For this post, I'm just going to do some writing about the idea of pacing in video games in general. As a preface, I'm going to point out where I think some video games fall flat in their pacing - but what works for me might not work for you.
Pacing is a powerful force in any medium - movies, books, and video games all rely on it to keep their audiences absorbed and entertained. But in video games, it's an even more powerful force than normal, as there are many ways to influence pacing, and many ways to therefore screw it up. And if it gets screwed up, then you can bet that you're going to lose some people along the way to your fabulous ending, amazing plot twists, incredible dungeons, or what have you.
I just posted my review of an old game that I really enjoy called Turtles in Time. It is a prime example of pacing done right, in many ways. For one thing, the characters move quickly, and thus can get where you want them to quickly. This may seem obvious, but there are certain games (especially RPG's) where the characters just don't move fast enough, and you feel like it takes you ages to get anywhere. For another, the fights are well-interspersed through the levels - you never have to go far to find one, but the levels are more than just one really long fight. Again, I've seen games screw this up - Teen Titans, for the Gamecube, while largely a pretty good beat-em-up, starts to drag towards the end because the fights take too long and there are too many of them in each level. Another way that Turtles in Time paces itself well is in terms of fight differentiation. True, the enemies are largely palette-swaps of other enemies, but you're always finding new types of enemies with new abilities to adapt to. A game that screws this idea up big-time is Alien Syndrome for the Wii. It takes ages to get to a new type of enemy in that game, and while that is one flaw among several for that game, it is quite significant.
But Turtles in Time only has so much it can teach us. In other genres than just the beat-em-up, pacing is huge.
Take, for example, the RPG. It can screw up pacing in a new and unique way - the story. If nothing happens in the story for too long, the players (or at least some of them) lose interest. The story needs to be long enough to satisfy the gamer, yet short enough to not make them feel like they just want it to be over. This is a similar problem to movies and books, but there are unique problems for video games. They have to balance dungeons vs city/exploration time - spend too much time between dungeons, and you begin to feel like you'll never make progress. Spend too much time in a dungeon, and you get the same feeling.
A game that I can think of that largely manages to pace itself well, both story and dungeon-wise, is Tales of Symphonia for the Gamecube. Its dungeons aren't too long or too short, and they're interesting enough to keep you engaged. There are a few points where the plot fails, in my opinion, but by and large the characters always have an objective, and you always feel like you're making progress towards that objective. That objective also changes from time to time, rather than remaining stagnant like the next game I'm going to talk about.
Which is: Lufia and the Fortress of Doom. The vast majority of that plot is spent trying to find things to get to the next person that might help you to accomplish your final goal. There aren't enough twists and turns - the meta-plot is always "go find people who know about stuff that can stop the bad guys," or "go find stuff to stop the bad guys." Once you finally get around to stopping the bad guys, that's it. There's no feeling of an epic struggle, or fighting emissaries of the bad guys, or even finding out who the heck the bad guys are and what they want - it's just trying to build up your power to stop them.
Now, there are standard tactics one can use to pace a game. One obvious and common one is to give you access to new abilities throughout the game. Most games do this (though, interestingly, Turtles in Time does not) - and for good reason. It keeps combat and puzzles interesting. Zelda and other such games give you new equipment - the bow, the bombs, the boomerang, the Ocarina. RPG's frequently give you new spells or abilities. FPS's give you new guns, RTS's give you new units, and so on and so forth. These tools are great when done well - however, you do run the risk of overwhelming your player with too many abilities or items, and if the items begin to become useless, the gamer feels cheated - I mentioned this in my review of Psi-Ops. A great example of this is the Zelda item from Twilight Princess that lets you control statues - it's only useful when there are statues around, whereas something like the bow is useful in many places. It made me, at least, feel cheated in that I didn't feel like I gained any power from the dungeon, at least not compared to the amount I gained from previous dungeons.
You can also, like I said, overwhelm the character with options - one example of this might be Zelda: Majora's Mask. You get a whole bunch of masks, but it's not really obvious when to use which, and many are useless in all but one specific situation. You can get through the game only using the primary masks, but doing some of the side-quests without a guide would be annoying.
Another tactic to pace a game is to formulate it, at least to some extent. Now while this might seem like an odd thing to say, the point is to give you a set point where you can feel like you accomplished something. This is critical in quite a few games - World of Warcraft is probably the best example of this. As you level up, you gain a bit of power after each level. As you go through dungeons and raids at max level, you can always aim for that next piece of equipment. Another example would be Lufia 2: Rise of the Sinistrals. Its dungeons always have the boss key, and some puzzles that make you feel like you make real progress when you solve them. Zelda, obviously, is another great example of this - the dungeons are always "explore, miniboss, new item, use new item to get to new part of the dungeon, miniboss, boss key, boss." And after each of these steps, you feel like you made progress - keeping you interested in the specific dungeon, and interested in the game.
I think I've talked about this enough for today, but I'll probably revisit it later. Pacing is a hugely important idea in video games (as in many media), after all, and one that entire books could be written on.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Review: Turtles in Time
Turtles IV: Turtles in Time
One of my all-time favorite co-op games, Turtles in Time is an arcade-port co-op sidescrolling beat-em-up game. You play as one of the four Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, each of whom has slightly different stats – speed, power, range, hp. You are assaulted by enemies of various types – color-coded for your convenience, naturally, followed by a boss at the end of each level. There's a token plot about Shredder stealing the Statue of Liberty, and the later sending you in to a time warp (which he just happened to have lying around?), but the plot is mostly in the background for the course of the game. Of course, these things could describe virtually any co-op beat-em-up. What is important is what sets Turtles in Time apart.
1) Fast pace. This is the number one thing any beat-em-up game needs. Not just hurling enemy after enemy at you (though that’s a start), but making them have different abilities so that you have to think on your feet, and still making it feel like you progress through the level at a speedy pace. This is what a good beat-em-up game needs – diversity among enemies, and a fast pace. Additionally, the characters themselves move quite quickly, which adds to the definite feeling of fast-paced-ness. Slow characters are the devil.
1a) Good pacing, time-wise. Levels do not drag on – they each last a fair amount of time, but you don’t feel cheated, nor do you ever say “ugh will this level just END.” The game itself, as well, is a quick beat - ~45 minutes from start to finish, but it doesn’t feel rushed. It leaves you wanting more, sure, but only in the way that everything good does.
