lost focus on the plot for however long the distraction persists. You don't want to make it difficult for the player to find out how to get somewhere, or how to unlock the door. You don't want them to be clueless until they find a clue.

Not knowing what to do next, and not having any indication of what to do to find out what's next, is often times a breaking point for games, and it is the worst mistake a developer can make if they want to maintain focus on the plot and presentation of their game. It destroys immersion, if the players have to think outside the scope of the plot/characters.

I have literally stopped playing a game for years, simply because I got to a point where I was clueless, and I saw no clues as to what to do next.

With that said, I would like to point to some specific mechanics that should be avoided in a plot/presentation based game.

"plot game" = any game that attempts to tell a complex story with complex characters, and tries to evoke the same immersion that a movie might. Games like Beyond Good and Evil, Assassins Creed, Dead Space, Half-Life or Prince of Persia.

maintaining immersion
puzzles have their place in plot games, but it's a fragile place. A puzzle in this kind of game should not be trivially placed, and it should not be unrealistically complex.

Take Bioshocks hacking minigame. In my opinion it's the worst break of immersion in the game. I'd be happier if breaking into safes were more like the Deus Ex/multitool method. The pipe minigame completely removes players from the emotions that the surrounding environment provides, which is bioshocks greatest strength. Instead of relishing in the awe-inspiring, suspenseful, visceral feel of Rapture, I get to play a very unrealistic, anti-unique, out-of-place minigame.

It's very rare that puzzles like the bioshock hacking game keep players immersed. A puzzle in a plot game needs to be bigger in scope than opening a safe or unlocking a door. Puzzles need to be more meaningful; they need to be designed not to impede players, but to encourage players.

I keep thinking of a puzzle in Prince of Persia: The Two Thrones, in which you have to maneuver a giant, warehouse-sized statue across a room, and face it the correct way. There is scaffolding blocking the statue from directly being moved, so you need to strategically move the statue back and forth, rotating here and there, but not there, or there. It's a terrible puzzle (at least for this writer), because it completely took me out of the character, and if you've ever played the Prince of Persia games, you know how good they are at making you feel like you are the character. It took me hours to realize that I wasn't going to figure it out by myself, so I had to consult an faq. Immediately after the puzzle, a giant action sequence ensued, probably an attempt to re-energize the player after the complex puzzle. It was a flaw in the game.

Half-Life 2: Episode 2 comes to mind when I think of good plot game puzzles. There is one instance where Gordon needs to turn power on for a switch, this involves exploring the area (a simplistic area) for the proper panel, and then a logic puzzle that asks him to plug this switch in to power that panel, and that switch into that panel, but not before unplugging the other switch to free up a panel, and so on. It was a simple puzzle, followed by an intense combat sequence (just like the Prince of Persia puzzle), but what makes this a good puzzle is that it didn't require the player to leave the character or the environment in order to solve it (like the BioShock puzzle did) and it didn't frustrate the player or expect the player to spend more than a couple of minutes solving it. These puzzles are all over the good (or at least expensive) plot games. You'll find similar puzzles in Dead Space, Assassins Creed, Beyond Good and Evil, and especially in the Metroid Prime series (a series which, I think, has perfected the use of the sort of puzzles I'm talking about).

Keep your puzzles short, simple, and plot-progressing.

That is unless you're designing a puzzle game, in which case, you'll want to read the second article when I write it.

sample: combat skill challenge

2009-05-05T01:38:00.004-04:00

I'll show you a method to convert a players turn in a combat encounter into a skill challenge.

Setup: A rogue fights a battlemage on a dusty path.

It's the rogues turn, and she's her speed away from a tough looking battlemage who wields a long-curved sword.

Move action: She moves up close to the battlemage
Skill challenge: She uses an encounter power, positioning strike.

Instead of using a standard action, convert each step in this attack into a few checks. Like this:

False stumble skill challenge, acrobatics check
You attempt to dupe the battlemage with your footing, pick a low DC, or high DC, and roll an acrobatics check.

Low DC, success - the enemy is confused enough for you to follow through.
Low DC, failure - the enemy maintains his composure, so you lose your element of surprise (can't follow through) (here, you could let the enemy counter attack, and turn the tables on the player, turning the skill challenge into a defensive one).

High DC, success - The enemy is confused, you get some extra room to think creatively (an additional action)
High DC, failure - The enemy does not fall for your trickery, he counters you with an upward slice of his sword (the DM would roll for damage here, skip an attack roll, the attack is the consequence of failure)

After those checks, proceed to the next part of positioning strike, the shove. Again have the player pick a low or high DC. If the player succeeded in the high DC check, she'll get an extra action to use against the battlemage. This extra action could be an extra slice of the sword or an extra move action, or to make things interesting, let the player give the action to another party member as an immediate action.

