Progress Update: What have I done so far and what's next?

Today I submit my various items of work for DE4106. Slightly unsure how to submit all the items, so to keep things simple, I have decided to keep everything in one place on my blog (seeing as all of the work is linked anyway). I have added tags and made the titles reflect the submission pieces. I hope this okay..! 



Existing and Intended Areas of Research


Looking back on the research and work I have carried out so far I can compare this to the key areas of research I set out in my Learning Agreement:

• Current Exploration games, and the design rationale and methodology behind them. An analysis of these games and a reflection of the designers in terms of success compared to what they set out to achieve.

• Partially done- Although I have been looking at various Exploration games and attempting to gather insights into the rationale and approaches behind their designs, I have not posted a specific set of blog posts for each case-study. This is something I may very well do so that it is easier to compare the design of these games in a single location.

• Current game design fundamentals, including rationale.

• I have begun to cover this in a good amount of detail through my Designer Guidelines segment (I prefer this to the term 'User Guide'). You can find this elsewhere on my blog. I will continue to add to, and develop this as the project progresses.

• In turn, investigate how most practicing designers would approach a Exploration game if they were tasked to make one. Main considerations should include their perceptions of the genre and what they consider to be important factors/ components when making a game of this type.

• I have started to explore this through my Practitioner Questionnaires and associated interviews. This is something that I can continue to investigate once I open up the model to game designers who are interested in developing prototypes based on the design model. As part of this, potentially I can also attempt to develop my own prototype(s) in order to compare and contrast my work to theirs.

• Toy design fundamentals, as products that are designed to invoke emotional responses in those who use them. This should include key emotional triggers such as exploration, empowerment etc.

• This is an area of research that I still need to investigate further. As I begin to move towards the game prototype stage, I will begin to research how to design a product that intends to trigger emotional responses and subsequent connections with the user. In theory, if the findings of this research are implemented into the design of the prototypes that are created, this should help them to deliver a more powerful / meaningful game-play experience. This is something that I can then include as part of my design model.

• How games can invoke emotions depending on content and game play?

• I have already started to consider this in the research I have carried out. However, this is an area that can be explored in far greater depth than I have currently covered. Testing prototypes that are designed to invoke emotional responses will provide the most valuable feedback I can obtain in this area.

• The psychological differences between work and play and how this effects how experiences are perceived.

• An area of research that I am aware of through the research carried out in my Literature Review, but that I now need to consciously include in my practice.

• How players perceive Exploration games as game play experiences. In what way(s) they appeal to the player and the rationale behind this?

• I have started to look at how Game Designers, as players of these types of games, perceive them as game play experiences. A wider field of research can be carried out here before and after prototypes are made that are designed using the principles and guidelines set out in the model.

Areas of Practice and Development - What I Have So Far and What I Intend To Do Next

As previously mentioned, before I can get to the business of game development, I have had to begin to use the research I have gathered to inform the creation of a Designer Guidelines document to Exploration games, in order to inform the designs of the games that are to be developed. This is still very much a work-in-progress and will evolve as I entwine practical game design and development later on in the project. So far I have created a general breakdown of the various game elements, but have tailored the description and explanation of these towards Exploration games. In addition, I have considered how best to visually represent my game design model. I have started to create basic flow charts and mind-maps as two possible ways in which I can achieve this. From the work I have carried out so far, I believe a visual diagram alone will be insufficient to convey the large amount of information required to the game designer. This informed the necessity to accompany the diagram with the designer guidelines I am currently creating. Ultimately, the format of the game design model will be dictated through its use by Game Designers: if it is not user-friendly it will have to be re-designed so that it becomes user-friendly.

Once the basic model has been constructed, I can then begin to use it to draw up a summarised (or extended) set of guidelines for use on short game development projects (ie. Prototypes developed at Game Jams or prototypes developed collaboratively over a slightly longer period of time than Game Jams permit). As part of this, and to develop my own practice as a designer, I intend to become more familiar with the level design and scripting elements of game engines. I intend to focus on the recently released Unreal Engine 4 as my engine of choice as it appears the most powerful and flexible with its new Blueprint visual scripting element. Other engines that are noteworthy are UE4's predecessor UE3, as well as Unity 3D.