2) Differentiated characters. Of course, most games these days have this in spades, and I have to admit it’s not a huge factor in this game. But it’s there, and that’s important. The four turtles are not carbon copies of each other – each plays slightly differently. Like I say, it’s the little things.
3) Adjustable difficulty. Every game should have this, or virtually every game, anyway. Turtles in Time does it well – there are noticeable differences between difficulties, in bosses and mooks, and not just “damage x2.”
4) Good, customizable controls. You’d think this would be a gimme, but even these days, this sort of thing can be screwed up.
5) Lots of different moves. There were the grabs (2 kinds), normal combos, super attacks, power-ups, aerial attacks, and two kinds of running attacks. And yet, you can pretty much always do the attack that you want at any given time, and the attacks are all useful. Much, much better than punch (into a combo) and jump that some other games have.
6) Sound. From the “Oh, shell-shocked” and “Cowabunga” to the background music, it all fits the atmosphere brilliantly, and keeps the spirit of the cartoon.
7) Good level design. The obstacles all fit the themes of the various levels, and none come off as really annoying. None are too hard to dodge, but they definitely have to be kept in mind while you fight. Plus, the backgrounds are well done, and you get the feeling that you’re moving through an area and making progress.
Lessons to be learned from Turtles in Time:
With arcade-style beat-em-ups, and arcade-style games in general, (and all games!) it’s all about the pacing. Additionally, differentiation among enemy types helps greatly to keep the game going, where other similar games might fail – especially if none of the enemies are super-annoying.
One of my all-time favorite co-op games, Turtles in Time is an arcade-port co-op sidescrolling beat-em-up game. You play as one of the four Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, each of whom has slightly different stats – speed, power, range, hp. You are assaulted by enemies of various types – color-coded for your convenience, naturally, followed by a boss at the end of each level. There's a token plot about Shredder stealing the Statue of Liberty, and the later sending you in to a time warp (which he just happened to have lying around?), but the plot is mostly in the background for the course of the game. Of course, these things could describe virtually any co-op beat-em-up. What is important is what sets Turtles in Time apart.
1) Fast pace. This is the number one thing any beat-em-up game needs. Not just hurling enemy after enemy at you (though that’s a start), but making them have different abilities so that you have to think on your feet, and still making it feel like you progress through the level at a speedy pace. This is what a good beat-em-up game needs – diversity among enemies, and a fast pace. Additionally, the characters themselves move quite quickly, which adds to the definite feeling of fast-paced-ness. Slow characters are the devil.
1a) Good pacing, time-wise. Levels do not drag on – they each last a fair amount of time, but you don’t feel cheated, nor do you ever say “ugh will this level just END.” The game itself, as well, is a quick beat - ~45 minutes from start to finish, but it doesn’t feel rushed. It leaves you wanting more, sure, but only in the way that everything good does.
2) Differentiated characters. Of course, most games these days have this in spades, and I have to admit it’s not a huge factor in this game. But it’s there, and that’s important. The four turtles are not carbon copies of each other – each plays slightly differently. Like I say, it’s the little things.
3) Adjustable difficulty. Every game should have this, or virtually every game, anyway. Turtles in Time does it well – there are noticeable differences between difficulties, in bosses and mooks, and not just “damage x2.”
4) Good, customizable controls. You’d think this would be a gimme, but even these days, this sort of thing can be screwed up.
5) Lots of different moves. There were the grabs (2 kinds), normal combos, super attacks, power-ups, aerial attacks, and two kinds of running attacks. And yet, you can pretty much always do the attack that you want at any given time, and the attacks are all useful. Much, much better than punch (into a combo) and jump that some other games have.
6) Sound. From the “Oh, shell-shocked” and “Cowabunga” to the background music, it all fits the atmosphere brilliantly, and keeps the spirit of the cartoon.
7) Good level design. The obstacles all fit the themes of the various levels, and none come off as really annoying. None are too hard to dodge, but they definitely have to be kept in mind while you fight. Plus, the backgrounds are well done, and you get the feeling that you’re moving through an area and making progress.
Lessons to be learned from Turtles in Time:
With arcade-style beat-em-ups, and arcade-style games in general, (and all games!) it’s all about the pacing. Additionally, differentiation among enemy types helps greatly to keep the game going, where other similar games might fail – especially if none of the enemies are super-annoying.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Review: Psi-Ops
A review I did of a game some time ago. It's set from my standard perspective of analyzing a game for what makes it fun, and what doesn't. I don't talk about it in the review, but the pacing in this game is quite good. Pacing is a very, very powerful idea, and one that I'll expound more on this Tuesday.
Psi-Ops: The Mindgate Conspiracy
Psi-Ops is a fairly decent Sci-Fi FPS. It’s plot is okay – nothing spectacular, but certainly passable. You infiltrate the bad guy’s base, using your guns and your psi powers to kill bunches of people, recover special moon rocks, and save the world from the evil general. Evil twins and psychically-themed villains abound.
The psi powers, to me, are the highlight of this game. You have telekinesis, remote viewing (AKA astral projection), Mind Control, pyrokinesis, and “sense aura” (a cheesy, puzzle-only power). Pyrokinesis, sadly, is just another gun, effectively, and sense aura could’ve been a handy-dandy infrared-vision, but no, just a lame puzzle-solving power.
The FPS combat is nothing exemplary – it’s a lot like many others, with a minor difference in the auto-aiming dot that aims for a body part and shows you which. Don’t do this. Auto-aiming, if it has to exist, should be largely behind the scenes – plus, this wasn’t done that well – it made it harder at times to aim at heads. Also! Hit detection = terrible. Sniping someone’s head was nigh-impossible. For goodness sake, test your hit detection, people.
I do, however, commend this game for having co-op, difficulty levels, and creative uses of telekinesis (hold them with one hand, shoot with the other; rolly balls of doom) and mind-control (Finally, a “kill yourself” option!). That said, Pyrokinesis should have just lit the target on fire, or pierced/worked around terrain to make it more than just a gun that ran on psi. Aura View should also have been infrared vision, more distinctly than it already was.
