08 February 2010

[Literature] Fundamentals of Game Design, ch 1: Games and Video Games

These are my notes for the first chapter of Fundamentals of Game Design, a book by Ernest Adams and Andrew Rollings (pages 3 to 35). I do not know if I will do all of their chapters, but you can expect other posts dealing with this interesting book. [My comments will be inside square brackets.]

What is a game?

Work consists of whatever a body is obliged to do, and ... Play consists of whatever a body is not obliged to do
-- Mark Twain, The Adventures of Tom Sawyer

A game contains rules, goals, play and pretending. [play and pretending bring games close to theater]. Toys have no rules. Puzzles have only one goal but no rules. In some languages like Swedish, playing with a goal and playing without one are two different words.

Interactivity: Games require acive players whose participation changes the course of events. Play is a participatory interactive entertainment. Unlike books or movies which are presentational, ie their content does not change. [What about Gamebooks?]

Suspension of disbelief: The Magic Circle is the playground for pretended reality. However, the distinction between real world and pretended reality is sometimes blurred if events in the game [losing for instance] are meaningful outside of it [death! cf Mesoamerican ballcourt game sacrifices].

Challenge: A game must include challenge [cf Flow Csikszentmihalyi]. Challenge difficulty is perceived differently by players. Gameplay consists of challenge and actions.

Rules: Victory and defeat conditions are not must-have rules. They only make the game more exciting. Metarules are immutable rules that define how which mutables rules can be changed. [cf Morpheus in Matrix: some rules can be bent, others can be broken] [smart metarules make mods possible; this kind of meta-concepts echoes software engineering principles]

Players who are trying to achieve different unrelated goals that are not mutually exclusive are neither competing nor cooperating - they are not really playing the same game [what about AH/bankers/tradeskill players in MMOG? It seems there are different goals players can look for. Are there different games within MMOG (ie different rewards for different actions) or different ways to play the same game (ie same reward for different actions)?]

Symetry and roles: In a symetric game, all players follow the same rules. Fox games are non-symetric games: one player has the fox, the other has the sheep/geese/hounds.

Types of interactionIn simple wordsExamples
Single-player"me versus the situation"Solitaire
Two-player competitive"you versus me"Chess
Multiplayer competitiveeveryone for himself" (but agreements between players might be possible)Monopoly, Diplomacy, Agricola
Multiplayer cooperative"all of us together"Shadows over Camelot (without Traitor)
Team-based"us versus them"Bridge

Conventional games versus video games

Advantage of video games: With video games, players do not have to control the rules themselves. [In MMOG, Game Masters are often needed, not only for police purpose but also for in-game events] This means more immersion for the players.

Avoid trial and error [that is also a general HCI recommendation: users do not read handbooks. I wonder if "trial and success" could be a relevant game design that teaches the rules to the player. For example, whatever possible action done by the player in the first levels of Plant versus Zombies leads to victory. Even though it is not really a tutorial, the point is only to teach the player what key elements do and the principal game mechanics and actions.]

AI: Players often believe the game contains smart AI. In fact, most of the time, the game only fakes smart in-game characters to entertain the player enough. But sometimes, the magic circle is broken because of AI dysfunction or an unexpected choice from a player. [see for instance a NPC in eXistenZ that stucks the player in a while loop]

Segment: Your game can not please everyone because everyone does not enjoy the same thing. [interestingly, this applies perfectly well to marketing segments]

Gameplay is the primary source of entertainment in all video games. But aesthetics and harmony/coherence matter.

Types of challengeVideo game examples
Physical coordinationDDR, Tetris, Street Fighter
LogicMastermind
Pattern recognitionSonic the Hedgehog (behavior patterns of ennemies), Mahjong
Time pressureTrackmania, Zuma
Memory and knowledgeYou Dont Know Jack, Memory Match
ExplorationDoom, Portal
ConflictAge of Empires, Pac-Man, Half-Life, ICO
EconomicCivilization, The Settlers
Conceptual ReasoningThe Incredible Machine, Façade, Syberia

Risk implies reward, otherwise there is no incentive to take the risk.

Types of immersionExamples
TacticalTetris trance, the action is so fast the brain has no time to focus on something else
StrategicChess master, observing, calculating and planning [you need a player of the same or higher level so that you are not bored]
Narrativebeing inside a story, like in good books or movies

Test your skills

Each chapter has a collection of multiple choice questions to let you check if you have learned the biggest points the authors wanted to make. Following the questions, a few exercises and discussion questions bring interesting and inspirational matter about the current chapter. I only give my pick of the best exercises I found in this chapter.

  • Create a competitive game for two players and a ball that does not involve throwing it or kicking it.
  • Define a competitive game with a single winner, for an unlimited number of players, in which only creative actions are available.
  • As a potential designer, do you see yourself as an artist, an engineer, a craftsman, or something else?

