Game Evaluation
My Social Gaming Experience: Part 3
(Did you miss Part 2 or Part 1 of this series?)
Today we pick apart my experience with Zombie Farm. I played Zombie Farm regularly (2-5 times per day) for nearly two months; significantly longer than many of the other games I experimented with. As with most games, my amount of interaction for each play session was small – about 3-10 minutes per session. During this time, I completed routine tasks not unlike other farm-themed social games – planting crops, harvesting crops, buying doo-dads to spruce up the aforementioned farm, etc. Pretty banal stuff, really.
What Zombie Farm does do (again, some of which is not unheard of in other social games) though, helps to catapult the game from being just a click-fest to something a little more compelling:
Quests: At the beginning of the game, players are challenged (at their own pace) to complete quests – for example, plant and harvest 10 tomatos or harvest 2 Headless Zombies. These quests provide a welcome focus to the player – giving them something to strive for. If we are generous, we might also say that these quests present an “appropriate” challenge to the player. Note the use of the word appropriate here: good games don’t assault the player with challenges that are not accomplishable nor do they present ones which would be too easy. There is a sweet spot to hit when establishing the difficulty of the challenge to ensure that it fits squarely in the middle of this difficulty range. As I’ve discussed in previous posts, it is the challenge that creates the feeling of fun. Without challenge, we are just pressing buttons or swiping fingers.
Invasions: A differentiator for Zombie Farm from many other casual farming games is the actual inclusion of the zombies themselves… and their overall intent: invasions. Once you raise up a zombie army, you can choose to invade other locations (other farms, lawyers, pirates, robots, etc.). This aspect of the game is important because, much like the quests, it gives players an ever-present challenge to explore – the need to harvest zombies, complete the invasion, replace zombies lost in battle, rinse, and repeat. We see here the concepts of variability within gameplay (to keep things fresh) and appropriate challenge wrapped up within this single game mechanic.
Discoverability: If you would have asked me ten years ago if mainstream/casual gamers would grok the concept of an experience point (XP) system, I may have laughed in your face. Yet, here we are in 2011 and we see XP systems layered like MSG onto games that conceivably have no right to possess them – such as Zombie Farm. In Zombie Farm, the XP system works exceptionally well to drive players toward an arbitrary next level. Why would players want to get to the next level? Simply stated, there is content that is not accessible to them until they hit that level. Zombie Farm smartly dangles the carrot of this content in front of the player, showing blackened outlines of the super cool zombie they will have access to at the next level… which will require just a little more play to get to. Players like surprises – whether they are casual or hardcore – and I easily succumbed to this trap myself within this game. Another note here: notice my interest in wanting to get that next zombie. We humans have a strong interest in collection activities – whether those are titles on FourSquare, badges in Gowalla, Achievements on XBox Live, stamps for your stamp collection, or zombies for your zombie herd – our inherent interest (need?) to collect things is a powerful psychological driver.
This sounds so amazing, right? Yet, I stopped playing this game after about two months. Why?
- The game stopped presenting quests after about the first month of play, hindering the focus/drive for advancement.
- Introduction of new game mechanics or opportunities slowed. Instead of presenting something new within 3-8 play sessions, it slipped to providing something new every 12-25+ play sessions. In short, gameplay became a bit of a repetitive grind. To me, the value of my time began to outweigh the delight/surprise earned from the investment of this time.
Let’s recap our learnings from my time with Zombie Farm:
- Good games always provide appropriate challenge to the player. Challenges that are too hard or too easy do not effectively drive engagement.
- Good games provide variability in game play. If players aren’t forced to learn or experience new things, then they stop having fun once they’ve “solved” the gameplay puzzles with which they’ve been presented.
- Good games can leverage inherent human pscyhological behaviors/interests – such as our desire for surprise and our interest in collection activities. Mechanics that tap into these strong motivators are effective for driving consistent engagement provided that they are attainable and of sufficient frequency.
Join me for Part 4 next week for ongoing analysis.
My Social Gaming Experience: Part 2
(Did you already read Part 1 of this series of posts?)
When I began my foray into social games two that I immediately gravitated to were City Story and Zombie Cafe. As a big fan of the old SimCity games and a zombie lover (ewww…), these two seemed like a great choice to kick things off.
