Response Blog #24: Devolver Response

Because there were no required readings for the week, I thought I would once again give a small update on how my Devolver project was coming along.

After the Devolver test run a week ago, we learned that there were some things we needed to change about the game to make it simpler and easier to play.  Throughout the week, the Okapiers as a group have been working on changing the statistic system, the class, trait, and spell cards, and the combat system.

We have been going through each statistic, and have either been simplifying them to work on d20 roles or removing/merging statistics in an effort to have a smaller, more concise list that is easier to follow and keep track of by the player.

We have totally decided to redo the class, trait, and spell card system, as the original, which conformed nicely to the actual video game, was way to slow to actually use.  Instead of having separate cards for each class, trait, and spell, we are making new cards that merge these all into one, so the player need only draw three cards and choose one of the pre-made characters.  What this loses in randomness and variety, it makes up for in speed and simplicity, which we decided was more valuable for the game format.

Finally, we decided to improve the combat system similarly to the character cards by attaching enemies directly to the Field cards, which removes the need to have a whole separate stack of Enemy cards and increases the speed of combat in general.

These were just some of the changes we have decided on to improve for the final version of the game.

Response Blog #23: Class Response

In class today, we had a scavenger hunt.  My Devolver team teamed up together to help each other find the amount of items we needed.  We completed the task by finding a good hiding spot in the library, playing a board game in public, finding a sticker, placing an IMS program sticker somewhere in the library, and taking a picture of a Boba Fett we found.

Most of these tasks we did, and the other ones to which we did not get, seemed to be to have a focus on doing public things that would bring attention to the scavengers and the Interactive Media Studies program in general.  I found it interesting that some of the most public tasks that would cause people to ask questions emphasized the “non-traditional” aspects of the program, like games.

For example, the task that required you to get a person to say the name of a Pokemon without saying it yourself.  This would most likely bring the person to ask why this was needed at all, which would then lead into an explanation of the class and, inevitably, the program as a whole.

In terms of advertising and raising awareness for the program, I thought that it was valuable to be participating in an activity that was representative of the program itself.  We played a game that had many steps that would bring awareness to the program.  Instead of a pamphlet or poster, which have their own, separate effectiveness as simple advertisements, I could not think of a better way to advertise a program so focused on interaction than to actually interact.

Response Blog #22: Reading Response

For this week, Team Taco (the presenting group for the week) asked us to read this piece on history concepts and video games.

I found it intensely interesting when I read that the Assassin’s Creed development team keeps a history grad on full-time to help make sure the in-game world is as historically accurate as possible, at least in the ways that it is possible to do this (not the whole alien and time-travelling stuff).  This interested me because I am only co-majoring in IMS because I am seriously considering going into the video game industry, mainly working on the engine and back-end systems.  But in the game ideas that rattle around inside my head everyday, slowly taking form as I work on a game engine in my free time, I dream of one day being able to design a world system to accurate and engrossing that a player feels natural playing in it.  I do not want to recreate the world in a game and call it a day, but I do want the underlying physics and historical elements to be factually correct.  I want the parts of the game that are meant to connect to the real world to appear to actually be the world.  For example, I want accurate physics, light projection, destructible elements, enter-able building, etc, in addition to the supernatural elements I dream of implementing, such as superpowers, mythical creatures, magic, etc.  I do want to add supernatural elements, just in ways that mesh with a hyper-realistic world and seem so natural that the player wonders why the real world is not like this.  I had not really thought about how important the historical aspects of a game could be, but the fact that the Assassin’s Creed team has a full-time history grad on staff really speaks to how significant getting the facts of the world right can be to the immersion level of a game.  I find this goal translates almost perfectly to my desire for accurate physics in games I make.

Ironically enough, it seems that my view that crafting a world so similar to a player’s own, but flawlessly merging in supernatural elements at the same time, really is a great way to increase immersion, as the Assassin’s Creed dev team has been doing this in a similar way.

