Games, development, and you…
What role does character selection play in a game? A lot of game now allow for changing the outer appearance of your character. How does the appearance of your character affect your play? A lot games also have classes that are geared for certain styles of playing. How does class selection affect your game play?
Today’s question will be answered tonight, to allow for ample thinking time. Also, any comments will be highly appreciated and considered for use in tonight’s post.
There is a constant battle being fought by computer enthusiasts all over the world: which element affects development more? Hardware or software? Certainly hardware drives the capabilities of software, but without solid software there would be no need for hardware. It seems like an endless loop. People will continuously find ways to improve software without hardware improvements. People will always push the envelope on what hardware can accomplish. So how does the improvement of hardware affect the software of game? I’ll start with Moore’s Law. “Moore’s law describes a long-term trend in the history of computing hardware, in which the number of transistors that can be placed inexpensively on an integrated circuit has doubled approximately every two years.” (from Wikipedia). With such a rapid improvement in hardware, processing speed, and memory capacity it should be easy to document the effects in video games. Well, it kind of is and isn’t. Certainly graphics have improved, and physics are a lot smoother because of processing power. The mechanics behind a game have constantly improved as well, but that isn’t a direct cause from the hardware. Code under the hood of a game is extremely important, its what makes or breaks a game.
It used to be that games could only be a certain size, which was limited by the capabilities, or bits, of the popular consoles at the time. Game developers had to watch their limits carefully; if they went over the limits they would have to find something to cut out. Chris Crawfordtalks about this in his book Chris Crawford on Game Design. He describes how people would shout out their frustrations if a game was one or two bites too big, even after cutting what seemed like essential elements from the game. This doesn’t happen much any more. There is plenty of room for graphics, sound, videos, game data, code, and even save files. The bit-rating of systems became unnecessary with the rise of sixth generation consoles. From a wikipedia article on Sixth Generation video game consoles:
Bit ratings for consoles largely fell by the wayside after the 32-bit era. The number of “bits” cited in console names referred to the CPU word size, but there was little to be gained from increasing the word size much beyond 32 bits; performance depended on other factors, such as processor speed, graphics processor speed, bandwidth, and memory size.
The importance of the number of bits in the modern console gaming market has thus decreased due to the use of components that process data in varying word sizes. Previously, console manufacturers advertised the “n-bit talk” to over-emphasize the hardware capabilities of their system. The Dreamcast and the PlayStation 2 were the last systems to use the term “128-bit” in their marketing to describe their capability.
Developers had a lot more freedom as each generation of consoles progressed. Each generation brought on whole new capabilities for the developers. Games didn’t necessarily become more creative, but developers could express themselves in new ways. Instead of saying, “This dot represents a dragon”, they could actually make a graphic of a dragon and place it in the game. Developers could worry less about if a console could handle the demands of a game.
Where is this advancement leading us? What is happening is that developers are capable of creating their ideas. Its like handing Mark Twain a pencil and paper; he could tell stories without pencil and paper, but people couldn’t recall them exactly the way he wrote stories down. Well, I suppose its more like handing Mark Twain a single piece of paper and saying “write that Huck Finn story you talk about all the time.” He would have to condense the story by an absurd amount. Readers might understand the plot, but they might not enjoy the robustness of an entire book. When you give him the ability to write as much as he wants, he can take his time writing all the details he desires. People who read the book will be able to picture the story more vividly than if the book was only one page long. Developers can now write their epic games that could only exist as a dream a few decades ago.
While hardware improves, software will improve along with it, maybe software will push the hardware too. Game developers in the next decade may never need to worry about fitting all their ideas into a game. Perhaps the only thing holding developers back will be managing the complexities involved with massive games.
If a player asks friends or finds information online about how to advance in a game, does that affect the amount of fun the player can have with the game? We live in a time where if you ask a question about anything it will be answered almost immediately. Just search online and websites like Gamefaqs or Gamespot will give you cheats, walkthroughs, and maps. Can having too much information actually be a curse for gamers?
Today’s question will be answered by me tonight, to allow for ample thinking time. Also, any comments will be considered and thought upon for use in tonight’s post.
