There are many MMO* games that mix solo play with co-operative and competitive play across sessions. Not many however take this mass co-operative style and make it an essential component. Trying to organise tens or potentially hundreds of players towards a unified goal is a huge challenge no matter what incentives you give. With various skill sets and objectives of players it is important to make the act of playing together more important than achieving any particular goal. One game that has really shined at this is Transformice.

Transformice is a free to play web game in which players must get their mice to the cheese and back to their hole. It sounds simple but when tens of mice are trying to climb across the same platforms together many can fall to their doom or unbalance something making it impossible for anyone else to cross. With so many players, team work is almost impossible and if one player breaks away it can ruin the entire mission for cheese.

The fun comes from watching the chaos ensue and makes those often rare moments of achieving your goal feel that much more rewarding. The chat box below the game window is a great source of joy and venting as an entire platform capsizes under badly co-ordinated mouse movements.

The moments where you do reach your goal feel hugely rewarding because of the huge struggle it has taken to achieve. That said, the moments of huge team catastrophe can be hilarious as the uncoordinated mob falls to its doom.

What interests me about Transformice is how it sets conflicting goals. Players will be rewarded for being the first to complete the cheese capture, encouraging an every mouse for himself stampede. Also some teamwork requires the help of a special Shaman mouse to lead the way. This mouse has the most power to help or to punish, depending on the mood of the player.

With some MMO’s it is possible to play on your own and ignore any other players that might be in the world, it is then interesting to see an MMO that is solely based on interacting with others. Swarmation is another web based game in which each player controls a single pixel. Players are then challenged to co-operate and create a variety of shapes. On it’s own one pixel is not interesting and even the shapes the game asks players to make are not works of art. The act of putting them together and having to work with others makes each successful challenge very satisfying.

Die2Nite is another web based MMO (I didn’t intend all these to be web-based, but perhaps that says something about the medium?) in which teams of 40 players must survive for as long as they can against a zombie invasion. The game is very minimal in terms of interface, there is no 3D world to explore or even a player avatar to speak of. The vast majority of the game takes place in the worlds forum. Players must communicate and co-operate if they are to survive, sharing resources and pooling their efforts to have the highest chance of survival.

There are plenty of interesting things that happen in Die2Nite but one of the most interesting situations is when a player decides to go against the group. If enough players agree any other player can be banished from the camp, this makes them highly vulnerable to the zombie attack but gives them some new abilities to defend themselves. If enough banished players amass they can revolt and overthrow their banishers and rule the town themselves.

What is interesting about this dynamic is that it all involves real people and blurs the lines between reality and the game world. When someone steals from your game house it can feel like a betrayal on you. Mistakes and misunderstandings in the community can result in disastrous consequences; as team work falls apart so will the town.

A pure single player experience has its purpose and it is not going away, but I think there is much more fertile and interesting ground to be explored in these social experiences. When a game requires multiple people to work together to succeed but also encourages them to have their own agenda it creates an interesting dilemma. AI partners and opponents are currently very limited by technology and even if they can become believable players will always treat them differently psychologically. Using real people creates interesting social dynamics and I look forward to seeing how other games explore this area of design.

*I have used the term MMO in this article to discuss games that require more than 10 players. Perhaps this is a very broad term for MMO and would include many online FPS games which many may not consider to be MMOs. I think the term online multiplayer wouldn’t really do these games enough service so I hope you will forgive the stretched use of the term.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Players often rely on being given designer created goals when playing games. They are usually given a clear set of instructions and have an understanding of the win and fail states. Some games give the player more agency than others to complete their tasks but ultimately all players will push towards the same goal.

Most games are designed like this so playing a game without clear goals and objectives presents a dilemma for the player. How should they spend their time and how do they feel like they are being successful or progressing?

The game Minecraft is currently in alpha, which may explain its lack of goals and objectives. The game is an open sandbox in which players can destroy and build the landscape with their bare hands. Without any instructions or guidance the player is dropped into this world and expected to get on with it.