Both games featured a fun theme, pleasing aesthetic design, and an easy-to-use user interface. Thousands of other players played them, had rated them favorably in the app store, and they were hovering at the top of the popularity lists for games. How could they not be great?
I uninstalled them both after a few days of play.
Why? The devil here was in the details. The details, in this case, being the (mis)use of a mechanic I’ve seen in so many other social games: Time
In City Story, you use coins to build new buildings. Once you have some buildings (e.g. factories), you use some amount of coins to start off the production of some type of widget. After a variable amount of minutes or hours, you can then retrieve these products, usually generating more money than you had used to create products. Production Money + Time = Production Output.
In Zombie Cafe, you use some amount of money to start off cooking a recipe. After a variable amount of minutes or hours, you can then retrieve this meal and start serving the dish to customers. Again, we see a simple equation take place: Production Money + Time = Production Output. As with City Story, as a gamer, it is our hope that the the output we get is worth more than the money and the time we invested.
These games layer some additional mechanics to drive this operation (e.g. build 3 of X type of products, keep food on the tabe for customers or your cafe rating decreases, etc.). As a player, you must rinse and repeat this interaction over-and-over to meet these (or similar) goals.
I suspect the use of a time mechanic evolved for two primary reasons:
- When gaming within social networks such as Facebook, the passage of time doesn’t feel like a major expense – you are coming back to check on your social network anyway… why not take a few minutes for a game?
- For less patient gamers, you can conduct micro transactions to circumvent this time barrier. This provides a route to income for the developer/publisher.
As I’ve explored social games, I’ve learned to live (often begrudgingly) with the time mechanic. I have no illusions as to their impact and why they exist.
But for today, I want explain how the implementation of the time mechanic in the two above examples drove me away. What is surprising is how simple my concern is, and how easy it would be to fix.
In both of these games: Failure to monitor and conform to the game’s time mechanic while not playing the game is penalized.
In City Story, if I don’t collect the products my factories built within an arbitrary (and for me, unknown) period of time, they would be “ruined” and unsalvageable. I lose the money I invested and have to start again. I have to wait because time is an insurmountable barrier – unless I want to invest real money via micro transactions to circumvent the barrier. Of course, just the subtle negative feeling you get from not retrieving your goods in time is frustrating just by itself, the “financial” impact within the game notwithstanding.
In Zombie Cafe, if I don’t get my prepared dish off of the stove and onto the serving table, it burns and is unusable. Again, my failure to conform to the game’s timetable of when I should play it penalizes me. I’m asked to play the game when it says it should be played, not when I say it should be played.
In both of these games, the time mechanic is playing with you, instead of vice versa. I’ve played many other games where your end product doesn’t spoil… it just sits there and awaits player interaction. Sure, you lose out on the opportunity to be utilizing that resource to develop the next product, but at least you are not wasting previously invested time and money. In those cases, the time mechanic is in effect, but it is in effect within your control, and not vice versa.
What are our game design take-aways?
- As is the case with all interaction design, a good experience puts players in control of their actions and provides them with a clear understanding of the outcome of their actions. When we are playing a game, we exercise influence within the game. When we are not playing the game, most reasonable people assume that their lack of inaction wouldn’t (shouldn’t) have consequences. In both of my examples, the game punishes the player for not playing by the rules of the game – even when those rules shouldn’t be in effect because the game isn’t being played! And no, push notifications are not an acceptable solution to out-of-game interaction.
- Challenge is important to games (as I’ll discuss later), but insurmountable challenge or unreasonable/unknown punishment is regarded as unfair by the player. Since the joy of a game is the subtle battle of learning the systems and mechanics in play (even if most gamers wouldn’t think of that process so literally), a system that is not discoverable by the player will be regarded as unfair, confusing, and flat-out un-fun. Challenges should be within scope and understandable.
I suspect that as the social gaming matures, designers will learn how to move past the use of time as a barrier or punishment. Time is a cheap, quick-fix mechanic to drive challenge. Game designers can do better.
My Social Gaming Experience: Part 1
In early March I began an endeavor to experience social casual games. Now, approximately four months later, I’m ready to weigh in on my experiences. Why now? Simply put, I’ve now been able to experience the lifecycle of the social game experience – from starting the game and learning the mechanics to concluding my time with each game – across multiple games. I believe this repetition has given me the opportunity to take a step back and evaluate – at least for me – what makes these games tick.
