For our final week, we concluded this course by focusing on Fullerton’s experiences with creating games, how game designers are nowadays, and storytelling. In a video presentation, Fullerton tells us how she approaches narrative games, stating we shouldn’t settle for “formal, abstract, rational, challenging,” as it’s similar to playing safe or mainstream. We should instead strive and push for “dramatic, narrative, meaningful, sublime” types of games, meaning we should explore more of our innovative and narrative side. An example of this was when Fullerton worked on a game called “Cloud.” It originally had a complex narrative, but she chose to work on game mechanics first and the team ended up forgetting about the narrative. Her co-worker had to fill in the gaps with his own take, but it ends up being successful. From this experience, she states how gaps can be a good concept for games, starting with a light narrative framework and the freedom to add anything that’s needed, or let others/players fill it in. Instead of a simple hero story or set narrative, they want to focus on an open narrative and let players put themselves in it, tell their own narratives instead of the one provided.

Next, we looked at Fullerton’s game called Walden a game, based on a book about Henry David Thoreau living in the woods. We mostly just explored the environment, write down or read notes, and build equipment, which wasn’t much. When discussing over it, we see that the design of the game was intended and what Fullerton explained in her presentation. Rather than focusing on a heroic or cinematic story, we’re playing to experience emotions or thoughts and reflect on them. There’s no challenges or skills needed, just take in the visuals, narrative, and find the meaning of playing the game. This made me think of the games I usually play. While they’re definitely focused on skills or challenges, the narrative is always the most fascinating part for me. It makes you question why we’re doing this in the game, like fighting against aliens or what made the world post-apocalyptic. It’s even better if they let you explore it on your own, connect the pieces and feel a dedication to the story, characters, and the world created by the game.

Sources

Fullerton, Tracy. Game Design Workshop: A Playcentric Approach to Creating Innovative Games, 4th Edition. 2019.

GDC 2014: Tracy Fullerton – “Breaking the Mold: Experiments in Evolving Game Narrative from the USC Game Innovation Lab”

DMS Blog Post #9

During week 12, we talked about the accessibility of games. We described it as games being available to the public, it’s easy to use and understand, and how broad the game can be in terms of audience and the content. We then talked about the accessibility in games we usually play, such as tutorials, limited amount of controls, using familiar controls like WASD or joystick for movement, and an accessibility option (subtitles, brightness, difficulty mode, etc.). This really helps players familiarize themselves quickly with games nowadays, with previous knowledge of similar games and control layouts or introducing new mechanics slowly. Next, we looked at the Xbox Adaptive Controller, designed for people with disabilities. It adjusts things like increasing the movement, having bigger buttons, or use other senses to function. Though the controls are different, they’re easier to use and this allows them to play games that are intended for regular controllers or players. During the next class, we read some tips for accessibility and gaming. Some things we noted was that people with disabilities are rarely considered because it’s rare and they don’t want others to know or it can lead to harassment. That’s why games with accessibility options are always helpful and dependable, caring for all players.

For examples we looked at the games Jackbox Party Pack and Blindscape. What makes Jackbox very accessible is that it can be played on almost any devices. All we had to do was go on thier website on our phones and type in a passcode to get in the game. The game also has a cool feature where people can participate as the audience, where they spectate the game and vote for whoever they want to win. Another thing that makes it great is that there’s barely any restrictions, no right or wrong, and it can be relevant to real times like making the answers UB related. For Blindscape, it’s a free mobile game, and the whole experience was just a black screen and listening to a narrator. The purpose of the game was to experience how blind people would play a game, use what you hear and touch to progress instead of seeing. Though it’s not very accessible for us to play, it’s a good way to show what’s necessary to add for games to make it as accessible as possible.

Sources

The Jackbox Party Pack, Jackbox Games

Blindscape, Gavin Brown

DMS Blog Post #8

On week 11, we went over Fullerton’s chapter about balance in games. This was one of the important topics we covered because it’s what keeps players satisfied and a way to communicate with developers. In the chapter, Fullerton states “Players will do things that you could have never anticipated. There might be gaps in the rules that made sense on paper, but… they lead to irresolvable situations or gray areas.” This can be said for many online and multiplayer games, as it’s like a test between the players and developers for the direction of how playstyles will continue. The way players will play the game won’t always be the intended way, depending on what they’re allowed to do.

One game we looked over was League of Legends, which is like the definition of game balancing. Currently there’s over 140 playable characters in the game, and It’s hard to balance a game with that many playstyles and options. We also learned more about it from a video of their developer, Ghostcrawler. He mentions that there’s a lot to account for when balancing, such as catering towards lower or higher tier players, rewarding players for investing time in certain champions, and maintaining trust with the community. I agree with most of his points because League is also an esports game, where players are more strategic and experienced compared to regular players. If the developers were to balance the game just for esports, then it makes the game confusing or unfair for regular players. A good but repetitive system they use is to buff weak champions to make them playable and nerf the popular/strong ones so others can take their spots. This just shows it’s hard, almost impossible, to make everything balanced and equal without actively adjusting to player needs.

