Un-Edited Retro Game Review

Retro Game Review: Donkey Kong (1981)

Donkey Kong is a platforming game developed and published by Nintendo in 1981 for the arcade. It is one of the first video games to be made; yet alone being a ‘Retro Game’ it is one of the forefathers of the games industry. However, it is because it is basic that it is a good starting point to review a game critically, analyse its key gameplay aspects and see what makes them good or bad.

I have chosen to base the analysis/review of Donkey Kong on the article, ‘I Have No Words & I Must Design,’ by Greg Costikyan. I will back up this review by using articles by other writers that I believe are an important aspect of retro games. Costikyan breaks down all games into 5 key areas, ‘Interaction’, ‘Goals’, ‘Struggle’, ‘Structure’ and ‘Endogenous Meaning’ and I will use these areas as a starting point for my review.

Interaction is an extremely important part of games, without interaction it is impossible to consider something to be a game, and with video games, the loss of interaction makes them seem more like films than anything else. Interaction in games is the player’s choices/actions that they take and how these shape the gaming environment. As with most ‘Retro Games,’ the interaction of the player in Donkey Kong has very little effect on the game’s environment. With modern games, such as Call of Duty: Black Ops, the players actions drastically alter the state of play and have a direct consequence for the player/s. With Donkey Kong, however, there are very little choices and actions for the player to take, in fact the only actions the player can take are to jump and climb ladders. By today’s standards this is an incredibly simple game with very few choices for the player, but it was considered groundbreaking games design when it was first released, and has had a heavy influence on the majority of games that have since been made.

The next area that Costikyan talks about is Goals, which covers the player’s incentive to play and how objectives guide the player’s behaviour. The goals in Donkey Kong are just as simple as the player’s interaction, the goal on each screen is too reach the top level, with the overall goal being to defeat Donkey Kong and saving the ‘Lady.’

If there is any ‘Retro Game’ that masters the area of struggle, it has to be Donkey Kong. From the first screen it is evident that the game will test the player’s abilities. The struggle starts off simple; the player must jump over the barrels thrown by Donkey Kong and reach the top of the screen. The different obstacles that the player must pass in each of the screens add to the player’s struggle, and each screen is more difficult than the last. The game goes one step further to increasing the player’s struggle, once the player has defeated Donkey Kong the game restarts from the first screen with an increased difficulty; this process loops round continuously until the player loses all of their lives.

When Costikyan talks about structure, he believes that mutual player agreement that the game's rules and significance create structure. The games structure shapes player's behaviour, it doesn't determine it, and therefore players have the freedom to choose what they do within the rules. The structure of Donkey Kong consists of four screens that the player must complete to finish that ‘level.’ The first three screens consist of a series of obstacles that the player must jump over to reach the top of the screen, where the player will then enter the fourth screen which is considered the boss level as the player finally gets the chance to defeat Donkey Kong, thus beginning the cycle again on a higher difficulty.

The last area that Costikyan talks about in his article is Endogenous meaning, this is created within the structure of a game and these meanings are only relevant within the structure of that game. The endogenous meaning that is created within Donkey Kong is the sense of accomplishment that the player feels every time they reach the top of a screen, and the eventual joy of defeating ‘THAT DAMN DIRTY APE!’ Although the endogenous meaning of Donkey Kong may not seem that significant, especially when contrasted with that of modern games, it must be remembered that there was no real sense of endogenous meaning when Donkey Kong was released and that by creating this in the first place, it has helped with the development of thousands of games since.

The idea if segmentation in retro games and how that has influenced the development of latter games is an important issue to analyse when looking at the game. The idea of segmentation gameplay and its influence was first discussed in an article called ‘Rounds, Levels, and Waves: The Early Evolution of Gameplay Segmentation’ by Jose P. Zagal, Clara Fernandez-Vara and Michael Mateas. Gameplay segmentation can be broken down into three different types; each type of segmentation covers their own area of games, Temporal Segmentation - covers gameplay elements relating to limiting factors, synchronising and/or co-ordinating player activity over time, Spatial Segmentation - covers all aspects relating to 'virtual space,' for example, levels, and Challenge Segmentation - covers areas relating to challenges within the game.

