Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


Angelhelm

Member Since 28 Jul 2008
Offline Last Active Jun 05 2012 04:47 PM
-----

Posts I've Made

In Topic: Design by comittee

08 March 2012 - 07:42 PM

I am having trouble picturing what the player experience might be in a fractal environment. It is possible you write out a 30 second player experience of what the player might do and how.

Also the fractal pattern might making it hard to puzzles and level design. Do you think that this would cause major issues for development of this game? How could you work around these issues. Also to make fractal puzzle in theory you could keep going up or down magnitude's for infinite

I'm thinking it would also be a way to avoid enemies you can't beat. Based on the smaller-things-go-faster philosophy, if you go down one magnitude they would be huge and slow, a second magnitude and they would be a static part of the landscape. You could even climb on them. Plus at smaller levels it would open up a more jumpy platformy way of playing.


This sounds awesome, could you draw out a puzzle of how this could work because that will be the hardest part. Especially with the fractal patterns.

I would like to have a skype call with anyone interested in talking about the designs that have been laid out here.

Please let me know when we can schedule a meeting.

In Topic: Design by comittee

04 March 2012 - 02:48 AM

Great post!

(O nose the spelling police, please i didn't mean to it was an honest mistake. I will do better I swear. Posted Image )


In truth it truly comes down to the fact that I see the "fun" of the game arising purely from the actual gameplay of combat. The constant striving to outdo the opponent, whilst trying to survive their attacks. A game of chasing after each other whilst also running from each other. Executing a pure transition into a different element flatfooting the opponent or attacking across elements thus effectively catching them unawares. I want the elation to be from the ability to defeat my foe from having done a particularly clever set of transitions or feel the crushing disappointment of being defeated mercilessly by the opponent outplaying me forcing me to go back to the drawing board and rethink a stratagem or tactic.


Awesome, Now I think that you defined that the main player experience or fun of the game is going to be combat, and not just combat but intense competitive combat.
(please correct me if I am wrong!)

With that we can build our mission statement and design pillars to support that. Now I am not sure if the mission statement should be more focused on "creative use of different shapes for battle" or something more focused on "rapid shape shifting combat".(these are just examples) I do feel that the missions statement should make reference to shape shifting and battle. What do you think the mission statement should be?


Once we have the mission statement we can build or pillar and begin to organize everything into a design doc.

I would like to have a Skype conversion at some point in the future. To discuss this further.

In Topic: Design by comittee

03 March 2012 - 07:24 PM

I am currently traveling so my questions will be shorter today.

Stormynature your posted reminded me of this http://en.wikipedia..../KISS_principle

If you haven't heard of K.I.S.S I strongly recommend reading it.

Overall you guys have expended on the design and thus I have a much clearer idea of what your games are about but you guys didn't really answer why something is fun or why you made that chose for your design. Try to answer the why of something.

Now onto questions.


.

.

Battle is an arena setup. Two opponents fight till one is defeated. Arena area is large but not extreme and includes sufficient air space for aerial combat shapes and a sufficiently large enough body of water for water shapes. One design idea is to shape the arena into a giant sphere. The internal bottom half being water, the top half being air, and a platform level at midsphere level.

The shape shifting aspect is to provide access to different tactical options so as to gain advantage over the opponent. For example Grey Cube turns into a strong melee combat shape, in response Beige Cube shifts into an Aerial shape with a distance attack. Grey cube responds by dropping into water and altering to a water shape thus avoiding the attack. Beige cube chases Grey cube into the water with a new water shape only to be met with an ambush by Grey cube. This is extremely poorly written combat I might point out..


This helps a huge amount I have a much better idea of what your design is about and how and what gameplay is about.

Why do we have different levels(air ground water) i like the idea and you mention that is allows for tatical choices. Why is that fun. In a way you have already offered an explanation but i would like you to drill deeper into that. (in theory you could do all the same things on a level surface and it would still have the same mechanics what does having those different levels really offer. )

What I really want is to clearly identify what is fun and start to build a pillar based on that ( is it the changing of levels in the arena, the combat between you and your opponent etc, find what is the fun part of it and clearly define that once that is done. Then we will start to compare our choices against that to move forward.)


Thanks for the references it can really help give us a clear vision of the game.


