Just wanted to include a quick note on our Writing Games Analysis module. We discussed in our last class whether it would be a good idea to have the module earlier in the course, or later. As a member of the year which signifies the first time the course has been run, I think it's very important to have a look at when some of our modules are being taught on the course.
I think that Writing Games Analysis provides good fundamentals for games theory and that it would be of much greater benefit if it was taught a lot earlier on the course. It is during our college years that we should be thinking about the best/new/different/fresh ways to make computer games(after all, we represent the future of the industry). If I had the ideas and knowledge I've aquired from this module at an earlier time I think I would have been better prepared for later on, not to mention my FYP. Writing Games Analysis should be an essential module, early in the course.
You need ideas before you start implementing them.
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Spaces ...continued.
So as I said last night i have a few extra things I'd like to talk about regarding Game Spaces...
I had a read of Sudnow's paper about spaces, in particular the Eyeball and Cathexis sections. I found it a very...different...read. I liked it, and thought it gave a very good insight into how the author saw and used the game space of "Breakout"- a game which is played on the Atari. In the game the player is shown a few rows of different coloured blocks, which the player has to try and hit/destroy with a ball hit by a flat paddle towards them. The player can his the ball off the boundaries of the game space- the surrounding walls to try and hit the blocks.
I *think* I've played the game myself before, or at least something very similar as I remembered how the game was played (and how frustrating it was) as I read the paper. What I found the most interesting about the paper was how Sudnow tried out different ways to play the game, to try and beat it. One method he used was placing some black tape accross the bottom of the screen so he couldn't see the little paddle which was used to hit the ball. He tried to rely on his instincts and eventually found that he could hit the ball about 60% of the time!
Another thing he tried was using his peripheral vision rather than concentrating on the ball. He found this method worked much better. What facinated me most was that he was so immersed by the game and the game space that he felt he needed to complete it, to find the best way to do it using the game space he was given. It basically took over his life!
I think that the game space of a game is a very important element of every game, but it is important that the game spaces is suited to the game and its genre for it to really work. The player needs to feel that they belong in the game, that their surroundings make sense to be the way they are. I believe that is what makes the game space so important.
I had a read of Sudnow's paper about spaces, in particular the Eyeball and Cathexis sections. I found it a very...different...read. I liked it, and thought it gave a very good insight into how the author saw and used the game space of "Breakout"- a game which is played on the Atari. In the game the player is shown a few rows of different coloured blocks, which the player has to try and hit/destroy with a ball hit by a flat paddle towards them. The player can his the ball off the boundaries of the game space- the surrounding walls to try and hit the blocks.
I *think* I've played the game myself before, or at least something very similar as I remembered how the game was played (and how frustrating it was) as I read the paper. What I found the most interesting about the paper was how Sudnow tried out different ways to play the game, to try and beat it. One method he used was placing some black tape accross the bottom of the screen so he couldn't see the little paddle which was used to hit the ball. He tried to rely on his instincts and eventually found that he could hit the ball about 60% of the time!
Another thing he tried was using his peripheral vision rather than concentrating on the ball. He found this method worked much better. What facinated me most was that he was so immersed by the game and the game space that he felt he needed to complete it, to find the best way to do it using the game space he was given. It basically took over his life!
I think that the game space of a game is a very important element of every game, but it is important that the game spaces is suited to the game and its genre for it to really work. The player needs to feel that they belong in the game, that their surroundings make sense to be the way they are. I believe that is what makes the game space so important.
Game Spaces
We recently covered this topic in class and I must say that I found it very interesting. At first I thought I had a pretty good idea of what a game space was, basically the game space in which you play, your environment. I found it really intriguing to compare the game spaces of different games, to see how different game spaces worked well for different games. For example, if you look at a game like Grand Theft Auto, the space in which you are free to roam around is absolutely huge. This helps to give the player a the feeling of freedom to do whatever they want, which is, in essence exactly what the game is about. So I think the game space works quite well in GTA.
I've played all of the games in the series and something which occurred to me while thinking about the game space of in all of them was that it seemed to increase with every new title in the series. Focusing on the 3D games(GTA3, Vice City, San Andreas and GTA4), every one had a bigger game space than than last...all apart from one- GTA4. San Andreas had a much larger game space than GTA 4, and that begs the question "Why?" Why did the developers decide to make the game space smaller?
