Showing posts with label Video Game Design. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Video Game Design. Show all posts

Friday, September 19, 2014

Project 13: Bubble Puzzle

One of my favourite genres of video games is the "bubble puzzle," with games like Snood, Puzzle Bobble, Supermagical or even Zuma.

Puzzle Bobble - Taito 1994 - Image from the Games Database


I like that these games can either be very contemplative or very active. It's also easy to scale these games to be easier or harder based on speed and the potential number of combinations of bubbles. It's also possible to create interesting combination situations based on the kind of rules you apply to the game field.

I've definitely been feeling like I want to put more of my time into making a game again and I would also like the chance to explore some environments and tool sets for making games. So I've decided that Project 13, will be a Bubble Puzzle game that gives me a reason to get organized and make something fun.

Supermagical is the same but sideways - Image From Supermagical Blog

The Game

Basically the game will follow the simplest bubble puzzle format (such as Snood), where rows of bubbles will be pushed down from the top. You will have a dial and will have to shoot bubbles at the defending lines to push them back and defend yourself.

Stylistically I've decided (and I'm no artist so we'll see how this *actually* goes) that you will play a team of squirrels fighting against a bunch of robots.

Basically at each turn robots will produce a number of bubbles which will be pushed onto a line above the play field, once that line is full it will push onto the field. Meanwhile squirrels will dig up bubbles for you to shoot at the descending rows. Bubbles will stick together and will explode when more than 3 of the same type touch. If a bubble isn't attached to the top anymore then it falls to the bottom.

When bubbles fall to the bottom their power will be collected and you will use that power to turn off the robots. Once the robots are turned off, they'll stop producing bubbles of specific colours. Once the robots aren't making any new bubbles you win the round.

Snood - Image from Snood World


The Plan

I'm interested in making this game either in Unity or using an HTML 5, so before making too many further plans my first goal is to investigate these platforms (particularly finding an HTML 5 engine I like). 

My goal is to have played around enough to know what platform I'll develop the bubble puzzle game in by mid October 2014 (which we'll call the 16th).

Thursday, August 14, 2014

Projects 8, 9, 10 and 11: The Future Pack: Updates

The set of future projects that I wanted to write down but not start yet, also gets updating although I'm still not actually going to put a deadline on any of them yet.

  • Project 8 - Space Station Simulation Game
    • This is still on the back burner, although I have given it some more thought. I'm also thankful that SpaceBase DF-9 while similar is not exactly what I was thinking (although it may prove to be that it is what it is since it's hard to make a space station simulator the way I've imagined it.
    • I'm not going to start on this project until I've taught myself Unity as an environment to work in and made a simpler game first.
  • Project 9 - An Action RPG
    • The Action RPG is still the game I would most like to make, but as with the Space Station Game I want to get a little more experience so that I can make something I'm happy with.
  • Project 10 - A Sci-Fi Novel
    • This is the future project that I'm least ready to start. Given that it's something I've been thinking about for years it's a difficult project to work on.
  • Project 11 - A Fantasy Novel
    • This is probably the project I'm closest to really attempting to start. At the moment I'm not sure how much time I have to dedicate to it, since there are some other things I'd like to do and there's still that pesky PhD to work on.

Monday, August 19, 2013

Project 4: Snake Version 0.3.1 - now with a little less crashing.

Version 0.3.1 of the snake game fixes a problem where pressing the 't' key to give yourself points before the game starts caused the game to crash. All the cheat keys (and the control swap key) now only work while the game is playing.

All the other features introduced in version 0.3.0 remain unchanged.

You can download it here:

  • The Windows Versions (32-bit, and 64-bit)
  • The Mac OS X Version
  • The Linux Versions (32-bit and 64-bit)
  • Friday, August 16, 2013

    Project 4: Snake Version 0.3.0 (Almost Undetectably New!)

    The Snake game has still been holding my attention, so I've put together the newest update. This new version however is primarily changes to the design and organization of the game.

    Does this mean you won't be able to tell the difference from version 0.2.0? Not entirely. The new structure has made it easier for me to switch things in and out and make things a little easier.



    The biggest change is that now the controls are modelled after those implemented in Nibbles. This means that when you're heading in any direction you can now only turn to the side rather than back on yourself. However if you liked the original controls, all you have to do is press 'k' to switch between the two controls.