Response Blog #21: Class Reponse

In class yesterday, we had the first Devolver test day.  I volunteered myself to be the one who would stay back and assist others in playing our game, as I wanted to see how well the game played, seeing as I had designed most of the rules and codified the rulebook.

The game went over surprisingly well, although there were a few problems that arose due to a mis-communication between the card design and stat changes and a somewhat over-complicated gameplay system.  Not all of the stats were listed on class cards, so it became difficult to calculate current stats to apply in combat.  Also, many of the game mechanics, such as rolling for successful hits or critical hits was still very rough, and not optimized whatsoever for a d20 system.  For example, the stats were based out of 100, so the gamekeeper (me) had to make mental calculations frequently to resolve actions.  This was extremely helpful to me because I now know what needs to be removed, changed, and improved upon to speed up gameplay to allow for more immersion.

Other than those issues, I was actually surprised at how similar the game ran in comparison to the original Rogue legacy.  Our game has successfully translated the randomization of character creation to a card form, although we plan on reducing the assembly time of this by merging class cards with spell and trait cards to preserve randomization but increase speed, and which seems to be one of the coolest and most important features of the original game.  The signature difficulty also translated to the game, as random bad luck and bad room draws caused the player to restart four times before he started killing enemies, gaining gold, and buying upgrades.  Consequently, he beat the early one-stage game we had prepared for the day on the very next life.

In conclusion, at least through early play throughs, it seems that our game is on the right track to mimicking Rogue Legacy well, and even captures the semi-random hardness and glory that can come from playing the original.

Response Blog #20: Devolver Response

Even though a blog post was not needed for today, due to the presentations all week, I wanted to write a blog to not lose track of the numbering.  Because there were no readings required for the week, I will instead write about my work with my De-volver project.

My group is de-volving the game Rogue Legacy, which, at first, did not seem like a big problem.  But given its numerous similarities to RPG games and its seemingly incredible amount of randomized content, the devolution of the game has been slightly harder than previously expected.  Although we have made a significant effort to break the game down to its bare-bones, while still retaining its original character, the game is still a somewhat complicated beast.

I am mostly responsible for writing the codified rule book for the game, and I worry that it is becoming too massive too quickly.  Not that this is a problem really, as most Dungeons & Dragons-like games have huge, complicated rule books.  I just want to make it a personal goal of mine to make the rule book as simple and easy-to-understand as possible.  To ensure this, I plan on writing the rules in as simple, but detailed way as possible.   To remedy the length issues that this may cause, I was also thinking about making a quick start guide that would be considerably shorter, and leverage the more extensive rule book as needed.  This would hopefully allow new players to quickly get into the game, but also allow for multiple play-throughs to become more interesting and keep giving the player a better experience.

Response Blog #19: Class Response

In class, a group presented on the different types of cheating in video games.  One of these types was “The Code is Law,” which essentially dictated that anything that was programmed into the game was valid, even if some of these inclusions were almost game-breaking and definitely not intended to be used.

What most of the class, and myself, felt about this type was that it was not a bad type of cheating.  But then I thought about the negative connotations connected to cheating.  Are there negative connotations because cheating is intrinsically a bad action that is against the moral fiber of society?  If so, is cheating as an action limited to things that have negative connotations?  If we all felt that “The Code is Law” type was not bad, but just something that gamers tend to do in games, is it really cheating?  I would say it is not cheating.

First, cheating, in any sense really, is viewed poorly, and often times comes with serious punishments (such as when caught cheating on a test or partner).  In each of these two example cases, cheating on a test or a partner, a person is breaking “the rules.”   In test cheating, a person is breaking the agreement that he will use the test as a way to show his knowledge and preparedness of the material on the spot.  In dating, a cheat breaks the rule of fidelity.  These cases are negative because they are breaking established rules.

