Your Brain on Video Games

Thought-provoking TED talk that focuses predominantly on the positive effects of action shooters for vision-based tasks.

http://www.ted.com/talks/daphne_bavelier_your_brain_on_video_games.html

The Mighty Fine Actions at DoubleFine

Double Fine’s at it again, revolutionizing things and whatnot! This time, they’re opening up their game prototyping process to the public, a process they call the Amnesia Fortnight.  There are three days left for the public to vote for what game pitches will be turned into game prototypes.  Over the next 2 weeks, there will be a live stream of the teams developing those prototypes.

This is a phenomenal opportunity to see the game design process as well as how different teams approach it.

Kinda applicable to what we're doing in class.

 For info, check their site out!

http://www.humblebundle.com/double-fine#

Pheus & Mor

http://www.kongregate.com/games/PegasGames/pheus-and-mor?acomplete=pheus+and+mor

I was talking with one of my friend's about my original game design concept and he recommended I play this game.

One of the cool mechanics in it is that you have a separate controls for both Pheus and Mor.  This allows you to manipulate both simultaneously  if you so choose.  I found it rather disorienting to manage both at once at first but I slowly got the hang of it over the course of the game.

The game has a meaningful underlying story about the love between a boy and his dog.  Its mechanics reinforce the idea that this is good and mutual as a result of each character having a different skill set that's necessary to overcome the game's obstacles.  The boy can jump and slide on the ground but cannot swim, while the dog swims in water and can break walls down.  Additionally, some obstacles require Pheus, the boy, to use Mor as a stepping stool to transcend his own limits.  Through his dog, his beloved friend, he is able to achieve greater heights than he would alone.  This height metaphor runs deep in the philosophy of the game.

Enough rambling.  Play it!

Music is My Collin in Life

Collins continues onto dynamic music composition in chapter 8 of her book, Game Sound.  She describes the four advantages of dynamic music as: 1.) the ability to create music that changes with each play-through (which therefore increases audience interest by mitigating listener fatigue) 2.) the ability to create a multicolored production by transforming themes in the same composition (increases the cohesion of the musical soundscape of a production while also allowing the composer to utilize Wagnerian concepts of leitmotifs), 3.) the ability to add new surprises and increase gameplay enjoyment (dynamic music is modular and variable; hearkens back to point #1)  and 4.) the ability to add musical elements as gameplay features.

She continues on to discuss how games are non-linear and what the unique challenges for music are  within the medium.

The most important part of this chapter is Collins' breakdown of the manipulatable factors within music.   She covers ten separate aspects of music that can be manipulated.  In order to do this, she breaks apart the fundamentals of our perception of music.  This allows us to analyze what we can change while maintaining musical cohesion, which is important because games need to be interactive and maintain user interest.

Curiously enough,  I also met Guy Whitmore, another one of Collin's references, while I was in San Francisco.  My former employer, Ric Viers of BlastwaveFX, got me into a private party at Pyramind Studios--and, looking back on it, I was actually meeting some rather big names while I was there... Still can't believe it happened.

Collin All Audio Guys

In chapter 5 of Game Sound, author Karen Collins outlines the basic scope of audio production within video games.  She covers the different stages of production for sound within games while explaining the roles and responsibilities specific to each.  As with any production, there are three stages: Pre-Production, Production, and Post-Production.

This reading was a breeze for me, as this is my major focus area, and reinforced concepts that I've already studied.  The article was heavy in technical terms and concepts, though, which makes me curious as to how well received it would be to laymen.  This goes back to my lack of knowledge of how well a typical person would be able to understand and process high-concept ideas in sound design amidst a flurry of technical terms.  I'm entrenched in that world, and lack the laymen's perspective now.  

In a really geeky moment, I just want to say that I met one of Collins' cited sources, Damian Kastbauer, at the Audio Engineering Conference this past weekend.  The two of us, oddly enough, have tweeted between each other in the past.  I also attended several lectures by another one of her sources, Charles Deenan.  It is beyond peculiar to actually be able to put a face and personality on an academic source that is not one of my professors.  This is undoubtably my first time being able to do so.

