The Masked Carnie

(The following is mostly a cut & paste of a post I made on a message board.  I felt it was a significant enough observation that I should share it here. ) It seems to me that every game has roles to a certain extent, although I'm not so sure I can really count the first one as a "role."  There's a strange entanglement too within theory & practice.  Equal games with equal starting roles will usually end up with players adopting certain play styles based on the natural circumstances, so they are no longer equal.  Set role games have the possibility of mirror matches, at which point there's no difference in capabilities.  Set games will often also have a very blurry line with customizable games as slight customization options are available (choosing an Ultra in Super Street Fighter 4).  Customizable games, in practice, often end up with very few viable options and therefore will have even less options possible than many set role games.  Read p...

I'm bored, so you're getting a triple dose of posts today.  This time, I'm tackling how I handle each of the items in Super Smash Bros. Brawl.  You can see the full review of items after the break.  For an overall statement, I read something from David Sirlin's commentary on the last Game Developer's Conference that really resonates with me.  Bad players are going to want more luck because it gives them a higher chance of winning.  Skilled players will want less chance because they want a 100% chance of winning.  A good game designer has to find the middle ground that keeps both sides entertained and balanced, a difficult feat to achieve.  My primary philosophy was to be very liberal on items, because the more items exist, the less chance any particular one is going to come up at any given time.

(Image generated at http://www.milinkito.com/swf/bart.php?texto=&Submit=Crear+nueva+frase) Whether you know it or not, most games go out of their way to teach you how they are played.  It is in their best interest to do so to guarantee the best possible experience.  For non-electronic games, it's rather necessary, because everything is merely symbolic.  Video games will actually teach you because they want to, and they'll usually do a good job of doing so.

People who have been involved in gaming since its infancy have sometimes become upset at what they perceive as the dumbing down of games, making them easier in order to attract more players and make more money as a result.  Today I'll be addressing one such system: varying benefits.  How long this has been going on, I have no idea, but I first noticed it with the Metroid Prime series. Those of you who know me know that I suffer from Red Mage syndrome, aka hoarding.  I like to have access to as much as possible in the largest quantities possible.  This includes health management.  Often as I played Metroid Prime, I got frustrated that I wasn't finding any health to get myself up to maximum.  I'd end up toiling back & forth many times to get myself ready for what I perceive to be a big challenge with the next room.  What I didn't know is that the game will adjust the chances of receiving health and other items based on how well-stocked you already...

Art by Scott Ramsoomair of VG Cats The Escapist recently released an  article talking down about fighting video games, pretty much citing as negative what most of us think of as positive.  Arbitrarily difficult commands, lack of story, lack of original content, and lack of innovation within each system make up the grievances listed.  It's obviously written by someone who is not skilled at fighters, but while that gives his ideas less merit, they are not worthless.  After all, as evidenced with Wizards of the Coast constantly finding more ways to get more players involved in Magic: the Gathering, an outsider's reaction to things is definitely valid.  To that point, I'd like to address these main points at hand.

1) If you wanna listen to how things get done, expect to lose whatever comfortable illusions you may have had about the world. 2) Whenever Valve introduces a new mechanic, they train you in a safe environment, then slightly different to ensure you've got the idea, and finally give you a major threat so you truly have to incorporate this new thing.  I should keep an eye out for similar procedures in other games. 3) If you let players feel clever by cheating through a puzzle, expect them to think you designed it poorly by missing the cheaty solution. 3a) Good playtesting is essential to the brand and company.  Wannabe designers like me will impact how people think about your game.  While we will exploit glitches to further our performance, people dislike their existence in general. 4) Too much or too little action fails in a game.  Honestly, how long do you play through a game that doesn't shake it up constantly?  Mario games have shown this well going back t...

I'm a little upset with the Nintendo DS title, Yu-Gi-Oh World Championship 2010: Reverse of Arcadia.  Specifically, I have a problem with their card-checking method.  Previously, the only time you ever got to check any cards was when you specifically held the A button, indicating you would either respond or check the field.  However, there were still instances when players were unable to check cards that they legally would be allowed to know in physical form.  To my memory, this mainly occurred when cards were put into the opponent's hand.  With this version, players are instantly prompted generally anytime anything happens with them... ever.  Players will have to hit A to show they understand the card and wish to continue. This is way overkill, especially when you have some continuous card that triggers upon certain events.  It slows down the game considerably.  I'll give an example, but this would be a case when I cannot eliminate jargon for th...