The answer, then, to the question of whether enemies would be part of the platforming experience, is If the player has the desire and/or the ability to use them in a resourceful manner. You can kill every enemy that is in your power to kill, and sometimes this can be the best way, or you can use your enemies to your advantage and bypass them using movement options. It is all up to the player. I would find this to be fun because I would have a choice in how I approached a
Thanks for the references it can really help give us a clear vision of the game.
situation. I wouldn't have to do any one thing, I wouldn't be restricted to one solution. I could use my ingenuity, my skill, and my imagination to overcome the game's obstacles.


What does platforming mean to you? How would you define it? You say that if the player has the desire/ ability it is platforming but if they don't it isn't. What is it then?

Some enemy types are fast and small, taking few hits but coming in larger numbers


What does having small fast enemies that take a few hits and come in large number do for the player experience. Why is that fun? What wouldn't be fun about that.



You mention many weapons what purpose does each one serve. Why have so many? What does it offer the player experiences? Is there any downside to having so many weapons?


What is the core of the game about. At this point I am not 100% what the core of the game is( platforming, shooting, resource management, explorations, story) I really want you to try and give me a small statement about what you want the core of the game about.(This can change over time and isn't a final THIS IS WHAT THE GAME IS ABOUT!) At this point i am not really sure because we have so many different mechanics and facets of the game. This is good because we have lots to work with but I want to really nail down the core of the game before we keep adding in features.

What games inspire this or are like the vision of the game you see.

Sorry for my brief questions. ( I am sick and traveling on the road right now)

Awesome work regardless.

In Topic: Design by comittee

02 March 2012 - 05:07 AM

Okay some questions for each design so far.

First,

Okay, I'll bite. The player is a grey cube that can move around and jump in a 2D or 3D maze. The player also has keys to resize themselves one magnitude larger or smaller. The maze is fractal, so there are paths and enemies (grey cubes) at all magnitude levels smaller than the beginning size. When you're bigger you can stomp enemies and travel quickly, when you're smaller you can squeeze through tiny gaps in the walls. Preferably it is not possible to complete the maze using one size only.


I like the idea, it is original and fresh, it offers some very fun puzzle designs.

Some questions.

Is fractal mazes completely necessary to this design, or is it feature that would be really enjoyable? If so why is it necessary and what does it enhance about the game play? As opposed to just having level's designed out.

As well it seems that being the largest size would be the best options at all times, what reason other then to fit through small holes is there to change size?

And finally what elements of this game are fun? Or rather what mechanics make the game fun? ( I can already see that changing size to solves puzzles is a really unique concept for level and puzzle design. Why are the enemies fun or rather what do the enemies offer to the player in terms of challenge and why is that fun. The goal of this is to isolate individual mechanics and analyze why they are fun not because this will ultimately the overall gameplay.)


Second,

The player is a grey cube that can change to different shaped grey cubes. The enemy is also a grey cube thay change to different grey cubes. Each shape of grey cube has strengths over some grey cube shapes and weaknesses against other grey cube shapes. Grey cubes have a large array of shapes they can choose but a limited array is chosen between each battle.


I like the idea, it seems to promote tactical thinking about what shapes that you bring into battle.

What range of shapes are there?

How does battle happen? What does the player do in battle? What is fun about battle? (maybe run thru a mock battle of what it might be like, just so i have a better understanding of what battle is)

How many shapes can you bring into battle?

What is fun about having different shapes battling different shapes?

What is fun about having a limited amount of shapes you can bring into battle?



Thirdly,

This one's 2D, side-scrolling, with minor platforming. The player assumes the role of a grey cube, with an assortment of different weapons. The player picks up key grey cubes and uses them to solve logical puzzles, and receives storyline information by grey cubes that they recover from around the levels. Sometimes the player has to jump over small chasms, swim through flooded areas, navigate dark rooms by grey cube, or repair grey cubes with items found in about the level. There are numerous types of enemies, some quick and weak, some strong and slow, some ranged, some melee, some a mix of everything. Balance between the ability and wisdom in fighting enemies (They are no longer in the room and thus it is safe to travel through) and the wisdom in avoiding them (conserve grey cubes, grey cubes, and grey cubes) is part of the scheme of the combat system. The player is capable of jumping over small enemies and, with proper timing, has the ability to perform a "juke" that will place them on the other side of larger enemies (the player can also vault over some foes if they stun it with their grey cube weapon). The player can jump higher and farther with momentum, and can slide with sufficient running speed, allowing them to bypass many types of enemies if they execute the maneuvers correctly. The player can recover their vitality slowly over time if they have [grey cubes] in stock, or can immediately heal with a [grey cube]. There are boss grey cubes that require tactics and logical thinking, as well as boss grey cubes that require reflexes and precision. There are many areas that the player is not required to go, but will be rewarded for doing so (though grey cubes, "ammunition" to use grey cubes, or plot grey cubes). It's up to the player if they want to experience the plot in its entirety or simply complete the levels.