Segmentation plays an important part in the core game mechanics of Donkey Kong, all three types are present in its functions but the most influential form of segmentation in the game is the concept of Challenge Segmentation. The wave factor of this form of segmentation could be considered as the barrels on the first level come in ‘waves’ and the player must get to the top of the screen to stop them, but the main focus is the idea of Boss segmentation. In the game, the aim is to reach the top of the screen to save the ‘Lady,’ and after reaching the fourth screen the aim is to defeat Donkey Kong once and for all. The game then repeats itself on a higher difficulty, which introduces the idea of defeating the boss to progress through the game. This style of gameplay has been hugely influential on the development of modern games, many incorporate challenge segmentation into their games as one of its key features, and without games like Donkey Kong creating this concept in the first place, most of these games would have suffered as a consequence.

Temporal and Spatial segmentation are also present but have a smaller impact on the gameplay, temporal segmentation exists in the game in the form of a timer for each screen. This isn’t as bigger influence on the gameplay as the timer is extremely lenient, giving the player plenty of time to reach the top, its sole purpose is to ensure that they actually have to play. Spatial segmentations role in the game is the different screens that are involved in completing each play through. Donkey Kong can be argued as the first game to include different level screens, which is a huge influence on modern games.

The final article that I will use to review Donkey Kong is ‘Formal Abstract Design Tools,’ by Doug Church. In this article, Church discusses the tools that, as games designers, we must consider when making a game. The three areas that he looks at are Perceivable Consequence, Intention and Story.

In Donkey Kong, an example of perceivable consequence would be, when a barrel is rolling towards ‘Jumpman (later becoming the eponymous hero, Mario),’ the player realises that they must surpass this object or die and so they press the jump button. It is important that the player realises the danger of the barrels and isn’t killed meaninglessly, therefore frustrating them and stopping them from continuing. In Donkey Kong, the designers made the dangers clear to the player from the offset; any barrels that are thrown at you by a very large, very angry gorilla should be considered to be dangerous.

The second area that Church talks about, Intention, is very closely linked to Perceivable Consequence, as intention is when the player plans and thinks about their actions and the outcomes of these actions, therefore planning how to overcome obstacles, etc. Using the same example as for Perceivable Consequence, the player knows that they will die if they are hit by one of the barrels rolling towards them and so, they plan to jump over and pass this obstacle.

Church’s final area that he discusses is Story, the narrative thread of the game. Whether the story is driven forward by the designer and the player progresses along a pre-determined path or the player has more influence over the story, the story is the main thing that drives the game forward and gives the player a purpose to play. As a ‘Retro Game,’ Donkey Kong has a very simple storyline but is effective when combined with the style of gameplay. The story line is based around the playable character, the aptly named Jumpman’s girlfriend, known as the ‘Lady,’ being kidnapped by Jumpman’s pet ape, Donkey Kong, after he is mistreated by Jumpman and seeks revenge. However basic the storyline may be, it gives the game a decent narrative and the player the incentive to defeat Donkey Kong and save the ‘Lady.’

In conclusion, Donkey Kong may not be able to hold up against modern games in terms of the areas that I have discussed, but it is one of the games that created the foundations for all other video games to be developed and has been hugely influential. In the process, creating one of video games most successful characters, Mario, and establishing Nintendo’s largest franchise.

New Games Journalism Vs Old Games Journalism

New Games Journalism
New games journalism can be any article on games, from a review to talking about its development, that has been written in the style of what we know as 'New Journalism.' New journalism is a writing style that was created in the 1960s-1970s, where the writer focuses more on personal experiences/emotionse, rather than writing about the subject in a more analytical style. For example, if I were to review the new Call of Duty game in this style, rather than discussing the game mechanics and design style, I would discuss my experience playing a match online. In this blog I will discuss one of the NGJ articles that I read, called 'Bow N***er' by Ian Shanahan.