The Shove skill challenge, strength check
You follow through from duping the battlemage, to shove him into a more convenient position for inflicting pain. Pick a low DC or high DC, and roll a strength check.

Low DC, success - you're able to grab him and knee him in the stomach, causing him to collapse toward you for the moment. Roll regular damage.
Low DC, failure - He hastily blocks your attempt to shove him.

High DC, success - You're able to tumble around to the enemy's backside, trip his feet, and secure your blade at his neck. He lies helpless on the ground. Instant kill.
High DC, failure - your shove didn't do much to disorient the enemy, but you still scored a fair attack. Roll damage x2.

After this challenge allow the player to use her extra action in whatever way she wants.

I haven't tested this method in a session yet, I just came up with it, but I imagine it would work well against minions, and you could alter it in some ways to make it more team-oriented, then use it to fight a boss character.

my DM methodology

2009-04-29T01:27:00.005-04:00

building a world

I don't mean making all the cities, naming all the roads, coming up with histories, and assuming the players already know basic facts about your world. Frak that. That's not what world building is. That's what I'd call a complete waste of time, especially if your goal is to make an interesting place to explore.

You should start with a map of your area, and a theme of your area (there can be multiple themes depending on different regions of course). I just drew a giant continent to have land mass to put crap on, with some gulf and rivers and oceans and mountains; the standard array of geography. Once you have a continent, and a general idea about the theme of some of the areas, stop.

Players, Meet the world

A lot of people I talk to think that the players, unless they start out as zeros or they lose their memory through some convenient incident, should know a bit about the world. They have, after all, "lived" in it for a while by the time the first quest rolls around. But I say, omit that little detail. I don't care if the players are "suppose" to already know that the emperor was assassinated last year, for the sake of a stupid quest. It saves a ton of work for me if I don't have to worry about what the players should know already. It also makes it more interesting to learn about commonly known information if the players are talking to a massive ogre with an IQ of 45 and a large pie, rather than if I just tell them that this information is stored in your mental repositories, or that if you roll a knowledge check, you'll magically "know" this information already.

Reveal your world through quests and player/character interaction, not through arbitrary checks and metagaming. I don't accept the fact that a bard can just look at a crowded street and glean useful information from that.

Your players don't have to know your world before or even after the first session, don't force them to. It's like this: you like eating pie don't you? (don't you?) With a fork and a plate, one piece at a time, maybe saving some for the next few days. But I doubt you'd like the pie if someone took it straight out of the oven, and without letting it cool down a bit, shoved the entire pie into your mouth, and forced it down your throat and kept pushing it into your mouth until you digested the entire pie. You probably wouldn't like that very much.

So don't force down your world very quickly. Let the players get to know the world over the course of each session, and eventually they'll be comfortable with many areas, and they'll feel more immersed because of that. But you'll probably never be done defining your world, and showing the players new ideas or trends that become part of the world as they discover them.

I'm like 20 or 30 sessions into my new campaign, and I don't even have all the cities mapped or even the terrain, and I certainly don't have complete histories for each region of the map. I don't worry myself with useless information. Heck, I've even made up cities during the course of conversation with PC's, to let in a bit of "hey, I really am talking to a retired archer in the Lilly Pad tavern. I'd like to go to that city he was talking about to meet his partner."

One of the cities that just popped into my head while I was in character talking to a PC was Angost. The PC was asking where she could find composite bows for sale. I didn't have an answer, so I made one up really fast. "Ahh, you should head to Angost, there are lots of archer shops there."

Now the player has a personal quest, I have an interesting angle I could take for a new city, and maybe an NPC connection to fool around with. Whether or not she'll be able to complete that quest doesn't matter. It's the fact that she feels more connected to the world (she desires something in it and that something happens to be reasonably attainable).

Another example is the effectiveness of recurring villains. I was surprised how well a recurring villain can immerse players into the world, and make them care about what NPC's have to say. One of the four recurring villains in my campaign so far is the Goblin chieftan named Irontooth (yes, stolen from a Wizards of the Coast quest). The players first met him outside the city of Winterhaven (yes, I stole that too, it was an awkward time for me as a DM), and they were nearly all killed by him and his goons (near-death experiences help to make enemies memorable, especially one as intense as this). Being generous, I decided to call Irontooth away via a war horn, and not kill the players. Later on I realized this gave me the opportunity to bring him back.

The players have fought Irontooth three times now, each fight in a very different location than the last (what's he up to?). Recurring villains make even the most apathetic of players care, not only about the villain, but generally about all other characters as well ("I wonder if this guy knows anything about that guy?"). The same goes for recurring events (the "oh gods, not again" sort of reaction is almost always not a bad thing).