Also, rolling balls of telekinetic doom = awesome.
Lessons to be learned:
Don’t give me powers just to make fricking everyone immune to them at the end. Balance your game without resorting to such cheap tricks.
Don’t ever, ever give me a move or item that is only useful when you say it is. Ever! Zelda games could learn from this, as well. I’m looking at you, statue-controlly rod from Twilight Princess. (If you absolutely, positively have to do this, scatter things that I can use it on throughout the game, not just at puzzle-solving points.)
-Actually, the real problem is when one out of a set of useful things is only useful when you say it is. For example, when I go through a Zelda dungeon, I will get a nifty new item. In addition to this item being necessary for me to complete the dungeon, I expect it to be just generally useful. When it isn’t, I am disappointed. However, I’m perfectly willing to accept songs (a la Ocarina of Time or Wind Waker) that are only useful when you say they are, because all songs are like that. It’s only when you break the “useful” mold and give me something that isn’t that I get annoyed.
Auto-aiming needs to be less annoying and blatant.
Dear god, test your hit-detection. Sniping should WORK.
Guns and powers should be separate. Powers should not just be guns that run on Psi.
Creative uses of telekinesis = win.
Psi-Ops: The Mindgate Conspiracy
Psi-Ops is a fairly decent Sci-Fi FPS. It’s plot is okay – nothing spectacular, but certainly passable. You infiltrate the bad guy’s base, using your guns and your psi powers to kill bunches of people, recover special moon rocks, and save the world from the evil general. Evil twins and psychically-themed villains abound.
The psi powers, to me, are the highlight of this game. You have telekinesis, remote viewing (AKA astral projection), Mind Control, pyrokinesis, and “sense aura” (a cheesy, puzzle-only power). Pyrokinesis, sadly, is just another gun, effectively, and sense aura could’ve been a handy-dandy infrared-vision, but no, just a lame puzzle-solving power.
The FPS combat is nothing exemplary – it’s a lot like many others, with a minor difference in the auto-aiming dot that aims for a body part and shows you which. Don’t do this. Auto-aiming, if it has to exist, should be largely behind the scenes – plus, this wasn’t done that well – it made it harder at times to aim at heads. Also! Hit detection = terrible. Sniping someone’s head was nigh-impossible. For goodness sake, test your hit detection, people.
I do, however, commend this game for having co-op, difficulty levels, and creative uses of telekinesis (hold them with one hand, shoot with the other; rolly balls of doom) and mind-control (Finally, a “kill yourself” option!). That said, Pyrokinesis should have just lit the target on fire, or pierced/worked around terrain to make it more than just a gun that ran on psi. Aura View should also have been infrared vision, more distinctly than it already was.
Also, rolling balls of telekinetic doom = awesome.
Lessons to be learned:
Don’t give me powers just to make fricking everyone immune to them at the end. Balance your game without resorting to such cheap tricks.
Don’t ever, ever give me a move or item that is only useful when you say it is. Ever! Zelda games could learn from this, as well. I’m looking at you, statue-controlly rod from Twilight Princess. (If you absolutely, positively have to do this, scatter things that I can use it on throughout the game, not just at puzzle-solving points.)
-Actually, the real problem is when one out of a set of useful things is only useful when you say it is. For example, when I go through a Zelda dungeon, I will get a nifty new item. In addition to this item being necessary for me to complete the dungeon, I expect it to be just generally useful. When it isn’t, I am disappointed. However, I’m perfectly willing to accept songs (a la Ocarina of Time or Wind Waker) that are only useful when you say they are, because all songs are like that. It’s only when you break the “useful” mold and give me something that isn’t that I get annoyed.
Auto-aiming needs to be less annoying and blatant.
Dear god, test your hit-detection. Sniping should WORK.
Guns and powers should be separate. Powers should not just be guns that run on Psi.
Creative uses of telekinesis = win.
Design: Movie-Game
Sorry for the wait, but stuff happened on Tuesday. I really will try to keep a regular schedule to these updates - I'd like this to become a real, solid, ongoing blog by the time people actually start coming here.
Today I'm going to be writing about an idea that I've been tossing around in my head for a while. It's the idea of, effectively, playing a video game that is an interactive movie. Basically, you'd be watching a movie, but you could cut in and adjust things slightly as you progressed. For example, if you just set the controller down and watched the game (pressing A to move through dialogue, perhaps), it would form a cohesive plot - you'd end up getting one of the worst endings, of course, but stuff would happen - unlike most games, where if you don't do anything, nothing at all happens.
To clarify, you'd be able to do things like nudge objects slightly - perhaps hiding or revealing something to the characters. You'd be able to influence a character's decisions - things like deciding dialogue choices in typical games. Or during an action sequence, you could perhaps control a character directly, fighting off bad guys or what not. One potential way to go with the branching paths is that the game goes on regardless - even if you lose, or an important character dies because of your actions, you can continue to see exactly what happens to the rest of the characters. The idea is, after all, that you're controlling a movie - a movie that would go on regardless of what you did. And ideally, you'd be able to cut in and control things at any time - dialogue, action, whatever - you could adjust it as you chose, but as the next paragraph will say, not all the time.
Your ability to cut into the movie/game would be limited - you'd be able to control things here and there, but you would only be able to control bits and pieces, not 100% control 100% of the time. Though it would be interesting to have a game that you could choose just how involved you wanted to be - anywhere from 0% to 100% - but that's a post for a different time. Expect an eventual "automation to the extreme" post - the idea of having only limited control over aspects of a game has always intrigued me, and the idea of letting computers control most of a game is interesting as well. (Sidebar: Reminds me of the game that the Ellimist (of Animorphs) was playing with his friend at the beginning of "The Ellimist Chronicles" - a set of worlds, try to make yours the dominant one by the most subtle means possible.)
So to summarize, the game would have the following qualities:
-Have a plot that would reach a conclusion with no intervention from the player.
-Have the player be able to cut in at any point (though not necessarily for a long period of time) to adjust something - perhaps something physical, like a hidden object, or something mental, like a main character's attitude.
-Have the plot continue even if you made mistakes or "lost" - the show must go on.
-Intricate branchings of possibilities.
