I recently gave a presentation along with Mike Daly from Emergent Game Technologies about game jams for the Triangle Game Conference. Here are the slides and notes from the presentation in handy PDF format.
If you have any further questions feel free to email me.
Sunday
5:00 AM - final progress for tonight. The deadline is looking grim, but I’ll keep on trucking.
2:50 AM - woah, is it Sunday already? I’ve lost track of time these past few hours. Staying up late to make a final push into prototyping, lots of little details getting in, but still far away from completion.
Saturday
8:35 PM - as always with these things, the key is to expect delays. Right now it looks like I’m going to be pushing hard to finish the prototype tonight. Art assets (and dinner and other things) have slowed me down a bit.
4:20 PM - art’s coming along with some little tweaks. The next goal is to get to tier 2 (playable prototype) by midnight tonight. Taking a short break to get outside, enjoy the nice weather, and then come back recharged and ready to go.
2:40 PM - basic systems for the most part are in place. Consider the first milestone reached. Now I’m back to Photoshop drawing new art assets up for the prototype.
Here’s a picture to give an idea what’s going on now!
1:55 PM - bullets are going in, right now they fire at various points, now I just need to assign responsibilities and destruction and we’re almost at tier 1!
12:30 PM - quick break for food. Things are progressing alright, I feel that I can be done with the 1st tier of development (systems in place) by 3 PM or so. That includes basic spawning of enemies, attack cycle, a little bit of resource management, and player interaction.
10:45 AM - rested and ready to work again! This current push is to get basic systems within the game working.
3:45 AM - First images!
3:20 AM - so my idea is basically that you are the advancing wall of doom. Or rather you control the wall of doom (which is a massive machine ala FernGully). In a lot of ways I imagine it to be an inverse tower defense-style game. Unfortunately, it looks like this isn’t the most original idea, but it’s something that clicked early on. I’m going to do a little more work tonight before getting some sleep and starting again tomorrow, getting the basic systems in place as quickly as I can.
1:25 AM - game idea hatched and now working on the design doc and schedule. Trying to apply lessons learned from the Global Game Jam (and the lessons I’m going to teach when I present at the Triangle Game Conference). So even in 48 hours it helps to have a schedule to adhere to and a design document to follow, even if everything goes to hell at the end.
Friday
11:11 PM - I’m taking part of Ludum Dare 14, a 48-hour solo game-making competition. The rules are simple, finish something under the theme in 48 hours working alone and making everything from scratch. The theme for this one? Advancing wall of doom. I currently have no concrete ideas, but 48 hours to go!
Last week Microsoft released the first bits of sales data to various creators of XNA Community Games. Community Games briefly are akin to apps for the iPhone. Unlike games for Xbox Live Arcade which need to go through a strenuous (and lengthy) certification process, XNA Community Games only need to be approved through a few simple metrics by fellow developers before being released. Community Games remain Microsoft’s way of opening up the Xbox 360 to interested creators who may not have the time or resources to release a full Live Arcade title. Although Community Games have been available since the roll out of the NXE late last year, up until now developers haven’t been able to get a glimpse of how their titles were doing outside of anecdotal evidence.
Thanks to some creators who were willing to publicly share their sales data the first results are in. And they are not very promising. While some of the higher-profile titles are missing, it seems highly likely that XNA Community Games are not and will not for the foreseeable future be a viable way for indie developers to earn a living. The news isn’t all bad though. As GamerBytes documents, in some cases the conversion rate for some games have been fairly successful. The problem in general seems to be the lack of general players for XNA Community Games. Microsoft for various reasons has buried these Community Games deep within the interface for the 360. Unlike Apple and the App Store, there is very little promotion or publicity done for games. And the user interface for Community Games themselves makes finding good games a chore, there are no easy filtering or rating system that would allow potential players to separate the wheat from the chaff.
It’s a bit of a shame because otherwise XNA Community Games have seemed to be gaining popularity and momentum as a platform for developers. And with a few tweaks its not crazy to think that Community Games could be a nice selling point for the 360, especially with interesting titles like Miner Dig Deep or Carneyvale Showtime. But until then, the XNA Community Games feels more like a sideshow for only the most dedicated 360 players.
No updates this week due to GDC guys! I’ll be back next week energized, refreshed, and re-inspired!
One of the games I’ve been playing for the past year or so has been Valve’s Team Fortress 2, their team-based multiplayer shooter with the unique Tex Avery aesthetics. It’s long play life is certainly in part due to the pretty solid design and loads of polish that makes it highly playable. And being a solely multiplayer experience the game is inherently designed to be replayable. But that alone doesn’t explain why this game has been one I constantly revisited while something like Call of Duty 4 hasn’t. For me, the real reason why I keep on revisiting Team Fortress 2 are Valve’s ingenious class updates.
