Week 6: Game Design

Games Design, a pretty big topic, and with it comes a great deal of responsibility, if you don't have a good design you're not going to get much out of it. In a modern day game development company (obviously this is dependant on the size of the company and project) there would be a team of designers working together closely. Then this team would branch out into a number of areas such as lead designer, sound designer, level designer, character designer and so on. One quality all designers need is good communication, as the communication of ideas is what they do.

There are many stages to the games design process. These are started off by choosing a goal and a topic for which to base the game around. Then much research and preperation is done. The designer must immerse themselves in the topic, finding out information, details and anything relevant.

Next comes the design phase. This is divided up into three sub-sections.

I/O Structure - This is 'the system that communicates information between the computer and the player.' this includes everything from graphics to input method.

Game Structure - This is 'the internal architecture of causal relationships that define the obstacles the player must overcome in the course of the game.' So how to make the goal and topic into a workable system, and how the game would operate eg. how you would shoot/fight, and the tactics involved in these operations.

Program Structure - This is 'the organization of mainline code, subroutines, interrupts, and data that make up the entire program.' This structure is the vehicle which translates the I/O Structure and Game Structure into a real product.

All three of the structures must be created simultaneously, for they must each work together. Decisions made in one structure must be checked to see how they react with the other structures.

Now gameplay could be a term to describe how all of the above terms work and what experience they give you. A dictionary states that gameplay is the:
'Ambiguous term for the total effect of all active game elements. Refers to the holistic game experience and the ability of the game to command the attention of the player.

There are a number of things that are important to me when I play games, but i guess it depends on what sort of game I'm playing. For example if I'm playing a shooter, I prefere it to be realistic and a bit tactical. Even little details can win me over, such as if a character breathes heavily after sprinting of if the camera shakes when something explodes. What really impresses me is if a character moves realistically, reacting to the environment and whats going on around him/her.


One game that I thought did this well was Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter 2

But at the end of the day, no amount of realistic movement or camera shaking is going to get me to like a wrestling game.

Week 5: Writing About Games

After spend a fair few hours reading up on 'New Games Journalism' I came out with mixed thoughts, for each piece was unique and had certain qualities that I had never seen in games journalism before. 'Dreaming in an empty room: a defense of Metal Gear Solid 2' really dove deep into the game and analysed it in a way that I had never seen before, and it bought up some interesting points.

Whilst 'Possessing Barbie' dove deep into the mind of the gamer, showing how much we relate games to real life when playing them. Other examples such as 'Shoot Club: Saving Private Donny' and 'Going Planetside' were entertaining to read, and portrayed someones experience in an interesting manner but did not prove as intriguing as the first two I mentioned. (It seems a bit weird that im reviewing a review, but ah well!)

The issues that face reviwers are the fact that this is their opinion, and quite obviously people have different opinions, but I don't think that should be a reason for reviewers to make their reviews more objective. I feel this way because, to me, playing a game is an experience and if I'm reading a review hearing about experiences that changed someones view of the game is important. Sure features are important to understand the gameplay and how it works, but I would rather hear of how the reviewers jaw dropped than how many characters are available.

I often hear people say that you can't sum up a game with a score, be it 9/10, 87% or 3 stars, which is true, but the thing, is they have to. Why? Because sometimes people don't want to read pages and pages of information on the game, and how it captivates one. I admit, I would be like this sometimes. Take for example the new Ratchet and Clank game, I'm not a fan and would not shell out £45 pounds for it (the first Jack and Daxter was awesome though), but I took a look at the review out of curiosity, saw the score and though "meh". The score a game gets can also act as advert for the article itself, if I look at the score and it got 95%, I think "hmm this might be worth reading if the reviewer rated it this highly"

Recent Memories (Week 4 Continued)

So onwards with my history. I left you with my memories of the playstation and blowing up the Eiffel Tower, and soon I would be moving into the depths of the PS2.

I have always been a bit dissapointed with Sony at not coming up with a very original name for their new console, I mean, anyone can stick a number at the end of a name. I can make exceptions with games that have an arcade feel to them, because I think they generally don't have good storylines (or storylines at all for that matter) or if a film or game has a number and then a subtitle. For example 'Donkey Kong Country 2: Diddy Kong's Quest.

Maybe if Sony Had called it Playstation 2: The Games Strike Back, or Playstation 2: Return of the Games I might have been a bit happier, but the name stuck so that meant they HAD to name the next one the Playstation 3. I'd like to hear your suggestions on console sequel names! Ok, get this, whoever comes up with the best console name will win..........my respect, and nothing more.