Another, slightly easier to justify, perhaps, way to flavor similar powers would be to say that you're a guardian spirit of some sort, sent to safeguard a specific person, or prevent/enable certain events. However, you can only adjust small things or people's attitudes slightly, things like that. This would also allow for a more standard plot progression (assuming that "the show must go on" would be a feature of a movie-flavored thing), in that if you failed in your charge, that would be a game over, and that would be the end of that.
This is just a thought I've been rattling around in my head. Don't be surprised if I come up with more ideas relating to this and post them later.
Today I'm going to be writing about an idea that I've been tossing around in my head for a while. It's the idea of, effectively, playing a video game that is an interactive movie. Basically, you'd be watching a movie, but you could cut in and adjust things slightly as you progressed. For example, if you just set the controller down and watched the game (pressing A to move through dialogue, perhaps), it would form a cohesive plot - you'd end up getting one of the worst endings, of course, but stuff would happen - unlike most games, where if you don't do anything, nothing at all happens.
To clarify, you'd be able to do things like nudge objects slightly - perhaps hiding or revealing something to the characters. You'd be able to influence a character's decisions - things like deciding dialogue choices in typical games. Or during an action sequence, you could perhaps control a character directly, fighting off bad guys or what not. One potential way to go with the branching paths is that the game goes on regardless - even if you lose, or an important character dies because of your actions, you can continue to see exactly what happens to the rest of the characters. The idea is, after all, that you're controlling a movie - a movie that would go on regardless of what you did. And ideally, you'd be able to cut in and control things at any time - dialogue, action, whatever - you could adjust it as you chose, but as the next paragraph will say, not all the time.
Your ability to cut into the movie/game would be limited - you'd be able to control things here and there, but you would only be able to control bits and pieces, not 100% control 100% of the time. Though it would be interesting to have a game that you could choose just how involved you wanted to be - anywhere from 0% to 100% - but that's a post for a different time. Expect an eventual "automation to the extreme" post - the idea of having only limited control over aspects of a game has always intrigued me, and the idea of letting computers control most of a game is interesting as well. (Sidebar: Reminds me of the game that the Ellimist (of Animorphs) was playing with his friend at the beginning of "The Ellimist Chronicles" - a set of worlds, try to make yours the dominant one by the most subtle means possible.)
So to summarize, the game would have the following qualities:
-Have a plot that would reach a conclusion with no intervention from the player.
-Have the player be able to cut in at any point (though not necessarily for a long period of time) to adjust something - perhaps something physical, like a hidden object, or something mental, like a main character's attitude.
-Have the plot continue even if you made mistakes or "lost" - the show must go on.
-Intricate branchings of possibilities.
Another, slightly easier to justify, perhaps, way to flavor similar powers would be to say that you're a guardian spirit of some sort, sent to safeguard a specific person, or prevent/enable certain events. However, you can only adjust small things or people's attitudes slightly, things like that. This would also allow for a more standard plot progression (assuming that "the show must go on" would be a feature of a movie-flavored thing), in that if you failed in your charge, that would be a game over, and that would be the end of that.
This is just a thought I've been rattling around in my head. Don't be surprised if I come up with more ideas relating to this and post them later.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Design: List of Things Games Should/Shouldn't Have
Originally posted December 18th, 2008 at adamgameapprentice.blogspot.com:
Older Post - List of things that every game should have
And here's my older post for today, though hopefully just as interesting. I'm going to post my "List of things that should/should never be in a game" - though mostly it's things that should be in every game. Here goes:
In a word: Customization!
In another few words: No Pointless Restrictions!
-Subtitle toggle
-Difficulty levels, ideally some reward for beating it on each. (If absolutely nothing else, some indicator next to the save file.)
-(Very) Customizable Controls, savable to profiles
-Independent volume control for sound effects, music, and voices.
-If you have a tutorial, make it skippable unless it is (and must be) plot relevant.
--Good Solution: Have "do you know how to do x?" 3rd wall-breaking text, a la Fire Emblem for GC and Wii.
-If you have cutscenes, make them skippable. Consider giving a "Do you really want to skip this cutscene?" dialogue.
--Good Solution: Psychonauts lets you re-watch cutscenes.
-Text speed customization.
-Postgame content, if nothing else in the form of collectibles and difficulty levels.
-Invertable (seperate) flight/aiming controls.
-Autosave, especially in very level-based games.
-(Never make me run towards the camera. 99% of the time, this isn't a good way to do it.)
RPGS:
-No truly random encounters (a la FF1, Lufia 1, etc - instead do it like Lufia 2 or Paper Mario)
-Whenever you can see the name of an item, you can see what it does (description, probably by pressing or holding a button). That goes for spells, too.
-Always able to see max and current HP/MP.
-Give the main character a default name.
FPS:
-Different sensitivities on aiming
-Team vs mode (divided however you want)
-Weapon sets/toggles in vs mode, including make-your-own weapon sets.
Fighting:
-Tag mode, if it's reasonable.
-Team mode (both types: standard team fights (2v2) if more than two people can fight at once, and 1v1 with each controlling a group of people one after the other.)
Super Minigame Party:
-Create-your-own minigame groups (IE, only these minigames will show up in this play session, not those)
Strategy/Tactics:
-Vs mode! If it's at all feasible. Preferably with some co-op missions, as well.
Escort Missions:
-A "stay here" command.
-Never, ever should they run headfirst at an enemy that you could otherwise get the jump on or avoid.
-In fact, they should never fight except to protect themselves, you, or attack someone you're attacking. And there should be commands to cancel the second two, and run away in place of the first.
Older Post - List of things that every game should have
And here's my older post for today, though hopefully just as interesting. I'm going to post my "List of things that should/should never be in a game" - though mostly it's things that should be in every game. Here goes:
In a word: Customization!
In another few words: No Pointless Restrictions!
-Subtitle toggle
-Difficulty levels, ideally some reward for beating it on each. (If absolutely nothing else, some indicator next to the save file.)
-(Very) Customizable Controls, savable to profiles
-Independent volume control for sound effects, music, and voices.
-If you have a tutorial, make it skippable unless it is (and must be) plot relevant.
--Good Solution: Have "do you know how to do x?" 3rd wall-breaking text, a la Fire Emblem for GC and Wii.