A quick explanation is in order. For PCs and many console games nowadays its not unusual to see some level of support after the release of a game. Patches, minor tweaks are expected and many games get a few pieces of DLC and minor additions here and there. But recently games like Valve’s Team Fortress 2 and Criterion Game’s Burnout Paradise are at the forefront of what may be a new trend in games. The consistent release of (free) DLC at regular intervals to extend the shelf life and play life of older games.
Let’s take a quick glance at the aforementioned Team Fortress 2 class updates. Team Fortress 2 gives players 9 different classes to play (ranging from spies to medics to soldiers). Each class has its own unique weapons and skillsets that contribute to the battle in different ways. Valve since the release of Team Fortress 2 in late 2007 has released four class updates that significantly expand each class upon release with new weapons and abilities.
Burnout Paradise has experienced similar levels of support from Criterion. While not all the new content has been free, additions like motorcycles as an entirely new vehicle, new gameplay features like restarting events, and significant visual refinements have all been added over the past year for Burnout. And this doesn’t even include paid DLC like car packs and new gameplay modes.
These free updates are not just out of the goodness of these developers hearts, they represent good business practices too. Team Fortress 2 is more played now then at release and Valve has reiterated that each new class update brings along a significant sales spike on release. Burnout Paradise has also had some success especially as EA’s first significant downloadable title for consoles.
It’s a trend not only for major studios, but also for indie developers. Many web-based games are initially released in barebones form only to see each iterative release add new features and evolve the game into a more complete package. And many indie games are often released early to an “extended beta” where the end result is highly-shaped by player feedback and actual real-world play. This is increasingly a trend among iPhone games where releasing constant updates serves a duel purpose as not only a way to refine games, but also as a business strategy for keeping the game upfront in the iPhone App Store.
Extending the shelf life and play life of games can only be a good thing for both the developer and the player. It gives developers the ability to polish and refine after release and adjust their game to match expectations of players. And of course in business terms its far easier to develop enhancements to existing games to extend the sales of a game compared to developing a sequel. And for players it allows the opportunity to revisit older games as fresh experiences than having to churn and burn through games.
Not that iteration and refinement are magic bullets that will instantaneously extend the long tail so to speak. Updates need to be both substantial and meaningful, otherwise they fall under the guise of simple alterations and bug fixes like any other game patch. And there’s a marketing component involved also, it’s just as important to let players know about new updates so they can actually dig up these games and replay them.
In many ways, these updates represent the evolution of the now mostly-dead expansion pack that used to be de rigueur for the PC industry. They represent new opportunities to resuscitate games, keeping them in the forefront of players’ minds through constant play and word-of-mouth. They represent good developmental shortcuts in an industry increasingly looking for a sane development model. And in the best-case scenario they make games worth playing and replaying.
Recently I’ve been playing the addictive game Retro Game Challenge. Based off a long-running series in Japan called Game Center CX, Retro Game Challenge for us westerners follows the premise that you’ve been transported back in time by the vengeful and hapless gamer Arino to beat all the difficult games he was beset with in the 80s. This Mystery Science Theatre-esque setup is the flimsy excuse to basically have you play through a series of challenges through an anthology of classic 80s games.
Ah, but there’s a twist in this matter. In Retro Game Challenge, none of the classic games are actually real. The genius of Retro Game Challenge is that the developers have created loving homages to a number of classic titles for the Famicon/NES system. Cosmic Gate is based off Namco’s Galaga, Star Prince is Hudson’s Star Soldier, Rally King and its amusing adver-centric special edition to all the top-down racers of the era, Guadia Quest is Dragon Quest II, and the Haggleman series is a combination of Mega Man and Ninja Gaiden.
It’s clear that a lot of love and care has been put into both the creation and localization of Retro Game Challenge. Each game comes complete with a detailed manual and lovingly-rendered boxart. There are issues of classic game magazines complete with reviews, cheats, and editorials (and sly references to real game journalists). Even minor translation issues and bad engrish have been retained (Happy End!). And the games themselves are all more than decent, they all range from solid to outstanding in actual play quality. And the nicest aspect about Retro Game Challenge is the developers have carefully balanced the number of gameplay anachronisms that make these games quintessentially 80s while still retraining modern sensibilities about play.