'Bow N***er,' discusses the writers experience playing Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast on-line, and how players interact in this game. The article focuses on the writers experience playing against someone that is disrespectful and doesn't play by 'the rules.' The article is written in the style that the writer is his character in the game and such is the style of new journalism, trying to get the reader to connect with how he is playing the game. The first person storytelling of the article, crossed with the implied Good Vs Evil battle, gives the reader a emotional review of the style of gameplay, with an analysis of the core game mechanics and aesthetics brushed upon briefly in each paragraph.

In my opinion, NGJ is a highly successful form of writing. The fact that the style focuses on player experience is an effective way for readers to find out what a game is actually like to play, the weak point of NGJ is that if the reader wants to read about game mechanics and core features in great detail, they need to read OGJ as NGJ doesn't focus on this.

Old Games Journalism
Old Games Journalism is the traditional approach to reviewing games. The writing style is alot more formal than NGJ and tends to focus entirely on game mechanics etc. rather than player experience. The article that I will look at for this style of writing is a Half Life 2 review by Kristan Reed.

The article is instantly recognisable as being in the style of OGJ, it is a straight forward review of the game, without any personal experience or emotion discussed. The article talks about the games' visuals and its development process, then moves on to talk about player interaction within the game world, which moves on to story and style of play etc. The article is written more informally than most OGJ, in a way that makes it easy for the reader to understand all the areas that are covered. This was a very in-depth review of the game and gives the reader a clear understanding of what does and doesn't work about the game in terms of its mechanics, aesthetics and otherwise.

I find OGJ articles to be a very effective writing style, successfully informing the player on key parts of a game, covering every aspect of a game other than player experience and emotion.

Final Opinion
To sum up, both forms of journalism are an effective way of informing the reader on a game. If the reader simply wants to find out what a game is like, NGJ is more effective as it doesn't bog the reader down in any speifics, but if the reader wants a more in-depth view of a game, then OGJ is the better style. Personally, I prefer to read a bit of both in my articles, I want to know the specifics but at the same time I want to know what it is actually like to play the game, how the player actually feels whilst in the game world.

You Sunk My Battleship!

I had a rather interesting session on critical games studies last tuesday as we were given the task of iterating Battleships. I'm sure that everyone nows what Battleships is and how to play it so I'm not going to explain it. I paired up with Adam Woodhouse in class and we played an ordinary game of Battleships to begin with to familirise ourselves with the rules and to ensure we hadn't forgotten anything, especially as it's been years since either of us last played. Suffice to say, I annihilated Adam's fleet with minimal damage done to my own.

We decided that we wanted our iterations to improve the gameplay but not to change the game into something entirely different. The first iteration that we made to the game was to add a bonus shot, if you managed to hit your opponents ship you would get an extra shot, this helped to speed up the gameplay and made the game have a little less to do with luck, we also stated that yoou only got one bonus shot, otherwise it would be all to easy to destroy the enemy ships in a couple of rounds.

Before we began a second iteration we quickly decided that we wanted to keep the bonus shot in our version of the game as it was an effective method of speeding up gameplay and keeping a high tension (especially when I only had two spaces left on my battleship and Adam was ready to strike).

The second iteration that Adam and I decided on was to add a repair concept to the game. Each player was given two repair cards that they could use at any point in the game to fix partially destroyed ships, each repair card fixed one square of a ship and any ships that were completely destroyed were beyond repair. We decided that one repair card would not be an effective iteration but too many and the game's pacing would be drastically slowed. We also decided that when a player repairs a ship they have to tell the opponent where they have repaired, otherwise the game would be too drawn out as the opponent would have to search every square that they hit again. Unlike the first iteration, the repair cards quickly became a nuisance, as the opponent knew where the repair had happened they knew where to hit the ship again, so rather than challenging the payers and creating tension, the iteration purely served as a way of wasting a players go by making them re-hit the same ship.