As such, over the course of the next several blog posts, I’m going to take a non-empirical approach to discussing my time with these games and sharing some thoughts around their mechanics. Hopefully this discourse will prove interesting to fellow game designers, interaction designers interested in developing and incorporating game-like mechanics into their designs, or just the voyeurs out there that might like to pick apart how people think and feel. If that doesn’t sound like you, then plan on gaming back in a few months. ;)
Before we jump in though, let me provide a snapshot of me as a gamer. This is important because I do not believe I’m the target audience for many of these social games (as you will most likely see via my analysis).
Gary the Gamer:
- I’ve been playing games consistently for 28 years – video games, card games, board games, role-playing games, athletic games, etc. (Read: I love games and have a lot of experience with them.)
- I routinely now dedicate anywhere from 8-12 hours per week to gaming. This amount of time can vary, based on professional and personal commitments, but if more time is available, I will typically dedicate it to gaming. (Read: gaming is a major hobby and I willingly dedicate hours to it.)
- I game on many different platforms: XBox 360, PS3, Wii, iPhone, PC (er… Mac, actually) and real-world games (board games, card games, etc.). As a consumer, I most likely purchase around 2-3 games every two months. (Read: I am willing to dedicate money/resources to further my hobby.)
- What I look for in a good game: a good story, good aesthetics, fun play, and a surmountable challenge. I enjoy lo-fidelity/simple efforts or big triple-A mega releases within almost all genres of games. My least favorite genre is sports simulation, although I have played (and been entertained by) a good number of them during my storied career as a gamer. (Read: I’m open to new experiences as long as they are compelling.)
- I listen to multiple game podcasts weekly and read game reviews, game commentary, and game philosophy in books, magazines, and online. (Read: I take gaming seriously, and unlike Ebert, I definitely think of gaming as a form of art, creativity, and intellectualism on par with books, movies, and plays).
Now that the stage has been set, join me for My Social Gaming Experience: Part 2, where I tackle my first two games – Zombie Cafe and City Story.
The Kingdom of Loathing
About two years ago I found myself enamored by an online game: The Kingdom of Loathing. The Kingdom of Loathing, or “KOL,” as it is called by its fans, is a largely text-based online fantasy adventure. What is most notable about KOL is that it is very smartly written, whimsical, engaging, and easy to play for 10-15 minutes at a pop.
I was quite addicted to this great online adventure until I ran through the majority of the main game content. At that time I stopped visiting The Kingdom and eventually forgot about it altogether.
Until tonight.
About 15 minutes ago I received a great letter from The Kingdom.
Here it is in its entirety:
Dear Lamprey,
Okay, I’m not good at this kind of thing, but I feel like I have to give it a try. So, here goes:
I was hanging out the other night, listening to some old mp3s, and I was just overcome with memories of when we used to hang out all the time. Remember? You were an intrepid, fearless adventurer, and I was the free-to-play, fun-and-funny online role-playing game that won your heart. Do you still remember those good times? I can’t stop thinking about them.
I mean, I know things got kind of messed up at the end, and believe me, I’m sorry. If I could take any of that back, I totally would. And I know people grow and change, and you’re not the same person you were then, but hey — I’ve changed, too! I thought and thought about how to win you back. I figured I’d make you a mix CD, but I couldn’t decide what “our song” was. So I just concentrated on becoming a better game for you, and here’s what I came up with:
Remember how much fun you used to have with your clan? Alternately, remember how you never joined a clan because you didn’t see the point? Either way, clans now have clan dungeons, group zones where your whole clan can work together. Crawl through sewers to Hobopolis, a vast underground vagrant vacation vista! Slide into the slime tube, and stir-fry sassy slimes!
I know I wasn’t the prettiest game when we were together, so I had some work done. Almost every interface got an interface-lift. You can even manage most of your inventory via chat commands! I also came up with a way for you to automate some of the things you don’t love about the game, so you can spend more time with the parts you do love.
Not only that, but there are way more animated .gifs than there were before. Don’t worry; I haven’t lost that low-fi edginess you love, but I’m a lot easier to play with now.
