Notgames Forum
March 28, 2024, 11:32:38 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home Help Search Calendar Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25
331  Creation / Notgames design / Educating players to experience on: February 10, 2010, 10:23:48 AM
An interesting problem has risen during the testing of our upcoming game and although not that common so far, a few testers have been guilty of it.

The problem is that players play the game as "game" and instead of experience it, think of it in very rule-like terms. For example, they save on items that are intended to be used in case they need them later and are thinking in terms like "the darkness level needed in order to hide". What this means is that they are trying to take apart the mechanics during the game and then try to abuse them. This can be very hurtful for the immersion and especially regarding the suspension of disbelief when dealing with death and failure.

I know that Tale of Tales have gotten a bit of this, with comments like "what use are these flowers I can pick up?". Some players simply cannot see that some interaction can have intrinsic value and need some kind of game rule related boost. It is a bit like reading ahead in a book to see if a character dies and then complaining about there being no suspense.

Should one try to educate the players to play other kinds of games? Or should the attitude be "screw em"? I am all for education, but not sure how to do it, especially since it could mean exposing your tricks (eg "you cannot really die so just imagine you can"). The problem has not been so bad for us, since we still have many "gamey" aspects, but the further from normal gameplay one goes, this problem most likely get larger.
332  General / Check this out! / Re: More Hall of Shame on: February 09, 2010, 09:21:55 AM
It seems like the author is frustrated with games that does not explain enough of how they work, a fair thing. But then he uses that annoyance in order to say that the game themselves are pretentious etc, which I think is wrong. I have not played Path yet (sorry Michael Smiley) but I played The Void recently and cannot agree when he writes that the entire game is crappy and void (ha ha...) of fun. The problem with The Void is that it is super hard and very unforgiving and this could have done better. But saying that the entire game is pretentious, artsy crap is just wrong to me as I think it is a really interesting game that would have been more compelling to play if not for the difficulty and technical problems. It is also disturbing when journalist on more non-mainstream sites, wants games to stay simple and all about instant thrill entertainment (which is kinda implicitly implied in the text). Even if one does not like games like the marriage, how can one be mad for people trying out new stuff? If it sucks, well at least we learn something new...

To sum up: What he is saying just don't make any sense. Even worse is that he implies that games should be about "fun fun fun", which is a kind of sad mindset.

I shouldn't be upset with game journalists because then I would go around unhappy all the time, but some times it feels good to rant and vent Tongue
333  General / Check this out! / Hall of Shame on: February 05, 2010, 09:07:29 AM
Sometimes other developers confirm our worst nightmares or just say stuff we might not agree about in terms of not games. Thought we could use this thread for that sort of thing. Hopefully it can act as a sort of motivation when trying to make notgames and wondering if it all is really worthwhile Smiley

First out:
Quote
Macbeth the game is something I've been thinking about for years, but now, I think the emotional quality that games are achieving and the value level of the acting and the sound work makes it possible. The thing is, the unique quality of games is being interactive; it's about action and killing things and pursuing those mechanics is tricky when bringing in classic media; Dante's is more of a violent interpretation of the poem for example. Macbeth would be great, though; there are witches and a supernatural experience along with plenty of intrigue and murder.
- Jonathan Knight of Visceral Games (Dead Space and Dante's Inferno)

This just confirms the bias i have written about before. Some developers have a really narrow definition of what a game is and as such can only imagine doing certain things in them. I think quotes like this shows that it is really worth to make something different to show what can be done!
334  Creation / Notgames design / Re: My research: Player, Agent, Designer and Symbiosis on: February 04, 2010, 10:01:55 PM
Your talk about sounds as a descriptive feedback as really spurred me to try and fit more of that into our upcoming game. It is a very generic way to interact so it should be simple to have it at many places and I think it could be quite effective. The hard part is just figuring what kind of sounds that make sense, the grated fence and slime are simple things, but what other surfaces does this work with and how far can it be extended? For example: Would be be okay if a hot surface created a *fzzzz* sound and had the character say "ouch"?

As a side note, I have worked a bit with haptics too and while interaction is made a lot harder (since u have to have a 3d pointer!), it is soo awesome to feel textures of objects. Just rubbing the pointer against a slippery surface made all feel so real. There is Haptic version of Penumbra where you can feel the flesh of dead dogs and it is supposed to be really disgusting Tongue Unfortunately (fortunately?) I have not had the chance to try that though. Anyway, would be nice to have this as a kind of poor man's haptics.

More regarding player immersion: Emotion forcing when using sounds can be really effective and does not feel as intrusive as I first would have thought. The examples of this is heart beat sounds and breathing. When heartbeats are heard (after the player has been running, etc) it really feels (at least to me) like my own pulse as gone up and I make the connection that the pulse is mine and not the protagonist's. Same with breathing, where I have actually found myself changing my own breathing to match what is heard (I have also read that when creating Mirror's Edge, Dice reported that testers did the same). Perhaps there is more to explore in this area and more emotions can be transfered to the player so that they feel that it is their own (rather than the protagonists)? I like your idea that there is sort of an agreement between player and game regarding this, gonna try and keep that in mind when exploring more as it seems like good base to start from when laying out the "rules".