I’ve always thought of basing the growth of video games on the way the graphics look. Most of us grew up when games were just starting to define themselves. Computers improved at astronomical rates, and so did games. I suppose the reason I look at graphics as a reference is because most games have the same basic mechanics. The only elements that changed noticeably were graphics. After playing some recent games I thought that graphics don’t have much more room to improve. Physics can still improve, but they are already improving rapidly to keep up with graphics. I started wondering, will our kids ever worry about how games look? What will be the basis of our comparisons in the future?
There are several ways that the gaming industry can head. I want to focus more on two elements. One way could be studying the psychology of gamers, and changing the way that they relate to characters. The other is expanding games into the social interactions that people have outside of the traditional gaming environment.
Creating a character that players can relate to has been the goal of video games designers since the existence of video games. Well maybe not quite…but some games try. Heavy Rain for the PS3 is based on creating an emotional attachment between the characters and the player. This is an interesting take on games. Usually if someone dies they come back right away. The player doesn’t become quite as worried if the character is in a life-or-death situation. RPG’s have always tried to push the limits with emotional ties. Final Fantasy 7 has a sad moment where one of the characters actually dies and doesn’t come back for the rest of the game. These however seem only one-dimensional, or two at best. How about a character that plays the way that you feel as you play? I know a player controls the character, but what if something shocking just happens and the player wants revenge. Shouldn’t the character also want revenge? Shouldn’t the character act differently while in this altered emotional state? Maybe given extra strength, but not accurate movement. I think there needs to be an expansion on these emotional ties between the player and the character. Perhaps the best way is to make more emotionally flexible characters. Characters currently seem one minded. This character is the big tough one that busts a hole in any thing the looks at him the wrong way. Oh, a girl just hugged him? Punch a hole in the wall. Oh, he just found out who his father is? Punch a hole in the wall. Oh, an enemy just killed his best friend of 17 years? Punch a hole in the wall. I know this will take a lot of programming, and it will be almost impossible, but it would help in creating an emotional tie between players and characters.
Can the line between video games and reality become non-existant? Augmented reality seeks to bridge the gap between the two. ARhrrr is one game that can be played from a phone, where the player hovers over a map (placed on a table) and shoots virtual zombies. Objects can be placed on to the map and utilized in the game. People can mark actual objects, such as landmarks, and write a story about the location. A game could be played out in real life in real time. Suppose there was a mission to meet a virtual character at a certain location at a certain time, then the player actually has to travel to that place, say a mile away, and meet with the virtual character. Maybe players can place items in various real locations, hoping other players won’t find and steal those items. I can see it expanding very rapidly. I can also see it getting out of hand rather quickly. People already have enough trouble being distracted by texting, throwing video games into the mix might not help.
No matter what happens, I hope our kids, and our kid’s kids will grow up in a time where video games are still exploring the boundaries of technology and entertainment.
Note: There are many developers that have already started working on these two elements. I don’t want to demean the value of games by saying all players place their judgments entirely on graphics. That is not true, and a lot of games deserve more credit for their development in areas outside of graphics.
Where are games heading in the future? I know this is a broad question, but what sort of game elements do you think we will see in the future? This also encompasses game elements that you don’t want to see in the future.
Today’s question will be answered by me tonight, to allow for ample thinking time. Also, any comments will be boiled over and traced upon in tonight’s post.
The holidays are approaching, and so are the family gatherings. Families usually have traditions, like watching football during Thanksgiving, or giving presents. Some families plop down in front of a yule log and sing Christmas carols. Ugly sweater competitions, ugly dog competitions, maybe ugly baby competitions. The idea is to spend time bonding with family members that you haven’t seen for a long time. Well nothing says bonding more than playing video games! The amount of cheering, yelling, and kicking brought on by playing video games is bound to bring everyone a little bit closer.
So there are some ideas for family video games. Board games are very fun too. I won’t talk about those because most of them have been out for over a decade. I hope you bring out the video games this family gathering and spread the joy. Or you could just watch the yule log.