-If you have cutscenes, make them skippable. Consider giving a "Do you really want to skip this cutscene?" dialogue.
--Good Solution: Psychonauts lets you re-watch cutscenes.
-Text speed customization.
-Postgame content, if nothing else in the form of collectibles and difficulty levels.
-Invertable (seperate) flight/aiming controls.
-Autosave, especially in very level-based games.
-(Never make me run towards the camera. 99% of the time, this isn't a good way to do it.)
RPGS:
-No truly random encounters (a la FF1, Lufia 1, etc - instead do it like Lufia 2 or Paper Mario)
-Whenever you can see the name of an item, you can see what it does (description, probably by pressing or holding a button). That goes for spells, too.
-Always able to see max and current HP/MP.
-Give the main character a default name.
FPS:
-Different sensitivities on aiming
-Team vs mode (divided however you want)
-Weapon sets/toggles in vs mode, including make-your-own weapon sets.
Fighting:
-Tag mode, if it's reasonable.
-Team mode (both types: standard team fights (2v2) if more than two people can fight at once, and 1v1 with each controlling a group of people one after the other.)
Super Minigame Party:
-Create-your-own minigame groups (IE, only these minigames will show up in this play session, not those)
Strategy/Tactics:
-Vs mode! If it's at all feasible. Preferably with some co-op missions, as well.
Escort Missions:
-A "stay here" command.
-Never, ever should they run headfirst at an enemy that you could otherwise get the jump on or avoid.
-In fact, they should never fight except to protect themselves, you, or attack someone you're attacking. And there should be commands to cancel the second two, and run away in place of the first.
Review: Zombies Ate My Neighbors
Originally Posted December 18, 2008 at adamgameapprentice.blogspot.com:
I'd like to start doing two posts a week, roughly - one will contain something that I've already written, and one will be original for that week. My "Original" post for today will be a review of an older game that you may or may not have heard of called "Zombies Ate My Neighbors."
Obviously, with a title like that, it isn't a game that takes itself very seriously. The game an SNES and Genesis arcade-style top-down action game in which you play as one of two functionally-identical kids, a boy or a girl. Armed with a water gun, popsicles, soda cans, crosses, Martian Bubble Guns, and the like, you fight off hordes of undead and other monsters in an attempt to defeat the poorly-developed Dr. Tongue.
Honestly, this game is almost exactly what it tries to be - an enjoyable arcade-style action game that you can pick up, play for a while and have some fun, then come back to it later, or that you can play for a long time and attempt to beat. However, because this game isn't in an arcade, it has several flaws. One thing: It's too hard. The game starts fairly easy, and has health packs that you can pick up and use later, but the difficulty in later levels is over-the-top. The evil dolls, chainsaw murderers, and (oh god) sand worms are especially vicious, not to mention hard-to-avoid. Not only that, but if you continue from a password, you lose all your special items and weapons. Simply put, this game needs a couple of things to make it work - the option of lower difficulty, and save files. Don't get me wrong, I love a good challenging game, but without the option to save effectively, and without the possibility of a lower difficulty, it just isn't fun.
The plot in this game is almost entirely explained in the instruction manual. One change that could be made there would be to have the standard "intro plot" of most arcade games, where if you just leave the controller lying there the plot rolls before you start the game. That would be nice. Additionally, some sort of after-level plot (complete with cheesy narrating?) would be nice, if not after every level, then after every five or so. This game was practically tailor-made for the cheesy plot of a B-movie - the level names and general tone of the game are basically a playable B-movie, after all - so it's a pity that one wasn't included.
Another thing about this game is the length. Again, don't get me wrong, I love a good long game, but the challenge and annoyance of passwords makes this game feel like it drags on. I think that this problem would be mostly fixed by adding in very brief bits of cheesy plot, lower difficulty, and a better save option.
There are several things that this game does do right. The biggest thing that this game gets right that kills many action games is variety. Variety of enemies, variety of weapons, variety of power-ups, variety of level design - this game gets it right. The enemies are many and varied, the power-ups (like the inflatable clown decoys! Brilliant! If annoying-sounding) are fantastic, and the weapons are inspired. The level design is also very well-done (if challenging) - big thumbs-up to whoever did the level design for this game. The neighborhood, warehouse, shopping mall, hedge maze, and all the other levels all feel different and great. The pacing, similarly, is well done, largely because of the variety of things - though interjecting bits of plot between levels would add to it.
One other thing to complain about is having to wander around to find the last hostage. The radar is nice, but the levels are annoyingly large at times, and it's often very difficult to get to the hostages before the undead do. It's hard to find a solution here - making it less linear would be one way to do it, but I love the large stages. One solution might be to let you leave a level after you rescue, say half or three-quarters of the hostages - you can progress without having to scour the level for the path to get to the last hostage, but you lose some points that you would have gotten. Or at least giving you an item that lets you do this - maybe once every couple of levels you get another "get out of this level free" item? I think making the levels at least a bit more linear would help, or have the radar be more helpful (when there's tons of obstacles in my way, knowing which general direction to go isn't a great help).
There's not much to say about the graphics - they are pretty good for the SNES/Genesis, and fit the atmosphere.
The sound is also quite good - though there are effects that are annoying, and BGM's that really get on my nerves. That said, everything fits the tone of the game, so that's something. Slightly less annoying music and sound effects would be great, or at least the ability to change their relative volume.
Basically, this game needs a bit polish for it to shine, but it is already quite a good game, considering when it was made. An update would include difficulty levels, save files, some sort of option to get out of a level without wandering around it, slightly more linear levels - or at least some better way to tell where to go, slightly different sound, and bits of plot here and there. Then it would be the game that it tried to be, pretty much perfectly, at least to me - a quirky, retro-feeling fun little action game with an undead theme. It still wouldn't make anyone's "best games of all time" list, probably, but it would be fun for those who like the genre, and a solid little game - maybe an 8. Not especially outstanding, but certainly worth playing, and worth beating if you get some solid enjoyment out of it.
I'd like to start doing two posts a week, roughly - one will contain something that I've already written, and one will be original for that week. My "Original" post for today will be a review of an older game that you may or may not have heard of called "Zombies Ate My Neighbors."