This is most evident in Guadia Quest, a classic 8-bit RPG that screams Dragon Quest in every facet of its design. There’s still the need to deliberately choose to talk to people through menus, the battles are devoid of any animation, and you still have arbitrary item limits and random battle encounters. Yet the game itself comes complete with luxuries like having a journal so you can save anywhere at anytime, a spell that allows you to walk faster, and you level up in remarkably quick fashion. It’s nothing compared to modern RPGs from Japan, but these little additions allows players to remember a lot of the positive aspects of these old-school RPGs minus the frustration that generally accompanied them back in the day.
These tweaks in the retro game formula and other additions like Arino’s challenges allows Retro Game Challenge to remain fresh even after 20 or so years of game design evolution. I highly recommend anyone with a DS and nostalgia for NES games to pick up Retro Game Challenge as a refresher course on great retro games and a mini-lesson on the changes in game design since then. Plus, with a little luck we’ll see the localized sequel, Retro Game Challenge 2 in our near future.
Today we launched the brand-new website for Paranormal Puzzle Society. The game is still in the process of being developed, but as a well-known writer once said “Launch early and launch often.” We welcome all feedback to help us improve the game so please check it out!
At the DICE recently many videogame companies both big and small have talked about recent economic times and how they relate to the recent troubles of both publishers and and developers. Most people like EA CEO John Riccitiello have viewed the layoffs and disappointing sales of some big-budget titles as a temporary setback to the era of blockbusters and enormous games. And once these tough economic times are over normalcy will return to players and consumers and the trends of gaming will continue on as usual.
However, Nintendo despite the enormous success it has found with both its DS and Wii gave a more pessimistic view of the industry. Games, they argue, are not a recession-proof industry as so many others have claimed. And their answer for developers and publishers is simple: make smaller games.
It’s a claim that I’ve been championing for quite some time as some of the best recent game experiences have been through shorter games that knew exactly what they wanted to do and accomplished that in their shorter length. Games have naturally been gravitating towards shorter lengths just due to the practical realities of modern development. Few developers no matter how rich they are can make 50-hour epics nowadays. So rather than sell an epic game short, the better answer is to sell a small game big. Turn your small game into a Portal or a Gravity Bone and gamers will flock.
The final note from Nintendo’s talk is how they’re looking to bring indie developers onboard with DSiware. DSiware is the new downloadable service that will launch with the DSi and has a number of good games already come out for the service in Japan. Yet this is the first time I’ve heard of Nintendo actively pushing for indie developers to develop for the fledging platform. While it remains to be seen how many DS owners will feel compelled to upgrade to the DSi, it seems like another avenue worth exploring for the indie developer.
One of the unfortunate drawbacks of the modern game creation process is the loss of stylistic lineage that can be traced directly back to a company or even a single person. Directorial influence can be difficult to discern when there are dozens if not hundreds of people involved in the creation of a game.
Of course it didn’t use to always be this way. One only needs to go back two decades or so, when games were created by small teams or even a single person to see how influences could be attributed. It was not unusual for publishers on these older systems to directly tell gamers who was responsible for the game on the box much like movies with their “directed by” bylines.
Recent indie games harken back to those days. It’s easy to tell the difference between Edmund McMillen game and a Nifflas game. And no person or company for that matters best displays this singleminded adherence to a particular style then Jenova Chen and thatgamecompany.
Last week’s release of Flower for the PSN is the 2nd official release for thatgamecompany and the 3rd in a line of games that clearly demonstrate the similar design principles and concepts. These games (Cloud, flOw, and now Flower) in one way or another derive influence from Chen’s thesis on flow in games.
The thesis is mainly concerned with how to optimize changes in game difficulty to accommodate the best experience for players. But I feel the particular style that thatgamecompany’s games have adhered to this point have expanded beyond just that. Game difficulty still is largely in the player’s control, but these games have also minimized the chance of failure or outright done away with the idea. Players can do better or worse in these games based on their own metrics, but the game doesn’t consider or punish or reward players for better or worse play other than an increasing the visual and audio stimulus. The end result is a relaxing environment where players are free to explore, experiment, and do nearly whatever they please at their own accord.
Cloud, flOw, and Flower also focus heavily on the audio and visual components to entice players into this state of ease. The graphics tend to favor the bright and well-lit, there’s a softness to their images that takes the edge off. The audio is similar, the music and sound effects are warm and inviting, stuff that wouldn’t necessarily be out of place in a New Age album. In some moments there are even hints of a bit of procedural music as the sound effects are chimes and notes that tie into the main melodies in a soothing way.