Collins Chapter 8

So he talks about music/audio as changeable, so that it can and should react to both the changing gameplay and player input. He also talks about how it's important that music doesn't get too repetitive throughout a game and he outlines ten approaches to variability in music. Overall, this made me realize that music in games is much more complicated that it seems at first. There's a balance music producers have to find where the music isn't distracting to the player and it still creates a mood/feel to enhance the gameplay experience. Music is almost underrated in this sense, at least it was for me. As we learned in chapter five, it not only helps guide a player through the game, but it gives the game more meaning and makes it more immersive.

Collin 8, and more music!

Collins throws out 4 goals he believes music should strive for:
1. The ability to create music that changes with each play-through (whether he means through each level or through playing the whole game a second time I'm not sure. It seems that if the music was pre-recorded and assigned parts that the ability for it to change from the first play through would be unrealistic).
2. The ability to create multicolored production by transforming themes in the same composition. (I'd think of an example being a music score that would portray different regions and therefore be recognizable or just reflecting the theme of the overall game. aka, 8 bit music for an arcade style game).
3. Add new surprises and increase gameplay enjoyment. (This could be when a player finds a hidden item and is rewarded with the typical zelda like sound da da da daaaaa!)
4. Add elements that increase gameplay features. ( This I think of all the surprising sound effects that reinforced what is happening in the game.)

Poorly developed music is something that becomes tiring, as Collins calls it: listener's fatigue. Nothing's worse than spending time and energy in game design only to hear that people are muting your game and listening to their own music. Your score should be taking advantage of the player's sense of sound, and if it's becoming something that is mundane then the game's engagement value will suffer.

There are plenty of issues that come with sound development. A few years participating in a band or orchestra has taught me to appreciate the collaboration of instruments and timing. Within games, I've always recognized the poor transition in music, but with good transitions you'll hardly even notice. Many challenges face game sound design, the biggest one in my opinion is conflicting actions. Say a player is moving from one area to the next, each holding a different sound score, but then is encountered with a dialog scene or reward scene. Even more so, what if you have two different players each in a different scene within a game? If you had chose to play different music in different areas for multiplayer games, then there'll again be conflict.

My best suggestion for those looking to switch scenes and improve transitions between actions would be fade in and fade outs. Just like DJs, the music should seamlessly transition from one feel to another. From peaceful to battle scene and so on.

Music is probably one of the most underplayed roles in game design, which is too bad. It's probably too late in game development before inexperienced designers realize it's integration with game play.

Collins Chapter 8

Collins talks dynamic music as being more of a requirement for games as production values increase, and players tire of looping playback music. The looping music Mario used for its time is pretty epic. However, if someone tried that today, they would be considered lazy. Collins says why hire a composer if the music isn’t going to play a functional part in the game? The way that the game is designed, length, and how many players playing it, has a critical effect on what is composed. Listener fatigue is when you are stuck on a level and the music loops and makes you mad. Just like the music from the castle levels on Super Mario World.

Games are largely unpredictable in terms of the directions the player may take. This messes composers up, so they create a branching tree, which provides dynamic sound for every relevant event in the story. From there Collins talks about the Ten Approaches to Variability in Game Music.

1   Variable Tempo

2      Variable Pitch

3      Variable Rhythm/Meter

4      Variable Volume/Dynamics

5      Variable DSP/Timbres

6      Variable Melodies

7      Variable Harmony

8     Variable Mixing

9    Variable Form (Open Form)

10. Variable Form (Branching Parameter-based music)

It is cool to think that some composers can make variations of the same music to give it more shelf life. It makes me think how this same approach is used in movies and other digital media. 

Chapter 8

This reading was all about making music in games dynamic. This means not having the music being a static, background noise that just loops over and over. Instead, music in videogames should interact with and even help the immersion along and should respond to the narrative and what the player is doing. This is incredably difficult, though, because songs are supposed to be linear, and games definatly are not. I had never thought about how the many different choices in a game would effect the music but this reading brought up with a lot of different ways to deal with this.

Some of their ideas I recongized imediatly, like varying the tempo. This instantly made me think of Mario, and how the faster paced music could make my heart pound and suddenly the only important thing was getting to that flag. The fast paced music really put the timer in persepective for that game. Others made sense when I thought about them, such as the variable mix option. As I read that section I thought about many games that have many different places and cultures to explore, such as MMO's like World of Warcraft. Each area would have it's own kind of music that would be played. After playing Pokemon for so many years I can tell when I enter a battle because of the battle music. I don't actually have to be looking at the game.