Obviously, with a title like that, it isn't a game that takes itself very seriously. The game an SNES and Genesis arcade-style top-down action game in which you play as one of two functionally-identical kids, a boy or a girl. Armed with a water gun, popsicles, soda cans, crosses, Martian Bubble Guns, and the like, you fight off hordes of undead and other monsters in an attempt to defeat the poorly-developed Dr. Tongue.
Honestly, this game is almost exactly what it tries to be - an enjoyable arcade-style action game that you can pick up, play for a while and have some fun, then come back to it later, or that you can play for a long time and attempt to beat. However, because this game isn't in an arcade, it has several flaws. One thing: It's too hard. The game starts fairly easy, and has health packs that you can pick up and use later, but the difficulty in later levels is over-the-top. The evil dolls, chainsaw murderers, and (oh god) sand worms are especially vicious, not to mention hard-to-avoid. Not only that, but if you continue from a password, you lose all your special items and weapons. Simply put, this game needs a couple of things to make it work - the option of lower difficulty, and save files. Don't get me wrong, I love a good challenging game, but without the option to save effectively, and without the possibility of a lower difficulty, it just isn't fun.
The plot in this game is almost entirely explained in the instruction manual. One change that could be made there would be to have the standard "intro plot" of most arcade games, where if you just leave the controller lying there the plot rolls before you start the game. That would be nice. Additionally, some sort of after-level plot (complete with cheesy narrating?) would be nice, if not after every level, then after every five or so. This game was practically tailor-made for the cheesy plot of a B-movie - the level names and general tone of the game are basically a playable B-movie, after all - so it's a pity that one wasn't included.
Another thing about this game is the length. Again, don't get me wrong, I love a good long game, but the challenge and annoyance of passwords makes this game feel like it drags on. I think that this problem would be mostly fixed by adding in very brief bits of cheesy plot, lower difficulty, and a better save option.
There are several things that this game does do right. The biggest thing that this game gets right that kills many action games is variety. Variety of enemies, variety of weapons, variety of power-ups, variety of level design - this game gets it right. The enemies are many and varied, the power-ups (like the inflatable clown decoys! Brilliant! If annoying-sounding) are fantastic, and the weapons are inspired. The level design is also very well-done (if challenging) - big thumbs-up to whoever did the level design for this game. The neighborhood, warehouse, shopping mall, hedge maze, and all the other levels all feel different and great. The pacing, similarly, is well done, largely because of the variety of things - though interjecting bits of plot between levels would add to it.
One other thing to complain about is having to wander around to find the last hostage. The radar is nice, but the levels are annoyingly large at times, and it's often very difficult to get to the hostages before the undead do. It's hard to find a solution here - making it less linear would be one way to do it, but I love the large stages. One solution might be to let you leave a level after you rescue, say half or three-quarters of the hostages - you can progress without having to scour the level for the path to get to the last hostage, but you lose some points that you would have gotten. Or at least giving you an item that lets you do this - maybe once every couple of levels you get another "get out of this level free" item? I think making the levels at least a bit more linear would help, or have the radar be more helpful (when there's tons of obstacles in my way, knowing which general direction to go isn't a great help).
There's not much to say about the graphics - they are pretty good for the SNES/Genesis, and fit the atmosphere.
The sound is also quite good - though there are effects that are annoying, and BGM's that really get on my nerves. That said, everything fits the tone of the game, so that's something. Slightly less annoying music and sound effects would be great, or at least the ability to change their relative volume.
Basically, this game needs a bit polish for it to shine, but it is already quite a good game, considering when it was made. An update would include difficulty levels, save files, some sort of option to get out of a level without wandering around it, slightly more linear levels - or at least some better way to tell where to go, slightly different sound, and bits of plot here and there. Then it would be the game that it tried to be, pretty much perfectly, at least to me - a quirky, retro-feeling fun little action game with an undead theme. It still wouldn't make anyone's "best games of all time" list, probably, but it would be fun for those who like the genre, and a solid little game - maybe an 8. Not especially outstanding, but certainly worth playing, and worth beating if you get some solid enjoyment out of it.
Review: Geist
Originally posted December 1st, 2008:
Let's go ahead and start this with a bang. This is, admittedly, old stuff - I wrote this a bit ago, but I feel just as passionate about it now as I did then. It's about a Gamecube game that most of you probably haven't heard of, much less actually played, called Geist.
Geist is a pseudo-FPS made by Nintendo, of all people, on the Gamecube. Its main feature that I want to talk about and remember in this is, well, its main feature.
In Geist, you are a ghost who can possess people and objects name John Raimi (silent protaganist), with the ultimate goals of stopping the BBEG and reclaiming your body, which you were separated from at the beginning of the game. During the game, you learn more about the BBEG by exploring his base and interacting with his ghostly sister, Gigi, who is an appropriately creepy (and quite helpful) little ghost girl. But the possession aspect is what makes this game so great. I want to talk about it on two levels – on the level of it, specifically, and on what I can learn from it in regards to the genre shuffle style.
The possession mechanic, first and foremost, is brilliant. You can possess various people, and thus gain various abilities that allow you to move on in the game, or combat foes in new and special ways. It also allows an element of stealth – after all, it’s not always easy to tell when someone is being possessed.
However, the idea is not taken as far as it could be. Only certain people can be possessed – usually, those who are next to objects that you can possess in order to frighten them. It feels like a “necessary” cop-out – the game designers liked the premise, but couldn’t figure out a way to make it work logically without being overpowered. Frankly, this is really annoying – if possession of others is my superpower, then I should be able to use it, gosh darn it. This is somewhat subverted, however, in that you can detonate explosives to kill enemy soldiers, or control gun turrets to shoot enemies. However, by the same token, shouldn’t you have been able to possess guns to make them fire, or doors to make them open?
One particularly brilliant segment is defending your black friend from many soldiers by possessing various objects and using them to defeat the soldiers attacking him. You control gun turrets, detonate explosives, and even manually roll grenades to their feet, detonating them.
Unfortunately, the next segment is somewhat more limited – though awesome in concept, its execution is lacking. Your aforementioned black friend is on a motorcycle, attempting to escape the complex that is the setting for much of the game. You can possess his motorcycle, moving him, you can possess explosives, detonating them in an attempt to halt pursuit – or you can mostly just possess the gun on the back of the truck in front of him, using it to gun down all other problems. Blah – while an interesting use of the possession mechanic, the possession mechanic itself felt paradoxically underused in the scene. Perhaps a more appropriate setting for such an event would be on a helicopter turret, or some such.