    Furthermore if you want to make things easier or harder on yourself there are some cheats available:

    • Press 't' to add a point to your score, this moves the target and is just like you hit the target on your own.
    • Press 'y' to add a level. This levels you up, speeding up the game.
    • Press 'u' to turn off collisions, so you can go on forever without worrying about running into yourself. Press 'u' again to turn them back on again.
    That's pretty much the update for this time. Lots of changes that mean more to me than you, but it should make it a lot easier to do the things I'm thinking for the future. Speaking of which Version 0.4.0 will be along in a little while and should bring a GUI and different kinds of worlds to play.

    But for now you can download Version 0.3.0 below:

    Edit: See the Patched Version 0.3.1
    • The Windows Versions (32-bit, and 64-bit)
    • The Mac OS X Version Edit: There seems to be a problem with the Mac OS X app. I will investigate as soon as I can.
    • The Linux Versions (32-bit and 64-bit)


    Tuesday, July 16, 2013

    Project 4: A Further Surprise Snake Update (Version 0.2.0)

    So it seems I still have a lot of procrastinating to do. I've managed to turn out another version of Snake. (This time version 0.2.0).


    This version introduces:

    * Awful Sound Effects - it's weird old beeps, that kinda appealed to me
    * Mute - press 'M' to turn off the awful sound effects (this doesn't preserve between games yet)
    * Scaling Snake Colour - now as the snake grows it fades to grey towards the end of it's tail. This makes it easier to see which way you're going (especially when coming back from pause).

    Please play and let me know in the comments if you run into any problems or bugs or any thoughts at all really.

    You can get the game from these links:


    Thanks as always!

    Thursday, July 11, 2013

    Project 4: A Surprise Update on the Snake (Version 0.1.0)

    Again, my skills in procrastination have allowed me to get things done. This time, now that I don't have it as an active project, I managed to put out a revision of the Snake game.

    This version introduces a couple of new features:
    • Pausing! Now you can press 'p' to stop the game whenever you want. To resume the game just press any of the arrow keys and start going again. 
    • Bouncing Scores! I'm sure I'm the only person who cares, but now when you hit a target the score bounces up and down a little bit. It's not amazing animation, but it's something.
    • Proper key handling. This doesn't change the game at all, but I was able to apply a lot of the things I've learned about Processing.org and realized that the tutorial I'd followed way back in the beginning had a strange way of handling key presses (relying on the main loop of the program). Now I've updated it to use proper event handling. 

    You can download the update:
    If you'd care to beta test this for me I'd really appreciate it. Leave me your thoughts in the comment section.


    Monday, July 01, 2013

    Project 4: Snake: Update and Wrap-up

    It may have taken me nearly a year to do a few afternoon's worth of programming, but the first version of my Snake game is finally done. (Spoilers: You can play it using the links at the bottom of the article.)


    This was quite a bit of fun to put together. One of the nice things about programming a game (especially one this simple) is that the results are immediately visible. It's also nice to have small targets to hit that are fairly easily achieved.

    The game plays pretty much like any instance of snake you may have run across in the past. I did choose to have the edges of the world wrap because I was entertained by the math, but I also enjoy that it does cause you to think a little extra since the snake is not always apparent as adjacent to you. Right now the game speeds up for levels 1 - 10, but the game doesn't end until you reach level 33.

    For the record though you can technically win the game, however I'm not sure how possible that is in reality. I've found the responsiveness with my Mac Book Pro to be insufficient at the higher levels, but with a different key board it may be easier. It's also somewhat difficult because there's no boarder around the snake and so it's very difficult to see where the snake is at any given point in time.



    I'm pleased with the level and score markers that pop up. It would be nice to have them fade in or out, or for the scores to bounce a little. I decided to stop where I got to and if I'm able to put those in as extras in a later version. Additionally in later versions I'd like to add some game modes and manage difficulty better than I am right now.

    I'd really appreciate some help testing out this version of the game. If you have a little time I'd like to know:

    • if/how it works on different platforms (links are below)
    • if there are any bugs
    • is it fun? What could make it more fun?
    Comments in the comment section would be appreciated.

    For now it needs to be downloaded, it's not really worth making it embeddable.
    Control the snake with your arrow keys. You can quit with the 'q' key and win with the 'w' key. From the game over screen you can start playing again by hitting the space bar.

    These should all run with the included files. Processing has an automatic generator and I've found that the Windows and Mac versions seem to work for me. I haven't had time to test it on Linux yet.

    Thanks for your support. I'll do another version but for now it's on to other things!


    Wednesday, January 16, 2013

    Blog: Thoughts on Tales of Graces f

    I recently finished playing Tales of Graces f. Which is a PS3 expanded port of a Wii game (Tales of Graces). It's a jrpg that is part of the long running Tales series. Quite a while ago I played through the GameCube Tales of Symphonia, but other than that I haven't played other games in the series.