Another game we looked at was Hearthstone. It’s a turn-based card game and much like League of Legends, there’s a lot of cards and playstyles. In order to balance the game, cards have different costs and abilities, so the stronger ones would cost more and riskier, and lower ones are weaker. It’s important to know how to counter certain cards, choose the right ones, and know how to use them effectively. As shown in our playthrough, a starting deck against a much prepared and stacked deck will definitely be a disadvantage due to having outdated or weaker cards. This is all tied to balance, what’s fair for all players, and to not feel overpowered/underpowered.

Sources

League of Legends, Riot Games, 2009

Hearthstone, Blizzard Entertainment, 2014

Fullerton, Tracy. Game Design Workshop: A Playcentric Approach to Creating Innovative Games, 4th Edition. 2019.

For week 9, we talked about Fullerton’s chapter on player viewpoints and immersion. In the chapter, Fullerton goes over the 1^st person, 3^rd person, and overheard perspectives in games, and how they all provide a different view and angle of their games. Fullerton states, “The controls, viewpoint, and interface all work together symbiotically to create the game experience and allow the player to understand and have agency within the system.” This applies for many game genres like first person shooter, real-time strategy, adventure/story games. For the game to display their information effectively, camera angles matter a lot for player movements, and for developers to show what players want them to see and experience. In the game Destiny, it takes advantage of 1^st and 3^rd person view, 1^st person for using guns and favoring precision, while 3^rd person was used for swords or supers, giving players a bigger view when using larger weapons. In strategy or turn base games, it’s mostly overhead/isometric views as It’s intended for easier access to information and to multitask, to show players a broad view of what they have and the environment.

For our class playthrough, we watched the first parts of A Night in the Woods. It’s a 2D, third person game about animals living human lives. The story follows a cat named Mae as she goes back to her hometown, exhausted and irritated about everything, but finds unexpected things happening. What I really like about A Night in the Woods is that it feels relatable and grounded. There’s no action-packed story to tell, but instead we get to explore the setting and it’s characters as if it’s a normal day for everyone. There’s soothing music, entertaining dialogues, minigames, interesting characters, and choices to respond to some situations like Twine games. though the main viewpoint was 3^rd person view, the game sometimes switches it up to other viewpoints like 1^st person or overhead for minigames, which is a fitting experience. This also helps with the immersion, how you’re following one character and seeing everything through her, and the different viewpoints are to switch it up whenever the game wants you to experience something closely or in a different angle.

Sources

Fullerton, Tracy. Game Design Workshop: A Playcentric Approach to Creating Innovative Games, 4th Edition. 2019.

A Night in the Woods, Infinite Fall, 2017

During our classes before the break, we discussed Fullerton’s chapter about publishing and developing games. For developers, it’s generally up to them to create the game from scratch, and there are many roles within the development team such as programming, writers, artist, playtest, art, music, actors and more. For them to work closely and effectively, they must share equal amount of contribution and recognition, be as diverse and inclusive as possible. We can see the result of it in their games as well, like how the art, music, or story are the highlights of the game. As for publishers, it’s their job to make sure the developers meet deadlines, promote the game, and set expectations. Just like how developers need to work together, it’s also important that both the publishers and developers are cooperating for the game to succeed, or else the game can fail because it’s rushed, messy, or unfinished.

An example we mentioned was the Bungie and Activision split, which I’m very familiar with. Together, they made the games Destiny 1 and 2, but the criticisms were always about how rushed, easy and lackluster the game felt. Bungie originally had more plans for Destiny 1, but Activision wanted to push out a sequel as soon as possible along with more DLCs/season passes, which caused Bungie to rush crucial things like the story, game mechanics and loot variety. When Destiny 2 released, we saw a lot of returning elements from the first game, making it look like recycled content or a downgrade. After their split last year, Bungie now has full control over the Destiny franchise, and they promised its players they will continue to develop the game at their own pace and vision.

On Thursday’s class, we played the game Overwatch as an example of team-based games. Similar to Fire Emblem and board games we played, we had to choose a class/character of unique skills that can benefit the overall team like being the healer or tank. Through communication and strategizing, we’re able to take advantage of our characters’ roles, work together and win against the opposing team. I thought Overwatch was a perfect choice for what we learned that week. The game is very diverse and inclusive, the developers are always communicating with its players, values teamwork, and many there’s many indicators in game to show objectives or abilities.