Man, I wish I knew more about music after reading this. Some parts of this reading I had a hard time understanding (for instance I have no clue what DSP is). I'm looking forward to discussing this in class and hearing from people who may have a better understanding of music then me.

SPENT

I saw this game a while ago but recently stumbled across it again. I think it's a good example of using a game to help people better understand a problem in our world. While the game will tell you facts about living in poverty it will also show you plenty by forcing you to make the choices these people will face a lot. It also does things such as stack up all the problems you pile into your life because you don't have the money to make them go away. I wish the game went farther then a month, forcing you to play until you had to give up. All in all though I think it is really interesting.

http://playspent.org/

The importance of music

Music in video games is what drives the internal motives of excitement and the sense of adventure in a player. In everyday life people run to upbeat tempos to keep pace, they calm down listening to instrumentals and even feel a variety of emotions through the music as they share it with other people. The sound can affect the players performance. In the case of dark and mysterious games, a lurking melody can draw out the anxiety in a player and lead to a better surprise when the music stops and a spooky chime is drawn. These sounds bring a sense of reality to the game, and they shouldn't be overlooked.
Also, with music, there is a reflection of the game type. Certainly you wouldn't want to play 8bit music to something like Fallout- lol Annette, thinking of you. Simply because it doesn't suite the context of the situation. As a designer, you're trying to create an environment wether it's a melody or just the normal sounds you'd hear if you were in the situation. There are even games that don't play melodies, such as Golden Eye N64. It was pretty quiet at times, and the only sounds you'd hear the the footsteps and the echos of the surrounding nature. Then there was rapid gun fire, and the adrenaline kicked in.
Sound, whether it is there or whether it is used scarcely, is just one more way to mold the player's experience. Sets up the atmosphere for the player to dive into and tells them, subconsciously  what to expect. Just like the past reading explained how visual cues show the player where to go and what to do, the sound used (or lack of) will set up expectations in the player themselves and is a whole new way to influence game play.

Collins Chapter 5

I liked how this reading gave a bit of an overview of what people working with music do from publishers to producers to developers and so on. I guess I never realized how many people it takes to work on just the music for games. 

Music in games seems like common sense, but Collins makes it sound complicated, because it is. There's lots to think about from sounds with different actions to background music to fight scenes and do on. Mario is a great example of how music changing/speeding up can influence a players experience.

Collins Chap 5

In this reading it started out with looking at how a game gets developed, then narrows it's view to the sound design aspects of the game. Audio production is much like it is in film (since I have no clue how either area works this was quite an enlightening read). I'm excited to be learning about audio in general because it's one of the things I don't think about as much while playing games, but it is defanatly an important area. It looks as if the different composers try to make music for the game with the budget and project size that they have. They try to match the music as best they can to what's going on in the game to set the tone right. They join in at the pre-production stage and work with the developers as the game is created. They look at the major plot points in the game, as well as the major characters and try to create the music that way.

I noticed that there are many more pieces of music in a game then I really thought about. Major battles will get their own music, but apparently so will the main character running. This makes since, because you don't want just dead silence during your game (unless you are trying to do something with that silence) but this makes the task much more monumental the I first thought about. I can't think in musical concepts so I have no clue how they would be able to compose this music art and all these different pieces.

gaming: in and out of Simulation

Thought that you guys might be interested in this use of digital games:

http://www.hitl.washington.edu/projects/vrpain/

visual communication and learning curve in video games

I like the reading about learning faster to play better. One one hand this came across as an over-simplified way that people learn something, but on the other hand, there are some really good ideas that are applicable to the games we are currently working on (at least for me). Using analogies is one strategy that stood out to me - it's easier to understand something if it's related to something we already know. I think this is especially true with sequels. For example, when I was doing the game analysis of Assassin's Creed II, I struggled with moving around and jumping from building to building. My cousin on the other hand could do all that easily and smoothly, but he'd previously played all the other Assassin's Creed games. In terms of the game I'm designing right now, it has some similarities to chess, so I may have to further exploit that sort of analogy.