Styles are useful and important. Useful because they allow players to implicitly follow and trust release to release from a company or person. Companies like EA or Ubisoft are too large to have a company-wide style. Even the individual dev teams from these companies have to many cooks in the kitchen to effectively parse, at best you hope that certain directors or designs you know and trust can keep the soup from turning out bad. But when there’s a new release from thatgamecompany people already know a lot of what they’re going to get. And fans of previous games can take comfort in trying out newer or older releases with that knowledge in hand.
And these game styles I feel are important for the maturation of games as art. It becomes important for us as consumers of games, as observers of games, and critics of games to see such direct descendants from game to game. Going from Cloud to flOw to Flower you can see the changes, the lessons learned, and the subtle nuances each new game adds or subtracts as the company, the development team, and the creator grow into their own. These personal styles for a company or specific developer/designer aid in this analysis.
It’s a wonderful aesthetic and style that thatgamecompany has found for itself and its a wonder that they’ve taken such a contrary position to just about all the norms established in the game industry and managed to find themselves Sony’s poster boy for the PSN network and their own indie contingent. Here’s to more “flow”-ful games in the future.
Killzone 2 is coming out soon for the Playstation 3. This much-hyped tentpole release from Sony and Guerilla is aiming to set the standard for technical excellence and polish for the HD-generation of consoles. I have yet to play either demo or game, but judging by the numerous reviews it’s definitely no slouch. And by in large most critics have agreed with near-unanimous acclaim and good reviews.
Let me repeat that before we continue. Killzone 2 has gotten good reviews everywhere. It’s current MetaCritic score (for what it’s worth) is a 92. Many publications has bestowed upon it their highest possible rating. There are no negative reviews out there. No one has yet to say anything poor about Killzone 2.
So you think with all this good press no one would be complaining right? A good game for people to enjoy might create a lot of discussion, but shouldn’t create rancorous debate. Well, you would be wrong. Killzone 2 perversely has become one of the hottest topics in games.
Apparently a series of perfect scores and universal praise is not enough to satiate the Sony fanboys out there. One only needs to look at their responses to Edge Magazine’s review which game Killzone 2 a 7 out of 10 (which is still a “good game”). Or the complaints about IGN’s 9.4 review for the game. Even Adam Sessler has been under siege over X-Play’s 5/5 review of the game.
Fans are attacking a show because their perfect score wasn’t good enough for them. A perfect score was not nearly enough adoration for Killzone 2.
Console fanboyism is par for course in games. Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo fanboys have been duking it out for as long as each respective company has been invested in games (and Sega fanboys before them and so on and so forth). But the level of vitriol is so high for Killzone 2 that even observers normally immune to such outbursts are taking notice on the sheer insanity of the rants.
Killzone 2 is the recipe for the perfect storm of fanboyism. It’s a huge blockbuster title for a languishing console whose fans have had little to cheer about in recent months. The game has been on a rollercoaster of hype for over a year. The quality of the title is high enough that fanboys feel justified in belching out their raves. So the fanboy pride wasn’t unexpected entirely. What was unexpected is the way they’ve turned on the people who are supposedly on their side. The Edge review was low enough that the backlash could have been anticipated. But arguing IGN or GameTrailers or X-Play’s overwhelmingly positive reviews?
These people shouldn’t be taken seriously regardless and there’s no doubt they represent a small, but very vocal minority of actual readers and viewers of these various publications. But reactions like this don’t exist within a vacuum. Too many sites and publications foster this sense of separation within the games community. PS3 gamers are separate from 360 gamers are separate from Wii gamers are separate from PC gamers. These divisions are not built on similar interests, but just ownership of a particular piece of hardware as if that fact had some meaningful distinction. Implicitly they shift the debate within games. If I had my way, I would be arguing that Killzone 2 for all its polish and technical excellence doesn’t seem to be doing much of anything new or original. The actual debate should be focused on whether we as an industry reward canned polish too much. But because of the brouhaha over these reviews hardly anyone can mention such issues without being branded as biased due to singling out Killzone 2 as if he or she had some vendetta against the Playstation 3.
I don’t know if we’ve reached a tipping point when it comes to hyperbolic overreaction amongst fanboys. That’s something we’ll need to judge after the Killzone 2 wave has passed. And while the PS3 has a couple of heavy-hitters left in their lineup this year (Heavy Rain, Uncharted 2) I wonder if anything can get the fanboys as rabid as Killzone 2 has. And thankfully for the most part the reaction has been shock and indignation from various observers, the responses from the fanboys are pretty much self-parody.
And thankfully, my blog is inconsequential enough that I should be immune from fanboy criticism.
Subscribe via RSS