Killing a PC is taboo in many circles. To this, I say "everything in moderation". If you're encounter is tough enough to kill the players or a player, consider letting it happen. Especially if the player character is high-level (more sentimental value to the player). If you can pin the blame for the PC's death on another players inadequacies rather than the monster's prowess, even better. This creates distasteful feelings between the player(s) that's dead and the player(s) that's being blamed for the death (why would that ever be a good thing!?). The players may feel sour on this issue toward each other, but they are sour about the fake death of a fake character in a fake world (i.e. they're immersed).

Now, don't go killing off PC's left and right, because that would be terribly annoying, and after a few PC deaths, it would lose it's traumatic effect and thus not be useful for immersing the players.

Choices

I use to think that giving the players unlimited choice was the best a DM could do, but after crafting a couple of quests with that assumption in mind (mile-long pyramid charts), I realized how inefficient choice is. I then realized that my assuming infinite choice would be ideal, was a direct over-compensation for not wanting a completely linear campaign. There needs to be a balance between choice and progress. Achieving that balance will add simplicity to every aspect of the campaign, and will allow the players and the DM to focus on more important things like chasing down that white dragon.

The best example I can think of is a quest line I recently concluded. It involved the players entering a city. I had them choose which gate to enter, telling them via an NPC that the north gate (the closest one) was the entrance to an area called the Mid, full of the poor, the sick, and the dishonest (or are they?), whereas the south gate was the entrance to the Grand, full of the rich, the healthy, and the dishonest (or are they?). Either way they chose, events would transpire in exactly the same way, just with reciprocal reasons and different characters. From there, it would branch off to be a different experience than the alternative.

That's the first choice they made. The choice that initiated the quest line. It's a simple choice. The players have the pros and cons of each option, and so it's a real choice, based on an informed decision, rather than a meaningless choice. This immerses the players.

Don't map out consequences for pointless choices. If the players get stuck in a cavern, don't waste your time mapping out the consequences if they choose to stay in the cavern. They're not going to choose to stay in the cavern. If they do, they aren't good players. Don't go too far into detail if the players choose to talk to this guard over that guard. You might have different personalities for each guard that give slightly different accounts of where the dragon went, but don't make the decision to talk to one person over another an important decision (this is all relative of course). Don't worry about that.

the choices you pose to players should always be personal as well as progressive. Personal choices effect the characters depth, and determine the characters personality, and deepens her understanding of the event and world around her. A progressive choice is simply a choice that progresses the plot or quest in a significant way. Perhaps two opposing NPC's ask you to retrieve the same item. When you retrieve it, you have a choice of who to give it to. This choice can effect the questline significantly and it can divulge a little more about the PC's personality as well as that of their players. Perhaps you choose to keep the book for yourself, this also develops the characters, and I would argue that, if your players choose an option like this, it means they care about the world, or they're at least happy to play in it.

Another piece of advice. Skip some choices. If you end a session with the players about to enter a city, start the next session with the players in the nearest tavern already. If your party has been invited to Mr. Markin's dinner party, skip the formalities, and go ahead to the meal. In otherwords, avoid meaningless choices like, which street to go down to get to the tavern, and which chair to sit in for dinner. These do nothing but bore the players.

From beneath you it devours

Almost every recent science fiction story has a big bad villain that shows up only after a bunch of tiny clues culminate near the end, when the protagonists begin to see it coming, and are forced to confront it on some scale. As a DM it would be a good idea to every now and again, drop clues to some giant mysterious plot that makes the PC's feel like they're ants in an ant hill. You may not even know what the plot is yourself, just make some clues that are related in some way, so that the players are in a state of perpetual curiousity.

Combat shmombat

You don't need a bunch of combat encounters to make a fun session. All you need is a bunch of meaningful dice rolls. I'll leave it at that. (hint: look into skill challenges, the DMG).

That's only a little bit of how I think when I make a session.

famous quotes

2009-04-08T22:16:00.001-04:00

"I'm evil, I have to make funny quips about pain."

-Chasten Nealy as Magros, the Tiefling Infernal Warlock

"Chasten didn't get any..."

-Matt Christian as himself

"Those arrows were dipped in kick-ass!"

-Chasten Nealy as Himself.

the gang

2009-04-08T22:07:00.003-04:00

dnd XP

2009-04-08T22:02:00.001-04:00

You wroteon August 10, 2008 at 11:29pm
Gabby (Lia) - 610 total
Andrew (Ro) - 720 total
Chasten (Magros) - 680 total
Joel (Korang) - 520 total
Matt (Nimat) - 665 total
Kory (stupid name) - 325 total
Anne (Orala) - 500 total

Post #4
1 reply
You replied to your poston September 7, 2008 at 4:38pm
Andrew (Ro) - 1137 total
Chasten (magros) - 1097 total
Matt (Nimat) - 1082 total
Anne (Orala) - 917 total

