Author: Brett Lowey

Aesthetics

Short one today:

I think that game aesthetics ideally have the following properties (in order of importance):

1) Communicative -Clearly delineate and hopefully even explain mechanical distinctions (see Affordance)
2) Interesting -Some aspect about the visuals grabs the attention of viewers unfamiliar with the game
3) Unobtrusive -The visuals can be viewed for a long period of time without becoming irritating (Note that this can be achieved either through minimalism/abstraction or through lavish attention to detail/realism)

tiny-design:

The Battle Frontier in Pokemon Emerald was created as the ultimate set of endgame content to the game, at least in terms of battles. In creating a multitude of alternative battle experiences (whether it be randomized rental Pokemon in the Battle Factory, the cryptic rooms in the Battle Pike, etc.), the game was able to challenge the players for theoretically hundreds of hours, without having to create any new Pokemon.

Always thought it would be cool to riff on the pokemon core idea. Dragon warrior monsters and Ni-No-Kuni are the only games that come to mind are nice examples of that kind of thing. Hmm, maybe there are others I’m not thinking of?

Influence for Next Game

Ever since bumping into Keith Burgun’s perspective on game design, I’ve wanted to create a “game” as he defines it – a contest of ambiguous decision making. It seems that this kind of game is extremely uncommon among video games. In fact the types of sensibilities he describes are much more in line with hobby board games. (For more info on what that means, head to http://www.shutupandsitdown.com/videos/v/intro-boardgaming/). 

To that end, I’m learning the Grids Pro library in Unity, because it seems eaiser to create this kind of thing in discrete space (a square or hex grid probably) and likely in discrete time as well (turn-based). Here are some of the games I’m likely going to be riffing on.

Spelunky
Hoplite
Advance Wars
Endings
Hexcells Infinite

—
Also!

Games that look like they’re probably influences but I haven’t played them yet.
Invisible Inc
Auro
Close Castles

Halo Multiplayer Design Thoughts

Some quick thoughts about the positive aspects of Halo (1,2+3) Multiplayer Design.

1) Social dynamics of team multiplayer raise the stakes without adding any rules.
2) Heavy emphasis on items and vehicles makes map positioning and tactics important.
3) Weapons are very simple and distinct from one another.
4) Grenades and melee attacks mean you always have options, and give you common skills to develop while you explore other weapons.
5) High health and movement capabilities mean that skirmishes have enough time to develop and establish a back and forth “dialog” between combatants.

Roguelike Progression and Saving

Reading the most recent News Post from Tycho at Penny Arcade (http://www.penny-arcade.com/news/post/2015/08/05/) when I noticed him talking about a game called “Galax-Z” and how you are only allowed to “save” when you complete a complete 5 level “season”. When you break it down, this is what games like Spelunky are doing with the tunnel man system, or as Tycho points out, as From Software is doing in Dark Souls with the bonfire mechanic. You can have players run though your procedural system many times getting better, and have a strict cap on the amount of in game “progress” they make that the game keeps track of.

In this way, maybe its possible to avoid the problems inherent to a regular RPG level up or upgrade system (emphasizing grinding over skill improvement, which is boring), while retaining a bit of their stickiness factor.

Even Ori and the Blind Forest has been playing around with saving as a limited resource lately, and I think this is a very interesting design direction to take.