The rat segment is again a bit of brilliance – you possess a rat and attempt to return it to its owner, and in order to do so, you must avoid a series of mousetraps. However, your possessed host, the rat, is drawn to the cheese on the traps in an almost magnetic fashion. So in order to escape, you must avoid the traps and make your way safely back to the rat’s owner. It’s a brilliant use of the possession mechanic (even if why you can’t possess the mousetraps and set them off beforehand isn’t adequately explained).
The rat example brings me to my next point – the use of repeated genre swapping in this game. The thing is, though, it doesn’t feel like it is. Each use of the possession mechanic in a new way feels natural – the rat, the various people, missile turrets. To further this idea, your hosts are given different weapons – some hosts have shotguns, some (one, disappointingly) have a sniper rifle with a heat-vision component, some (one, again) have rocket launchers. The overall effect is that each host, animal, human, or usable object, feels like a new experience – and it’s pulled off brilliantly. This is emphasized by the fact that animals see limited to no colors, and your ghostform has its own blued-out vision as well – human hosts and mechanical objects see normally, though the perspective of inanimate objects is often entertaining. (Of course, your own body is the best form for combat – a very nice automatic weapon and anti-ghost grenades, along with the ability to go bullet-time – quite awesome, though a bit of explanation as to how that last part worked would have been nice.) As an added bonus, despite the fact that the final boss is fought in a moderately different way than anything before him, it doesn’t feel forced – in other words, it manages to (to some degree) avoid the annoyance of Star Fox Adventures, Mystical Ninja Starring Goemon, and Banjo-Tooie with the “random genre swap” final boss, by setting up a reasonable premise and keeping the shift moderate.
Lessons to be learned:
Possession is an excellent, underused mechanic with a lot of room for unique growth in future games. Taking control of your enemies = awesome!
Rapid genre swaps can work (in a non-party game setting) if you set up a logical premise for them, and don’t make the shift too dramatic.
If I were to remake the game:
Make pretty much everyone and everything possessable. While the “scaring” mechanic is a good start for limiting possession, it’s too limiting – set up circumstances that can be used to scare any given NPC (save bosses, of course, unless that’s the trick). Possessing a soldier’s gun, for example – or simply the light fixtures or PA – would be a viable way to make this work. This would also mean that, in the example of protecting the black friend, for example, that while possessing the actual people doing the shooting would be possible, it would be much more practical to do it the way that was intended. It would also give the game a much-needed sense of “more than one way to do things.”
Alternately, be able to possess anyone, but if they are not scared first, then you have only limited control over them, as well as only temporary control, similar to when ghosts possess you towards the end of the game.
Make more objects possessable, preferably everything. I’m on the fence as to whether simply not allowing doors to be opened in ghostform with no explanation is worse than trying to provide an explanation for it. If most everything is possessable, give a way to turn on/off seeing the auras around what’s possessable, in degrees – objects, people.
Spend more time in the simulator at the beginning, and when we go back, let it complete and only maintain your individuality by Gigi sneaking into the sim and helping you fight the brainwashing, or your memories of her/your family/whatever.
Things used to scare people would be possessable in any order. (Ladder, extinguisher, and pipes in any order, not just that order.)
Dear God! Higher difficulty levels! I mean, really!
Co…op? Somehow? Maybe? *shrug*
Grenades! Throw->Possess->Roll->Explode.
Flying hosts – invertable
Possessions should be quicker to initiate. I loved simply being able to slip out of a body – slipping back into one should’ve been just as natural.
The story would be deeper, and Raimi wouldn’t have been silent.
The game would have been 2-3x as long.
Multiplayer Changes:
Online, online, online. Bigger maps – this game could be the next Halo if done right.
Better ammo/gun system. Direct Halo rip?
Capture the flag.
Ghost Barriers!
Vehicles! Possessable, of course.
New Toggles:
Ghosts – invisible to non-ghosts
Ghosts – invisible on radar
Ghosts – damageable
Ghosts – pop out of hosts when the host dies, or respawn back at their base
Hosts – damage transfer between them
Hosts/Vehicles – possessable only by certain teams
Ghosts – limited possession of already possessed hosts
Objects – indicator of whether or not the object is being possessed
Let's go ahead and start this with a bang. This is, admittedly, old stuff - I wrote this a bit ago, but I feel just as passionate about it now as I did then. It's about a Gamecube game that most of you probably haven't heard of, much less actually played, called Geist.
Geist is a pseudo-FPS made by Nintendo, of all people, on the Gamecube. Its main feature that I want to talk about and remember in this is, well, its main feature.
In Geist, you are a ghost who can possess people and objects name John Raimi (silent protaganist), with the ultimate goals of stopping the BBEG and reclaiming your body, which you were separated from at the beginning of the game. During the game, you learn more about the BBEG by exploring his base and interacting with his ghostly sister, Gigi, who is an appropriately creepy (and quite helpful) little ghost girl. But the possession aspect is what makes this game so great. I want to talk about it on two levels – on the level of it, specifically, and on what I can learn from it in regards to the genre shuffle style.
The possession mechanic, first and foremost, is brilliant. You can possess various people, and thus gain various abilities that allow you to move on in the game, or combat foes in new and special ways. It also allows an element of stealth – after all, it’s not always easy to tell when someone is being possessed.
However, the idea is not taken as far as it could be. Only certain people can be possessed – usually, those who are next to objects that you can possess in order to frighten them. It feels like a “necessary” cop-out – the game designers liked the premise, but couldn’t figure out a way to make it work logically without being overpowered. Frankly, this is really annoying – if possession of others is my superpower, then I should be able to use it, gosh darn it. This is somewhat subverted, however, in that you can detonate explosives to kill enemy soldiers, or control gun turrets to shoot enemies. However, by the same token, shouldn’t you have been able to possess guns to make them fire, or doors to make them open?
One particularly brilliant segment is defending your black friend from many soldiers by possessing various objects and using them to defeat the soldiers attacking him. You control gun turrets, detonate explosives, and even manually roll grenades to their feet, detonating them.