What games do you find suitable to play with your family? Its that time of year where families join together to celebrate their differences. I’m looking into E rated games that everyone can enjoy, even that “Crazy Aunt” that just wants to take everyone shopping(or tries to escape family time). This person might need some help too, maybe someone who knows what a PS3 is…
Today’s question will be answered by me tonight, to allow for ample thinking time. Also, any comments will be toiled over and raced upon in tonight’s post.
Most games require that a player follows a certain rule set while playing a game. Designers decide on goals and objectives that the player should complete to reach “the end”, which usually results in a reward. Most games are played out this way. For example, in Red Light Green Light kids line up in a row and can not advance to an end point until the “officer/traffic light” yells “GREEN LIGHT!!” When the “officer/traffic light” yells “RED LIGHT” everyone must stop. The objective is to gain as much ground as possible in between the green light and red light. The goal is to reach the end point before the other kids. These goals and objectives are set in stone, but how the kids accomplish reaching the end point is not set. Maybe there is a kid that can run faster than everyone else. A less able kid might hold this kid back sacrificing position for the greater good. There might be another kid that decides jumping is the best way. If you are in the air when “red light” is called you will obviously have some extra time before landing to travel further. All of these actions could be allowed, and all of them are unique to the kid’s preference. They are playing a game, and they will have fun their own way.
Enter video games. Video games are computer versions of childhood games. We play video games to have fun. I believe that people will perceive games differently based on their preferences. Seraphina from Border House describes in “The dilemma of character versus game” how a player will sometimes chose a character based on looks and not how the character acts in the game. Near the end of the article Seraphina describes how a girl, “…found that Caprice didn’t really match her play style, but instead of looking to another character, she decided to call it quits right then and there.” I think that really describes how a majority of people feel about games. If the game doesn’t immediately fit their idea of fun they will not play, regardless if their version of fun develops later in the game, or in another character. Seraphina was spot on, and I don’t want to recap the whole article so just read it!
How does this all fit together? Like a jigsaw puzzle…because people will force their way of fun into a game, especially if it is a game they know well. Who hasn’t played a racing game and decided to race around a track backwards? I played Roller Coaster Tycoon a lot, and when I was bored I would make a theme park with no exit, just to see what people would do. In Super Smash Brothers Melee, Donkey Kong can wrap his arms around another player, so my cousin would grab other players and jump to the death. This didn’t exactly benefit him, but it was fun. There was the Corrupted Blood design that allowed for players in WoW to cause extreme chaos, and altered the roles that people played. There is the Red vs Blue series which made a multitude of videos following the lives of Halo characters. There are countless other videos that have been made with countless games. Fun isn’t some generic soup. People will always explore ways to have fun in games.
Then come the cheaters. Playerssometimes like to exploit games to have fun, sometimes at the cost of another player’s fun. This is a blurred line at best. A general rule is if it hurts someone don’t do it. Don’t break your friend’s arm when they are laying down some heat in Mortal Kombat. How can we measure hurt in games though? Especially in online games where a countless number of people interact with each other? Any action could steam up another player. A player might do the train a thousand times in WoW while following someone. A player might aggro a ton of enemies and run them back to a camp. A player might camp a spawn point in an FPS. These scenarios are possible, and they are within the limits of the game. They may be annoying, but if someone is reaching a new level of having fun, is it really an evil? There are the cases though where people alter the code of a game. I don’t really see anything wrong with this, as long as it is played locally. If all the players agree to playing the hacked game, then there is no problem. Each player has the same advantage and mechanics as the other players. If a player uses code alteration to gain an advantage over other players, then its an evil. Like I said, cheating is a blurred line, and there will always be discussions over what can be defined as cheating. I will leave that argument to others.
Creating your own brand of fun in a game is natural. In fact, I might just play Tetris upside-down to see how it works. Explore games on your own! When you think you have done everything possible, well, come up with your own game inside the game. Don’t be discouraged by people saying “You are playing that wrong”, or, “Isn’t that T.V. a little close to the bathtub?”. Old games can become new again! New games can become old, and then new again! Old bread can become stale, so throw that out…
This morning I asked the question: “What makes a suspenseful horror game?” Well, I’ve had time to reflect and now will state my beliefs.