Well, in an interview with someone from Rockstar who are the developers of GTA, at: http://games.kikizo.com/news/200705/101_p1.asp they said this: "I think when people think about San Andreas it was always about the size, scope and scale of the game, and in part it was almost seen as a 'features list'; it was all about how many cars, how many planes, how many this and that - whereas GTA4 is a completely different beast altogether. It's a far more evolved, more detailed game."
I think that Rockstar realised that there is probably a limit to the size of a game space before it just becomes, well, too big! While it gives the player a sense of freedom I also think it is important to keep the player focused on the goals of the game as well as other things. They still kept the game space big, but focused more on the detail of the city.
Anyway...I didn't realise how late it is! It's 2am no matter what the time written under the blog says! Time for bed I think! I have some more to offload on here about game spaces but I'll get to that tomorrow. :)
'night.
I've played all of the games in the series and something which occurred to me while thinking about the game space of in all of them was that it seemed to increase with every new title in the series. Focusing on the 3D games(GTA3, Vice City, San Andreas and GTA4), every one had a bigger game space than than last...all apart from one- GTA4. San Andreas had a much larger game space than GTA 4, and that begs the question "Why?" Why did the developers decide to make the game space smaller?
Well, in an interview with someone from Rockstar who are the developers of GTA, at: http://games.kikizo.com/news/200705/101_p1.asp they said this: "I think when people think about San Andreas it was always about the size, scope and scale of the game, and in part it was almost seen as a 'features list'; it was all about how many cars, how many planes, how many this and that - whereas GTA4 is a completely different beast altogether. It's a far more evolved, more detailed game."
I think that Rockstar realised that there is probably a limit to the size of a game space before it just becomes, well, too big! While it gives the player a sense of freedom I also think it is important to keep the player focused on the goals of the game as well as other things. They still kept the game space big, but focused more on the detail of the city.
Anyway...I didn't realise how late it is! It's 2am no matter what the time written under the blog says! Time for bed I think! I have some more to offload on here about game spaces but I'll get to that tomorrow. :)
'night.
Dissertation
Just thought I'd fill ye in on what I'll be doing for my dissertation.
I've decided that I'm going to explore the question "What makes a good game?". This will involve looking at all of the qualities which make a game, and hopefully being able to come up with what qualities are needed in a game for it to be considered good. As it ties in with the beginning of my FYP I think it's a good choice! :)
The main reason I've decided to look at this question is because I think it's a very difficult one to answer, as every game is different but I like a challenge! Plus there doesn't seem to be any "formula" out there which anyone could follow to make a great game. Every time. I'm not sure if it's possible to come up with such a formula, but I think I can identify the key aspects that a game should have for it to be good....but I'll save that for my dissertation. ;)
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Rules rules rules....
So in Thursdays lecture for Writing Games Analysis, we discussed rules. More specifically, rules in games.
We tried to define what exactly a rule is and there were a few key words which I think define what rules are quite well. One of the words mentioned was "constraint"...Daniel I think, mentioned this.
Rules in general, not just in video games are constraints. I'd struggle to think of a rule which doesn't restrict your actions or anything else. ("No eating in the labs" ...think we all know that rule...! :P)
According to http://www.thefreedictionary.com one of(or part of) the definitions given for a rule is "An Authoritative, prescribed direction for conduct." This suggests that rules are present to act as some kind of authority; to control what we do, how we act, and to govern what is acceptable and what is not.
This isn't to say that you have to follow the rules and abide by the constraints which are set by them, but they are still there and limit(or at least attempt to limit) your actions.
One thing which we talked about at the lecture which I hadn't thought about before is the presence of "unwritten rules". There are many unwritten, or unspoken, rules in games.
One which was mentioned i class was: If we were playing a game of x's and o's, and there's no written rule that states that each player only has a certain length of time to move, then the player could choose to wait as long as they like to make a move - or "refuse to enter the arena" and not make one at all! I found this quite interesting and am trying to think of some more unwritten rules in games, or just life in general. I'll pop my ideas into my next post. :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