    Tales of Graces f (via GameFaqs)
    This game is an action rpg, in which you run around on the world map and then when you run into enemies (which are visible in the world) you enter a combat environment where you can move around the enemies and use different combat commands which are bound to the different controller buttons. The rest of the time you run around the world and talk with people and try to avoid TOTAL ANNIHILATION OF THE PLANET (as I said, it's a jrpg). Interestingly the game is also set over 3 (well 2 and a half) different time periods where you play first as a child and then later as a young adult. The last section of game takes place about six months after than the main story line and gives you an extra adventure and a bit of a "where are they now" section.

    I'm very charmed by this game. Objectively, it would be hard to rate it as especially good since it has some design and technical problems that hold it back from being excellent, equally it would be hard to consider it bad since none of its problems are game-breaking. Overall it's average, however I enjoyed playing it and as I said I was really charmed by our encounter (which lasted 50 or so hours).

    Some of the visuals are pretty cool. (via GameFaqs)

    I'll talk below about the things I liked, didn't like, thought about and would include in a game of my own. As always please be warned since there will be spoilers.

    Things I Liked


    Many of the things I liked I only came to like after a lot of time spent playing the game. By the end of the game, I came to really like the characters, but in the earlier parts of the story they felt flat and a little unpleasant. As you spend more time with them and as the story lets them develop they become a lot more lovable and entertaining.

    While the characters got better overtime I think I may have enjoyed the story a little less at its end than I did at its beginning. In the earliest phases we play a local lord caught in a greater conflict between three greater kingdoms who are all suffering a shortage of the magical go-powder that makes all the magic and technology work. Later the game shifts to more of standard, chase down the giant evil and kill them (although it is actually more nuanced than that). Overall the story was still a good part of the game.

    Another thing I liked, although I don't know that it's the kind of thing I want included in every game, is the aging up structure of the narrative. Playing the first few chapters as kids lets you be bad at the game while your character is still young (which makes more sense than why a 20 something year old soldier is not quite sure which end of the gun/sword/gunsword should be pointed at the rats). It also offers more narrative options than keeping the time in the game continuous, so you're able to be a kid, have a tramatic event happen and then runaway to clown school (by which I mean the knight academy). I don't know that they implemented it quite as well as they might have, there are things that might have been done better and worked into the story (you lived two blocks away from your friend for 7 years and never talked to him?), but overall I think it made the story work in this game.

    Hey we're just kids right now! (via GameFaqs)


    I also liked getting an extra mini-adventure at the end of the game. This was added on for the PS3 version and lets you return to your main characters six months after the end of the main quest. It's nice to get a calm way to transition out of the game at the end. The story was less intense, but still interesting and lets you see the characters returning to their real world jobs and sorting out their real world relationships. As with the rest of the story it could be slightly better and less melodramatic but it was a really nice way to finish the game.

    Things I Didn't Like


    For some reason the developers created an artificial intelligent for the camera and made it terrified of the main characters. It was difficult to see things in many areas of the game because the camera was so far away from the action. Some of this might be in the nature of PS3 games (and my having a not-quite-actually-hd television, it was also somethings difficult to read the type) and it did make it easier to see the enemies around you, however at first at least I found it really disconnecting. I understand that the models and textures might not be at the top of the line for the PS3 but it would have been nice to actually see some of what was going on.

    I also found that the difficulty on the bosses was way harder than any of the mooks in the area. I guess the intention was that I should grind more, but I (for some crazy reason) didn't want to grind. It's especially frustrating since the difficulty shows up at strange times in the game (you might get five boss fights in a row that are easy and then one that's nearly impossible). Other than an attempt to boost the hours that the game takes, I suspect that some of the difficulty imbalance is due to the fact that single enemies are at a great disadvantage of groups of enemies (since they are easy to stun-lock and simply can't move as fast as your party of four fighters), however for story reasons some bosses need to fight alone and so they ramp up the difficulty to keep things "balanced".

    The combat system was also quite complicated (or I was fairly dumb). After 40 hours of play time I was still learning how the game worked. While I certainly take some of the blame, having not played a "modern" jrpg (the last I think I played was Final Fantasy 12, which isn't modern or at all the same) and having not played a tales game in a very long time. On the other hand the game was still giving introductory tutorial messages during a boss fight more than 30 hours into the game. At the end (especially in the future section) I felt good with the combat system and got better at winning fights, but it certainly took me a long time.

