Week 16 - Gaming Cultures

It's easy to say 'Gaming Culture' but i think this is to generalised, because there are so many different experiences avalible and with them come different people and different behaviour.

For example you have your MMORPGs, where communites are created and people will become submersed into a virtual world. On the other hand you have FPS', where teams and clans are formed and compete in a more competative nature.

There is also big money at stake with the major gaming leagues, where people and teams (depending on the game) will compete for vast amounts of money. The gaming leagues will show the greatest players and teams, but perhaps they don't have the same sense of community that an MMO game would have.


My experiences within a game community aren't that extensive but I was once a member of a clan, and a bloody good one at that. Not good as in talent-wise but because we were a good team. The game was Socom: U.S. Navy Seals on the PS2. It was more of a casual thing for most of us, we would usually have a clan match once a week and then play together whenever we were online. Like I said, it was the people in the clan who made it. One guy, Taz, who was a bit of a loud mouth would ALWAYS blame laggers and would get really worked up sometimes (much to our amusement). We were all quite laid back and never took it to seriously, but when the match came around we would co-ordinate and used tactics to work well as a team.

It was a great game with a solid online mode, which proved to be a great foundation for (TUE) - The Ultimate Elite (ok so everyone thought it stood for Tuesday, but the name makes us sound good doesn't it?)

Week 15 - An Introduction to the Games Industry

Over the last 20 years the games industry has changed a great deal. Before it was all bedroom programmers and now it's large teams working together.

The success of games is the key to this. A successful game with large profits will mean a greater budget for the next project and so on, creating spaces for more employees and better technology. A game ten years ago would have had a budget of around $1.5 million, where as now a game tends to have a budget of $15-30 million. I Find it amazing how quickly the industry has progressed, and I am convinced that one day it will compete with the film industry.

The one word that is most feared by me when I think about the future is outsourcing. The process of recruiting people from outside the company, often from different countries, to work for you thus reducing the head count and salaries in your company. As a result, less job opportunities...eek!

But upon reading an interview with Pandemics Executive Art Director, Carey Chico, I was slightly more reassured. He explained that they are always looking for talented artist, especially those who are capable of more than one task. He also shed more light on the outsourcing situation, by explaining that the artists are need to get the message across to the outsourced employees, they don't just hand them a brief and pick the work up a couple of months later.

Of course different companies vary and so will the industry 2 years from now when I'm job hunting.

Week 11 - The Elements of Game Design- Gameplay

The word gameplay gets thrown around alot out there, and probably has a hundred different definitions. So I'm going to make it a hundred and one by trying and describe what I think the term gameply means.

Every game has rules. If a game had no rules it wouldn't really be able to exist. For something like a game to function properly there have to be boundaries, places you can't reach, things you
can't do. We also need to be told what we can and can't do in a game. Different game genres usually have set rules, for example, a racing game has a track. This is the track you race and you have to stick to it. Of course people try to expand these rules, by letting you take different paths of giving you the illusion that you can go where you want, but they generally still stay the same.


Burnout Paradise did this by giving you a big city and letting you go where you want. But utimately it was just a bunch of tracks duct-taped together. You were still confined to a track and were still made to go a certain route if you wanted any chance of winning.

I think this is all relevant in the term gameplay. There are other more technical sides to it aswell, such as, what button does what and how much damage this gun does.

I think if I had to sum it up (which is incredibly difficult and probably unaccurate) I would say that gameplay to me, is the game designers giving us decisions to make. For example, how do i approach this battle, what weapon should I use for this situation or how early should I apply the brakes if I dont want to crash, unless I want to crash and see the car deform and explode, which happens all to frequently when playing Burnout.

Week 10 - The Elements of Game Design - Story and Character

Its got to be said, characters can make or break a game, or any story. After all, they are the ones you control, listen too and interact with. Obviously TV programs and films are different in the way that you do not interact, plus the fact that a film only has 2-3 hours to introduce, develop and explain a character, where as books, games and TV programs can take longer.

The first games to really bring characters into them were games like Full Throttle. They actually used voice actors and were able to develop them which added so much more depth to the game.


I also find it interesting to play Grand Theft Auto 3, and to notice how the main character never speaks a word! But yet the story still keeps you hooked. I think this is due to the characters around you and how they have strong but different personalities.

When I play a game or watch a film, the script can really make a difference, for example the film Enemy at the Gates, a film about the rise or a russian sniper during WW2. It had an epic story line and battle scenes but was let down by a terrible script in my opinion (and Jude Law).