Fig 1. Epic Game's latest game engine, Unreal  Engine 4 (Epic Games, 2014)

Reference

Fig 1. GiantBomb.com, 2014: Unreal Engine 4 (Epic Games, 2014) [Image] [Online]

Available at: http://www.giantbomb.com/images/1300-2231753

[Accessed on 5th May 2014]

DE4106: Exploration Game Design Model: User Guide - An Introduction to Game Elements

As part of my on-going practice I have started to develop a User Guide for designing an Exploration Game. The following is a segment from that guide...


The utilisation of constraints acting as a rule-set should help to maintain focus on what I believe are key contributing elements that help define the Exploration genre. The following elements can all contain constraints that I believe are relevant to Exploration games:

1. Plot / Theme / Narrative
2. Setting / Environment
3. Characters
4. Props (Static / Dynamic)
5. Player Objectives and Goals
6. Game Mode(s)
7. Win / Lose Conditions
8. Game (or Gameplay) Mechanics
9. Game Loop(s)
10. Player Perspective (1st Person / 3rd Person / Interchangeable)
11. Player Controls / Inputs

I will now elaborate on why I believe these elements are important to an Exploration game and why they should be implemented in a constrained manner:

1. Plot / Theme / Narrative

From the research carried out so far, and from the responses obtained from various Game Designers (Field, Hill, Morris and Jones) narrative appears to be universally considered to be a core design fundamental / element. This makes sense, as it provides context across the other elements, such as environment/ setting, objectives, characters etc. Narrative provides the player with a purpose and a reason to explore and engage the game-world they are presented with. (Hill, Morris, Field, 2014). The desire to explore and discover is a known contributor to what toy designers consider to stimulate the sensation of fun (Shore, 2010). How that narrative is narrated to the player is also an important consideration. Done right (such as in The Stanley Parable) narration can play a significant role in the immersion of the player. It can provide a sense of identity and belonging within the game-world and act as a bridge between the player's conscious sense of reality, to the fiction we as designers are attempting to draw their conscious mind into. (Donlon, 2014). Existing Exploration games have approached narrative in two distinctly separate ways. Either the narrative is provided to the player by the designer (which is the more traditional method employed by video games), or the player is empowered to create their own emergent narrative through accomplishments and game play. This approach appears to work especially well in games that include a heavy social element such as Minecraft. It might be possible to introduce a narrative framework to the player to provide context and then allow the player to create their own emergent narrative through their actions within the game. In theory, this should an applicable approach to both single player and multiplayer games. The challenge with this approach is ensuring the gameplay is varied enough, so that the player feels in control of the game mechanics and empowered to achieve their self-defined goals and objectives  through their actions. Balancing game mechanics might prove to be especially challenging here, if the player is given a lot of freedom in terms of interaction with the game-world (environment, props and characters).


2. Setting/ Environment

The way the player will view the game-world, settings and environments can vary in both time period, geography, climate and even reality (in terms of clearly fictional alien worlds or environments based on real-world locations). Within Exploration games, whatever environment and settings the designer chooses, it is vitally important that this is believable to the player in the sense that they feel involved and part of the world they are interacting with. This will encourage them to want to engage with and explore the environment they are presented with. The environment is the space that contains all of the characters and props, and all connected processes and mechanics (game play) are defined and executed. The environment consists of both visual and audio assets, and utilises two of the player's primary senses (sight and hearing). In order not to break the sense of immersion primarily generated by the setting / environment, it is important to consider how non diegetic guiding elements such as the GUI and control / mechanic tips are portrayed to the player. A lot of modern games attempt to relay starting tips through an interactive tutorial that utilises diegetic assets that exist within the environment (such as characters and props) (Jones, 2014). Environments should be rich in content, inviting and engaging to the player.