    The combat system ... of course we know what's going on here. (via GameFaqs)
    The crafting systems was frustratingly complex for very little pay off. Craftable things seem to come in three types, food (and items), gear and valuables. The valuables system was fairly straight forward, but required you to go through the list of every item you have available and see what it can be crafted with, then you can sell the outcome (or save them to see what you can combine them with). The actual utility of this never became clear to me other than to have a bank of spare cash and it took more time than I'd really have liked.

    The food system basically works the same way. When you have food as an item you can use it to heal the whole party for some percentage of their HP. More interestingly if you use the crazy inexplicable object creator thingy to make food, it can produce effects in the battle environment (like reviving dead characters, yay cheeseburgers). While this is cool, the fact that no food items are not actually usable to produce effects makes the whole system less helpful.

    The gear system is where the problems really stood out to me. As far as I can tell there were at least four different mechanics that affected the creation of gear. Some of them augmented gear and others gave you new types of gear and then somehow you could get things back from gear without losing the augments and then ... you could do something with them. Unfortunately this is not at all intuitive or explained well in the tutorial text and I was never able to understand it. (And I'm willing to admit that it might be me as much as it's the game).

    Things I Noticed


    Back in the days of the Super Nintendo, on the the things I enjoyed about many RPGs was the sudden access to flight, freeing you up to travel around the world anywhere you want to go and to do anything you want to do. In particular the mode-7 airship from Final Fantasy VI (3) and Flammie the Mana Dragon from Secret of Mana hold a special place in my heart.

    Now however, most games don't allow you to fly around the world. In Tales of Graces f you can't even pick your destination from the map, you have to pick it from a list beside the map. Given that it's tough to remember where you want to go by name some times this isn't an ideal solution to the going places problem. It's also much less immersive and fun than getting to fly yourself

    Things I'd Include in a Game


    One of the interesting things about this game is that I don't feel like there are any components I'd really chose to integrate into a game. Basically, while I enjoyed the game, I didn't feel that any of the novel parts of the game were actually things I'd choose to play.

    Final Thoughts


    Overall it's a little difficult to talk about  this game. I definitely enjoyed it and will probably play bits of it again at some point in the future, but overall it didn't stay with me the way some games do. I also think that while it's a fun game it's not a great starting point either for the series or the genre. Tales of Graces f is a solid game but nothing to really shake up your world.

    He has crazy eyes, but it's only because someone crazy got in one of his eyes ... (via GameFaqs)

    Wednesday, September 12, 2012

    Project 4 : Snake : Update

    The deadline for the first phase of the Snake project was September 1, 2012. By that point I had hoped to have a basic version of the game up and running. Unfortunately, I wasn't quite able to finish all that I'd hoped to do in the given time period.

    Snake. Version 0.1 - it's almost a game.

    What I did manage to get done was all the basic parts of the game except for the actual snake. I have a dot that goes around the world and can hit another dot that gives the player a point. This is mostly the point of snake, but right now my snake can't grow a tail.

    Building the game in Processing.org was interesting. Processing is designed for non-expert programmers to be able to develop animations and interactions. It based on Java, but has a limited set of  the java utility libraries (although it does allow for other libraries to be added). The java basis is convenient because that's the language I've done most of my development in so far, however not having things such as queues makes things (such as the tail of the snake) harder to implement.

    Even though I haven't finished the tail of the snake, it's interesting to note that the game already has the feeling of snake. The controls have a slight delay (because the movement of the snake is not linked to key presses) which feels very similar to most of the other implementations I've played in the past. I actually find this somewhat frustrating, since it causes you to have less control than you might. In the implementation I finished a while ago (and then deleted somehow) I implemented the control differently (I think I had the snake move on the key press regardless of its speed) and this made the game much more controllable and less frustrating.

    Since I didn't get everything done in the last phase, I'm going to start my next phase by finishing getting the snake's tail running. I also want to implement the move-on-key-press control system and a way to switch between the two so there are traditional and "comfortable" modes. I also want to put in some of the "game" functionality, including a start screen, a pause screen and an on screen score / level system.

    It's come back into the semester and sadly I still have one class left to complete in my PhD, so this can't be a high priority for the next few months. I don't think it will take a lot of time to finish but I want to do a good job so I can have it in a state where other folks can play it, so the balance of all that I'll end this phase on October 14, 2012.