Retro Games

Back again, I'd like to make a quick apology for my last post, I was getting rather stressed looking for the collaborations on books and so wanted to get the post on bibliography done as fast as possible.

This post is going to be on the subject of Retro games and gameplay 'Segmentation,' as well as the chosen game for my first assessment.

The article I read and discussed for the Retro Games lecture was 'Rounds, Levels, and Waves : The Early Evolution of Gameplay Segmentation' by José P. Zagal, Clara Fernández-Vara and Michael Mateas,this article covers the concept that modern games take things for granted that were developed as a result of the existence of retro games, the key aspects of which can be covered with segmentation.

Gameplay segmentation can be broken down into three different types, each type of segmentation covers their own area of games.

• Temporal Segmentation - Covers gameplay elements relating to limiting factors, synchronising and/or co-ordinating player activity over time.

• Spacial Segmentation - Covers all aspects relating to 'virtual space,' for example, levels.

• Challenge Segmentation - Covers areas relating to challenges within the game.

Temporal Segmentation
There are two main aspects covered in this area which are temporal co-ordination and temporal resource.Temporal co-ordination is about turn-taking, rounds, etc, it covers how time progresses and flows in a game. Temporal resources are about gameplay elements that are restrictive of game flow, such as time limits. Temporal Segmentation is a simple game mechanic, however, without the development of retro games, the term wouldn't even exist.

Spatial Segmentation
As stated previously, Spatial Segmentation covers the game world itself and its elements such as levels and checkpoints within those levels. It is quite a broad topic but ultimately stems down to the way the level has been made; even the components that make up Spatial Segmentation aren't necessarily included as they are a part of Challenge segmentation. Spatial segmentation boils down to three main areas; level structure, aesthetic design, and background i.e. static backgrounds etc.

Challenge Segmentation
Challenge Segmentation can arguably be seen as the section that retro games have had the biggest impact on in the development of modern games. There are so many elements that appear in challenge segmentation that couldn't have been developed from board games - waves, bosses and bonus stages all owe the retro game thier existence.


Challenge segmentation can be seperated into 4 main parts; Waves, Puzzles, Bosses and Bonus Stages. All of these are parts of a level that may or may not appear but when they do they add challenge to the game which makes players strive to overcome them. In board games you rarely get bosses, waves or bonus stages - there are often puzzles though - and as a result these were developed specifically video games and as a result, is the reason I consider them to be crucial part in the development from retro games into modern video games.

Enough said about segmentation in gameplay, the main things that I took from this article was a wider critical games vocabulary and a new way to look at game development and design.

Retro Game Review
The first assessment that I've been set is a review of a retro game, the game I've chosen is Donkey Kong, made by Nintendo to convert 'Radar Scope,' an unsuccessful arcade game, into a game critically acclaimed by the Americans in 1981. In essence it is a very basic platformer, where the player has to progress up ladders onto each level whilst jumping over rolling barrels throne by Donkey Kong from the top of the stage.

That's all for now, but don't worry, I'll be back!

Bibliography time!

Books

Griffith, C. 2009, Real-world Flash game development: How to follow best practives and keep your sanity, Focus Press: Oxford.

Steed, P. 2002, Animating real-time game characters, Charles River Media: Hingham (Ma).

Contribution to Books

Barrett, K., Harley, J., Hilmer, R., Posner, D., Snyder, G., Wu, D., 2003, Pseudo Interactive’s Cel Damage, Grossman, A., Post-mortems from Game Developer: Insights from the Developers of Unreal Tournament, Black & White, Age of Empire, and Other Top-Selling Games, San Francisco, CA, pp 41-50.

Caillois, R., 1962, The Definition of Play: The Classification of Games, Salen, K., The Game Design Reader: A Rules of Play Anthology, Cambridge (Mass.): MIT Press, pp 122-155

Articles

Stevens, C., 2004. Custom-build your own flash game: dip a toe into the ocean of Flash possibilities--without getting out of your depth.(flash games). , Internet Magazine, Vol. 118, pp 72.