The reading about visually directing a player seemed a bit obvious to me, but it raises a good point that "players need a reinforcement for their goals" and "the want to feel like they have solved something". So you can't directly tell players what to do throughout a game, but you can use visuals to accomplish the same thing. Lighting, Hotspots, Animation, and Contextual Trails were the four main forms of Nuernberger covered. These are all important visual cues, but I feel like he neglected to talk about color, which can be a very important and effective visual cue. For example, he always talked about how he needed to get players to pick up certain object to solve a puzzle, so he would use things like lighting and animation to draw players to it, but the same could be done with contrasting colors. For example, in Skyrim, the words for "shouts" are always in a bright glowing color on a gray wall, so it stands out and it's clear where to go to learn the word. When designing games, especially highly immersive ones, I think it boils down to not "telling" players what to do, but "showing" them.

Visual Communication

In this reading the author talks about the use of visual direction as a way of using hints or guiding the player and reinforce their gameplay goals. Nuernberger uses a boss battle in Zelda as an example. What also is visual direction is the way that you start out on the left side on NES Mario.

Nuernberger talks about different visual features used. Lighting Cues is when something has a special light or effect on it, implying that you need to interact with it. Hotspots -which are things that are explicitly stated in the game that says you need to interact with this. Animation - which is when a light flickers on or off. Contextual Trails - which is like using blood on a trail the user is taking, saying Danger! After reading this article, I keept thinking about how hard it would have been playing Resident Evil series and many other games without visual direction. Not only would it be difficult, it would probably be impossible.

The second reading on Dalmau talks about every learning process being described as a function of time and knowledge and calls it the learning curve. He talks about establishing knowledge and strategies for recycling knowledge with things that we already do, like use the computer. Dalmau talks about Consistency as being applied in different areas but highlights some main points as Color schemes, typography, dialog design, and controls. He also talks of visual patterns and the different ways of customization.

Visual Communication = Good Choice

This reading was all about visual communication, and I highly enjoyed it not just because of the well written articles but also because I could think of many different examples in games that I highly enjoy. After reading these articles these examples and other techniques I see in games make a lot more sense.

In "Visually Directing the Player" the writer Joshua talked about the idea of visual direction. Visual direction is a good idea because players don't want to be directly told what to do like they are an idiot. They want to be given a chance to figure it out for themselves. This makes a lot of sense. People don't play games to be dragged around from point a, point b, point c, etc. Joshua gives four ways to give visual clues: lighting, hotspots, animation, and contextual trails. Each one was kind of obvious when pointed out but I had never sat down and thought about why designers use these techniques. Especially the hotspots. I thought back to games like Mass Effect and Fallout(I swear I'll stop talking about this game...someday), which are full of hotspots, and tried to imagine trying to navigate those spaces without them. Even in my imagination it felt impossible.

The second reading was a bit more of a broader topic: "Learn Faster to Play Better: Hot to Shorten the Learning Style". While the article was focused on how the player learns in the videogame and how the designer can make this learning proccess easier, it did focus heavy on the idea of the visual clues and visual communication. The writer talks about the idea of symbols and how they are much easier to use to convey information. He also talked about consistency of the information you are trying to convey, and how the use of  visual patterns can help this.

Visual communication is awesome. period.

The common theme running between Delmau's piece Learn Faster to Play Better and Nuernberger's Visually Directing is how to inform a player what the goal is by hints/clues/ inclinations developed through visuals. This is probably my favorite subject. Players will understand quicker if there is a visual cue such as lighting, hot spots, animations and contextual trails not only because they are looking for these cues, but because they are reminded of them through memory. Delmau mentioned that within a game's working are traits that are found in previous objects/digital media. There is a list he mentions of all the common and expected workings of the mouse and the keyboard. When online games don't use the W,A,S,D or arrow keys or even the space bar, it can be a distraction to the player to learn. While a switch up is good, some things are staples. An interesting statement was shared in Delmau's piece, "the player should know how to play the game before they even begin." Standards for games are to use real life knowledge as well.
In Nuernberger's piece, visual connections are better than just telling the player what to do because it gives them a sense of accomplishment. This feeling ties the player into the ethos and passion of the game play, something that supports their reason to keep playing it.
I believe strongly in visual communication and that it's often taken for granted. People can forget to include it because it may be interpreted as too complicated, risky or just an embellishment. What is really important though, is creating a sense of reality and problem solving within the game, and this can be strongly aided with the graphic communications.