    Thursday, August 16, 2012

    Blog: Thoughts on Pikmin

    I recently finished replaying Pikmin. Pikmin is a real-time strategy game released by Nintendo for the Gamecube in 2001. Pikmin was later followed up by Pikmin 2 and now Pikmin 3 is scheduled to be a launch(ish) title for the Wii U. In it you play Captain Olimar, erstwhile space ship captain who has crashed into a terrifying planet full of giant captain eating monsters. You have to find the 30 missing parts of your ship  with the help of 3 different, colour-coded for your convenience, species of animate carrots. I rented it (and played it through) through when it first came out and recently picked it up at my local game store.

    Piiiiiikmin (via GameFAQs)

    You play Pikmin by raising up a swarm of these small simple creatures who's basic functions are to fight things and carry things. You get more pikmin by having them carry food back to their "onions" from which they sprout new seeds which bloom into pikmin which you then pluck and put into forced labour fighting monsters, removing bariers and carrying more food and your ship parts. Different pikmin are immune to different environmental hazards. Put together you get a game that's part puzzle game part action-strategy game.

    It's a simple game and really short (I finished it in 3 light evenings, and I wasn't that good). I enjoyed enough to feel like writing a bit about it, especially because of the brightness of the game and how much fun it was it was to play.

    What I Liked


    The greatest part about Pikmin is the feeling of the game. It's bright and colourful and the controls are (for the most part) not frustrating. It's easy enough to see a problem, decide on a solution and implement it (whether or not it will work is another story). The controls feel good and the game doesn't fight you outside of a couple of AI elements, since the pikmin are supposed to be independent creatures you sometimes have to work with what they want. This doesn't detract from the game at all though.

    It's kinda fun to hang out with these guys. (via GameFAQs)


    I like the constrained nature of the game. Your ship has crashed, you have 30 days to retrieve 30 ship parts. Pikmin fight things and cary things. All you need to do is make sure the paths are open (which you do by using more pikmin to fight things. The game isn't overwhelming with complexity, either in the gameplay or the story, so it's simple to sit down and play for a few minutes when ever you feel like it. Days last 13 minutes, so it's easy to get a small snippet of Pikmin in although it sometimes takes a couple of days planning to get a task done and it's easy to forget what you were aiming to do.

    What I Didn't Like


    The biggest issue I had with Pikmin is the strength of the enemies. This is partly due to my having played a lot more Pikmin 2 where the a lot of the bosses from Pikmin become easier, regular field enemies and you have stronger Pikmin to fight them. Still I would describe Pikmin as an easy game, except for the combat. It's also true that most of the enemies are based on patterns and the more you play the more comfortable you get with the correct way to fight each kind of enemy.

    Patience is a virtue rarely explored in video games. Watch out for the feet. (via GameFAQs)


    I also found that the game is a little bit small and simple (despite my having like the constrained nature above). Again this might be my experience with Pikmin 2 peeking though, but the areas are a bit small and there aren't any extra things to do. It would be nice to find a few extra surprises here and there to expand on the game a bit.

    While it's mostly alright, the AI was not all it could be. While most of the game felt like you were collaborating with helpful, mostly compliant creatures (who sometimes had their own agendas) every once in a while the covers fall off and you run into problems. One instance I had was when a bunch of blue-pikmin who are able to walk through water (they have gills) wouldn't carry a ship part back to the ship unless a bridge was repaired for them to carry it over the water. It's a case where what should be a largely emergent AI system was trumped by traditional video game design and it made the game worse for it. From what I recall they did make this much better in Pikmin 2, but as an AI researcher its frustrating to see something we could implement much better going to waste.

    Things I Noticed


    Pikmin was also re-released on the Wii and while I haven't played it (I have watched Chuggaconroy's Let's Play), I noticed that they signifiantly reworked the controls. This seems to have removed a lot of the issues I've had with getting the pikmin to the right places at the right time. While I don't think the Gamecube controls are terrible it does look like the Wii controls make the game a lot easier.

    Things I'd Include in a Game


    The bright and happy aspect of Pikmin shouldn't be underrated, even if it causes people to feel like it's a "kiddy" game. It's obviously not appropriate for every game, but sometimes its nice to be able to relax and enjoy the atmosphere ... although this possibly makes it more horrific when you get a swarm of pikmin eaten.

    How can it not be charming? (via GameFAQs)


    I also like the bite sized chunks attached to achievable goals. This game came out long before the "social gaming" trend started and it's a good reminder that small fun pieces of game play doesn't have to also be about microtransactions.

    Final Thoughts


    I enjoyed Pikmin and if you're able to get your hands on it I recommend playing it. It's a lot of fun by itself and an interesting example of where video games have been in the past. I'm really glad I picked it up and I'm pretty excited for the forthcoming Pikmin 3.