As you said, this is fascinating Smiley

Are you aware of any other research in this area? It seems like it would be well suited for experiments.
335  Creation / Notgames design / Re: My research: Player, Agent, Designer and Symbiosis on: February 04, 2010, 03:57:38 PM
I agree that iconic with effects is the best way to do it and now I am interested in exploring that further Smiley In penumbra we had this on some stuff, for example "touching" a grate fence played a "metallic rattle sound" and a slimy larvae creature played a "squishy" sound. Sound is such a powerful tool as it connects better with the imagination too (as far as I know, humans use sound more for clues than for actual representation.). Sounds are also easier to make "real" in a game.

However, iconic will only be able to convey simple meanings (or perhaps I am wrong?), for example it is harder to describe the functioning of some apparatus by just a sound or symbol. I guess that one can pick and choose, and go for text when needed. I like the comment that having text saying "you" makes the game a conversation with a designer, good remark! Perhaps the best is to make the remarks seems as from the character and then make the player embrace the role. If the comments do not push too much emotions on the player perhaps that is better too (meaning that comments are not of the form "it is a really scary hall", but instead say "it is a dark and filthy hall")
336  Creation / Notgames design / Re: My research: Player, Agent, Designer and Symbiosis on: February 04, 2010, 11:58:35 AM
I like you hypothesis on the immersion. Then one should kind of construct the character depending on if the focus should be on the world or a more personal level? It would be interesting to try this in a a game like half-life 2. How different will player react during the 20 (or so) opening minutes depending on if Gordon stays silent or not.

The reason I am so interested in this, is because I want to explore the notion of self and consciousness through first person in games. I think it could be very interesting to actually experience various situations for "yourself" and doing so might help provide a deeper understanding. The thing I am think about is if one wants to have protagonist that gives comments, or not if one wants the biggest effect of experiencing these things. Comments from a protagonist could be really helpful in terms of describing the world and situations, but might perhaps be harmful in the making a personal experience.

An idea I am explore is to have comments in second-person so when interacting feedback can be of the kind: "The steel feels cold as you touch it". This would mean projecting feelings on to the player and I am curious what effect it has on the player's sense of "being".
337  Creation / Notgames design / Re: Player death and the suspension of disbelief on: February 01, 2010, 04:14:05 PM
Some quick notes:
The capture does not needs to be a puzzle, for example the player can find the place deserted or what not. Or just have some puzzle-less escape. I feel that a notgame should try and avoid puzzles unless they are optional and does not hinder the player from progressing. Of course that is up for debate, but I would like games to be interactive in away that they give freedom instead of being in the way (which is what puzzles do). I am sure you agree more on this, but just wanted to state me position Smiley

Of course death should be avoided unless it fits with the story, but I think one could get away with a "The story should not end like this, should it?" thingie if the player does something truly stupid Smiley I know, best avoided, but sometimes it can give you more freedom as a desinger if you can allow for some immersion breaking but very unlikely moments. At least, that is my feeling after dealing with annoying physics for a couple of years Tongue

As for tension from the story, I think what one needs to think about is that bad things are out of the player's control. For example, if you walk through a dark corridor which ends with the protagonist dying, the death should be caused by outside forces (a killer jumping out from closet) and not from protagonist induced things (the character trips and the killer catches up). I think the latter makes the player feel cheated. Not sure though since I cannot really compare any experiences. All games are failure based so I guess we need to try this stuff out Wink
338  Creation / Notgames design / Re: Player death and the suspension of disbelief on: February 01, 2010, 11:14:08 AM
Another thing I thought: Would it be OK to kill the player if a really bad choice is made?

I would like to compare this to adventure games. Early adventure games contained situations where the player could get stuck because of something done earlier. For example, if you forgot to pick up a key in a room, it was impossible to escape the cell you later found yourself locked up in. This is of course really annoying, so it was gotten rid of quite quickly. However, it still exist to a certain extent in IF games because you have much more freedom there than in normal adventure games. For example, the player can always drop an item, and doing this at a really bad time, can make the player stuck later on. We also have the same problem with the physics in Penumbra, in some scenes it is possible to do some really "stupid" choices that will make you stuck. The reason why this exist is because the game would be very restrictive otherwise and needed to be very linear, which we do not want. So the rule: "If the player is really that stupid he earns getting stuck" is applied at times. Generally, the player will need to want to crash the game in order for it to happen.

Lets now go back to action sequences and player death. Lets use the player encounters bad guys while walking example again. Would there be actions where it would be okay to allow death? One could perhaps even say that death would not be immersion breaking in these cases because the player reacts to irrationally that she cannot possible be immersed in game. For example, if the player just runs up towards the bad guys with no weapons or anything then perhaps it would be okay to kill her off and restart the game from some previous position? I think this might be a possible design, but there is always the problem that what a designer thinks is obvious for everybody might be far from the case. Some play testing should solve that though.
339  Creation / Notgames design / Re: Player death and the suspension of disbelief on: February 01, 2010, 10:51:35 AM
Still you might wanna have shorter bursts of action in games with no failure too?

