Out of all of the main game mechanic categories, I think that probability will be my weak spot when designing games. I like doing math, and I consider myself pretty good at it, it's always been something that has come easily to me. The Art Of Game Design laid it out very simply and made it seem pretty easy, but in an actual game, it usually isn't just one simple probability. It's probability after probability after probability that all interact with each other to create a more complex system. This isn't so much the case for board games; they usually do just have one simple chance mechanic like a spinner, die, or drawing cards from a deck. In video games though, there are usually a lot more numbers. Every attack has to have some chance of missing, everything has a bunch of different stats, and all of these numbers interact with each other. Now, this isn't always the case. There are some games that still do have simple probabilities, but for the most part, popular games nowadays tend to be more complex. I am terrible at creating a balanced system of numbers, stats, and probabilities. It's a very difficult thing that takes a lot of trial and error, and I don't think I have the patience to do that. Math is always taught as the one subject where there is a simple way to find an answer, but theoretical math is very different from practical math, and I think probability is going to be one of the most difficult aspects of designing games.
0 Comments
Once again this post will be based on Jesse Schell's The Art of Game Design. In this section, Schell talks about "problem statements" or statements that determine both your goal and any constraints. It's clear why these statements are useful since they give you something to work towards and also so that you know your limits before you start. This post will be about I time I started a long term project without a problem statement, and why I wish I had had one to begin with.
So, way back in sixth grade, little me decided that I wanted to write a book. I sat down at my computer and began typing. I didn't know where the story would go, or what characters I wanted to have; the plot was entirely based on whatever came to my head as I was writing. Now, the average person probably would have given up on this book at some point, but miraculously, I stuck with it. Sure, there were long periods where I didn't write anything, but around the end of ninth grade, I finally "finished" the book. I say that because I knew there was a lot of editing to do if I wanted it to not be a piece of crap. Obviously, my writing style had come a long way since I started writing the book, and it was good to go back and fix all of the grammar mistakes my younger self didn't know needed to be fixed. But it wasn't just that. Somewhere along the way, I had come up with a problem statement: "How can I write a book (series) that challenges the idea of good and evil?" Originally, all I had wanted to do is write for the sake of writing, and for the first seven chapters, the story had just been floating around aimlessly. I wouldn't say these chapters were boring necessarily, but they had no greater purpose, they were just about my main character's life. In chapter eight I finally introduced my main antagonist (that took a while!) and from there things started to pick up and that's why I really solidified my problem statement. Reading back through it, I realized I was going to have to entirely rewrite the beginning of the book, because it wasn't working towards a purpose at all. Had I started out with a clear idea and problem statement, this editing wouldn't take so long, and I could probably be done by the end of this year. Now, I'll be lucky if I can finish the book before the end of high school. Having such a clear problem statement now will help me during the editing process though since I'll be able to make sure that what goes in the final cut is all important, and helping me reach my goal rather than meandering. Overall, if I can stick to the problem statement, the end result should be much more interesting. This is yet another post based on the writings of Jesse Schell in his book The Art of Game Design, specifically about games and their themes, and how they use different elements to support those themes. For this post I'll be talking about one of my favorite games Portal 2.
Coming up with just one phrase to signify the theme is a bit tricky. It's definitely an experience-based theme, set in a sort of science-fiction world. There are two main themes that really intersect here: the fantasy of living in a world where portals exist, and discovering things about Aperture Labs in order to escape. These can come together into one central goal, surprisingly, with a phrase said throughout the game: "Thinking with portals." It's a bit broad, but it captures the idea of using this fantastical technology in order to solve problems. Now let's look at how different elements are used to support this theme. Mechanics: The game has strict rules about what you can and can't do. Portals can only be placed on portal surfaces, limiting where you can go, and you can only have two portals at a time. One portal will lead you to the other, and if you only have one portal, it won't do anything. While it isn't easy to die, there are ways to do so like not going fast enough in boss battles, bumping into a turret, or falling into the water which adds a sense of danger. The mechanics make the puzzles more captivating and challenging by limiting what you can do and they create a more realistic atmosphere by having ways to fail. Aesthetics: The entire game is beautifully design to look like a run down lab. Everything is nicely modeled to fit in with the sci-fi theme. The different colored portals lets you differentiate between them, which is important for knowing which one to fire next. The music is incredibly important, adding urgency to certain scenes, and eerie, empty feelings in others. It's an amazing soundtrack, and everything sounds sort of techno to give it that robotic feel. The rumble pack in the controller is also often used to emphasize the effect of things crashing and give weight to your person as they land from a large fall, making it feel more real. Technology: Valve did an incredible amount of work in designing a physics engine for this game. Sometimes is can be mind-boggling to look at different angles through the portals because it's something we never see in real life, and yet, they manage to make it feel real. Without a great physics engine, the puzzles wouldn't work at all and the player would likely get frustrated having to learn all the in game mechanics as well as the physics of the game. As I said before, using the rumble pack when it's played with controllers was also a great choice for making the game feel real. The tech allows the game to be real despite being so fantastical. Story: The story is largely told through audio. GLaDOS, and later recordings of Cave Johnson are what really get the story across. Yes, there are physical things in the game such as Ratman's drawings on the wall and cut-scenes, that help tell the story as well, but for the most part it is entirely told through the audio as you try to figure out the puzzle, with only minors clues that you can see. This is very effective though since the story is supposed to be mysterious, and slightly up to interpretation as it keeps the player looking for little details, like Cave Johnson's posters on the wall, or a project from the bring your daughter to work day science fair with Chell's (the player model's) name on it. The mystery of it makes you want to progress through the game to learn even more. Overall, the elements work incredibly well together to create a well developed world where portals existing simply feels natural. I love this game for so many reasons, and the way that the theme is enforced by the four main elements certainly includes many of them. |
AuthorHi, I'm Abi, a DSA student who likes games, drawing, writing, and acting. Archives
February 2020
Categories
All
|