Fig 1. An environment from ThatGameCompany's Flower (ThatGameCompany, 2009)

Fig 2. A player-crafted environment from Mojang's Minecraft (Mojang, 2009)

 3. Characters

Some games contain characters, other games (like Tetris) contain no characters at all. All Exploration games I have encountered so far include characters as primary drivers of the narrative that is taking place. However, this is not to say that Exploration game have to contain characters in order to be successful. Characters can be categorised depending on role. 

• Primary characters are those that are central to the plot or player experience. Usually primary characters are given the most detail by artists, audio designers and designers and feature heavily throughout the game. Therefore, it is essential that the player is able to connect and associate with primary characters, especially on an emotional level. Creating believable characters (in context with the game setting) is therefore vital.

•  Secondary Characters are those that which usually temporarily feature in the plot or wider environment. Examples can include 'disposable' NPC's (henchman/ goons that the player has to dispose of) or vendors like those found in Skyrim. Secondary characters are usually not as 'fleshed' out as their primary character counterparts. 

• Note: At this stage I am uncertain whether Exploration games that attempt to tap into the player's emotions should contain combat or violence. There are noteable examples (ie. the Mass Effect series) where game designers have purposely 'built up' characters only to kill them off as a major plot point. This is designed to have a powerful emotional impact on the player. Minecraft also contains basic combat mechanics within its game-play and is completely successful as an Exploration game...

In The Art of Games Design (2008), Schell explains that traditionally game worlds are traditionally almost always based in fantasy situations, most of the characters contained within those worlds reflect this, as they are products of their environment (Shell, 2008 p. 311). I believe that this has been one of the problems in getting a player to invest emotionally into traditional game characters as they are simply too unbelievable to relate to. Making characters more realistic to the player (within the context of their game-world) would allow this emotional investment to develop and be nurtured through careful and considered narrative. This is perhaps one of the reasons multiplayer games develop such a strong social aspect, because fellow players are represented through their in-game avatars. This is also mentioned in The Art of Game Design (Shell, 2008 p. 312).

4. Props

All games contain props. Props are any animate or inanimate object contained within the game environment. Props can vary completely in terms of scale and can be assigned various properties depending on their scale, mass, material make-up etc. Overall, props can be categorised into three distinct groups:

• Static props are those which the player cannot physically move, collect or manipulate the properties of. Static props generally form the basis of the environment. Geometry (such as mountains or trees) are also included in this category. However, some static props can be interacted with in terms of providing physical boundaries, platforms or obstacles to the player. For example, the player may hide behind a wall to prevent them from being shot.

• Semi- Static props are those which typically do not move about the environment, but can be animated so that they move around a  static pivot-point (such as a door, or window).

• Dynamic props are those which are fully interactive to the player. Any prop that can be collected and manipulated, combined with another prop or open up game mechanics through their use are considered to be dynamic. In an Exploration game, this prop type is perhaps the most important to make as intuitive for the player to use as possible in order to maintain a high level of immersion.

5. Player Objectives / Goals

Player Objectives and Goals define what the player has to work towards within the game-world. They both drive individual win/lose conditions played out through the game mechanics, while also helping to define the win/lose conditions of the overall game. In traditional games, these goals or objectives were almost exclusively defined by the game designer, and it was the task of the player to try and 'beat' the game by achieving these objectives. Ultimately, I believe this approach is the fundamental reason why most games leading up to this point have been driven by skill-based challenges set up by the designer. It is only in recent years, when games have reached a level of technological advancement that allows them to adapt far more dynamically to the player's actions. This can be done in multiple ways, from developing more responsive and adaptable AI to more 'open' sandbox style level design, that gives the player more creative freedoms within the game-world. For Exploration games, I believe empowering the player with this type of freedom is essential in promoting their desire to explore the environment they are presented with, as they feel they can shape and directly influence it.