For example, take the novel The Road, which is far from an action packed novel, but the "action sequences" that are in it are quite important. Should this just be be skipped for games that have no failure, or is there perhaps some other way to do it? This is kind of dilemma I am in myself, since horror games are mostly about non-action elements, but often requires small bursts of action.

I think you mentioned in some post that the problem you had with failure is that he protagonist did not do what you wanted him to or what you would have done in real life (due to controls). Hence the problem with normal failure based action is that the mechanics take training (meaning failing a lot) in order to get the protagonist more closely to what the player would really like to do. Perhaps having "simplified" controls and instead make it as a choice is a way to go? I think that there must be some kind of fear of loss and stress involved and the trick would be to do this without making the player focus on underlying mechanics.

If the actions is constrained to short bursts it should be easy to control it and hence make the world react to the player's choice, adding a sense of the possibility of loss, but without ever making the player fail. An example would be if the player while walking encounters some bad-guys and now has to deal with this. The player could just hide in the bushes and wait for them to pass, but if moving close enough the protagonist is captured and then requires the player to escape from another place. In the end, the player will end up on the same story path, but since there where unknown consequences depending on the actions at that point, it should instill enough stress and fear of loss. I think simply having an element of the unknown could be what it takes to create a dramatic action sequence.

This is of course only viable for short instances. The permutations for many of these kinds of situations would become too much in the end.
340  Creation / Notgames design / Re: Player death and the suspension of disbelief on: February 01, 2010, 08:12:57 AM
Regarding Amnesia:
I do not want to talk too much about Amnesia yet, even though is a pretty small forum. Wanna keep some secrets for release Wink One of the thoughts I have had in my when designing stuff is that my father should be able to play it, yet we also wanna cater to a more general audience, so trying to find some kind of middle ground. What we are essentially trying to do with death is that the game never stops or repeats, the player should never find herself doing the same thing over and over. Instead what the player needs to do changes so that if you just push forward you will eventually move forward in the game. And while doing this, the game never repeats the challenges exactly the same. Do not except a revolution, but I think we are moving a little step in a new direction Smiley

Regarding blog post:
It was a while since I wrote that and I actually lean a lil bit more towards your views now. I think that the entire failure system that is built into games is by far its greatest baggage. I also think (like you say) that high tension can be made even though there is no risk of failure. As you said, failure is a bit like exposing the hidden mechanics and unveiling the illusion that the player is in. "See, you thought you where in a fantasy world, but as you can see it is just a simulation which will always repeat itself over and over again.". Failure is also a large reason why so many people do not play games, they simply can not move on.

This brings me to a another point: How would actions scenes look like in a game where there is no failure? I have a hard time imagining this, and I think there is a strong underlying bias in me, caused by 25 years of video game playing, that is holding me back. Of course, I would not like for notgames to produce the same kind of shooters that normal games do, but I think it would be interesting to discuss the possibility. Most (all?) games where there is no death, have cutscenes as soon as there is some action element, but that is no way to solve it. I am curious to hear ideas about this!
341  Creation / Notgames design / Re: Player death and the suspension of disbelief on: January 31, 2010, 02:08:33 PM
This is a really interesting issue! How did you like the system in braid where you could easily rewind? I think Braid is an interesting example, since although death is gone, you still need to get have obstacles (that sometimes are very tricky). This means, that having rewind does not take away the problem. At least in my opinion.

I have written a post a about this a while ago:
http://frictionalgames.blogspot.com/2009/07/nothing-will-save-you.html

In our upcoming game Amnesia we will also be a addressing this a bit. While there is still death, the game always changes after death, so the player never know what to expect. There is also no Game Over screen or similar, so the player stays in-game.
342  General / Introductions / Re: Robert Hodgin on: January 30, 2010, 09:57:07 PM
Also just gotta say that you have some made some really awesome looking stuff!
343  Creation / Reference / Re: Heavy Rain on: January 29, 2010, 11:12:14 AM
I also like the idea of criticizing games from this kind of stand point! Pointing out both good and bad stuff can be very helpful! While there is a certainly a need to approach things from a completely different angle, many advancements might be made by simply analyzing what there is.

Wasn't literature critique like this 100 years ago or so? From what I understand, many of the great authours where famous critics too! Not sure how this is/was in the movie industry. Perhaps someone with more knowledge can give more information on this?
344  General / Check this out! / Re: The Uneasy Merging of Narrative and Gameplay on: January 29, 2010, 08:59:53 AM
I liked the conversion and continuity examples. Show pretty nicely how some linear-media tricks does not work. It also makes it quite clear that the ,still way too common, buzz word "cinematic experience" is a dead end.

While speaking about flaws is nice, I did not see any suggestions on how to use the media though. But I guess that is our job kinda Tongue
345  Creation / Reference / Re: Heavy Rain on: January 29, 2010, 12:57:20 AM
Michaƫl:
Good stuff! Gave me something to think about! I hope Mr Cage peeks at the forum Wink
Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!