31 - 10

Epic Mickey
Source.

An interesting article that describes a pipeline of pre-production that is used on the game "Epic Mickey". It describes two things that i found particularly interesting.

One is working with a source material as wide and sensitive as disney animation. They have to keep the artwork true to that yet still bring a personal twist to it. A great example of this is that in the animation of the main character, Mickey Mouse, they have to be able to show both ears on the character, no matter what angle or position.

Another interesting thing was the need to visually differentiate the "static" game world from interactive parts of the game world, since bits and pieces can be added and/or removed by the player by means of a magic brush (wiimote).

Skeletons in your closet?
Source.

This article is very technical, which i won't get into much.

But what can be derived from it and what it made me think of, mostly, is the importance of proper animation in games. Motion makes a world believable and come to life, enhances character, and enforces action.

With action in this context i specifically mean actions the player undertakes and you want to have some effect on the world. The player is after all, merely pressing buttons, but you want the action of pressing a button to become so much more in the game world itself.

RAGEQUIT!
Source.

Loads of players don't finish their games. This article talks about the psychology behind this, and what game developers can do to ensure the playing experience is pleasant and fullfilling enough for players, and makes them want to finish the game.

It appears the trick is to give the proper feedback to players. It's alright if a player loses every now and again, or if a game is too hard. As long as the players know they are being treated fairly and the challenge is one that can be overcome. When a game is lost, be sure to let the players know why they lost and how it happoned, so they can anticipate and avoid repeating the same mistakes. "Modern" games have a lot going on on the screen and sometimes they can get confusing without the proper feedback.

A good example is giving players in shooters a "grenade warning". With modern, realistic graphics it can be hard to spot a little grenade coming your way, but that same grenade will most likely kill you. So in most modern shooters these days you get a little graphic warning on the screen telling you a grenade has been thrown and where it has been thrown, so the player can undertake action to avoid death. They can still die from the granade, but they'll know they've died from a granade, and not randomly.

24 - 10

The "blue sky in games" initiative.

The "blue sky in games" initiative is an interesting reaction to the ever-growing realism in games today. Some people have had enough, they want to "go back" to a time where games had blue skies and where about fun things, or basically, nonsense.

They want a certain escapism in their computer games, not an "American Ghetto" simulator.

I think it's interesting to see that after years of hunting for realism in games, now that it has almost been achieved, people don't like what they see. These virtual worlds are getting a little bit "too real" for comfort, it seems.

Source:
http://www.ukresistance.co.uk/2005/11/blue-sky-in-games-campaign-launched.html

What is realism in gameplay?

What is "realistic" gameplay anyway? The article views "realistic" gameplay as having to do things in the game that hamper your actions as they would in real-life, get shot in the leg and you have to take time to heal your leg, for example. But is that really what "realistic gameplay" should be?

It treats these virtual characters and events as if they where real events, and attempts to apply appropriate consequences. The problem with this though is that the thing with real-life events is that it actually influences life in the long term, and usually permanently. In a game this is impossible to do, because you can just shut off the computer. Always.

Should we really try to make games more realistic by dumbing down the consequences of real-life actions and distilling them into arbitrary gameplay mechanics that distract from the actual goal of the game? Maybe we should consider that game realism is something that should be considered relative to the game world instead of our own. Maybe we could "punish" undesired behavior in a game in a way that has dire consequences in the gameplay itself.

Source:
http://videogames.suite101.com/article.cfm/video_game_realism

The missing health bar.

Trying to find a good article on this, as it's been one of my greatest gripes with these "next gen" games that try to minimize the HUD, i came across a staggering amount of mods where they bring back the health bar. It appears i am not the only one that is bothered by the lack of health bars in these games. I miss running around with just one HP left, looking for that shield upgrade or health pack before you take the final blow and kick the bucket. It's thrilling.

I did find an article that rants about the inappropriate use of "health bars" in superman games; why does an invincible man require a health bar? Allthough that bit wasn't perticulairly interesting, the article goes on to suggest alternative versions of "health bars" such as using the populace of a city to be saved as your "health bar".

It all boils down to a need to have graphic feedback on the challenge you are undertaking. Not fight against time, but a resource that depletes when you make mistakes, that's basically what the health bar is all about. Now these modern games usually DO add somekind of visual feedback for this, the screen turns red, the character starts limping, these sort of things. Maybe it's just me that likes to have my progress communicated to me in something as clear as a progress bar.

Still, i think it is crucial to communicate critical information well, and theres just nothing as nice as the good ol' health bar.

Source:
http://www.joystiq.com/2006/07/03/superman-needs-no-health-bar/