Baby, Won't You Light Up My Interface Tonight?

In the past, I encountered an article/video much like Joshua Nuernberger's article on using visual cues to direct the player.  It was a commentary created by the Valve developers for game Left 4 Dead.  One thing the developers talked about is how important light placement was in directing player movement.  Their production was set in the midst of a zombie apocalypse and featured fast-paced and deadly zombie action.  The game was intentionally designed with low-lighting, in order to hide zombies in the environment as well as to assist one of the game mechanics--wherever you weren't looking is a potential spawn point for enemies.  One thing that the developers noted, from player-testing, is that players would typically follow whatever path was lit up.  This hearkens back to basic human survival instincts.  Our primary sense is vision, which is why many people are afraid of and feel powerless in the dark.  We can't see what is around us and need to rely on our other senses, which all come secondary to sight.  Nuernberger's article was interesting but not really all that insightful for me, though.

Daniel Sanchez-Crespo Dalmau makes some good points in his article on making more intuitive interfaces for players.  His logic is very straightforward and holds true because of it.  Just as with Nuernberger's article, Dalmau hits at basic human psychology to deliver meaningful game design.  His article strikes at how humans learn, and that is through relating things to our prior experiences.  Therefore, games that build off of historical precedence will have less of a learning curve than games that try to pave forward a new schema.  The closer this precedence is to truths in the real world, the quicker players will be able to pick it up (ex: that fire burns is a real-world principle.  Players would be able to recognize this instantly were it introduced into a game).

"There are no bad players--only bad designers"

Rouse and Want a Player Wants

The idea of actually making something that a player is interested can often be put on the back burner when creating your own game. There are a lot of things to get in the way, your own goals and interests, what you want the game to be like.... a lot of understanding and reasons why your game would appeal to others can be lost in the mix up. In the end though, we are trying to make something for everyone, not just ourselves. In Rouse's What a Player Wants, there is discussion about what expectations come from the player. Too often game ideas and concepts are repeated in hopes that the past success from one will sprout into another.

Players want a challenge. Many of the motivations that come from playing a game are the enticing bragging rights that come from score ranking and competitive play. Interaction between the game and player isn't enough, people are social and want to relate what they're doing with other people. Challenges can be learning experiences, making 2 and 2 connect, or just learning how to jump over that gap.

Players want to socialize. How can you brag if no one is listening? Online gaming is a huge success because in a way, it brings a small sense of believability to the game knowing that some reality leaked in. These are real players, for example.

My last few favorites were how people want an emotional experience and want to explore. I believe these two tie together fairly well because of the basis of motivation. If there is something that draws the player in and keeps them there whether it is a personal endeavor or just an adrenaline rush, that it gives them more reason to explore the game and continue playing.

Rouse - what players want

Players want things like rules, feedback, structure, reasonable solutions, goals, immersion, fair chance, not to get stuck, to play, etc, etc. Really they want everything.

Rouse Reading

This reading was all about what players want out of a game. As soon as I saw the title of the reading it got me thinking, both as a player and a designer. I tried to think, as a player, what do I expect out of a  game and I also tried to think about what aspects I put into a game for the player as a designer.

Some things I had thought of came up in the reading such as I want a challenge and I want a bragging experience. He has a good list of different things players look for in a game. I couldn't find one thing on the list I disagreed with, but it is noteworthy that one game will not have all of these items listed. One I had never thought of is the one having to do with social games, mostly because I don't play many multiplayer games. But games like League of Legends or Team Fortress 2 not only give players a challenge but they also allow them to socialize with other players and have bragging rights in the community the game provides.

Not only does Rouse talk about what the player wants, but he also goes into what a player needs and expects to play a game. With this list I think you could apply all of the concepts to one game. All in all it mostly seemed like a list of things to think about when trying to design a good game. It got into things like a feedback structure, consistent rules, and having an achievable goal.

All in all the main thing I thought about during this reading was the fact that I think the industry really panders to certain types of gamers, while ignoring others. I see so many games focus completely on the challenge or the bragging rights and not so much on the exploration or immersive quality. This is not to say that I can think of one group of gamers that is being completely ignored, but I do think the industry plays favorites.