The PS2 was great, from driving round a fictional New York running down tramps in GTA:3 to mowing down giant ducks in Timesplitters, and making the ultimate insult with Guybrush Threepwood (I've got a mate that looks like him by the way) , it really was a good console with great games.

So owning the PS2 and loving it, it was inevitable that I was going to get the PS3. Ok, so it hasn't had as much success as the Xbox 360 or the Wii (which I think is a novelty that I would play for 20 minutes and then get bored, and why is it encouraging people to fake doing stuff thats better to do in real life, the whole point of computer games, to me anyway, is to experience something new that isn't possible, or that I don't want to do in real life. I'd much rather play tennis than have character, that I made to look like me but who actually has the face of a mass murderer, inaccuratly replicate the game with crap graphics.)

I feel much better now, so let me tell you about my PS3, I think it's much better than the 360, which I do have, mainly for Gears Of War and Command and Conquer 3, partly because the PS3 feels more sturdy. Plus the fact that you don't have to turn the volume up to beat the noise of the fan. But all facts aside, I don't like Microsoft, because they ripped Apple off.

They say if you can beat them, join them, but I'm not joing Microsoft, I'm using them for my entertainment, so it's ok to hate them still.

Fear Of The Boring

When I look my posts I've made on my blog so far I often stop and ask myself, 'is this interesting?' But when I really think about it, I ask myself, 'am I trying too hard to make it interesting?' I know I can on a bit and reading my blog back I can see that some parts are boring but should I change them? I don't think so.

Take Crysis, for example. It's this beautiful world of living, breathing and functioning environments, with top end weather and sound effects, and advanced A.I. Giving you a realistic experience as if you were really there. But you know, Sometimes after a hard days work (whatever that is) I just want to mindlessly shoot human-sized ducks with an Uzi on an alien planet.

I mean, Crysis is pretty cool and all but sometimes I think they're trying too hard to be interesting. Timesplitters was that game that allowed you to mindlessly shoot human-sized ducks with an Uzi on an alien planet, and thats why I loved it, Because it let you make your own experience, not to be bound by the laws of real life. Timesplitters was stupid. Now how many Games Designers say 'Right, lets make a game that's stupid and makes no sense?'

'splitters was a rare thing (That was of course until EA got hold of Timesplitters 3 and sucked the soul out of the series by trying too hard) and I hope we see more games which don't take themselves so seriously and take the piss a bit more.

So I guess you guys will have to put up with the boring stuff for now, otherwise I might turn into EA.

(As you can probably tell by the post time, it's pretty late, and I can't sleep, so I hope didn't make too much sense for you)

Week 4: The History Of Computer Games: To the Millennium and Beyond!

So lets see where we are. It all started in the 50s, where we saw coin-ops, spacewars and oscilloscopes, then through the to the 80s and 90s in which we played the Master Systems, SNESs and playstations. Now onto the stuff that got me hooked for life.

The Playstation 2 was set free in March in Japan and November in Europe of 2000, and with it's smooth, detailed graphics and unrivaled gameplay at the time, it was sure to be a success. I remember looking close at the screen and dribbling at the tracks left by the snowboards in the original SSX.

Over the next couple of years nintendo release the Gamecube, and Microsoft release the Xbox, providing competition and creating some of the best games ever seen, such as Super Smash Bros. Melee, Grand Theft Auto 3 and Halo (though some people may disagree). These three consoles battled it out, until the time came when they decided more consoles were needed. Que the next generation consoles!

Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo each went for different stratagies when designing and marketing their consoles. Microsoft releasing their Xbox 360 before everyone else hoping to get a head start, whilst Sony took their time designing their PS3, a more high spec. console hoping to last longer and then their was Nintendo who aimed the Wii at casual gamers hoping to find a gap in the market.

At the moment the standings as of September 30th, 2007 are as follows

Playstation 3: 5.59 million consoles sold
Wii: 13.17 million consoles sold
Xbox 360: 13.4 consoles sold

Well thats about all the history I can give you without getting out my crystal ball, so on to current affairs.

When I signed up for this course I didn't kid myself thinking 'wow I'm going to make millions, live in a mansion with my super model wife and drive a Aston Martin DBS (what a car)', I just wanted to do something that I enjoyed and earn a living doing so. But I have to admit, all this talk of out-sourcing and the games industry transforming is making me wonder, is that even possible?