You can also have a custom title now, just in case you didn’t feel like I appreciated what made you unique as an individual.
I should also say
Haiku Dungeon’s been revamped.
See what I did there?
Maybe you quit because you got sick of always adventuring above the water. I admit that seems unlikely, but I fixed that, too — there are a bunch of underwater zones with new food, equipment, mechanics, and challenges.
And that’s just the tip of the iceberg, trust me. I’m still the silly, clever, deceptively-complex game you fell in love with, only with about 95% more awesome.
So, I’m just sayin’, if you can find it in your heart to give me another chance, I won’t disappoint you.
If you don’t drop by, I promise I won’t bother you again. I just really felt like we deserved one more try.
Love, The Kingdom of Loathing.
I share this letter because I think it is a great example of how to target a communication to your intended audience and, well, because I think you might enjoy checking out The Kingdom for yourself. Now, time for me to head back in and see if I can relive some good times!
Can I Haz Social Gaming?
Currently I’m embarking on a fortitude-testing quest: I’m exposing myself to social casual games.
Why?
Social gaming is now (arguably, of course) the world’s most popular form of gaming.
My first exposure to these games was a brief one a little over a year-and-a-half ago.
At that time, I dismissed them as “those time wasters that people play between Facebook updates.”
Since that time, social gaming’s ability to successfully grab (and maintain) people’s hearts, minds, and wallets has been indisputable.
As a fan of games, amateur game designer, and perhaps more importantly, a user experience creator, I feel it is critical that I understand the mechanics of these games and what type of experiences these games provide.
As such, I’m now diving into these games head first and giving them a chance to woo me in the same way that they have seemed to woo 65+ (80+?) million others.
Currently, I’m exploring CityVille, Zombie Farm, and Trade Nations.
My plan is to dissect this adventure (and my learnings) in future blog posts. Stay tuned!
The Best Games of 2010: Part 2
Today I’m finishing up my discussion of the best games of 2010. Hopefully you didn’t miss the first part of this discussion.
In the interest of full disclosure, I must share an important caveat: there are a lot of other great games that I didn’t play this year. Consequently, there may be some titles that are undeservedly missing from my list. Hey, I’m only one dude, ya’know?
So, to make partial amends, let me begin with…
2010’s Startling Omissions: (great games that other people loved that coulda-maybe-shoulda made my list, but I didn’t get a chance to play them in 2010)
Mario Galaxy 2 (Wii), Bayonetta (Xbox360, PS3), Assassin’s Creed: Brotherhood (Xbox360, PS3), Call of Duty: Black Ops (Xbox360, PS3), Battlefield: Bad Company 2 (Xbox360, PS3), Dead Rising 2 (Xbox360, PS3), God of War III (PS3), Donkey Kong Country Returns (Wii), VVVVVV (Mac OS/PC), Amnesia (Mac OS/PC), Kirby’s Epic Yarn (Wii), Professor Layton: Future Unwound (DS), Pacman Championship Edition DX (Xbox360, PS3), Deadly Premonition (Xbox360).
How about I make amends by swearing to play more in 2011? Phew… I’m glad that weight is off my chest.
Onward to the remaining best games that I did play…
The BEST Games of 2010 (continued):
5: Plants vs. Zombies (iOS)
Any iPhone game that illicits multiple playthroughs from my wife or causes me to choose it over a flashier Xbox, PS3, or Mac/PC game is noteworthy. Plants vs. Zombies did both thanks to a simple-to-learn design that is deceptively deep and uproariously fun to play. We may want to consider monitoring this game, since I’m pretty sure it is a gateway drug to hardcore gaming.
4: Limbo (Xbox360)
Here we have yet another game that might serve as ammunition for the “games can be art debate.” This is another title that I’ve already previously praised, so let me just say this: Limbo is not just a great game from this year, it is a thought-provoking effort that will be picked apart, discussed, and most likely mimicked, for many years to come.