Sources

Destiny 1, Activision, 2014

Destiny 2, Bungie, 2017

Overwatch, Blizzard Entertainment, 2015

This week in class, we went over the dramatic elements in games. There are many aspects that contribute to it such as the characters, story, progression, music, environment and mechanics. They all make games have a tension or challenge to it and adds more depth to the story. To me, characters felt the most important in that list because they make up the most of any narrative story. It’s important to give them personalities, make them relatable, and show development as the story progresses. Without characters, games won’t be able to tell the whole story in an entertaining or interactive way.

Going off that, we were assigned to bring in cards and create a story using them. My group had Pokémon cards, and by looking at the character traits and color we quickly created a story from it. After, we discussed that it’s easy to create a story in your mind, and just slot the given characters into the narrative structure. We all share the same value of a hero saving the day, so we add the friendly/popular looking one as the protagonist, and the ugly/scary one as antagonist. To flesh it out, we add more dramatic elements like history, personality traits and relationships between the characters.

Another interesting example we had was our next playthrough with the game Virginia (2016). From what we played, it’s a linear story about an agent working with her partner on a case. Unlike other narrative games, the visuals and graphics were cartoony and blocky, there’s no dialogue, slow gameplay, and we’re limited to just what the story provides, no exploring or finding secrets. All these contribute to making the game feel mysterious and unsettling, but also unique and beautiful. As players, all we can focus on are the characters and the environments, without the worry of obstacles or mechanics. We noticed that a majority of the other characters are white males, so it gives a feeling of loneliness and singularity. This overall is another reason why characters are important to the dramatic element. There’s no dialogue or objectives in this game, so we had to look to other characters for help through their actions, facial expressions, and personalities. We also follow the main character we play as if we’re living her life too. We see her morning routine, flashbacks of her getting the job as an agent and share her concerns about other characters. We can even look back at previous games like Half Life or Firewatch. It’s the characters that explains what’s happening in the game, helps players identify/recognize, and what’s their personal situation in the story.

On Tuesday, after reading Henry Jenkins’ article Game Design as Narrative Architecture, we discussed how games don’t have to tell a story to make it playable or interesting, that games “can be an abstract, expressive, and experiential form” (Jenkins). We listed examples such as Fallout, Minecraft, and Sims, explaining all those games are a form of spatial storytelling, where the environment explains more of the story than the narrative or progression. In Fallout, we’re thrown right in the middle of a post-apocalyptic world, and it’s up to the players to explore and feel the atmosphere of the game in order to be immersed. This can even apply to our previous playthrough with The Beginner’s Guide, where the creator tells a story by combining a variety of his friend’s unfinished levels, ideas, and background info instead of an intrinsic feature.

After the discussion, we delved more into spatial storytelling in our playthrough with Half-Life 2 and Firewatch. In both games, we start off in the middle of a story with some hints on how we got there. In Half Life 2, our only objective was to meet up another character, with little to no introduction about who you are and why you’re doing it. While progressing, we see a form of regime, enforcers abusing civilians in jumpsuits, a large tower looming over rundown buildings, and cameras/robots everywhere. We also interact with a handful of characters, and through the interactions or their personality we get a feel of who’s a friend or foe.

Moving on to the next game Firewatch, the dialogue between characters and flashbacks were the focus to tell the story. It felt as if we’re jumping between three different story paths at the same time. One moment we’re reading through the main character’s past, next becomes a walk in the woods and driving, then at a tower talking to another character. Though it was confusing, a story can still be found there, and through more interactions we’re able to piece the beginning, figuring that the main character was struggling with a past relationship and has taken the job as a fire watcher.

In both games, without an introduction or any storytelling, we had to consider everything the game provides to get a feel of the theme and plot, letting the environment tell the story. This shows that if there was only one clear story in the overall narrative of a game, then there’s no need for exploring, multiple characters with unique dialogues, or offering choices. 

Works cited

Jenkins, Henry. “Game Design as Narrative Architecture.” Electronic Book Review, July 10, 2004.

For this week’s lectures, we went through many activities regarding prototypes and game development, which gave us a better understanding of how games look like during the early stages. On Tuesday, in groups we had to create a game based on issues of current games. Our group focused on “pay to win,” games that rely heavily on in-game purchases to progress. We came up with ideas like buying certain spawn locations, starter packs, microtransactions, and weapon rarity. Doing this activity made me realize how games nowadays probably had no problem doing the same thing, as long as people are buying them and staying relevant.