Chun, R., 2004. Design Simple Flash Games. , Macworld, Vol. 21, Issue 4, pp 62-65.

I hope I'm not a Vidiot!

Another article from Costikyan this week, discussing the importance of games designers drawing innovation from non electrical games, as to widen their creativity.

Vidiot - Someone who's sole understanding of video games comes from them alone.

Basing your whole knowledge of games on video games severely limits a games designers imagination, and the resources for the games designer to draw upon for inspiration and problem solving will be restricted.
A key part of playing boardgames is the communication and debate that it creates between the players, the interaction between players is one of the main reasons that people choose to play boardgames rather than video games. It is important that as games designers, we try to incorporate this interaction into our designs to make a more enjoyable and interactive experience.
Tabletop games promote a business model of 'sell the parts and pieces of the game' rather than the game itself, this is also something that games designers need to look at, as tabletop games tend to offer expansions and a wide variety of choices for the player, video games only offer the player one choice and expansions to video games are only now becoming more mainstream.
RTS games have a lot that games designers should draw on for inspiration, rather than the player purely interacting with what's in front of their eyes, the conflict and struggle within the game tends to be a larger focus for the player than actually playing it.
Sci-fi and fantasy boardgames have a habit of being a too complex branch of wargaming, this is an important lesson for games designers to learn, try not to over-complicate games but still try to make them as in depth as fantasy boardgames are.

Summary
People don't understand that boardgames can be relative to video game design and can learn from what does and doesn't work in them.
People restrict their ideas to what they play - creates similar games, this leads to a stale games market and dissatisfied players.
It is a current trend that innovation is led by technology rather than creativity in today's game design.

Design Tools

Blog post 5

This week I have analysed two articles, 'Space of Possibility and Pacing in Casual Game Design - A PopCap Case Study' by Marcos venturelli and 'Formal Abstract Design Tools' by Doug Church. Both of the articles discuss the vocabulary involved in games design and the thought process of designing, Venturelli focuses on the emerging 'Casual Game' market and Church discusses games design in general.





Doug Church's Article
In Church's article he discusses key design tools that are very important and interesting - these are 'Percievable Consequence,' 'Intention' and 'Story.'

Perceivable Consequence
Perceivable Consequence is the player's understanding that their actions will effect how they play the game and it's outcomes. An example of this would be in a platformer, when the player comes across a hole that they must clear they realise that they must press the jump button to clear the hole, otherwise they will fall into it and die - to put it simply, perceivable consequence is realising how the game works and what dangers there are.

As a designer, we need to think about perceivable consequence, we need to ensure that the player knows that every action they take will have a consequence, whether it be good or bad, for example, as a gamer you should know that falling down a hole is a bad thing but that is because the designer makes it so. It is due to this that 'Perceivable consequence' is a crucial design tool.

Intention
Intention is very closely linked to Percievable Consequence, intention is when the player plans and thinks about their actions and the outcomes of these actions, therfore planning how to overcome obstacles, etc. Using the same example as for Percievable Consequence, the player knows that they will die if they fall down the hole and so, they plan to jump over and pass this obstacle.

As a games designer, it is important that we think about intention and implement it in our designs, although ultimately it is the player that makes their own intention. As designers we give the player choices on how to use their intentions.

Story
Story is the narrative thread of the game. Whether the story is driven forward by the designer and the player progresses along a pre-determined path or the player has more influence over the story, the story is the main thing that drives the game forward and gives the player a purpose to play.



Marcos Venturelli's Article
Venturelli's article discusses PopCap, and generally talks about aspects of casual games and casual games developers. PopCap is a well renowned casual game developer and so is the ideal focus for this article, from the article there are two key tools that we can take, 'Pacing' and 'Possibilty.'