3: Super Meat Boy (Xbox360, PC/Mac)
I’d never played a game that engendered such true masochism prior to Super Meat Boy. I’m not talking about the shallow cry-for-help-because-you-are-emo-and-broke-up-with-your-girlfriend type of pain, I’m talking about honest-to-God pain that is pleasurable. Have I sold you yet? No? Let me clarify then: This retro-inspired 2D platformer has the most responsive controls I’ve ever seen and creates euphoric levels of reward after you’ve spent 10, 20, 50, or sometimes a hundred tries to complete a level. If Plants vs. Zombies is the marijuana of gaming, this is the ultra-high-quality cocaine reserved for celebs and politicians. So, now that I’ve referenced self-mutilation and drugs, I’m sure you are just dying to play it, right? Bottom line: cast these literary indiscretions aside and PLAY THIS GAME.
2: Mass Effect 2 (Xbox360, PC)
Mass Effect 2 focuses on delivering a character-driven story; an effort in which it exceeds all expectations. Featuring one of the most well-realized original sci-fi settings ever seen in gaming, solid gameplay, meaningful voice acting, and an engaging storyline, it will stand the test of time as one of the greats.
1.5: StarCraft II (PC/Mac)
What? 1.5?!?! You think I’m sneaking an extra game into this list? Well, deal with it – this list now goes to eleven.
The original StarCraft is still seeing play today – 12 years after its release! I can only imagine that this successor will see a similar uncanny lifespan. Hell, how many video games are you aware of that have entire televised leagues in the same vein as conventional sports? Obviously, StarCraft II provides an immaculate multiplayer experience similar to the first StarCraft (which led to it being referred to as “South Korea’s national pastime”), but interestingly, what is more notable to me is the high quality of the single-player campaign and the related storyline. Even without multiplayer, this game is good enough to earn the second place spot on my list. StarCraft II: see you at the old folk’s home in 2022.
1: Red Dead Redemption (Xbox360/PS3)
Where to begin? Gunplay that never tires. Phenomenal writing and voice acting. Emotionally evocative landscape design. A soundtrack that captures the spirit of the Wild West. Room to continually explore and live in one of the most memorable digital worlds ever created. Well-designed multiplayer which included a series of epic cooperative scenarios. Red Dead has all of these and ties them all up with a bow in what many people are calling the best storytelling of the year. Much like a good book or movie, I’ve escaped back to this game time and time again, only to realize that my love only grows stronger with each visit. Red Dead is not only the best game of 2010, but a true masterpiece that is now one of my favorite games of all time.
There you go folks, the best games of 2010. Go play some of them.
The Best Games of 2010: Part 1
If you’ve been to my blog before, it should be apparent that I love games. And when I say love, I’m not referring to a shallow, escapist enjoyment sorta love. I have a deep, thoughtful, and in many ways analytical love for games.
Towards the close of every year, all your major gaming sites post their “Top 10 Games of X Year” style articles. I will admit that I devour this analysis with the same devotion that the paparazzi have in their efforts to grab an upskirt shot of Britney Spears.
Let’s get back to love. I love games and play a lot of them. Luckily, the guise of “amateur game designer” provides me with ample excuses to couch my gaming time in a thin veneer of professionalism. At least that is what I tell my wife (“Hey, I’m workin’ here!”). Of course, that means I have to make good on that statement… and put in a little work when it comes to justifying my gaming.
As such, I offer you my analysis of the BEST games of 2010. In two parts. With some bonuses.
Today is part one.
The BEST Games of 2010:
10: Halo: Reach (Xbox360)
Bungie wrapped up the primary Halo story with an opus to console first-person shooters. As with previous Halo games, you receive an excellent multiplayer package and a solid single-player campaign. I do believe this to be “the best” of the standard Halo games. Within the same breath, I would also note that I’m excited that Bungie is moving on to something else, since the Halo story and gameplay is ready to be refreshed.
9: Carcassonne (iOS)
This is the first of two iOS games I’m including on my top ten list for this year, and it is easy to do. Based on the tabletop game of the same name, this version provides a slick electronic rendition of the game’s fun and intuitive gameplay directly to iPhone gamers. With single player and multiplayer options which allow you to parse out turns into smaller snippets of play time, any free minutes you have with your phone and this app will never be boring.
8: Fallout: New Vegas (Xbox360/PS3/PC)
Fallout 3 was my favorite game of 2008. Fallout: New Vegas uses the same engine (with a few improvements) to place you in the wastelands of the Mojave Desert instead of those found in Washington DC. Storytelling is even better than Fallout 3’s, too. So why isn’t this higher on my list? Fallout: New Vegas features more bugs than an entomology lab, punctuating the moments of exquisite storytelling with crushing frustration as you are forced to reload your game, or in some cases, fully reboot your system. A great game in need of some programming TLC.