Communication channels

Past - channels and emotes

Dourish reports that in old MUDs of the 80's, typing emote smiles and bows would make your character smile and bow to another user. Twenty years later, typing /smile in SWG would similarly let your character smile for a few seconds to another character. Compared to textual MUDs, the SWG players see avatars acting when performing the emotes.

Chats with multiple simultaneous channels have been used for at least a decade in first-generation (ie pre-2000) MMOG such as Everquest. As of December 2009, UO, another first-generation MMORPG launched in 1997 only allows its players to participate in one channel at a time. Hence I guess multiple simultaneous channels have been a feature found after the latest first-generation MMOGs. Conveniently let us say multiple simultaneous channels is a second-generation MMOG feature.

Even though MMOs have evolved a lot in the last two decades, it seems that within the MMOG worlds themselves, the communication mechanisms have not evolved that much.

Present - voice-chat

Some current virtual worlds/MMOGs offer general group activities who require a fast-paced synchronizations and collaborations between avatars within the virtual worlds. Intense action between players means textual chat does not provide a fast-enough and handy-enough communication chanel. As Monty Sharma says, typing and combat don't mix - it's a good way to die. And being able to talk freely improves strategy because your guild can discuss the plan of attack in detail without being tied to the keyboard for IM. However, enabling such a functionality within the game means increasing enormously the data traffic for the server, potentially increasing player latency. To my mind, this is the reason why MMOG system designers avoid implementing a voice-chat system within the game. Hence, players often use a external third-party tools like Ventrilo (launched in 2002) or Teamspeak (launched in 2002) and many guilds (if not all) look for free Teamspeak or Ventrilo servers so that they can use a voice-chat system.

Since its creation in 2005, Vivox has brought voice font and 3D voice to MMOG. Their voice-chat system has been integrated into more and more MMOGs:

  • Eve Online in 2006
  • Second Life in 2007
  • SOE Station Voice plateform in 2008
  • All Points Bulletin in 2009
  • Global Agenda in 2010

Technically, the Vivox system is based like Ventrilo and Teamspeak on VoIP. But the difference is the Vivox voice-chat can follow the client-server architecture and logic of the game itself (providing, I bet, the MMO game developers have an access to the Vivox component(s) API). There is actuallty a lot to comment about Vivox solutions, whether from the social, technical, community management or marketing perspectives so I may post about all this later. An interview with Monty Sharma, VP of Vivox production management and marketing, tells a lot about the overall strategy and benefits for all sides. For the end-user, the MMOG company seems to provide this voice-chat service. But behind the scene, the MMOG company does not suffer the enormous extra data traffic generated by voice-chat and the development burden as they outsource it to Vivox. A win-win-win strategy between MMOG companies, Vivox and end-users.

In the end, third-parties such as Teamspeak, Ventrilo or Vivox have realized that The real-time strategy is too important, and the socializing is too much a part of the fabric of these games to leave the communication in a rudimentary form. Voice is elemental in this context.(Monty Sharma). It seems substantial improvements in MMOG player communication have come through in the last five years...

Future - Facial

I wonder if written chat will still be actively used in Global Agenda. Global Agenda is a MMOTPS, which means text-chat can be deadly in critical situations. Maybe it will be used between strangers who do not want to talk to each other during quick missions they have to complete together. The interviewer of mmorpg.com explains voice-chatting is not always what players want in the game.

One of the issues I had while playing DDO is that groups would invite you into a party and immediately set up voice chat. Suddenly strangers were on the game talking to you over your computer. This seemed a little more open than having a password to get into say Ventrilo and only allowing certain people in.

It might well also happen that emotes are still widely used during PvP encounters. For instance, the following chat log is something perfectly possible:

St3ve [Team 1] has been killed by j4ck [Team 2]
j4ck waves at St3ve
j4ck [Team 2] has been killed by Azure [Team 1]

Azure waves at j4ck
St3ve laughs

The Ragnarök Online MMORPG enables the use of alt+digit shortcuts for emoticons. For instance, by default, alt+2 displays an interrogation mark above your avatar's head. Even when fighting dangerous boss monsters or other guilds, players can use these emotes without having their fingers too far away from their skill shortcuts.

In the futurist dystopian movie Gamer, a (fat and ugly) player smiling or laughing will make his/her (slim and sexy) avatar respectively smiling or laughing. With Microsoft Project Natal recognizing 31 body parts, we are on the way to facial recognition. Actually, Shane Kim, Microsoft Corporate Vice President, mentions that Project Natal also got voice recognition. It has a multi-array microphone so that it can recognize different voices in a room among the different players. It also recognizes faces. I do not really think that recognizes faces means recognizing facial expressions like smiling. But it's on the way ...

Suggestion to Microsoft

For frequently visited web pages like the Project Natal main page, I'd suggest to be CSS-compliant with as many "common" browsers as possible. Try visiting this page with Firefox3.6 and access/display the tabs at the top of the page ...

Edit (February 25th 2010): it seems that Microsoft has updated the page :-)