To be honest the lack of any instructions is a hindrance at the start of the game (one which I am sure will be rectified). However after consulting one of the many beginners guides I had quickly constructed a small house and was ready to take on the world. The player must deal with a number of obstacles from finite resources which must be dug up from the world to a dangerous night time filled with zombies and skeletons.

Even with all this the player is never given an end goal or structure to their play experience, leaving them to ultimately decide why they are playing. Perhaps their goal is to explore as many nearby caves, build a tree-house or find as many diamonds as they can. All of this is up to the player and the game itself will not track or reward these player determined milestones with any form of achievements or recognition.

As described earlier, night time is when monsters come out and if you are not in a well lit barricaded area you wont survive long. This day night cycle is used in many games, usually resulting in a closed shop or just a darker landscape. Here it clearly breaks up how the game must be played, forcing the player into a different style of playing.

I found that the open nature of Minecraft and the day night cycle forced me into creating routines and short term objectives. I would create my own goals during the day, such as planting trees, collecting wood or exploring my local area. At night I would dig underground or fix up the inside of the house. The day night cycle kept me changing how I was playing, stopping me from sticking at repetitive tasks as well as adding some time pressure to what I was doing.

Asking the player to create their own fun is putting a lot of expectation on the player and may alienate some. However given the ability to express my creativity through creation I found it liberating. There is certainly a place for the heavily scripted and linear adventures such as Uncharted but giving the player a range of tools and freedom to explore can be a much more compelling experience. I don't need a carrot to tempt me forward just a game that lets me create from my imagination whilst still giving me secrets and mysteries to explore.

I wonder how other games and genres could look to bring some of these ideas into their design to give the player a more open environment to express themselves. Would a game like GTA work if it wasn’t built around following a story and set missions? Could you create other kind of worlds were exploration is the main reward? I would be interested to know what other games have really let you feel open to explore the world and create your own objectives.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Most verbal communication in online games so often eatures a mixture of slurs and profanity. Most games offer no alternative to voice chat often feeling like the only option is to mute it all out. However shutting your ears to everyone reduces your team interaction and communication; it removes the player from the fact they are playing with real people. How refreshing it is then to see that Little Big Planet provides all the communication tools you need without having to open your mouth.

The control interface in Little Big Planet gives the player full control of their arms, head and even hips, as well as providing various emote options that when combined allow players to express almost any emotion without need for any vocal contribution.

For example when a player completes a particularly difficult part or wins a race they usually activate the biggest smile Sackboy can muster combined with waving and dancing arms. Even when a frustrated player shows Sackboy’s clenched fists and angry face he looks adorable making any potential conflict look more like a child's tantrum.

During moments of frustration or continued death I often push Sackboy’s sad emoticon all the way to all out bawling complete with arms outstretched double thumbs down. More often than not this prompts the second player to sidle alongside with a cute smile and give a few “there there” pats on the back. Que both Sackboys switching to a full happy mode and jumping for joy.

This use of puppetry makes the player feel like they are role-playing as the little Sackboy rather than speaking over the game as themselves. It takes the player into their avatar and makes events as described above feel like an important part of play. It is hard to tell if players that would normally curse and insult play differently when their voice cannot be heard but largely discouraging that communication makes the online play experience more enjoyable.

The beauty of this is that if it allows players of all ages, genders, languages and race communicate in an even and safe environment ,it encourages a greater level of roleplay which voice communication often ruins.

Instead of building non-verbal systems to support co-operation, roleplay and enjoyment, many games use voice communication as an easy out. I wonder if some games would actually be enhanced by being designed as if no player would ever be able to speak to another verbally. How could you use avatar emotes, automated responses and other actions to allow players to act out their thoughts. It may not work in every situation but I think many games would have a wider appeal if voice communication was not the only way to say how you feel.

I would also add that voice communication is possible in Little Big Planet (and is complete with lip syncing Sackboy) but in my time of playing it was a very rare occurrence. Another side effect of this level of puppetry in Little Big Planetis it has allowed for Machinima such as this

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

When DVDs reached mainstream popularity we saw the explosion of bonus features. With more memory and better software, movie makers could now deliver additional material to supplement the movie. Now it is fairly standard for a movie to have a making of and directors commentary. These give valuable insight to the viewer and create more value with the owner having more reasons to watch multiple times. Not only does this reduce the chance of them selling the disc second hand it also can make them closer and more involved with the film.

