- The machines we play on have evolved and gotten better (technically) over the years. The technical side of computer games is understood by many in the industry pretty well.
- While creating computer games, design is understood less than the technical stuff. “It actualizes the vision, putting art, code, levels, and sound together into what players experience, minute to minute.” The design basically is what brings all the components needed to make a computer game together.
- Unlike the technology used to play computer games, the designing of them hasn’t evolved as much. “Design evolution still lags far behind the evolution of overall game technology.”
- One thing holding this back is a “lack of a common design vocabulary.”
- We should be able to pick a part in a computer game we either like or dislike, figure out why we like/dislike it, and find a way to either fix it or build upon it.
- As there are many computer games on many different platforms and for many different audiences, we need to see the common elements in all of them.
- A design vocabulary would mean you could talk about underlying components of the computer game, instead of just saying “it was fun”/”it wasn’t fun.” We already do this naturally with the technical side of things as they’re easier to isolate and see.
- In genres, design evolution tends to occur through refinement; “this year's real-time strategy (RTS) games clearly built on last year's RTS games.” Design vocabulary tends to be specific to a certain game or genre.
- “The notion of "Formal Abstract Design Tools" is an attempt to create a framework for such a vocabulary and a way of going about the process of building it.”
- Formal Abstract Design Tools (FADT) are not ingredients but things you use to make your game; Church used the example of when you build a house you don’t build it out of tools, you use those tools to build it.
- “Every game doesn't need every tool.”
Mario 64 Gameplay
- This game is able to mix open-ended exploration with clear direction along most paths. There is lots to do but there is a lot of choice on what parts of the world the player can work on.
- Designed to have multiple goals in each world, and players are encouraged to explore all of the area early to see stuff that may not be accessible then, but when they come back later they will have some idea of how they could get that stuff.
- The worlds are consistent and predictable and there are simple controls that can be used at any time. You are never limited on what you can do; all controls are available all the time. These combined mean the player can plan what they could try out; players often have this plans subconsciously. They can then try these out and if they don’t work, they know why. The world is very simple and consistent.
- “Any action you undertake results in direct, visible feedback.”
- Intention: "Making an implementable plan of one's own creation in response to the current situation in the game world and one's understanding of the game play options." This means the player should be able to examine a situation in the game they are playing and think of a way to get past that situation.
- Perceivable Consequence: "A clear reaction from the game world to the action of the player." This means when the player carries out their intention, what happens should be what they thought would happen.
- Perceived consequence is often used in RPGs; usually plot/character development related.
- Although they are less direct about consequence. “For example, the player may decide to stay the night at an inn, and the next morning he may be ambushed.” It may have actually been a consequence for staying at the inn, but to the player it seems to be a random occurrence.
- In Mario, you know what’s going to happen; there’s never a chance the game will go “you have reached a dead end.” “Instead, they see they can try a dangerous jump or a long roundabout path or maybe a fight. And if it goes wrong, they understand why.”
- Perceived consequence can be brought on in many ways, but if the player is involved in the choice, there would be a better reaction to the game from them.
- RPGs tend to force players into a given situation, mainly for narrative reasons.
- “In our field, "story" really refers to any narrative thread that is continued throughout the game.” Not exactly the same as pre-written text in a book.
- Story can be made by the designers, or can even exist in games such as NBA Live, where what the player does basically creates a story of what happens in their play through. It’s a story that the player gets to control instead of the designer.
- Story: "The narrative thread, whether designer-driven or player-driven, that binds events together and drives the player forward toward completion of the game." The story in a game is any narrative that is continued throughout the game.
- In adventure games, “layers know they will have to go everywhere, pick up everything, talk to everyone, use each thing on each other thing and basically figure out what the designer intended.” There is only a few possibilities that work and the player knows they have to find them.
- “This loss of some consequence and most intention comes with a major gain in story.” The designer is free to craft the story how they want with and they are able to script exactly what will happen in the game.
- “The more we as designers want to cause particular situations, the less control we can afford to give players.” You have to choose a balance between giving control to players or a progressive storyline.
- In traditional SquareSoft console RPGs, they are able to include intention, consequence and story all in one game, but by using intention and consequence in the combat system and story and consequence in the unfolding of the story. ”They don't try to put them in places where it would be hard to make them work effectively.”
- “With a bit of a stretch, one can say that sports and fighting games actually mix all three of the tools into one.”
- The tools given as examples in this article are not the only tools.
