Change of plans

Recap

The last months I have been working on the prototyping environment. Sadly I found that the environment wasn't gonna work out the way I wanted to in Unity3d. I also found that I was spending the majority of the time developing a tool with flexible tools. I'm to much of a beginner programmer to really get that to work the way in a way that it would really be usefull. After 2 months I found I had mostlty build the basis for a generic platformer. About 80 % of the essential elements that I had found for any kind of game were there but they weren't flexible and easy enough to use yet.  It's the way these were going to be combined that was going to result in interesting gameplay. I was going to have to change the elements quite a bit for them to work the way I wanted to. And to get it to work the way I was had to go against the framework of Unity it self.

So I've decided to move away from the prototyping environment. I want to graduate as a gamedesigner so the best thing for me is to design  a game not a tool.

After my mock exam presentation(a presentation about the progress that we have to do about halfway into the project) I was given the advice to remove the technical focus from my game and focus on the design of game rules.

I did some thinking about that and I looking back I think it's all falling in to place now. I come from a competitive gaming background and primarily focus on forming the core rules of a game. So it only makes sense if my project reflects that.

But what game?

I have 2 primary interests as a gamedesigner right now. One part of me likes designing games with a limited set of rules that have a lot of depth in them. These are the type of games I really like myself and have the most experience with.
The other part likes to come up with experimental interactive concepts. These are concepts that touch the borders of what we consider games. They focus on evoking emotions unusual to games (for example a game that plays like a walse for 2). To avoid going into to much detail I have a link to a description that I think kinda describes what I'm looking for. Again they are experimental so they tend to be hard to define.

I gave both of these types of games a shot during brainstorming but I found that the limited ruleset game concepts are more clear and more feasable. So I decided to focus on those for the rest of the period.

New direction

So my new project goal is now:

"Design a game with a couple of simple gamerules that form a engaging competitive game that's easy to learn but hard to master."

The game experience is to be be engaging to play due to the gamesystem not the art or sound. The rest supports this experience in a as minimal way as possible. So no fancy artwork, soundtracks or complex technology as the selling point.

Form?

Since the focus is now primarily on finding, tweaking and refining the game rules the form is left to be decided. It can be any form really (that includes cards, boards, roleplay etc). What remains the same is that form is not the focus point but merely a means to an end.

Impact on thesis

This change in direction impacts the research I was doing for my project. The focus is not on prototyping methods any more but on finding and enhancing a type of play.

Since the gamerules are the focus now I need to research gamerule types and the effect they have on gameplay. I need to define for myself what is required for competitive gameplay and what enhances it.
And I need to do a lot of prototyping in the following weeks with the concepts I have designed. The majority of the time will be spend adjusting the gamerules.
In the end I want visitors of the graduation expo to join in on the game and walk away convinced that this has competitive depth (even though they only played it for a fraction of the time). I'll know that the game is a succes when players find it hard to quit.

The research will still be primarily practical and not so much academic in nature though and mainly serves as a point of reference for my design decisions. I don't really intend to make a statement (although I will share my view on what makes a good competitive game and what doesn't).

So next up I'll start by sharing the games that form my current main inspiration.

Update: Warmups finished , A book of lenses on prototyping etc

Reached the end of the InsurgentX tutorials. Was a nice warmup.

Spend most of the time yesterday trying to find the game elements that reoccur in each game type. Wikipedia lists a ton of genres but I think that most genres contain reoccuring elements. So I've done a lot of brainstorming, mindmapping and sketching on A4's to find them. Considering comparing screenshots to find recoccuring elements.

I've discovered that I kinda already know why you should prototype and think I have a good idea of what method to use when. I just haven't put this into practise yet. My biggest obstacle to overcome is definitly the technical and practical hurdle and not so much the theoretical.

I had some spare hours today that used to read the chapter about iteration in 'The Art of Game Design: A book of Lenses' by Jesse Schell'.  I was pleased to read that he also states that the primary focus of prototyping is to answer questions. He has a lot of pointers on what to consider when designing/building prototypes so I'm reading through those.