Recently in Game City, I attended a seminar all about the games industry, which if you've read my post about Game City you'd know that I thought was brilliant, but it did bring up certain issues. Like the Game Artist who said that it is best to specialise and choose one particular area, but how do I know what I want to do 6 weeks into the course?! He also mentioned out-sourcing and how the companies have a small design team that come up with the basis and then out-source it to a mass of people to produce for a smaller amount of time thus being cheaper. It made sense, and it made me think. But hey, we'll cross that bridge when we come to it.

Week 3: A History of computer games 1980s-1990s

So after seeing Atari formed, and pong born in the 70s, we move onto the 1980s. Just after a home version of space invaders was released for the VCS (or the Atari 2600), there was seen to be a bit of a crash in the games market. Magnavox released a game called K.C. Munchkin, which Atari thought was to 'similar' to pac-man and so sued them (as you do in America) and won.

Atari then released the highly anticipated version of Pac-Man for the 2600, which didnt represent the original arcade game at all! Together with the dissapointing E.T, the companies sales plumited like a plane with no wings and as a result, massive numbers of Atari's games ended up in a landfill in New Mexico (I wonder if they'd still work if we dug them up).

1983 saw the release of the Commodore 64, which outperforms any video games console to date, but with too many products on the shelves from a multitude of publishers, many third-party companies go out of business.

Next comes Alexey Pajitnov, with his mighty game Tetris in 1985. Tetris comes from the Greek root tetra-, meaning four, and Alexeys favourite sport, Tennis.

In 1986 the great war between nintendo and sega started with of the NES (Nintendo Entertainment System) and the Sega Master System. This part of the war was won by Nintendo with massive sales, crowding out Sega and Atari.

Then the market for Tetris explodes, and great contraversy is created by who owned the rights. There is a very interesting program made by BBC4 on this, which I suggest you check out if You get the chance. That with the release of the Gameboy, the Sega Genasis, the TurboGrafx-16 and Atari's handheld 'Lynx' was as busy year for all 4 companies.

Then in 1991 comes the release of the awesome SNES (so what if im a bit biased) and the iconic Sonic (see what I did there).
But even the release of Donkey Kong Country in 1994 can only just help Nintendo Catch up to the might of the sega Genasis.

Now that the Gaming Industry is starting to kick off Sony decide to jump on the bandwagon with their 32-bit Playstion, and chuck Sega off. Now Nintendo see this and decide to make a 64-bit machine, the N64. (Honestly, it's all about a bunch of blokes trying to prove who has the biggest CPU)

Whilst Sony and Nintendo battle it out, Sega try several atempts to jump back on the wagon with the Sega Saturn and the Dreamcast but never prevailing as the Saturn is never able to compete with the popularity of the PS and N64, and Sony releasing the PS2, which was just more powerful.

So we've seen Graphics advance from Pac-Man to Mario 64 in these 20 years, which I find astonishing when looking back at the previous 20 years. The advances where happening even faster and to a better quality, which was a good sign of things to come.

Continuing with my history we find me still on my SNES, and increasing my collection with the likes of Jungle Strike, Super Mario Kart and Jurassic Park(which is probably the hardest game I've ever played since there are NO save points in it!) Going back to Mario Kart, I can see that that was another big game in my gaming history, and probably because it was something I used to play with my dad a lot. We would battle it out in the mushroom, flower and star cups, and he was pretty damn good at it.

Then one birthday I got a playstation. This was probably in 1996 or 1997 im a bit foggy on the date, but none the less it was brilliant. Proper 3D environments! CD Quality audio! But I think that one of the things that was most exciting about my first game Air Combat, was that the pilot cursed every time your missed a shot! Ok so the extent of it was him saying 'JESUS MISSED!' but I was young and that sort of thing would create gasps and 'ummmm's amongst 8 year olds.



Games like Command and Conquer and Final Fantasy IIV (which you may have read from my profile is my favourite game ever) started to appear in my collection, which I think turned me from a casual gamer into a semi-hardcore gamer, starting to get involved with the stories rather that gaining quick thrills. Also issues of morality seemed to matter more, for example, not wanting to let you npc team mate die, and being able to choose which historical monument to destroy with the Ion Cannon when you complete the NOD campaign in Command and Conquer. You could pick from the White House, Big Ben, the Eiffel Tower and the Brandenburg Gate. I have to say, it was the French every time.