    It is the fundamental nature of the Pikmin. All things must be carried. (via GameFAQs)


    Thursday, August 09, 2012

    Blog: Thoughts on Mass Effect 3


    This is another post of my thoughts on video games. As with the Legend of Zelda: Skyward SwordI finished Mass Effect 3 quite a while ago. Interestingly unlike Skyward Sword, Mass Effect 3 left less of an impact on me and I find that it has largely faded from my mind (and it isn't, on it's own, a game I'm likely to return to).

    Just a warning this post will contain major spoilers for all three Mass Effect games.


    This is Calrin Shepard. Your only defense against the Reaper threat.


    To go back a bit, I really enjoyed Mass Effect, more, I think, than a lot of other people. I enjoyed the RPG aspect of the character management and the combat (although not the inventory). I even enjoyed the Mako sections (that bouncy tank) that no one else liked. The thing I liked most about Mass Effect though was that it let me play a guy who was geuinely enthusiastic about going to space, meeting aliens and doing cool things.

    Mass Effect 2 therefore was a mixed bag for me. It was easier to play, better organized and still a lot of fun. It felt a bit more closed in and I found it harder to play Shepard as the space enthusiast and as a realistic human being. Because of the way the game was structured it was necessary to get as many paragon or renegade points as possible to get powers and story points unlocked successfully. This meant that you weren't free to chose the dialogue option you wanted, but had to pick the choice that gave you the points you needed.

    Enter Mass Effect 3, which felt on the one hand like an apology for how much Mass Effect 2 wandered off from the original idea of Mass Effect and on the other hand like a plea from EA for everyone on earth to start playing their games. This made the game quite mixed having some of the aspects that I really enjoyed from Mass Effect (such as the interplanetary diplomacy and your original crew), but still some of the streamlining from Mass Effect 2 that felt a bit as though the control of the game was not up to you.


    Someone who sorta looked like me used to sorta work for you.

    Things I Liked


    As I mentioned the thing I liked best about Mass Effect was the feeling being able to run around and be excited about being in space and meeting new and crazy races (if you wanted to play that way). Mass Effect always seemed to be light hearted enough that meeting people and doing things always felt fun. Now I realize that the plot in Mass Effect 3 doesn't allow for so much light heartedness but it was nice to at least have a chance to go do some things that were more "spacey".

    It's good to have the old gang back together.

    I also liked the way the combat was designed. Mass Effect was clunky at best (even though I enjoyed it) and while Mass Effect 2 was much slicker it also limited the options available to you (playing as an engineer I felt like my hands were tied for much of the game). Mass Effect 3 seems to have found a balance point between the two, where you get to play the way you want to play but the game is still streamlined and organized. That being said though the very best part of the combat (at least as an engineer) is the joy of setting the bad guys on fire.

    Surprisingly I also really enjoyed the multi-player. I hadn't expected to enjoy it, in fact I hadn't even really expected to play it. I don't usually go for multi-player games, I tend to play games for a break for interacting with people.  The fact that multi-player was somewhat necessary to get the best ending for the game (and we'll get to the ending in a bit) drew me in especially since I didn't want to spend too much time grinding on the single player elements to get my "readiness" up to the top level.

    It turned out however that the multi-player was maybe the most fun part of the game (even if I was the weakest link on several occasions). Especially once I got used to the maps and the style of play (and it was kinda tough as an engineer) I had a lot of fun and I think if I were to fire up Mass Effect 3 again in the near future it would be to play multi-player (especially if I could do it with people I know.)

    Things I Didn't Like


    Unfortunately Mass Effect 3 has a number of aspects that I just didn't enjoy. The first of which the story. Actually it's not the story itself that was my problem so much as all the side-stories you needed to do to get on with the main story. This is one of the parts where my memory is fading a bit, but the number of times you had to do the traditional RPG thing of helping one person to get the thing to help another person to get the thing to help the first person to get the thing you needed to do the first part of your quest seems very high.

    In particular I feel like Tuchanka was both the best and worst part of the game. On the one hand you had incredible character moments and scenes that changed the shape of the galaxy, but at the same time you're dicking around on a planet doing things that had do nothing to stop the invading fleet of giant sentient space robot lobsters.

    I think the solution to this would have been to make the game much more open (I recognize there are some options, but they're less even than in the previous two games). You have 7 days and all of space open to you. Go see who you can convince to save earth and the rest of the galaxy. You can keep most of the set pieces and scenes of the game the same, but you give the player a lot more flexibility to cut and run when the time invested is out weighing the benefit collected.