6. Game Modes

Game modes allow the designer to change the overall win / lose conditions as well as provide more variation and contrast to the game mechanics that are in use. This in turn can change the player's goals and objectives and there-in, how they play the game. For example, Conquest mode in Battlefield 4 (Fig. 3) is played much differently than in Deathmatch mode. The core game mechanics remain largely the same but the objectives and goals vary because of the win conditions defined by the game mode. Not all games contain more than one game mode. This is usually because the designer may want to stick to a specific vision, the game mechanics that are in use are too rigid to change, or the designer believes more than one game mode would be detrimental to the overall game-play experience. Modern Exploration games such as Rust currently only utilise one game mode. This may be because the game is still limited in terms of development, or the designer does not feel additional game modes would add value to the overall experience.

Fig 3. In Battlefield 4's Conquest mode, players have to wait around static flags in order to capture them (Dice, 2013)

7. Win / Lose Conditions


Win / Lose conditions in games are rather self-explanatory in that they are the game conditions that must be met in order for the player to either ultimately win or lose the game. These are normally defined by the outcome(s) of various player goals or objectives being met. An example of other Loss conditions can include the player's health being depleted, or a time limit expiring. Win / Lose Conditions in some games can also be defined by the outcome of game loops. The following fictional game loop scenario from a 'Farming Simulator' game provides an example:

Have Money -> Buy Seeds -> Plant Seeds -> Crops Fail to Grow -> Unable to Harvest Crops -> Unable to Sell Crops -> Insufficient Money to Buy New Seeds -> Lose Game.



8. Game Mechanics


According to Schell, Game Mechanics "are the procedures and rules of your game. Mechanics describe the goal of your game, how players can and cannot try to achieve it, and what happens when they try" (2008, p.41). Game Mechanics are what make games unique from linear experiences such as books and films, and it is this level of interactivity that is perhaps a game's most powerful element versus these other forms of media. Game mechanics utilise the player's interaction with the various characters / objects within the game's environment, and usually involves direct player input via a control method.Game Mechanics should always fit within the context of the game-world and the overall narrative. This is crucial to ensure that they form a large part of immersing the player within the game.

Fig 4. Crafting is an essential game mechanic in FacePunch Studio's Rust (FacePunch, 2013)

9. Game Loop(s)

Game loops are a sequence of tasks/ events that direct the gameplay within a game. They both dictate and are effected by the gameplay mechanics within a game. The player experiences gameplay loops at all times whilst experiencing the game. There are different types of loops depending on the game type. For example, an interesting article by Michail Katkoff on Gamasutra explores game loops in mid-core game and how they are used to enhance the gameplay experience. Within this article, Katkoff explore the ‘dual loop’ (Fig.5) and how the meta-game plays a significant yet subtle contribution to the overall gameplay experience (Kotkoff, 2013). Other articles, such as on Valve’s Developer Community web site discuss game loops in level design, where a player is directed back to a location they have visited before. While maintaining the player’s interest or at best, the illusion of free-will where they player believes they have chosen to retrace their steps.  Overall, gameplay loops are used to make levels (or entire games) seem far more in-depth and broader than they actually are. (Valve, 2011)I believe game loops could play a significantly important part of the design of Exploration games. By re-using parts of the environment, this will help to reduce the amount of development time required by all members of the development team. Some games now use procedurally generated environments (or 'maps') to get-around this potential issue. However, where this technology may not be available to the design team, making good use of game loops can help to encourage the player to re-visit areas as part of a larger exploratory task (ie. re-using resources at a set location, or re-visiting a previously visited area for new clues). 

Fig 5. Dual game loops in a typical mid-core game (Katkoff, 2013)

10. Player Perspective (First-person, Third-person or Interchangeable)

Player Perspective is how the player views the game-world and everything therein. Mainly games utilise either the First Person perspective, the Third Person, or an Interchangeable perspective that uses both. Choosing what perspective(s) to provide to the player is dependent on the type of game-play that will take place. Sometimes designers purposely restrict the player to a first-person perspective in order to limit their view of the environment. This can help to influence the way the player plays the game (ie. a more cautious approach when sneaking around an enemy base).