As many games reach million pound budgets and million pounds of success it is very surprising that many of these behind the scenes features are so rarely used. It would give the player another reason to play through, create a closer connection between developers and their audience as well as increasing peoples knowledge and understand of how games are created.

The recent remake of Monkey Island 2 features a commentary mode that when prompted allows the player to here some insight into the scene they are playing from the original games creators. For me this was a huge selling point for re playing the game and has given me interesting insight into the games inception.

Players and reviewers will often question designers decisions and may even provide some of their own solutions. It is usually the case that many of these problems and potential solutions had already been discussed and had very good reasons to not be included. But without any of these points being addressed by the developers it can often leave players feeling disenfranchised with the studio. By giving the player a making of documentary or in game designer commentary it would give the player a much better understanding of why the game is how it is.

Some would argue this content can be time consuming to make for the relatively small amount of people that would be interested. I however think that much of this can be implemented relatively easily and be an invaluable insight to a growing number of players. At the very least every game studio should get its key designers to talk through important moments and decisions to be used as commentary on the final game.

The more interesting and useful content the player is given the more likely they are to continue playing, not trade in the game and tell their friends about their experience. Beyond Monkey Island and Valve’s directors commentaries there really aren’t many other examples. If you are developing a game right now think about how you could implement such a feature and really enhance the experience for your biggest fans.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Teams are only as good as their ability to communicate. Games that encourage strong team play need to find ways of allowing players to communicate both visually and audibly to ensure a successful session. The easier a game makes it for players to convey information quickly the more likely they are to succeed and the more likely they are to enjoy themselves.

Left 4 Dead is a game that requires strong team play. If players do not work together the chance of anyone of them succeeding is slim. With such fast paced action and three other team mates to deal with it is important that it is made as easy as possible for players to share information and strategies.

The game gives the player scarce resources and limited inventory meaning finding an item is of huge importance. Usually voice communication is the easiest way to communicate this information with other players, however Valve have built audio responses that trigger based on the players sight. This means when any player character looks at an item an in-game message will be spoken to all other players such as, “Pills here”. This allows players to pass information on even in the heat of the moment when they may need to focus on other things.

The game also shows team mates as silhouettes at all times, making them visible even without line of sight. This makes it much easier to keep track of your team and is easier to follow than a radar or map positioned in the corner. When a player becomes in trouble their silhouette changes and the game automatically alerts their team to the situation. It means even without the player giving any manual communication their team will be given the vital knowledge in an instant.

Some would say automating the communication of some of these moments removes some of the responsibility from the player. I believe it allows the player to focus on higher level strategy discussions without having to worry about conveying some simpler messages that need to be shared. It is also really important as a way of including players who may not have or wish to use voice communication. It also allows players to work as a team across language barriers with key audio and visual alerts appearing in the players local language.

Many team games rely on player to player communication with the game providing little support in relaying good information between players. Automated audio and visual clues can really make a huge difference and I think Left 4 Dead is a great example of using them successfully. What other ways do you think games could help make team communication more efficient?

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Gaming has been in our homes for almost 3 decades now resulting in several generations of adult gamers. For the adult gamer time is precious and we have all manner of things to cram in to our busy lives. With such little free time, socialising with friends becomes a high priority, this of course behind the top priority of spending time with our loved ones.

Gaming can be hard to fit in to this schedule, making games that can be played with other people hugely important and much more appealing than a single player epic. Almost every game seems to be trying to find a way to play with your friends rather than against them. Most of these games focus on team work and co-operation but largely require both players to be of the same ability.

Games such as Gears of war 2 have tried to allow for different levels of skill by allowing each player a variable level of difficulty. The problem with this is that it doesn't matter how easy the settings can go if the player is unfamiliar with the vocabulary and the controls being used. Dual stick shooting is a learned control scheme, not an intuitive one.