7: Civilization 5 (PC/Mac OS)
Imagine a portly, shoddily-dressed teenager with a really bad haircut locked away in his room for hours on end, peering unendingly at the VGA monitor on his Magnavox 386SX PC. Have that image in your mind? That was me in 1991 when Sid Meier’s very first Civilization game was released. This turn-based strategy game was a revelation – featuring exquisite gameplay and near-infinite replayability. Fast forward to 2010, and the fifth iteration of the game, and you can say the same… except, well, I’m no longer shoddily dressed. Civ 5 even does something better than all its predecessors – it features one of the most intuitive and well designed user interfaces I’ve ever seen in a complex game. Even if you don’t like this style of game, I would at least recommend checking it out simply to view the interface; it makes deep strategy gaming palatable for the masses. That, in and of itself, is a huge accomplishment.
6: Heavy Rain (PS3)
Not without some flaws (including some bad voice acting and some really reprehensible and never-explained story red herrings), Heavy Rain nevertheless pushes the gaming genre forward. Remember all the outrage that occurred when Ebert said that games are not art? This may be one that could be used in the future to try and combat that statement. I found myself addicted to the ambiance, storytelling, and mystery this game brought to the table. It evoked true emotion, not unlike the emotion experienced with great music, books, movies, and artwork.
Join me tomorrow for the remaining BEST games of 2010.
Bonus:
Biggest Disappointment in 2010: Fable III (Xbox360)
I loved the original Fable. Fable II being even better. Fable III took some bold steps to try and simplify gameplay, which I’m assuming they believed would help to propel the player through the game more easily. Unfortunately, this meant that the largely linear storyline, although intriguing, was straddled with some poor and basely un-fun game mechanics. If there is a future Fable IV, I’m hoping it makes an effort to go back to its roots.
Best 2009 Game Played in 2010: Demon’s Souls (PS3)
I’ve already written about Demon’s Souls in a previous post. It is challenging, eerily ambient, and the sole reason for why one of my friends bought a PS3. If I could go back, it would probably be my favorite game for 2009. Simply amazing.
Ambient Adaptation and Storytelling
Recently I’ve had the good fortune of being exposed to a few games that break away from the designs seen in the current crop of “popular” gaming options.
Limbo (XboxLive Arcade): Limbo begins with no instructions and no words. There are no cutscenes and a minimalist musical score. Mechanically, the game is a puzzle-solver that is wrapped up in a 2D side-scroller. Based on this description, you might assume that the game is quite shallow. But you would be mistaken. And in a few moments, I will tell you why.
Demon’s Souls (PS3): Demon’s Souls is a 3rd Person Role Playing Game (RPG). The game drops players into a graphically-impressive dark fantasy world. There is a limited introduction and an even slimmer tutorial. The game is set at a punishingly-high level of difficulty (that cannot be changed by the player) and has some mechanics (or lack thereof) that you might see in a video game from the early 1990′s (for example, no pause, extreme punishment for player error, and arcane stats that would make most well-educated individuals scratch their heads in bewilderment). Again, we might assume that such a game would create frustration more than it would engender fun. You might even accuse the design team of essentially “falling asleep at the proverbial wheel.” But again, this unique approach actually works in the game’s favor, creating an experience unlike any that I have played in the most recent decade of gaming.
I believe these games heavily utilize two concepts to great effect:
Ambient Adaptation: A widely-accepted theory (to which I ascribe) about what makes a game “fun” is that it is the process of learning that occurs while playing a game (i.e. being challenged and then learning how to overcome those challenges) which makes the experience enjoyable. As such, we can assume then that without a challenge, and without the accomplishment of beating a challenge, we would find the game to not be very fun. Demon’s Souls pushes players into a world where the player will live and die by not only their skill, but also by their ability to learn. This environment, while at times frustrating, also forces the player into an almost continuous-cycle of learning. As such, if we agree with the assertion that learning is the catalyst for fun, then Demon’s Souls effectively seeds the game with constant opportunities for fun. Sure there is the capacity for learning in many of today’s other blockbuster games (for example, via regular skill acquisition and basic puzzle-solving), but what is so unique about Demon’s Souls is how the game, by leaving the player out in the cold with little instruction, forces even the simple actions to become opportunities for learning. In turn, these seemingly insignificant learning opportunities form a cycle of continuous self-reward, thereby contributing to the creation of an overall positive and “fun” gaming experience.