Okay there is lots of different mechanics going on in this design. It sounds a little complicated but overall could be a fun rewarding experience.


I have a few questions.

It seems that the players grey cube has many movement type abilities that are focused moving past the enemies( sliding, momentum jumping and juking) thus making enemies part of the platforming experience? Does this make platforming a major part of the game? If so why? If not why? Why is that fun? What does it add to the game by having these abilities are they necessary? why?

Sometimes the player has to jump over small chasms, swim through flooded areas, navigate dark rooms by grey cube, or repair grey cubes with items found in about the level. Why are these fun? Are all of them necessary? (if we remove one of them does the overall game suffer) Are some more important then others? If so why? Overall what do having these different area's or goals offer the player experience.

Is receiving storyline information by grey cubes important to the game play itself ? Does it change how the player plays the game itself? Why or why not?

It would appear that there is some sort of resource management in the form of Healing over time [grey cubes] and Full health [grey cubes] as well as Ammunition [grey cubes] and Plot [grey cubes]? ( correct me if i am wrong on the fact of resource management in the idea of different [grey cubes] that the player uses over time)

Could you explain why each one is important to the game? Are some more important then others? Is it necessary to have all the different types [grey cubes] ? Why or why not? What aspect of the game suffers if we remove them?

What do the different types of enemies do? What type of experience do they create for the player? Can the player kill the enemies or only just stun them? What do you mean by wisdom? ( I could take it to mean puzzle solving around enemies but i don't want to presume)

You mention ammunition [grey cubes] for multiple weapon's what are these multiple weapons? What do they do? How does it change the game play experience?

I think i asked you the most questions of anyone ( you wrote the most Posted Image !) Don't feel overwhelmed if i am asking you to response more then you can handle but please choose one main mechanic that your game will be about and explain the choices for that mechanic. Ie What it is, and how it effects the game play. We really want to nail the core of the game and build around that.

Finally,

The goals that i am trying to find out with these questions: Mostly why each choice was made and how it will effect the game play experience. It is okay to not have an answer yet for all of these questions but these are important to design. Every choice we make as a designers must have a reason and a why to it. Also a lot of these questions are repetitive in an attempt to really drill down into the core of each mechanic.

It is my belief that by starting with a strong core mechanic and building sequential mechanics around that, that the overall game will be stronger and we as designers will have a better vision of what the game is truly about.

If anything i have asked is unclear please ask me to clarify . Also i can think of one answer for each of these questions. I hesitate to just jump in and tell you what i think and would prefer to draw it out of you so we can discuss the reasons why we are making these decisions.

To give you a bit of heads up in the coming weeks of some of the things i might ask you about your design are the game design pillars of your designs and perhaps the mission statement of your design.

see this link for the definition of pillars that i will be using. http://technicalgame...04/pillars.html

As well i will in the next few weeks i will want to talk about the aesthetics in each of these designs. Please read http://www.cs.northw...hunicke/MDA.pdf

Please read specifically the part on aesthetics *note: their are actually nine aesthetics the ninth being competition.

Thanks! You guys are doing great! Posted Image


PS: Others please ask questions, but do it in a format that is critical asking why or how is awesome. We don't know exactly what the designers vision is and it is infinitely more valuable to understand the why and how of a designers choices rather then just telling them what you think. As we begin to understand others reasoning for their choices, it allowing us to asking more probing questions and possible undercover holes in the design, in which the designer will have to deal by iteration upon the design.

Ultimately leading us to being better designers and creating better games.

In Topic: Design by comittee

01 March 2012 - 01:12 PM

Just so you know, you might not want to call it that Posted Image

Design by committee is a term referring to a style of design and its resultant output when a group of entities comes together to produce something, particularly in the presence of poor leadership. The defining characteristics of "design by committee" are needless complexity, internal inconsistency, logical flaws, banality, and the lack of a unifying vision.


Well i guess hoping that we can leave our ego's and political view and other nonsense at the door and just focus on the art of design.

I am an idealist what can i say! Posted Image

PARTNERS