Even though this point is mostly semantics about the “correct” definition of cheating is, I do not believe that you can cheat in a system that has rules that allow your action.  For instance, if I am playing a game of Terraria, and I quit the game right before I die, thereby saving myself from death and loss of progress and items, I am not cheating.  This was a system that was built into the game, and, thus, I am not doing anything to break the game’s rules and play it unfairly.  Sure, it might detract from the survivalist or adventure aspect of the game, but it is just a (clever?) manipulation of game rules.  I am not going out of my way to change any rules of the game, so I cannot be cheating.  I may be a bad sport and a manipulative control freak, but I am not a cheat.

Response Blog #18: Reading Repsonse

While reading the articles on the history of Dungeons & Dragons and the development of the role-playing game, I found it interesting how the games evolved to focus less on race and more on relationships the players made in-game.  I thought this was representative of the trend of games to first want to mimic the world, and then, as time goes on and game genres are developed, to start making social commentary.

At first, in the age when there was only really Dungeons & Dragons in the role-playing genre, the game(s) had a prominent focus on race and race relations.  There was even a chart on racial intolerance in Dungeons & Dragons, such as the infamous dwarves and elves disliking each other.  Extra race mechanics, such as racial skills and bonuses, helped to separate characters of different races even more by different abilities.  Players would become their characters, in part, by realizing these racial intolerances and racial skills, and structuring their play around how each character should act if real.

This seems to be done in an effort to mimic society, which was visibly separated by racial discrimination, and also influenced heavily by the stereotypes designated to each race, such as strengths and weaknesses.  The game was not making any commentary on these perceived biases other than saying they are an integral part of human society, and should thus be included in a game that tries to create a fantastical, but still human-like, society.

As the role-playing game developed, game makers started focusing less on these race differences to drive gameplay, but started to focus on class and group inequality and conflict.  For example, RuneQuest had different races, but the main gameplay focused on the player entering into cults and forming his or her own identity and role.  Instead of leaving character construction on the selected race, with its inherent stereotypes, the game tried to progress its commentary by its inclusion (and subsequent opinion) on the classes of society, which was most likely a commentary on the economic and social classes that developed in modern society that were somewhat independent of race, if not still linked weakly.

Thus, the role-playing genre’s progression from its start to later games shows the progression of commentary forms to first mimic the world to try to show its faults and then to make stronger, more specific statements by emphasizing and over-exaggerating perceived faults.

Response Blog #17: Class Response

Today in class, we discussed the definition of role-playing game and what games did or did not fit this definition.  While I did not personally agree with all of the items that we, as a class, decided upon, I will assume that they were all true and collectively form the definition for a role-playing game.

Now for my blog entry: I do not think Pokemon can be classified as an RPG by the class definition.  My three main points of contention are that Pokemon does not allow for character progression and contains a “god” character, among others.

The first point has to deal with the distinction between the “trainer,” who the player actually is, and the Pokemon.  The trainer collects and uses Pokemon almost like items, doing nothing himself or herself besides ordering these pieces of equipment around.  The trainer has no growth and has no stats that change.  The trainer is pretty much static besides for being able to use certain moves and control Pokemon at certain levels.  It’s the Pokemon themselves that really fulfill the requirements of a role-playing game, but the game stresses that the player is the trainer, and not the Pokemon.  For instance, battles seem to convey that the trainer is commanding the Pokemon what to do, which establishes the trainer is separate from the Pokemon.  Also, each game in the series makes frequent references to Pokemon as being allies or friends of the player.  Because the game itself seems to emphasize the difference between the trainer and the Pokemon, I feel like the game does not fulfill the necessary character progression for the trainer.

In reference to an RPG game not allowing for a maxed out character in stats and abilities, Pokemon once again fails this.  It can be argued that the trainer has the same stats at the beginning of the game as at the end, as the trainer can go anywhere and essentially capture any Pokemon.  If abilities, such as being able to effectively control Pokemon of all levels or using certain moves, are taken into account, the trainer is always maxed out by the end of the game, no matter what.  This rule was that the player’s character should be able to be different for each play through, but this does not happen in Pokemon.