Pacing
Pacing is the speed of progression and flow in the game, and how the game is affected as a result. The easiest way to describe pacing is that casual games have a fast pace and more mainstream games have a slower pace. In casual games, there is little story and very few choices for the player to make and as a result casual games are appealing as they are very fast paced, making the player make quick decisions that increases the tension and thus makes them more fun. In more mainstream games, this wouldn't work as the story and planning would be lost, defeating the purpose of designing a detailed and in-depth game.

Possibility
Possibilty is the number of options that are available to the player, the more options available, the slower the game progresses. Both tools are very closely linked and as a result casual games have very few possibilties to ensure a fast paced game. With more possibilities the player has a lot more choices to make and so spends a lot more time thinking about these choices, theerfore the pacing of the game is ultimately slowed down.

Pacing and Possibility
As designers it is our duty to find the right balance between pacing and possibility when designing a game, this can be affected by genre and other aspects, but ultimately once we find the balance we find the type of game we want to create and then we use these tools to form the basis of the experience the player has when playing our game.

Board Game Iteration

Blog post 4

In the first week of the course I designed a board game centred around a zombie apocalypse, where players had to be the first to get to the evac zone and escape the apocalypse. The game is a basic board game where the player rolls a dice to move across the spaces to reach the end.

To make the game more interesting there were spaces where the player could pick up cards that would either be beneficial or detrimental to player progres; for example, picking up a card with a chainsaw would move the player forward 3 spaces whereas a card with a horde on it would force the player to retreat a space.
I also added in a combat aspect to the game to make it more interesting, if two or more players landed on the same square, they could decide to work together to progress faster or they could fight and one of the players would either be forced back a space or made to miss a turn.

When playing the game it became apparent very quickly that there were some problems with the game. The first problem was that with only one six-sided dice gameplay was slow as each player could not move very far forward and they were always within a square or two of each other, which meant there was no real sense of competition. The second problem was that there weren't many cards on the board so for the majority of the game the players progressed very slowly, one space at a time. The last problem that I found with the game was that the combat system wasn't very well designed so the players were constantly getting into conflict and failing to progress.

This week (week 3) I had to review these problems and try to improve the game. The first thing I improved was the board layout, I made more spaces and doubled the number of card spaces so that players could land on a card almost every turn to make progression faster and more enjoyable. I also added in spaces with 'abandoned buildings' that the player could be forced into if they got a bad result on a dice throw, these buildings could also either be beneficial or detrimental to player progression.

To make player progression faster and more competitive, I added in a second six-sided dice which meant that players had the ability to progress much further than each other, depending on the roll of the die. And the final improvement that needed to be made was the combat system. I decided to change it to a similar system to that of the combat system in 'Risk,' but instead of the players fighting each other they would have to fight a horde of zombies which would determine progression for that turn.

When I played through the game again with these modifications, it was immediately clear that they made it more enjoyable. The pacing of the game was made a lot faster by the use of two die and the extra card spaces added. The combat system has been improved significantly but it still doesn't work properly and will need more iteration before it works successfully with the rest of the game.

The paidea/ludus analysis

Blog post number 3

Hello again,
Today's critical games analysis lecture was centred around what makes a game and how we define them.
There are several ways to define a game and I have been set the task of analysing a couple of games using some of these definitions.

I must fierst talk about what the games offer in terms of paidea (effectively 'play' for pleasure) and ludus (more constrained by rules, with a clear outcome(e.g. winning)).

I will then analyse what each game conforms to in terms of Agon (competition); Alea (chance/randomness), Ilinx (movement) and Mimicry (simulation, make believe, role-play).

The first game that I will analyse is 'Dead Rising 2'
The premise of the game is your player is trapped in a quarantined shopping centre with thousands of zombies and the military won't arrive for 3 days. the game has various missions and side mission, varying from obtaining zombrex(zombie antidote) for your infected daughter, to saving random survivors that you find on your travels, to trying to clear your name of any involvement you had with the zombie outbreak. These 'objectives' place the game under the heading of ludus, however, one of the main attractions of Dead Rising 2, and its predecessor, is the inventive way you can kill zombies.
The player can use practically every object imaginable to kill zombies, for example mowing down a huge horde of zombies with a little pink tricycle or hiding out in a restaurant throwing plates at any zombie that dares get close enough. If the player wishes he/she could just spend the entire time until the military arrives killing zombies, as long as a couple of the most important missions are completed. The ability to run around in a sandbox environment with unlimited weapons and unlimited zombies offers the player the ability to play the game as paidea instead of ludus.