Restricting the player to a first person viewpoint can give the game a more realistic feel, as this is how we view real life. Some designers believe that this in turn helps to immerse the player into the game-world which would would be ideal for Exploration games. However, Exploration games such as Journey are presented from a third person perspective and successfully immerse the player into the environment. The platform based challenges contained within this game are arguably easier to navigate in the third person, so this may have been as much as a game-play based designed choice as an aesthetic one.

Interchangeable perspectives provide the player with more freedom but designers have to take far more care when designing camera angles and distances from the player character, especially when 'clipping' can more easily occur with geometry, props and characters that make up the environment.

Fig 6. In Giant Sparrow's The Unifinished Swan, players reveal their environment through a first person perspective (Giant Sparrow, 2012)

Fig 7. ThatGameCompany's Journey is played entirely from a third person perspective (ThatGameCompany, 2012)

11. Player Controls / Input

How the player physically interacts with the game as a piece of software is another important consideration for any game. Depending on the platform the game is released for, the control method and input devices will vary accordingly. What is universally important, is that the controls should be designed in such a way that they seem intuitive to the player's actions and how these are represented within the game-world. Poor control layouts, or controls which cause the player to struggle to manipulate the game mechanics, can completely break immersion and ruin the intended experience. 

Recently devices such as the Oculus Rift V.R. Headset (Oculus V.R. Inc., Fig. 8) are specifically designed to increase immersion through output (what the player sees and hears) whilst simultaneously enhancing immersion through natural player movements that are translated into inputs (player head movement). In theory, these types of devices may form part of the ideal control device for Exploration games that are restricted to the first person.

Fig 8. The Oculus Rift V.R. Headset may considerably change the way we view and play games (Oculus V.R. Inc, 2014)

References

Field, Peter (2014) Questionnaire For Game Designers: Considering a new Design Model for the 'Exploration; Game genre. 23^rd March 2014.

Hill, Benjamin (2014) Questionnaire For Game Designers: Considering a new Design Model for the 'Exploration; Game genre. 1^st April 2014.

Jones, Andrew (2014) Questionnaire For Game Designers: Considering a new Design Model for the 'Exploration; Game genre. 30^th March 2014. 

Morris, Stephen (2014) Questionnaire For Game Designers: Considering a new Design Model for the 'Exploration; Game genre. 1^st April 2014. 

Donlon, C., 2014. Narrative vs. narration - Eurogamer.net. [Online]
Available at: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2014-03-29-narrative-vs-narration [Accessed 26th March 2014].

Schell, J., 2008. The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses. New York: CRC Press.

Shore, M., 2010. What is Fun?. Manhattan Beach, TEDx. [Online] Available from: http://tedxtalks.ted.com/video/TEDxManhattanBeach-Michael-Shor [Accessed on: 24 November 2013]

Katkoff, M., 2013. Gamasutra: Michail Katkoff's Blog - Mid-Core Success Part 1: Core Loops. [Online] Available at: http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/MichailKatkoff/20131024/203142/MidCore_Success_Part_1_Core_Loops.php

[Accessed on: 2nd April 2014]

Fig 1.  Thatgamecompany.com: TGC>>Flower, 2009 [Image] [Online]
Available at: http://thatgamecompany.com/games/flower/
[Accessed on: 10th April 2014]

Fig 2. Enterminecraft.com: Minecraft Free Download, 2014: Minecraft (Majong, 2009) [Image] [Online]
Available at: http://enterminecraft.com/minecraft-version-history/
Accessed on: 20th April 2014]

Fig 3. Gamespot.com: Flood Zone Map Drowns Nicely in Battlefield 4, 2013: Battlefield 4 (DICE, 2013) [Image] [Online]
Available at: http://www.gamespot.com/videos/flood-zone-map-drowns-nicely-in-battlefield-4/2300-6415769/
[Accessed on: 2nd April 2014]

Fig 4. Orcz.com: File:RustCraftingMenu.jpg, 2014: Rust (FacePunch Studios, 2013) [Image] [Online]
Available at: http://orcz.com/File:RustCraftingMenu.jpg
[Accessed on: 14th April 2014]

Fig 5. Katkoff, M., 2013: Gamasutra: Michail Katkoff's Blog - Mid-Core Success Part 1: Core Loops. [Image] [Online] 
Available at: http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/MichailKatkoff/20131024/203142/MidCore_Success_Part_1_Core_Loops.php
[Accessed on: 2nd April 2014].