It is rare to find couples of avid gamers skilled in the same genres making co-op games of this fashion difficult to impossible to play. It is therefore no surprise that these couples tend to not game together and perhaps opt for other activities they can share and enjoy.

Mario Galaxy looked to change this notion with the introduction of “co-star”. Whilst player 1 plays a traditional 3D platform game, requiring all the skill and timed jumps Mario is known for, the second player simply controls an onscreen cursor. At first this may sound rather patronising and uninteresting, but in fact it offers player 2 a very important supporting role.

The “co-star” player can hold moving platforms, hold and kill enemies and collect coins, 1ups and star bits. When faced with a tricky situation such as several moving platforms or a difficult to reach collectible the “co-star” player can make life a lot easier. It turns the second player into a huge help rather than an accommodated hindrance.

The key to this mode is understanding the needs of each player. A game like Gears assumes both players have come to the experience looking for an equal outcome. Mario Galaxy understands that whilst player one is looking for challenge and skill, player two is looking to be able to drop in and drop out whilst helping their partner all with no fear of penalty. In these games player two is not interested in delivering the killer blow they just want to join in and have fun.

As gaming spreads we need to find more ways to accommodate multiple players of different abilities and desires. This doesn’t mean dumbing a game down to the lowest common denominator but letting people play the role they want in a joined experience. Think about the different styles of gamer and how you can assign them tasks that best suit their skills. For example If one player wants to be the precision gunman let the other assist as a look out.

Gaming is now an important part of the social fabric and I am sure there are many of you out there who like to play with a partner or child that want a different experiences to you. What games do you play that give you both a fulfilling experience without having to sacrifice your enjoyment for theirs?

Below a video of two guys playing co-star mode in Mario Galaxy

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Point and click adventure games have a number of tropes like their linearity and focus on story but the one thing they all have in common is their ability to stump you! There is usually only one path and one solution to every problem, often resulting in your “rubbing” every item you have collected in your inventory together and crossing your fingers.

Long stints of puzzle frustration are rewarded with the great highs of self achievement. There is nothing better than finally figuring out a puzzle and having the feeling you are the smartest person alive. It doesn’t matter how many other people have solved it before you, in that moment you are a genius!

Whilst the pay off is always worth it, temptation is always whispering in your ear. “You could make this so much easier on yourself if you just looked at the guide.” “Come on, one look wont hurt! You’re only going to do it this once.” Of course if you do cave in, it will never be “just that once” if you give in once you will do it again and again.

Adventure game designers know this, they know we are weak, so to try and alleviate some of that frustration they have begun including hint systems. Something subtle to point you in the right direction without cheapening the experience. Sometimes though these aren’t enough and you really just need to know the answer.

The internet has created it’s own adventure game “Win” button with complete guides only a couple of clicks away. Once the player has found and used a guide it becomes an easy “alt tab” solution to even the most minor struggle. Now when the player becomes even slightly frustrated they will just resort to the guide.

What makes Machinarium interesting is that it supports its hint system with a complete game walk-through. After what I have just said this may sound counter productive. Surely with the player having a complete guide built into it they will resort to it all the time as they usually would with an online guide.

Machinarium cleverly avoids this by hiding the guide behind a helicopter-esk minigame. It may not be hugely challenging, but this small barrier between the player and the solution is enough to make them reconsider. By building it into the game it also discourages the player from checking an online guide and potentially reading more than they should.

I think this is an interesting solution to the problem of the player ruining their own experience. I found on my own play through I tried to use the in game guide several times but the mini-game was enough to convince me to try a little more. It meant I still got to enjoy the success of figuring it out myself, but on the one occasion I was truly stuck I didn’t have to leave the game to find the solution.

One might argue that if the player wants to read the guide from front to back that is their choice. I, however believe if the games designer responsibility to make the players experience as enjoyable as possible. That means giving the player just enough information to get them to where they need without removing the challenge.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Open world games are so called for the freedom they give the player. The rules are made to be broken and the player is encouraged to do anything he likes within the game world. Despite the characters being human they rarely require even the lowest needs from Mazlow’s hierarchy.