Bad acting can make just as much difference. Take Assasins Creed. Altair, possibly the coolest looking and moving character I've ever seen in a game, but was played by some American (in the Middle East!) who sounded more wooden than my desk, and weakened the character as a result.


Though, I think that it is very important to have convincing and nice looking characters, because first impressions really count. Whether you think it or not, your mind will automatically asses something (or someone in our case) within the first few seconds of seeing it, and make a judgement. It's then up to the writer and actor to build their personality and change that persons mind to how they want you to see that character.

So when you first saw me, you would have made a subconscious decision on whether you liked me or not.....I wonder if its changed?

Week 9 - An introduction to Game Technology

Throughout my gaming life I've used about 15 controllers from different systems, from the basic but classic snes controller to the bulky and clumbsy xbox pad. As controllers they all do fine and serve their purpose, but sometimes it's the little touches that can really make it stand out from the rest.

Take for example the z button on the back of the n64 controller that made it feel alsmost gun like, or the c stick on the gamecube controller which looked alot like a nipple. One thing I have noticed is that Nintendo seem to be the ones who take on new ideas and have really pushed the idea of a game controller along. Their latest game pad the wii-mote is something completely different and never used before in games, and for that I praise Nintendo (although I am not the biggest fan of the wii), they are always in search of new ideas rather that churning out the same old thing.


As far as my favourite controller goes, I'd have to say the PS2/3 (as theyre more or less the same) is the most functional, and you can see this from the way that it 'hasn't' developed much over the years. A close second would have to be the gamecube controller because it was just so damn comfortable. It felt like it was moulded to fit your hands, as if you'd pressed your hands into a ball of clay and made a controller out of it.


Looks though, is a different matter. The N64 pad was iconic, with its three handles almost looking like some sort of hybrid super-controller. The PS3 pad however, is a bit too industrial looking for my tastes with its perfect cricles and straight lines. But it shocks me to say that the xbox 360 controller is my favourite for looks, partly because I'm not a huge fan of it. I think it's the smoothness and curved contours that draw me to it.


When I look at the future of gaming I can see controllers moving more towards motion sensing, even though I do not think it enhances the gaming experience a great deal. Who knows, maybe one day we'll be able to hook ourselves up to a PS5 and let our minds be the controllers.

Week 8 : Storytelling for games

Stories are vital to nearly every game going. Although it could be debated that some genres do not require stories and would still deliver an enjoyable experience. Examples of this could be Tetris. You're not clearing blocks to save the princess or fight of aliens, you're doing it because it is your aim, plus it has a certain feeling of accomplishment when you slot that long block down the nicely placed gap that you created.

One great storytelling experience that I was sucked into (and have repeated 4 times now) is Final Fantasy IIV, and I have yet to play another game that has more depth or felling in it. There are so many things that make a good storytelling experience, but I think that one of the main things I look for is believability, because it is what makes the experience real and draws the player in.Stories in games are usually told by a character, NPC’s or a narrator. But in the world of MMORPGs, of which I am not very familiar with, the worlds are dominated by human controlled characters, and it’s these that create some of the most interesting stories. For example, when people wage war on each other, and I’m talking about hundreds of people invading a city populated by other ‘real’ people.

So I guess that a game can make a great story and not just be made by one.

Week 7: Art Direction

Once every so often you come across a game, and whilst playing it think 'wow just look at that!' and whilst it takes much more than one person to make design and make a game, the Art director is a very important person. The Art Director is the keeper and champion of the vision of the game. He is someone who would work closely with many people including the creative director, designers and the entire art team.

Essentially, the Art Director defines the artist style and helps develop it among the team. To me it seems like it is one of the most important roles within the art department, because if the overall style is off and not exciting to look at, people aren't going to want to look at it (putting it simply).

Art Direction is evident in most forms of media, but film is probably the area in which a art director would get the most 'kudos'. I do not think that games and films are so different, other than the fact that in a games the player has choice on what he/she sees and how events unfold, although cut scenes and certain games would be quite similar. In fact, games could prove more of a challenge since what is seen by the player is not predefined.

Proof that they are not dissimilar is shown by Jerry O'Flaherty, previously the Art Director for Gears of War and Unreal Tournament 3, being made the director for the upcoming CG-animated Thundercats film.


So to be an Art Director would require a massive understand of all things art. Lighting, color, perspective, scale, and composition. A big understanding in all of the jobs would be necesscary, such as, modeling, concept art and the game engine.
But all of these would mean nothing without a creative imagination and a passion for games.

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.