Fig 6. ShaneTheGamer.com: The Unfinished Swan: Review, 2012: The Unfinished Swan (Giant Sparrow, 2012) [Image] [Online]
Available at: http://www.shanethegamer.com/the-unfinished-swan/
[Accessed on: 16th April 2014]

Fig 7. Goongala's Grumbles: Journey Review: The Greatest Game Ever Made...,  2013: Journey (ThatGameCompany, 2012) [Image] [Online]
Available at: http://goongalasgrumbles.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/journey-greatest-game-ever-made.html
[Accessed on: 21st April 2014]

Fig 8. PCGamer.com: Oculus Rift Development Kit 2, 2014: Oculus Rift Dev Kit 2 (Oculus V.R. Inc, 2014) [Image] [Online]
Available at: http://www.pcgamer.com/2014/03/19/oculus-rift-dev-kit-2-announced/
[Accessed on 28th April 2014] 

 

DE4106: Game Design Models: Structure Representation - Mind-Map

I have been giving more thought about how best to present my game design model in a visual sense, seeing as most of my research and subsequent findings are designed to guide designers to create visual material. I have come to the conclusion that I do not believe I will be able to represent the model (with every bit of detail required) in a single diagram. I am now leaning towards a type of User-Guide which I can make visually rich by the use of diagrams and other images to illustrate various points.

However, this being said, I do believe I am able to construct a mind-map that represents the various 'elements' that make up a game and how they are all interdependent on each other to make the game whole. Below is the original rough sketch-up I made of this mind map, followed by a neater version I created using PowerPoint. I have also evolved this mind-map from the initial flow chart diagram I produced a couple of weeks ago (this can be found elsewhere on my blog):

Fig 1. Initial sketch-up of a mind-map displaying the inter-dependent relationships of individual game design elements (Shorrocks, 2014).

Fig 2.  Mind-map displaying the inter-dependent relationships of individual game design elements (Shorrocks, 2014)

To read the diagram, start at the Start element (connected to Plot / Theme / Narrative) and work your way through. You should be able to think of any video game and relate its various elements to the mind-map. Please let me know if you come across any exceptions!

The white connecting lines display the inter-dependent links between each element. The red connecting lines show those interdependent relationship which are not universal in all games.

The various elements share the same titles as those I have added to my guide that you can find elsewhere on my blog (development is on-going). Further detail on each element can be found within this guide. The guide itself is being tailored and gives consideration towards Exploration games, but the mind-map itself should be universal to all genres.

The mind-map is split between visual and the mechanical design elements. I drew inspiration from Jesse Schell here, from his inspiration book The Art of Game Design (2008) where he provides the following diagram that shows the game elements that are more and less visible to the player:

Fig 3. The Relationship between Game Elements (Schell, 2008)

The mind-map also drew inspiration from another diagram (Fig 4.) found in The Art of Game Design (2008) that focuses on the overall design process from initial concept through to player experience. The differences between the diagram I have created to Schell's diagram, is that mine focuses more of the various game elements as they work within the game, without including the player's experience and as much detail in regards to direct player interaction.

Fig 4. Designer, Game and Player Interaction Mind-Map (Schell, 2008)

References:

Fig 1. Shorrocks, J., 2014. Initial sketch-up of a mind-map displaying the inter-dependent relationships of individual game design elements. [Diagram] (UCLan).

Fig 2. Shorrocks, J., 2014. Mind-map displaying the inter-dependent relationships of individual game design elements. [Diagram] (UCLan)

Fig 3. Schell, J., 2008. The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses. New York: CRC Press. [Diagram]

Fig 4. Schell, J., 2008 The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses. New York: CRC Press. [Diagram]