Unfortunately, the next segment is somewhat more limited – though awesome in concept, its execution is lacking. Your aforementioned black friend is on a motorcycle, attempting to escape the complex that is the setting for much of the game. You can possess his motorcycle, moving him, you can possess explosives, detonating them in an attempt to halt pursuit – or you can mostly just possess the gun on the back of the truck in front of him, using it to gun down all other problems. Blah – while an interesting use of the possession mechanic, the possession mechanic itself felt paradoxically underused in the scene. Perhaps a more appropriate setting for such an event would be on a helicopter turret, or some such.
The rat segment is again a bit of brilliance – you possess a rat and attempt to return it to its owner, and in order to do so, you must avoid a series of mousetraps. However, your possessed host, the rat, is drawn to the cheese on the traps in an almost magnetic fashion. So in order to escape, you must avoid the traps and make your way safely back to the rat’s owner. It’s a brilliant use of the possession mechanic (even if why you can’t possess the mousetraps and set them off beforehand isn’t adequately explained).
The rat example brings me to my next point – the use of repeated genre swapping in this game. The thing is, though, it doesn’t feel like it is. Each use of the possession mechanic in a new way feels natural – the rat, the various people, missile turrets. To further this idea, your hosts are given different weapons – some hosts have shotguns, some (one, disappointingly) have a sniper rifle with a heat-vision component, some (one, again) have rocket launchers. The overall effect is that each host, animal, human, or usable object, feels like a new experience – and it’s pulled off brilliantly. This is emphasized by the fact that animals see limited to no colors, and your ghostform has its own blued-out vision as well – human hosts and mechanical objects see normally, though the perspective of inanimate objects is often entertaining. (Of course, your own body is the best form for combat – a very nice automatic weapon and anti-ghost grenades, along with the ability to go bullet-time – quite awesome, though a bit of explanation as to how that last part worked would have been nice.) As an added bonus, despite the fact that the final boss is fought in a moderately different way than anything before him, it doesn’t feel forced – in other words, it manages to (to some degree) avoid the annoyance of Star Fox Adventures, Mystical Ninja Starring Goemon, and Banjo-Tooie with the “random genre swap” final boss, by setting up a reasonable premise and keeping the shift moderate.
Lessons to be learned:
Possession is an excellent, underused mechanic with a lot of room for unique growth in future games. Taking control of your enemies = awesome!
Rapid genre swaps can work (in a non-party game setting) if you set up a logical premise for them, and don’t make the shift too dramatic.
If I were to remake the game:
Make pretty much everyone and everything possessable. While the “scaring” mechanic is a good start for limiting possession, it’s too limiting – set up circumstances that can be used to scare any given NPC (save bosses, of course, unless that’s the trick). Possessing a soldier’s gun, for example – or simply the light fixtures or PA – would be a viable way to make this work. This would also mean that, in the example of protecting the black friend, for example, that while possessing the actual people doing the shooting would be possible, it would be much more practical to do it the way that was intended. It would also give the game a much-needed sense of “more than one way to do things.”
Alternately, be able to possess anyone, but if they are not scared first, then you have only limited control over them, as well as only temporary control, similar to when ghosts possess you towards the end of the game.
Make more objects possessable, preferably everything. I’m on the fence as to whether simply not allowing doors to be opened in ghostform with no explanation is worse than trying to provide an explanation for it. If most everything is possessable, give a way to turn on/off seeing the auras around what’s possessable, in degrees – objects, people.
Spend more time in the simulator at the beginning, and when we go back, let it complete and only maintain your individuality by Gigi sneaking into the sim and helping you fight the brainwashing, or your memories of her/your family/whatever.
Things used to scare people would be possessable in any order. (Ladder, extinguisher, and pipes in any order, not just that order.)
Dear God! Higher difficulty levels! I mean, really!
Co…op? Somehow? Maybe? *shrug*
Grenades! Throw->Possess->Roll->Explode.
Flying hosts – invertable
Possessions should be quicker to initiate. I loved simply being able to slip out of a body – slipping back into one should’ve been just as natural.
The story would be deeper, and Raimi wouldn’t have been silent.
The game would have been 2-3x as long.
Multiplayer Changes:
Online, online, online. Bigger maps – this game could be the next Halo if done right.
Better ammo/gun system. Direct Halo rip?
Capture the flag.
Ghost Barriers!
Vehicles! Possessable, of course.
New Toggles:
Ghosts – invisible to non-ghosts
Ghosts – invisible on radar
Ghosts – damageable
Ghosts – pop out of hosts when the host dies, or respawn back at their base
Hosts – damage transfer between them
Hosts/Vehicles – possessable only by certain teams
Ghosts – limited possession of already possessed hosts
Objects – indicator of whether or not the object is being possessed
Back! And Stuff. First Post
I decided that I didn't like my old blog's address (vain, I know) and thus am moving here, since there appears to be no way to change the address. I'll try to update more regularly from now on - once every tuesday is my plan (well, twice every tuesday - something old, something new, most of the time.)
But for now, I'm going to toss my old posts onto here. I'll make a real post or two before the day is up.
Originally posted December 1st, 2008 at adamgameapprentice.blogspot.com:
Well, here it is. I've finally decided to start a site.
Of course, this isn't a real site, but it's a start, and meant to encourage me to expand my horizons and start my own stuff. This is just a temporary home.
Anyway, I'm Adam, and I'm a 4th year college student in Cognitive Science. I intend to do my best to become a game designer after I finish here, and take some courses elsewhere. Here, I intend to write my game design thoughts down, as well as review and critique games that I've played, past and present. Should be good!
But for now, I'm going to toss my old posts onto here. I'll make a real post or two before the day is up.
Originally posted December 1st, 2008 at adamgameapprentice.blogspot.com:
Well, here it is. I've finally decided to start a site.
Of course, this isn't a real site, but it's a start, and meant to encourage me to expand my horizons and start my own stuff. This is just a temporary home.
Anyway, I'm Adam, and I'm a 4th year college student in Cognitive Science. I intend to do my best to become a game designer after I finish here, and take some courses elsewhere. Here, I intend to write my game design thoughts down, as well as review and critique games that I've played, past and present. Should be good!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)