Post #5
You replied to your poston September 21, 2008 at 10:12pm
Matt (nimat) - 1382 total
Andrew (Ro) - 1412 total
Chasten (Magros) - 1472 total
Anne (Orala) - 1267 total

Post #6
You wroteon September 28, 2008 at 3:48pm
Matt (Nimat) - 1707 total
Andrew (Ro) - 1472 total
Chasten (Magros) - 1532 total
Anne (Orala) - 1392 total

Post #7
You wroteon September 28, 2008 at 7:33pm
Anne (Orala) - 1767 total
Matt (Nimat) - 1907 total
Chasten (Magros) - 1682 total
Andrew (Ro) - 1547 total

Post #8
You wroteon October 12, 2008 at 9:06pm
Anne (Orala) - 2042 total
Matt (Nimate) - 2057 total
Chasten (Magros) - 1957 total
Andrew (Ro) - 1767 total

Post #9
You wroteon October 26, 2008 at 8:26pm
Matt (Nimat) - 2404 total
Andrew (Ro) - 1968 total
Chasten (Magros) - 2232 total
Anne (Orala) - 2415 total

Post #10
You wroteon December 14, 2008 at 5:04pm
Andrew (Ro) - 2168 total
Chasten (Magros)- 2432 total
Anne (Orala) - 2615 total
Matt (Kovili) - 2604 total

Post #11
You wroteon December 14, 2008 at 5:11pm
Alternate Mission

Gabby (Lia) - 2305 total
Joel (Korang) - 2265 total

Post #12
You wroteon February 1, 2009 at 5:15pm
Matt (Kovili) - 3254
Andrew (Ro) - 2618
Chasten (Magros) - 3057
Gabby (Lia) - 3130
Dan (Eldrin) - 2525

Post #13
You wroteon February 22, 2009 at 9:18pm
Dan (Eldrin) - 2700
Gabby (Lia) - 3655
Chasten (Magros) - 3282
Andrew (Ro) - 2718
Matt (kovili) - 3304

Book Review: Little Brother

2009-02-26T22:47:00.003-05:00

Little Brother, by Cory Doctorow, is perhaps a teenage version of 1984.

The book, set in the near future, starts out while the main character, Marcus Yallow, is in school. Right off the bat, we learn that Marcus is quite the hacker as well as a huge fan of Harajuku Fun Madness, an ARG that he plays with three of his friends, Darryl, Vanessa, and Jolu.

Marcus and Darryl decide to skip school to meet up with Van and Jolu and play a mission for Harajuku Fun Madness, but they're caught in the middle of a terrorist attack that suddenly has the entire city in panic. When they try to escape, Darryl is stabbed, and when Marcus stops an unmarked vehicle, to ask for help, they are all apprehended by the Department of Homeland Security and taken to a prison in an unknown location. The reader is left wondering what happened to Darryl?

That terrible axiety of not knowing if Darryl is dead or alive, free or captured, stays with the reader for almost half the book as Marcus confronts the DHS, who've turned his city into a police state.

After the DHS releases Marcus he makes the decision to fight back, and that's when the story really speeds up. He starts by using his Xbox Universal (a free xbox the MS released, where the game sales would generate the profit rather than hardware sales), to create an encrypted network to communicate safely with people who want to help fight back. He did this by installing an operating system called ParanoidXbox, based on Paranoid Linux. The OS was designed assuming the user was contantly being watched and/or attacked by the government, so the security and encryption on it is top-notch. He burns copies of ParanoidXbox and distributes them, which inadvertantly leads to a surge of new users on the "Xnet".

Next, Marcus starts an initiative to jam Arphid, which is all over the city in the form of driver's licenses, credit cards, train passes, toll passes, car keys, passports and lots of other stuff. His aim here was to get as many Xnetters to clone as much Arphid as possible, effectively swapping the Arphid data of one person with another's, on a massive scale. This resulted in a huge logistical mess for the Police and DHS, which turned public sentiment against the DHS occupation of the city.

That's just a couple of things Marcus, with the help of Jolu and the Xnetters. But one thing I really want to point out is the fact many of the things Marcus does are turned into social commentary and how-tos on the subject.

For instance, I know how a spam filter works now, and I know how encryption works, and how to use it.

The plot is not a critical-thinking deep, analytical plot like 1984, and it's not trying to be. It's a fun read that keeps you on the edge of your seat, and if you're a geek, who's under 25, you'll undoubtedly be able to identify with the characters on a lot of levels.

I recommend this book to any geek who loves sci-fi, but also to those of us who concern ourselves with issues like privacy, copyright, DRM, constitutional law, and file sharing. It's an important read, trust me on that.

First Post

2009-02-09T12:47:00.000-05:00

I've started this blog to write mostly about anything that does not line up with the content of my other site.

Which is: http://doubleshotexpresso.com