On Thursday we did our first class playthrough on The Beginner’s Guide, a Steam game by Davey Wreden, based on his friend Coda’s ideas. The levels were unfinished, but the point was to understand the story behind every level design rather than the mechanics. It was a unique and beautiful game, but it wasn’t because of the gameplay or visuals. I found it in the narrator’s guidance and explanation for Coda’s designs, showing players how even the most simple or random idea can turn out into something brilliant. Overall, it really fascinated me how the creating process was better than a playable outcome, and shows how important it is to follow how you visualized your game to be.

After the playthrough, we presented our paper prototypes in groups. My prototype was based off the website Twine’s functions, which I hope to master in time to finish my project. What I liked about my group is that most of our ideas and designs were inspired from our last board game session. I was instantly familiar with many of their game mechanics, and I’m excited to see how the final versions turn out.

All these activities were to help prepare us for our solo project, coming off from brainstorming an idea. They were all very effective and inspiring, especially The Beginner’s Guide playthrough. I learned that rather than focusing on the outcome of my project or any game, the focus should be understanding your passion and vision of the game first, then go through the basics of developing and creating prototypes before coming up with final decisions.

                This week we went through some board games as examples and inspiration for our upcoming solo project, as well as learning more about procedural rhetoric and structure of games. On Tuesday we were assigned to bring in our own preferred board games and play them in groups. My group played Secret Hitler, a game I was already familiar with, but very refreshing to have new players explore and interact with. The goal is to have the Fascist players elect their Hitler player as chancellor, and the opposing team, Liberals, must prevent it. However, only the fascists know whose roles others have, so it’s up to the Liberals to form trusts and figure identities. While we had fun playing it a few times, we also discussed what the procedural rhetoric is and what mechanic/rule we can try adding in to make it different. We figured the procedural rhetoric was lying to win. As players, we can’t blindly trust others just because they made one favorable move or believe everything they claim. Only through interaction and communication can either sides can win, and that’s what makes it so intense and entertaining. One mechanic we added was the liberals can force someone to reveal their role after gaining enough power, which benefits them greatly since they know if that person is on their side or not. We chose this new mechanic because we felt the liberals were at a disadvantage having fewer liberal cards than fascists to gain power. Another thing I really enjoyed about this is that the board game requires players to also interact with other rather than with just pieces or dice. It adds a whole new mechanic that we can manipulate, and it’s not bound to the board and objects. A lot of factors are introduced, such as people’s personality, deception, persuasion, intimidation, and much more. The more we attempted the game, the more chaotic and confident we were, and it becomes an enjoyable experience.

                On Thursday we went over more about the designs and forms of games. After reading through Tracy Fulleton’s book The Structure of Games, we listed down certain elements and structures all games should have and what creators should think about. Things like what certain playstyle and players you want in your game, the objectives, rules, progression, and outcome. All these matters the most as it’s like a groundwork or to-do list for any game. Looking back at the board games we played last class and every other game I’ve tried, they were all enjoyable because of the same interest other players had, the rules and mechanics kept everyone on the same page, and the designs were very unique and creative.

One topic I found interesting during this week was from our class discussion on the reading Age, Race, Class, and Sex: Women Redefining Difference by Andre Lorde. In the article, the author talks about how differences between genders and race are causing distortions and dehumanizing between groups, particularly for women of color. I find this very intriguing because we’re reading this from the perspective of someone who’s deeply affected on oppression and separation, and representing a whole community against other groups. It also states how we grow up letting these definitions and labels influence us, and not thinking about the negatives until it becomes apparent. Lorde mentions that if we don’t pass on what we know and ignore the differences, “the younger members of a community view the older members as contemptible or suspect or excess, they will never be able to join hands… nor ask the all-important question, “Why?” (117). I find this to be true because it does feels like we’re taught to be accepted, you have to fit in or to feel above others. The thought of being raised to behave and love/hate certain people without question is starting to become reality as we’re diversifying more than ever. This part about growing up educated in diversity stood out to me because it wasn’t until attending university that I learn more in depth about race, gender and sexism. If we were to educate early and differently, would our environments be better and equal? Would this eliminate oppression, differences and sexism if it were taught at a young age?

Overall, I thought this reading was very insightful, as it gave us a smaller picture in a bigger problem. I usually see this struggle in oppression and equality between white people and others of color, but I now realize that there are also differences within groups that need solving as well. In the article, Lorde says “Our future survival is predicated upon our ability to relate within equality… we must recognize differences among women who are our equals, neither inferior nor superior, and devise ways to use each other’s difference to enrich our visions and our joint struggles” (122). From what the article shows us, in order to put aside our differences and join, we fist must acknowledge them and abandon old definitions that won’t serve anything but cause separation.

Works cited

Lorde, Andre. “Reading Age, Race, Class, and Sex: Women Redefining Difference.” Sister Outsider, 1984. Pg 114-123