Ambient Storytelling: Jeff Watson would define ambient storytelling as “stories or games that take place in the background, rather than traditional attention-focusing media artifacts such as movies or console video games.” Although this is certainly an appropriate definition, I might propose a definition for use within the context of interactive entertainment (e.g. video games): “Ambient storytelling is the conveyance of an experience through subtle methods during the course of regular gameplay.”
Limbo is a shining example of how a story can be generated without cinematics, talking, or text. Limbo provides an ambience and play mechanics that work seamlessly together to constantly challenge the player to ask him or herself a singular question: “what is going on here?” Many games unceremoniously provide the answer to this question via the aforementioned shortcuts (cinematics, text, etc.). Limbo, on the other hand, challenges the player to develop their own story as they play through the experience. This act of imagination and creation stimulates the mind in ways that many hand-fed experiences cannot. In fact, how often do we hear people say “the book is better than the movie”? Well, ten times out of ten, the book triumphs for the same reason why Limbo’s ambient storytelling is head-and-shoulders above a pre-defined game storyline: it empowers the reader/player to become the driver of a story that is inherently thought-provoking and personalized.
It is my hope that game developers will analyze and take to heart the lessons learned from these two exceptional games. In fact, I would confidently wager that ANY and ALL games would benefit from the better use of ambient adaptation and ambient storytelling.
Dragon Dice Probability
I just wrapped up Level 4 (or week 4, for you non-gamers out there) of the Game Balance Concepts course that I’ve been taking. This week was all about probability and randomness.
Here is one exercise the instructor gave us to work on as homework (I’m reprinting it exactly as he posted on the blog):
Game #1: Dragon Die
This is a dice game that I invented with some co-workers one day (thanks Jeb Havens and Jesse King!) specifically to mess with people’s heads on probability. It’s a simple casino game called Dragon Die, and it’s a dice gambling contest between you and the House. You are given a standard 1d6, and you roll it. You’re trying to roll higher than the House. The House is given a non-standard 1d6 – it’s similar to yours, but instead of a 1 it has a Dragon on it (so the House die is Dragon-2-3-4-5-6). If the House rolls a Dragon, then the House automatically wins and you automatically lose. If you both roll the same number, it’s a push, and you both re-roll. Otherwise, the winner is whoever rolls highest.
Obviously, the odds are slightly against the player here, because the House has this Dragon advantage. But how much of an advantage is it? You’re going to calculate it. But first, before you do, exercise your intuition. Suppose I said this game was offered with a 2 to 1 payout. That is, if you win, you keep your bet and get twice your bet in winnings. So, if you bet $1 and win, you keep your $1 and get $2 extra, for a total of $3. If you lose, you just lose your standard bet. Would you play? That is, intuitively, do you think the odds are better or worse than 2 to 1? Said another way, for every 3 games you play, do you expect to win more than once, or less than once, or exactly once, on average?
Once you’ve used your intuition, do the math. There are only 36 possibilities for both dice, so you should have no problem counting them all up. If you’re not sure about this “2 to 1” business, think of it this way: suppose you played the game 36 times (wagering $1 each time). A win nets you $2 up, a loss causes you to lose $1, and a push is no change. Count up your total winnings and losses and figure out if you come out ahead or behind. And then ask yourself how close your intuition was. And then realize how evil I am.
And yes, if you’re wondering, the actual dice-roll mechanics here are something I’m intentionally obfuscating, but I’m sure you’ll all see through that once you sit down and look at it. Try and solve it yourself. I’ll post all answers here next week.
Are you ready for the results? Here you go:
I was a bit surprised at how truly bleak this situation is for the player… every time you play, 3/4 of the time you will be faced with a loss or a draw… and, I don’t know about you, but a draw to me isn’t much better than a loss.
I guess now if you ever see this game trying to tempt you, you will be armed with the information to help you (and your money) stay away from it.