There are obviously many variables that aid in making a suspenseful horror game. First are “physical” elements, such as the visuals to sounds. Second are “psychological” elements, such as fear or relief. Third are those little gremlins that work inside your body, tirelessly cranking wheels and cogs that operate your sense of being. I would like to focus mainly on the first two elements, and leave the third one to scientists.
1) Visuals. Some people are only frightened by visuals, and why not? Visually a creature can be quite daunting, especially if it pops up unexpectedly in a video (thanks youtube). A monster in a horror game needs to be memorable, which is usually accomplished with huge spikes and drool. If I turn a corner and there is an old gnome wearing overalls with a century old beard I’m not going to be scared. If I turn a corner and there is a gnome with spikes all over his body and his eyes are on fire, well I might just yelp. Size matters too in this department. If I turn the corner and see a foot I would probably pan up in horror. Tall people freak me out, I think it has something to do with a dominating presence. Maybe its just the thought that they can fix lightbulbs easier. Tall people are fine, don’t worry. Horror games and movies have really advanced in the visual department. Just look at the difference of the 1931 Frankenstein and this man’s description of a regenerator (may contain some strong language) from Resident Evil 4. As you can see horror has become more graphic, more obscene, and darker. Its not just what a person can see either. Absence of a visual can lead to the imagination creating its own creature (which is often fitted to personal fears). This leads to a bold point, and a transition to sound…
Suspense isn’t always what is seen, it is what is unseen as well.
2) Sound. Sound effects and music adds a substantial weight to suspense in games. When a game goes silent you know something is amiss. Then there are those chords that make the hairs on your neck stand up straight. The worst are those, “BAM SHRIEK!!!!” hahaha, we made you jump because of a loud noise. Sound affects the mood of a game more often than we think. The best use of sound in a horror game is a recurring sound effect. Shuffling feet, or a groan, so that you know something is always just out of eyesight. The best sound effect is in Doom: the footsteps of the Cyberdemon (its hard to hear in the video but if you played the game you will agree). When fighting the Cyberdemon there are a lot of things on your mind, such as, “why is there a 12 foot demon with a machine gun for an arm?” While you try to run away and find ammo the footsteps are clearly reminding you there is a Cyberdemon on your tail. Its a death march, its constant, and it represents a horrifying creature only a few steps away. Ca-chunk, ca-chunk, ca-chunk…
Sound effects are most effective when they clearly represent an object of horror. Just hearing the sound effect somewhere else can spark the memory of a demon chasing you.
3) Fear. Many people fear many things. I fear writing about such an ominous and also vague emotion.
4)Relief. When you know you have conquered over an almost impossible task you feel a rush of relief. This often works for horror games. After a boss fight, or some chase scene, there needs to be a sense of relief. A kind of down-time where the player can relax. If there is constantly a flow of scary images and events then the player will feel overwhelmed and will not keep playing. What would be the point? Bombardment can work in small doses, like a chase scene where the creature appears to be gone, but actually pops out ten seconds later from a shortcut. That will certainly be scary, but if such a scenario happens all the time the player will suspect that such events occur all the time in the game and will not let their guard down.
Suspense is all about letting a player know that x proceeds y and whenever x happens they should expect y. Scaring people is about altering that time from when x has occurred and y is about to happen.
If I tell you that when I sit in a chair it will hold me, then you will believe its true, especially if I sit in the chair. Suppose however that the second time I sit in the chair it is crushed and I fall to the ground. I’m sure you would be startled, because generally if I sit in a chair once and it holds me then it will do so repeatedly. Now, suppose I buy a rickety old chair to replace the first one. Every time I go to sit in the chair you will suspect that the chair will be crushed. It never is crushed, but you know the possibility of the chair being crushed exists. Over time you might overcome the fear that lurches your stomach every time I prepare to sit. This is what suspense is, knowing that something unexpected can happen with startling results, but also not knowing when the event will happen again.
There are a lot more details that go into creating suspense in a horror game, this obviously just scraped the surface. I’m sure I’ll think of more latter, so watch out!
What makes a suspenseful horror game? I suppose this also extends to movies, books, and real life situations.
Today’s question will be answered by me tonight, to allow for ample thinking time. Also, any comments will be mulled over and touched upon in tonight’s post.
Quasiternal 