As I try to find recoccuring game core elements among genres I did discover that it would be best if I focussed on 1 genre that interests me the most for the time being and then implement/rebuild the flexibility of the environment afterwards. I was kinda planning to do that anyway.

There are 2 types of games that really interest me at the moment. They are a platforming environment & top down environment suited for simple multiplayer gameplay. I want to explore fairly geometric simple multiplayer gameplay. Easy to learn hard to master.

The other is exploring expressive concepts through abstract visuals. This is the arty side of mine.

The arty side is the most experimental which doesn't just focus on fun, the multiplayer side likes to make fun engaging games in which the player can grow in skill over time.

First I need to learn to build game elements though before I can really focus on expression or engagement. I think starting off with editor script tutorials by the walkerboys and doing the platformer tutorial would be best. During these tutorials I'll learn how to make a spritemanager in unity and build the 1st level of mariobros1. They also cover how to go about designing a tool which should be really helpfull when I design the elements to extend Unity with.

I'm also considering designing multiple simpel prototypes geared towards top down multiplayer and platforming gameplay and build those on set days that I reserve for experimentation. That way I don't just follow instructions but put them in practise aswell.

So in short: Lot's of things to decide but I think I'm heading in the right direction and I'm on schedule.

My own thoughts on prototyping

Started of this week doing the InsurgentX tutorials to warmup and it's definetly getting me in the right mindset. Especially started to see that classes aren't that complex. It's more the hierarchy that's confusing to me. About 3/4 into the series. 

I've done some webresearch. I found a bunch of links but I notice that I really needed to inventarize my own knowledge because a lot sounds familiar.  So below are my thoughts on prototyping.

What I know

Figured it’s best if I try to inventarize what I know about prototyping myself while doing research.

I’ll start of with what methods that are know to me. Then I’ll talk about the use of prototyping as I know of.

So first of the methods. For gamedevelopment 3 methods are known to me.

1  Paper Prototyping	Using pen and paper the core mechanics are tested quickly
2. Physical Prototyping	Through physical  behaviour and rules game play is acted out. Uses physical ‘dummy’ objects to simulate ingame objects
3. Digital Prototyping	A quick messy digital version is made containing the core features

Each method has it’s advantages and disadvantages  

Paper Prototyping 

Is usely the one designers start off with since it requires the least technical investment. This means the designer can focus on the design itself and avoid distraction by technical bugs.

This approach is limited though. While it’s very usefull to test quick game rules the rules are changed to test how the game plays. This means there is a difference in game rules and can cause differing results from the actual game.

Also because it’s paper the concept get’s throw in a set of boardgame rules. This can cause players to overthink their actions and this may not be what you want for a digital game.

Physical Prototyping
A very free form of prototyping. Players utilize their own body feature which means the only thing that needs to be built are props for the players to use. These often don’t require much work. This method makes heavy use of the players imagination to fill in the gaps though.

Physical and Paper prototyping are usefull at the start to get view of the players decision making.

Videogames are interactive and evolve over time though and often have a lot of things going on at the same time at once. Distilling the game in paper form can mean a lot of manual calculation is required. This disrupts the play experience. The more complex ideas can get dropped pretty quickly due to this. And this might not be fair.

Tools: Blocks, Physical Props, Imagination

Digital prototypes
Since these are ‘simple games’ this form get’s closest to the actual game and is thus most representational for the real game experience. They tend to take longer to make then paper or physical methods though.

The uses of prototyping
Prototyping really means testing to me. Testing is mainly done because there are questions. Prototypes are used to find answers to these questions. So prototyping has 2 main uses in my opion.

1.   To answer  existing questions
2.    To find new questions

Designers can have different type of questions.

What prototypes should consist of
Prototypes should focus on answering the questions the designer has about the concept. This means the designer needs to distill the game to it’s core and find the most fast, effective way to produce different results.

Prototypes should allow for fast tweaking. If option 1 doesn’t work option 2 might and maybe option 3.

What should be forgotten when prototyping:

All unnecessary features that aren't necessary to answer the question. These just take up time and distract. Examples are complicated animation features, particle effects, rendering etc.

To be continued