Realism in games may be a completely separate issue, but it is interesting that most open world games don’t feel the need to even ensure that the player character is well rested. The closest most game worlds get to having a regimented structure is a day and night cycle.

What makes Bully interesting is it does try to give the player a structure and responsibilities. They are required to attend lessons during school hours and stay inside after curfew. Attending lessons results in experience encouraging the player to go to class.

When class is on, all of the kids usually walking around are gone, replaced by a few teachers. Should you choose to avoid your tutoring, they will hunt you down! It may not be an impossible punishment to avoid but it does change the environment dramatically depending on the time of day. It really helps the player get into the role of a school pupil.

It is a stretch to say the world of Bully feels alive, but it does makes the world make more sense compared to the aimless pedestrians of Grand Theft Auto.

The other side of the coin is that too much structure can become a chore. Most players don't want to be forced into mandatory real life requirements like eating and sleeping. They just want the most direct route to the action, its why fast travel is so prevalent. Why reflect realism when people are playing games for escapism. If we had the choice wouldn’t we all like to chose exactly what we did and when!

While I agree with most of this argument I think a better balance can be reached between making the player feel and act like a part of the society they are inhabiting rather than a visitor passing through. I don't expect a game to be as intense as the Stalker Reality Mod but I think some of the worlds we play in need to give the player more reason to exist there. This could even help create those closer relationships with the in-game characters, create better empathy and challenge our understanding of the world when the structure is changed.

Can anyone think of other examples of games that ask you to try and integrate with the world rather than be the ignorant hero? How fun could you make a game were the player was forced to obey more rules and actually look after their avatar like they do themselves?

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

It is fairly standard for all games to begin with a menu. A series of options allowing the player to set up and chose their game type before beginning. Throughout the game more menus are used to deliver choices and options to the player, they're easy to understand (in general) and fairly straightforward.

Any menus during action and gameplay take the player out of the experience. The more time the player spends away from the game and in these menus the less immersed they will be. Burnout Paradise attempts to rectify this by keeping you in the game as much as possible by doing away with the pesky menus.

It does this by turning the world into your menu. Instead of chosing your next race from a list you find them at various traffic lights across the world. Rev the engine and wheel spin in front of them and you are off!

Cars are not simply unlocked and put into your garage they are unleashed into the world for you to find and when you find them its time to race. I often found that the cars I was looking for would drive past me in the opposite direction, forcing me into a 180 handbrake turn. That chase is so much more enthralling because it started with an exciting maneuver and not a yes response to a pop up menu.

Even when the game does offer you a menu, to connect online, it overlays this on the side of the screen and never once pauses the action. The more dexterous among you will be able to make their selections without stopping a race.

I think keeping the player in the world and focused on driving as much as possible is so important for immersion. Perhaps the Burnout Paradise world is not as rich as some story based games, but immersion is about being lost in the moment. Staying in the car is so important to that feeling, something supported by Jordon Mechner,

"The longer the player plays without a break, the more his sense of the reality of the world is built up. Any time he dies or has to restart from a saved game, the spell is broken."

I really think more games should attempt to lower the amount of breaks and menus that get between the player and playing. What other games do you think best keep you in the moment?

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

The first time a game allows you to press a button is often the Start menu. A legacy from the arcade days when machines would sit idly waiting for someone to play them, it feels outdated on home gaming. I already know what game I have selected and that I want to play it, I dont need a title screen or flashing "press start" to be the first interactive moment I have.

This start menu, and the loading screens that usually follow, are a barrier between the player and the game they want to play. Its why I am often surprised that some games begin with a series of menus and loading only to be followed by a long opening cutscene. In many games it can take over 10 minutes before the player is actually doing what they intended to do when they sat down.

Which is why it was a great relief to find out once I had put the Fifa disc into my console I was playing with in seconds. Before you are even at the menu screen the game presents you with a simple 1 on 1 game of Football called Arena mode.

This immediately allows the player to begin the game in a straightforward and non-competitive way. The player can feel out the controls and experiment without any pressure or fear of consequence.

Football is a team game so stripping away any team mates focuses the player on the most basic controls of moving and shooting.