There is a Rouse in the House!

This reading talked about what players want. It was broken down into bullet points, which makes for easy bloggin’. He talks about how the creator of Pokemon wanted to make a game for himself rather then make it for everyone. That is an interesting thought, Now if only everyone made games like this.

He talks about why do players want to play. Players want a challenge, while socializing, and bragging to their friends and the world that they are the best. Players want en emotional experience that they can explore and fantasize. Sounds like me playing Madden.

It was interesting while reading each section; I was trying to think about a bad example and a good example of every element that was mentioned in this reading. I found it interesting that the author said that Sim City 3000 should be thought of as a “software toy,” rather than a game as there is no explicit goal. No wonder why it never got played in the library growing up.

Rouse also talks about what players expect. They expect a Consistent World, expect reasonable solutions to work. Expect Direction, and they expect to accomplish a task incrementally. They expect to be immersed, while expecting some setbacks, they should expect a fair chance but should not need to repeat themselves or get hopelessly stuck. The player should do work rather than hopelessly watch; as they do not know what they want but know they know when it is missing. Mentioning the game Grand Theft Auto almost seems fitting to go here. It took a long time to end the game, and crazy stuff was always happening. Ah, good times.

A Rousing Article

Richard Rouse goes through, in an easy to read format, the basic desires and expectations of gamers.

He says that Gamers want:
A Challenge
To Socialize or, alternatively, A Dynamic Solitary Experience
Bragging Rights (which fits into the social dynamics outlined above)
An Emotional Experience
To Explore
To Fantasize
To Interact

Giant, lazy, bullet-point lists aside, I find the aspect of fantasizing to be one of the greatest elements of modern video games.  There are two things in particular that Rouse talks about in relation to fantasizing that particularly caught my attention are that "computer games provide a good medium for players to explore sides of their personality, that they keep submerged in their daily lives".  Games have the capacity to be an introspective tool, allowing people to discover themselves in ways that are not available to them in their ordinary life.  I remember when I played Fable 2, there was a particular point of the story that faced me with a moral dilemma.  I had been placed in a situation where I was posed with having to choose between allowing a foolish young woman to lose her youthful body and become an old woman or to take that curse upon myself and become hideously scarred.  Normally, I play the stock hero who takes all the burdens upon themselves, in a completely fantastical and impossible way.  This time, though, I chose to not intervene and risk bodily harm to myself.  I remember justifying it to myself as the woman being a one-time write-off NPC character whom I felt no emotional contact to and therefore had no obligation to them as a person.  The judgement I cast on her was entirely unheroic and showed that, in the end, I would sacrifice my time, my blood, my effort and even my life to achieve a lofty end-game goal but that I wouldn't sacrifice my physical beauty to preserve the quality of life for a stranger who had made a mistake.  To this day, I still ponder on what my choice at that moment says about me as a person and whether or not I like what it means. This feeds right back in to Rouse's statement that games allow players to engage in socially unacceptable behavior in a safe environment.

Players Expect:
A Consistent World
To Understand the game-world's bounds
Resonable solutions to work
Direction
To Accomplish tasks incrementally
To be immersed
Some setbacks
A fair challenge
Not to need to repeat themselves
Not to get hopelessly stuck
To do, not to watch

Adam's Game Balancing

Learning to balance between a game that is too difficult to play, is too unbelievable and one that is too easy and too unrealistic is the key theme within Adam's piece, Game Balancing. There is the difficulty level to consider, for example, for it must be difficult enough that it serves the situation of the game by addressing the character, the player, and then constraints appropriately. Within every game, the mechanics guide the balance within play. The action and procedure lead to a satisfied interaction within the game.

Consider space, the environment which the player is interacting. There is the physical and the digital space, depending on the type of game play. From this environment, you learn what to expect from the boundaries that are constricting your space. For example, if you were playing on a football field you wouldn't consider that catching/throwing the football across the field into the stands would be acceptable play.

The objects, attributes, and states are anything that interacts with the player. These can be the visible objects as well as the characteristics of the items in play. There's the ball, but then there's the items in your way or items that prevent/enable you to play within their context.