In summary, I believe that the Pokemon games would not fall into the role-playing game category based on the definition we defined in class.  Although I do not think that the Pokemon games are RPG games anyway, I believe that our class definition is still not correct.  I am a believer in simplicity, and I feel the discussion leading up to the tenets of our definition are just too complicated.  Instead, I propose that a role-playing game is any game of any media that allows the player to completely assume the identity of a character and make decisions that allows the character to become any role that the player desires (within the bounds of reason for the game).  Thus, I would argue Pokemon still isn’t an RPG because there is only one possible outcome of the trainer at the end, and the player has no real control over that outcome.

Response Blog #16: Reading Response

As I was reading over Dr. Phill’s piece “Red Dead Redemption and the Myth of the Noble Savage,” I could not help from thinking that stereotypes have been the way that players could instantly understand a character and what he or she was about.  For example, a Native American needs to look like what the player envisions a Native American as so that the player can connect his background and knowledge of Native Americans to the in-game character, and, thus, be able to make assumptions that can further the story of the game.

The problem here is when these stereotypes are disparaging to the people they are trying to represent.  For example, I do not think that any Native American would have a problem with a video game version wearing traditional ceremonial or battle attire.  This is merely a superficial stereotype, that, although is probably not occurring as frequently in modern times as in past times, helps players connect instantly with who the character is.  These superficial stereotypes that have to do with appearance may almost be praised by the community if it shows the history of the culture in a fair and compassionate light.  Problems and comments about racism arise, however, when characters are given personality stereotypes that affect how the character acts in the world.  For Native Americans, these could be the stereotypes of a lack of intelligence, evil intentions, primitiveness, etc.  These are the stereotypes that need to be removed from games.  The other ones, which are really not meant to be negative, but representative, are merely ways to integrate rich culture and history from the real world into the game world, as a character that looks like a Native American, or is even just revealed in some way to be a Native American, is suddenly given a history and becomes relatable through what players already know.

What the gaming society needs to do is make and praise games that break the stereotypes of disparaging characteristics, but keep, even glorify, the important traits in characters that would bring fresh air and more realism to depictions of their race in video games.  By doing this, the once marginalized races can reclaim their glory, and find happiness in the acceptance and proliferation of their culture, practices, and history.

In summary, removing all race stereotypes also removes fundamental characteristics of races, like history and values, that the race has come to define themselves on, and which without would create dull, human-less characters who are only a shell of the people they are trying to represent.

Response Blog #15: Class Response

We played Depression Quest in class today, and I was surprisingly engrossed in the story it told, and in a way with which I had not connected to a game in a long while.

The game felt so different because it was focused on narratology rather than ludology.  The game mechanics were simple, and, honestly, there was little gameplay from a ludologic standpoint.  The player just clicks links base don how he or she wants to act.

The brunt of work done when playing the game deals with reading the text entries given after each choice.  The game unravels as the player reads more and more into the presented situation.  I found this mechanic very powerful, and I connected with the characters on a level I do not think I ever had in a video game before.  Instead of being a character, I felt like I was reading the biography of a person who was wholly separate from myself but still myself in some way.  I could control how I wanted to respond to certain situations, but I could not control the overwhelmingly sense of hopelessness that pervaded the game until it was close to finish.  This manifested in ways such as automatic responses to situations, like going out with coworkers, and response choices, often the happy or rational ones, being non-select-able.  I thought this was incredibly powerful and really conveyed the state of someone in depression.

Finally, I like that, even though the possible endings are not close to infinite, the game does not dictate a specific way to let the player play, but instead lets the player make choices that might be how the player would actually respond in that situation.  The game tries its hardest to anonymize the protagonist and make him or her seem universal, which it succeeds at somewhat, but this ability to make personal choices really help the player to connect to the fictional world and characters.

In conclusion, the game was by no means perfect, and it was often repetitive and tiring at points, but its minimalistic control scheme really let the story take center-stage.  And the game succeeded at weaving a real story of depression, unbiased by the media or assumptions about the disease.  I cannot think of a better way to let someone “play” depression, as the game crafted relatable characters, events, and response choices that both allowed player immersion and the feeling of depression to be conveyed.