The Masked Carnie

Seriously people, when you go to any arcade, those big prizes like consumer electronics and giant stuffed animals are simply a cocktease.  They look so pretty you just wanna take'em home and show them just how much you love'em.  You won't.  Let's do a little math here.  At my arcade, games are supposed to regularly pay out about 20% of what they take in (1/5 for those not so inclined into percentages).  That means your money is shrinking to 1/5 of its original amount.  Once you actually get in the redemption center, most everything's priced at double the cents (not dollars) it cost to bring it in, so now your money is really 1/10 of what it originally was.  Assuming completely average skill and assuming you only play skill-based games (good luck finding them), you're going to spend 10x what it would actually cost to purchase items. My point is not to say you will never succeed, just that it should not be your goal to get those big items.  I have actually seen

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 are.  If you'

Ya know, I had a really long post ready to go today.  The more I wrote it though, the more I realized it was a futile effort.  I'm saying the same things another great player has said, but probably not nearly as well.  Instead, I'm going to refer everyone to my favorite book. Playing to Win was written by a champion Street Fighter player, but it does more than focus on fighting games.  He actually takes Sun Tzu's book Art of War and translates it to games.  There really isn't much difference, as Sun Tsu speaks of victory regardless of any morality whatsoever.  In war, that sense of victory really comes from having a clear definition of what that victory is, and the more you detail that victory, the more difficult it becomes.  Let me give you a simple example.  I'm not exactly sure what our definitions of "victory" for our overseas wars are, but I'm pretty sure they all hinge on removing so-called "terrorist" groups.  If you define victory

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.

Aside from Super Street Fighter 2 Turbo HD Remix, I haven't really gotten myself involved with anything David Sirlin has done.  In fact, I haven't participated in any of the testing because I'm too cheap to create the materials.  I also know now from the example of Chaos that I have to really twist people's arms to get them to try anything new. Ironically, I am not cheap enough to avoid buying a finished product, and the deluxe model at that.  I ordered Flash Duel yesterday, and to drive up interest in Yomi, I'm going to bring it to my local game shop.  The game is supposed to take about 5 minutes to play and has the flavor of two fighters training with each other for the upcoming tournament. I look forward to getting my friends involved in this.  I haven't checked on this game in any way, so I'm going on faith that Mr. Sirlin is a good designer.  I think I'll be justified.

Here's the real irony with me.  I work in an arcade.  Simultaneously, I dislike the deceptive practices adopted by arcades everywhere.  Not everything is like that, though, so I'd like to show a little contrast between a couple games my arcade has.   Spin-N-Win is anti-game #1 in my sights.  The premise is simple enough.  The light spins around the wheel, you hit the giant stop button to stop the light and get whatever tickets it lands on.  Sound easy?  It actually is, too easy.  If that's all there was to it, this would be an arcade's biggest loss instead of its biggest earner.  What's actually going on is that this game, like many others, has a predetermined percentage of big winners.  Your chance of getting the big prize is hardly reflective on your own ability and moreso on how many people have played before you.  If not enough people have played since the jackpot was won, you are not allowed to get the jackpot!   It will lie to you and tell you that you hit

Before I go off on a rant here, keep in mind this is an image from MS Paint using a screenshot from a camcorder, not a direct screenshot from the game.  Please do not blame me for the quality, it's the best I have to work with.  That said, Capcom has made a some questionable choices on their presentation.  For the purpose of this article, I'm talking about the main menu.  You know, that thing you will always have to look at when you start the game, unless you actually take the time to make someone else go through the menu for you every time. Really?  I'm sure I don't even have to check to know that there's slash out there of Ken x Ryu (shotoshipping sounds awfully wrong in this context), but this is just disturbing.  I can read so much into this, it's scary.  You've got Ken on top, staring down in a way that looks anything but fierce.  That establishes him as the seme.  Ryu's face and body positioning is done to look like he's begging for Ken'

I know I won't be able to keep up the pace of one post per day, let alone the two I'm doing just this morning, but I want to get my thoughts out here while they're fresh in my mind.  An interesting phenomenon I've encountered is how much I tend to latch on to music in my games.  I used the Capcom logo because they are generally good at providing enjoyable music for their games, primarily with Mega Man and Street Fighter.  It does a lot to set a specific mood. For example, the theme Zangief gets for Street Fighter 4 is not generally masculine, but really jazzy.  This showcases the playful nature of the gentle giant.  It also frequently shifts rapidly from low to high and back, simulating the very "spinny" nature of his moves and the inputs needed to get them.  Guile is very masculine, but in a defensive kind of way.  It gives the idea of "you're not getting past me."  It works for his defensive nature.  Ken's theme is very upbeat and quick,

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 to Super Mario 2/

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 the sake of brevity.  My deck

I just spent some time last night playing Chaos with my local game group.  It took a lot of arm-twisting to get them to sit down for a session, but I think they all left the table feeling well-rewarded for doing so. This game is easy to describe once you've played it before.  When I first opened up the rules though, I had no idea what was going on.  Here's a little summary that would get you started.  My friends have described it as "Go Fish on crack," which is a pretty good description.  The whole deck is dealt out to all the players, plus an additional pile used to draw cards.  The deck is pretty close to a standard deck of cards with 13 values, 4 Order cards, and 2 Chaos.  You're trying to make sets of 3 without later getting the 4th.  Order cards have the most power overall, but they go away if you ever get a Chaos card. You get 3 actions in a turn (pass not being one of them), and 3 possible things to choose from.  You can seek a card from another player b

Welcome to my experiment in a constructive blog. I currently work in what is essentially an arcade, and I will be offering my insights in that regard. More than that, I'm fascinated by game design and a passionate follower of David Sirlin. You'll hear about the problems and successes of families in arcades as much as you'll hear about all things gaming (well, maybe more on the game part). I was gonna use Facebook in that regard, but hell, who needs a character limit?

I just started experimenting with El Fuerte on Street Fighter 4 a week ago.  His normals seem pretty bad, but all I really work with is his Habanero Dash.  It's a struggle getting him to knock the opponent down, but once I do, I get to play my Fuerte game of irritation.  6 different things I could do when dashing, assuming I don't just stop and do something else, means the opponent has a hard time pinning down any particular move from me. This isn't simply me trying to brag about my El Fuerte skills (I can't do a single repetition of his infinite, so I can't brag), but to comment about the frustration it generates.  It's one thing if I consistently beat people with Zangief, another with Dhalsim, another with Gouken, and entirely another with El Fuerte.  Gouken is an example of all-encompassing play, because I will play spacing, grabs, one specific good combo, and parry often.  Zangief is a formula people understand as a walking tank that you want to keep away.