As mentioned not only is this mode used to kick start the game (pun intended) it is also used to mask loading screens. This keeps the player in the game and even gives them a slight taste of the upcoming match as the player used is from his team.

What I love most about the Arena mode is that it really encourages experimentation. Without fear of losing the ball or running out of time I can attempt all kinds of over elebarote goals that would normally be impossible in an actual game; This improves my skill at the game and makes me a better player.

This may not be appropriate for every game but I think it shows a line of thinking that can be applicable to many games. Think about those moments that take the player out of the experience, the menus, the load screens even sometimes the cutscenes. How can you make those moments more immersive and engaging for the player, keeping them in that experience for longer.

EA Sports have successfully created the most fun loading screens since Ridge Racer and have given me the perfect environment to play and hone my skills without a fail state. I think more games should find ways of allowing the player to experience a free form play state, without the threat of failure. Perhaps Gran Turismo should start with a windy test track with the fastest car you own or the opening moment of street fighter be that infamous fight with a car.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

The more a game keeps you involved away from the screen the more it becomes a part of the your life. Its why games companies are putting Twitter and Facebook into their titles, some even have their own social networks. They want you to be thinking about the game wherever you are.

Game Freak have taken another approach to keeping us involved once the power is off, they made the Pokewalker. Essentially a pedometer come Tamagotchi with a couple of built in mini games that can interact with the DS via infrared. The Pokemon philosophy is here in spirit allowing players to catch more ‘mons and interact with friends walkers. All of these can then be pushed back into the DS for your main game.

At first this doesn't seem like much of an innovation, especially considering the game it connects with is already fairly portable, but after a few days with the device you start to see the clever intricacies that make it unique.

While Pokemon is a great hand held game that can be played in small sessions or epic marathons, the Pokewalker allows for real microgaming. Whether you are waiting for someone to pick up the phone or walking between rooms this device gives you a small hit of Pokemon in a matter of seconds. You are never more than a couple of button presses away from catching a new ‘mon or finding a rare item.

The real genius of the Pokewalker is that it actually IS a pedometer. It does seem trivial at first, but every step in real life grants my pocket monster 1 game XP. Each step also increases my chances of finding a rare Pokemon or item. Its cheesy but that one to one ratio does create the nice illusion that you are out walking with your favourite Pokemon, making you more connected to the game and your virtual pets.

More importantly it started making me think about where I go and how I get around, I have even found myself thinking about going jogging just to get more Watts (the walkers currency).

Just carrying it with me everyday has made me more aware of the amount of steps I do on average. Most days only around 5,000 well below the 7,192 average for a man. I’m slightly embarrassed to reveal how lazy my days really are and while the Pokewalker wont make anyone fit, it does make people more aware of their daily exercise. How many games can you think of that really make you aware of your daily routines? More importantly how many games can you think of that appeal to kids and make them think about how much exercise they have?

So I commend Game Freak and Nintendo for not only making a great example of extending play into daily activity but by making people a little more aware of themselves.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »

Hello World!

Welcome to Heaven Twiddling....Ta Da!

Have you ever thought about the significance subtle sound changes make to playing Call of Duty? How the Pokewalker can enhance and continue your experience away from the game? Or how the environment in Burnout Paradise tries to do away with the traditional menu system? 

If you have thought about those things, or they got your cogs turning, you should come back here (lots) and subsribe to the RSS feed. I aim to post a couple of blogs a week on interesting design decisions. Also I would really appreciate any comments, ideas and insight you have so please comment away on my posts.

It's not much to look at yet, but soon this will be a burgeoning site of intellectual discourse on games design (I hope).

I have always enjoyed looking at how things work and I decided it was time to start writing down the some of the things I notice in the games I play. I don't expect everything to be a revelation for you (although I hope some will make you go "ohhhh yeah!"). I just hope by highlighting some key design choices that make certain games interesting and note worthy, that together we can look at how they work and how else they could be used.

I hope I can live up to your already sky high expectations ;)

Glenn

PS. In case you wondered, the name Heaven Twiddling is an anagram of my full name.

Permalink | Leave a comment  »