The second game I have chosen to analyse is 'Fallout 3'
'Fallout' is a game set in a post apocalyptic future where nuclear warfare has destroyed the earth and the last few survivors of humanity struggle to survive everyday, facing horrific foes like towering super mutants or feral ghouls and fighting off bandit attacks and the last remnants of a government that wishes to 'purge the wasteland.' Like with 'Dead Rising,' the game falls into both categories of paidea and ludus. The game has an almost infinite list of quests and tasks for the player to complete, along with hundreds of different items to collect. If the player wants to play the game like this they can spend upwards of 60hours to complete the game, not including the DLC, the game has a karma characterisation that adds to the ludus style of play that is influenced by the actions the player takes and governs what missions are available to the player and what allies they can make. On the other hand, if the player just wants to have some fun (the paidea play through) they can just complete the core storyline quests and spend the rest of their time roaming the wasteland, looking for fights and collecting weapons and armour.

Both games have strong elements of paidea and ludus styles of play and I believe that every game has, or should have, both. Without the element of ludus, the game quickly loses meaning and there is no lasting appeal for the gamer, and at the same time, without the element of paidea, the game will not be enjoyable for long and it is unlikely that the player will lose interest quickly or only play the game once.


Agon, Alea, Ilinx, Mimicry
As well as paidea and ludus, games also fall into categories of Agon (competition); Alea (chance/randomness), Ilinx (movement) and Mimicry (simulation, make believe, role-play).
These categories often find games conforming to them, often on purpose by developers who believe that these are needed to make the game work. I will use these categories to see what 'Batman: Arkham Asylum' conforms to and how it benefits the game.

The game doesn't conform to Agon within the game itself, as there is no online mode where you can compete with other players, but it does include trophies/achievements which can be compared with other players.
There are several elements of Alea in the game, most notable when fighting bosses, as they have several different fighting styles/attacks and it can often be hard to identify which attack will come next so the player must take chances with their fighting style. The game strongly conforms to Ilinx, as Batman's main traits are his stealth abilities and his detective skills. The hole environment within the game forces the player to use these traits to successfully take down enemies and progress to different areas of the game. The use of Batman's gadgets further adds to this element as they are fundamental in successfully sneaking through rooms packed with heavily armed thugs and scaling walls to get to good vantage points. The final category, Mimicry, has a strong presence in the game as the player often believes that they are Batman, and the sense that they are dealing with some serious opponents can often seem very realistic, especially when confronting the joker.

The majority of games conform to all or at least parts of all of these categories and so I don't perceive them to be relevant, I believe a better way of categorising/defining games is by their genre, i.e. 'Call of Duty' and 'Medal of Honour' fall into the genre of FPS, whereas, 'Ratchet and Clank' and 'Mario' fall into the genre of Platform games.

What makes a game a game?

Back again, and this time I'll be looking at what makes a game by analysing a BBC bite-size game for KS1, based on the definition of what makes a game by Greg Costikyan, in 'I have no words & I must design: toward a critical vocabulary for games.'

Here is a summary of the themes that Costikyan believes are needed to make a game;

Interaction
Puzzles and games will always be present together. The players choices/actions/interaction shape the gaming environment.

Goals
Gives the player incentive to play/to the struggle. The objective guides the players behaviour. Chance of failure is just as important as achieving goals.

Struggle
Without struggle or competition, the victory is unsatisfactory. The difficulty needs to be in keeping with the players abilities to make the game enjoyable.

Structure
Mutual player agreement that the game's rules and significance create structure. The games structure shapes player's behaviour, it doesn't determine it, therefore players have the freedom to choose what they do within the rules.