    Another thing that bothered me about the game is the amount of time taken for Shepard to get anything done. Even if we exclude the length of time it takes for interstellar travel (which they don't really talk about in game, is it seconds or is it days) there's still the fact that the game takes a lot of time. Enough time that the onboard reporter to have several reports that it seems would take place days or even weeks apart and for that mater there's enough time for people to build a giant super weapon. It speaks to the weird construction of the threat in this game. Giant sentient space robot lobsters that are explicitly designed to absorb and destroy all life in the galaxy have to conduct month's long ground wars?

    And I'm fighting you by hand ... why?


    This is one of the more common problems in video games (and a lot of creative works), the relative power of the bad guys is set way to high for the good guys to ever combat. We want a strong enemy so we can feel great having over come them and been victorious, but if the creators have to invent reasons why the bad guys don't auto-win over the good guys the story telling is going to be slightly hollow.  It's difficult to take a defeatable video game enemy as a real threat to the entirety of life in the galaxy.

    This feeds into my last major issue and it shouldn't be any surprise to hear that it's the ending. I'm less bothered than a lot of people because I'm in the camp of believers that most of the game was "the ending" and as such the results of the decisions you made and the actions you took are played out long before you start shambling around the citadel with a small child (the spoilers will really take effect now, also context is everything).

    The thing I was most upset about with regards to this was the resolution between the Quarians and the Geth. Now I may in fact be wrong, but as far as I can tell, regardless of the actions you take in Mass Effect 3, if you took particular actions in Mass Effect 2 there is no way for you to get the "best result" and save both races. I suppose you can call this the natural outcome of the choices I made thoughout the first two games (although I'll counter by telling you that it would have forced me to make only the paragon choices through out the game regardless of how I wanted to play it and that in Mass Effect 2 this means siding against the optimism I was playing for with my Shepard), but it is extremely frustrating that there was no option in the game that let you do anything about this.



    This may prove to be wrong, as I mentioned, but I did extensive research online at the time, knowing the outcome I wanted. I think this is another thing that game designers should strive to avoid. If someone wants something to happen in the game they shouldn't need to play with the walkthrough open on the side.

    The second point where this becomes a problem is in the final ending. You're given a large ending-o-tron which can make one of three endings happen. You "win" by giving up, you "win" by annihilating the reapers and all other forms of artificial life (including the Geth you might have just saved and your teammate/ your own ship's AI) or you "win" by smushing everything together into a big circuty mess and all you have to do is kill yourself first.

    The problem comes here though, if your "readiness" score is high enough and you choose to destroy all artificial life then you get a scene which suggests that either Shepard survived or, at least, Shepard's corpse was recovered. No mater how high your score is if you make the other two choices then this hint isn't given at all.

    So for me, the choice came down this, kill my ship/shipmate EDI or kill myself. I had my score up high enough (thanks to all the multi-player I played) and arrived at the final choice with enough war resources to "win" the game. In and of itself this isn't a bad choice. You or your friend. Selfishness or Selflessness. Simple dramatic choice. My Shepard chose selflessness, of course, because that's the way he is.

    My problem is that I could have made that choice without doing all the extra work. I could have skipped all the optional missions and all the multi-player. None of it mattered. I gave up all the work because of a plot related choice. So in effect the game didn't reward me for my work and actually punished me for trying to live up to an ideal.

    I haven't played the "extended ending" so I don't know exactly how it affects what we know about the world at the end of the game. From what I've read it doesn't bring Shepard back to life, nor make clear if EDI survives if you chose to destroy the Reapers. It adds a do nothing option, but I don't know what the result of that is either.

    I would have really liked to see a result that allowed you to explore the consequences of your decisions without relying solely on which button you chose at the end and what your "score" was thought the game. To stick within the framework they've chosen it the ending should reflect at a minimum how well you've played and what you've decided. So if you want endings for people over a line in the score and under it then make six endings, good merging, good surrendering and good destroying and then bad / mediocre merging, surrendering and destroying. Don't tie the quality of the outcome to the choices made by the player.

    However the other way to do it would be to remove the score and make the result of the game much more dependent on the choices the player has made throughout the game (and in fact all three games, as long as there's a chance for the player to try to get the result they want for the major decisions). This allows for players to see the ending that's tailored to the way they played the game (and saves you from needing to incorporate a weird ghost-space-child to give you a sudden victory at the end of the game).