The actions and interactions between the players and the objects are the oprative moves and the resultants of those moves. So in the beginning, there is the action, and after that action has been made there is the resultant. What action you decide to make has a consequence leading to a better understanding and mastering of the mechanics within the game.

The rules, overall, are the foundational, behavioral and social constructs in the game. There are the rules made by the game, but then there are also the social dynamics within the participants that lead to mutual agreements or disagreements. Behavioral rules tie well within the social dynamics in the sense of a maturity with how other rules are being handled. Each player becomes aware of how other players are abiding by the rules. This could reflect well with the idea of 'cheating' or just finding 'loopholes' within the structure that allow a player to have an advantage from considering and acting upon and idea another player didn't consider. (I believe that might be Bogost...)

Adams - balancing

Very cool reading. Adams really breaks down all the elements that make a game balanced. I really like breaking it up between PvE and PvP. But most of the time I was reading it, I just kept thinking about SC2. It's a game I like to play occasionally, and it's probably the most balanced game I've ever played. In fact they recently released the bata for SC2 - Heart of the Swarm, so it's not balanced yet. There are a bunch of new units, so lots of people will play it for a while, and eventually it will reach a point where it's completely balanced, in fact they already removed a unit because it was too powerful. Then eventually some actual strategies will start emerging, eventually leading to "standard play" with each race match-up. That's not all the stuff Adams talks about, but that's what I could immediately connect to a game.

Adams Reading

This reading was all about mechanics.

The first mechanic was space. Obviously the player must be able to fully understand and move around in the game, or the constructed, limited space the designer has created. There is also the idea of spaces within spaces, such as levels or rooms or confined areas in the game itself. After this mechanic came the idea of objects, the things gamers will interact with in your space. With objects come attributes  or the information about the object. Gamers always want to know what the best gun is or what sword will do the most damage. However, all these attributes should not be obvious. Along with attributes come stats, and those gamers are very familiar with. These interactions with these objects in the space are actions, which is the third mechanic. These actions are anything a player can do in the game, and event the simplest step and movement must be considered. These actions must be confidened, and so the next mechanic are the rules that constrain them.

All in all this reading was very interesting. Some aspects of mechanics that were talked about I already knew, but the reading went into details I hadn't even though of. Other aspects it brought up I had never through about, such as all the different types of rules that need to be thought about, not just the written. Also the mind boggling idea of the space a gamer has inside the game. I also found myself thinking more about how all the objects in my game are going to interact, and the unitended consiquences of these interactions.

Adams Family Readings

In the mechanics reading Adams talks about various game mechanics including Space, Objects, Attributes, States, Rules, and Actions.

Space is the “magic circle of gameplay.” It defines the various places rthat can exist in a game and how those places are related to one another. Adams says that game spaces are generally discrete or continuous, have some number of dimensions and have bounded areas, which may or may not be connected. A game with fancy aesthetics can fool you into thinking that its functional space is more complex than it really is, think a monopoly board.

Objects are characters, props, tokens, score, or anything that can be manipulated in your game. Objects are nouns of game mechanics. Objects generally have one or more attributes of which are often the current position in the game space.

Attributes are categories of information about an object. A car has maximum speed and current speed as attributes, and each attribute has a state. A state helps define that attribute. Actions are the verbs of game mechanics.

Rules are what define the space objects actions and consequences and goals. They make possible all the mechanics. Adams defines the most important rule as the object of the game. You must be able to state your games goal and state it clearly.

In the Game Balancing Reading Adams goes in and talks about the difference between fairness and difficulty. As well as what is a balanced game. Adams defines a balanced game as having meaningful choices. The players must perceive that the game as fair. The difficulty must be consistent. Then Adams talks about dominant strategies in video games and the relationships among player options. Transitive describes a relationship among three or more entitles with advantages or disadvantages to a choice. Intransitive relationships works more like rock paper scissors.

Adams talks about PvE (player vs environment) and PvP (player vs player) and making the games fair. Adams says that PvE games should be fair, where a stalemate should not occur. Players should not have to do research outside of the game world to win the games.

A point that Adams talked about was fairness to a game. We can relate to that whenever we play a game I think that is why we have the difficulty settings. It is unfair to start out all games on difficult especially if it is your first time playing.