Endogenous Meaning
Within the structure of a game, endogenous meanings are created, these meanings are only relevant within the structure of the game.

My Examination of these definitions
I agree with Costikyan's definition/analysis of what makes a game a game. All of these elements do not necessarily make an enjoyable game.



My analysis of a KS1 game in reference to Costikyan's definition of a game

The KS1 game that I am analysing is a simple maths game where the player is presented with three shapes and has to pick the correct one five times to help a scientist build a robot.

Interaction-the player has almost complete control due to the fact that the only actions in the game are selecting different shapes, there is no other way to interact with the game or progress further. Player interaction doesn't change the state of play of the game.

Goals-the goal of the game is to select the correct shapes every time to help the scientist finish his robot.

Struggle-the game has different difficulty settings so the player can play to the best of their abilities without struggling to much or progressing to fast. It is satisfying to overcome the struggle, picking the right shapes and achieving the goals.

Structure-loosely structured around the player's interaction. The player has choices that they can make, get the right shape and progress further or get the wrong shape and have to retry. The rules pre-determine player behaviour.

Endogenous Meaning-There is no endogenous meaning within the game, although, the feeling of victory can be debated as an endogenous meaning. the game has a lot more relevance in the real world as it benefits the player's education.

Overall Evaluation of Game
The game needs to have a bigger endogenous reward and needs to be more challenging, giving the player a bigger struggle but bigger reward in return. the choices given to the player are very limited and so the game can become extremely repetitive and under challenging. the game doesn't give enough feedback to the player after each choice, this could be improved drastically to make the game a lot more educational and to benefit the player more.

imdcgd101 introduction to critical games studies

Hidey-Ho!

I've just started a degree on Computer Games Design at the University Campus Suffolk in Ipswich and a requirement is to make a blog.

My first post is an exercise we did where two people interview each other to find out some general information about them. What follows are the answers to each of the questions that I was asked.

1. What is the title of the book (fiction) you are currently reading (or the last fiction book you read)?
The last fictional book I read was called World War Z, by Max Brooks, and is based around a world wide zombie outbreak and the struggle of the humans to survive. The book is written in a documentary stylised way as survivors of the zombie outbreak re-tell their harrowing stories to the narrator. It was a very enjoyable book to read as the style and tone actually make the story sound real and the book takes itself very seriously.

2.What is the title/topic of the book (non-fiction) you are currently reading (or the last non-fiction book you read)?
I'm not really a fan of non-fiction books and so I very rarely read them but I recently purchased a book called 'The Art of Avatar,' basically a guide to the designing and making process of the incredible world of Pandora, created by James Cameron. The book reveals to the reader the long design process that was involved in creating the world and its creatures and includes several interviews with James Cameron and his design staff. As I'm a huge fan of the film, I loved this book and would definitely recommend it to anyone who also loves the film.

3. What is the last live performance you attended?
On the 10th of September I was lucky enough to see Muse at Wembley, it can quite easily be summed up as INCREDIBLE!!!!!!!!! I have always been a huge Muse fan and the show was just amazing in every sense of the word.

4. What is the title of the last film you saw at the cinema?
The last film I saw at the cinema was Scott Pilgrim Vs. the World, easily one of the most enjoyable films I've seen in a long time. I am now planning to getting the graphic novels and I hope they be as good, if not better, than the film.

5. How many hours a week do you spend playing video games?
In the long stretch between A-levels and Uni, I was spending upwards of 6 hours a day clutching a controller or frantically scrolling a mouse over a zombies head, but since I've started Uni, these hours have been cut down to 3 or 4 a day at most. (At least until Fallout: New Vegas is released)

6. Hour many hours a week do you spend playing games other than video games?

To be honest, I rarely play any non electrical game any more. I play the occasional board game at Christmas with my family and play poker with either my brothers or my friends roughly once a month but other than that everything I do has to be plugged in to play.

(Just to let you know, this isn't really a sing-a-long blog, I just liked the name)