    The final thing I'd like to gripe about, is the Citadel. In the first game it was a wide open space (if not as large as you might like) where you could chose several different ways to get around. In the second game it was a 3 story office building with nothing interesting in it at all. Mass Effect 3 does a better job of making it an interesting place to visit, but it still feels small and chopped up. I wish there had been more space, more options and more things to do even if it meant spending more time in elevators.

    Things I Noticed

    When I wrote up my thoughts on Skyward Sword, I found there were a bunch things which I didn't feel that strongly about, one way or the other. For Mass Effect 3 I don't have anything I feel that neutral about. If this continues in future thoughts on games, I may remove this section all together, but for now I'll leave it at my unneutral feelings.

    Things I'd Include in a Game


    By far the best part of Mass Effect 3, and the whole Mass Effect series is the relationships between you and your team mates. Characterization is important to making you feel connected and making you care about what's going on in the game. If you had never spoken to Mordan would you care when he sacrifices himself? You might, because some of the characterization is done through the main plot, but there's so much more when you've had those long weird chats with him every time you've run past.

    Sometimes you just want to hang out with your buddy. 

    When developing my own game, I want to make sure that the way you interact with your team mates and the choices you make and the actions you take are well reflected. I want to make sure that you feel like you're working with real people who care and are interested in what's going on around them. This can be complex, but it's also as simple as Shepard's relationship with Wrex: "Wrex." "Shepard."

    I'd also keep the number of team mates down. By the end of Mass Effect 3 you have two and a half crews whom you've adventured with and whom you care for. When wrapping up the story a lot of these angles are going to have to be cut short or else the game will last forever. To combat this keeping a small handful of people to really care about is important and helps make the game feel more meaningful.

    Final Thoughts


    Despite what EA would like you to believe, there's no real reason to play Mass Effect 3 if you aren't a long term player of the series. I really enjoyed a lot of my time playing the game and if I'd stopped halfway through I'd have had a much more positive outlook on the game. I know that endings aren't easy, but unfortunately Mass Effect 3's really hurts it. Not so much for its content alone but for highlighting all the weakness of the series all at one time.

    At some point, I may play these all again. I've partially played through Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2 to see what the renegade side is like but never to completion. I'd like to revisit them, but I'm still disappointed that to get some of the outcomes I want I have to auto play the paragon route.

    I really liked Mass Effect and I liked Mass Effect 2 even though I disagree with a lot of the decisions BioWare made about that game. For Mass Effect 3, I enjoyed the gameplay, but feel left short by it. I enjoyed the story, but felt it didn't fill in all the gaps I wanted to know about. At the end of the day, I was left liking Mass Effect 3, but not loving it.

    Yeah, I had a few graphical problems. It may be time for a new PC.


    Friday, August 03, 2012

    Project 4 : Snake

    As I have mentioned here before, one of the goals I have is to design and make video games. I don't know that I mean to do it as a career (said the perpetual student) but  it would be a fun hobby.

    I don't have experience in games programming (baring some assignments during my bachelor's degree) so I need to start actually doing something to start getting some experience (you have to start your 10 000 hours somewhere).

    I figured to give myself an achievable start I'd though I'd tackle something with not too many moving parts. As such, I thought I'd implement Snake. For the uninitiated, in basic snake you play a snake, made up of squares and you eat dots which make you longer and you try not to crash into things (either the wall or yourself.)

    Emulation of the Snake I remember best on the TI-83.

    I like snake for a number of reasons. The first as I mentioned is that it's relatively easy to program and a simple implementation can be put together in a day or an afternoon (even if you don't really know what you're doing). It is also easily extendible (it's not too much extra work to get to tron bikes or to caterpillar) and still has enough game play aspects to introduce interesting ideas.

    This is not a terribly novel thing to do. There is a site at snakegame.net which has an archive of some of the more interesting implementations which come in a variety of flavors. There's also a cool version Snakes on a Cartesian Plane which plays with a lot of different game play concepts and ideas.

    It's punny and an exciting experiment.

    A friend of mine, who happens to be experienced in the way of game design, mentioned a developer who always implements snake as a way to get familiar with a new platform. I feel like this is a good idea and I'm planning to follow that as well as I start teaching myself how to make games.

    The first stage I'd like to finish is to implement a vary basic, limited graphics version of snake using Processing.org. I actually did most of this a while ago but somehow lost the project on my computer so need to start again. This should be fairly quick (as I said maybe an afternoon of work) but I'm going to give myself a deadline of September 1, 2012 to finish.

    Reading

    I’m not sure that anyone, myself included, really needs this post. On the other hand, I read a thing about re-reading and I want to write ab...