The Game of Stuff

Born out of, the Story of Stuff, our game was created to tie in with the greater message of the perils of consumerism on our environment. The fact that neither Bob nor myself consider ourselves programmers has added to the difficulty of this project. Considering our lack of Game Maker skills, I actually feel we did quite well. Bob and I refined our levels through multiple iterations, altering mechanics for each level, changing elements from mouse click to key clicks, and after several play tests, recreating one level from the ground up to make it more engaging.

Our game is not perfect of course, but I feel many of its flaws are a result of the topic and its elements.

1.  Attempting to create a game to tell the complex story of a documentary is too complicated for artists with our limited skill set.
2. The Story of Stuff, is animated with simple stick figures who walk across a stark white background. To stay true to the imagery of the story, we had to emulate its simplicity. Naturally, this reduced the visual appeal of our game substantially.
3. There is a lot of text! Designing a game that does a text based story justice is REALLY difficult. It was hard to create a game with mechanics that didn't detract from the written story. 

Although the result is rough, Bob and I are happy with the version we have submitted for our final. We might continue to revise and improve upon, the Game of Stuff, outside of class. I encourage everyone to watch to watch the video above. 

Wanna try, the Game of Stuff? Follow this link:

Link to Google Drive - GameofStuff.exe

Is Gamification Bullshit?

...Well yes, Bogost's definition of bullshit allows cookie cutter games to fall perfectly into place. He could not be more correct in saying that games that serve a marketing purpose, improve sales, and enhance interaction with one's customers where they might have been lacking before, only to increase a company's bank balance, are bullshit as they do not to add to the expansive culture of video games. I do disagree however, with whom he associates this term with.
Businesses aren't the only ones guilty of gamification.

"This rhetorical power derives from the "-ification" rather than from the "game". -ification involves simple, repeatable, proven techniques or devices: you can purify, beautify, falsify, terrify, and so forth. -ification is always easy and repeatable, and it's usually bullshit."    -Ian Bogost

Easy and repeatable, huh? Well in that case, aren't many large game companies guilty of gamification at some point or another. Take Infinity Ward's, Call of Duty: Ghosts, opening cut scene that was ripped straight from the final scene in, Modern Warfare 2. You HAVE to know that your extensive fan base is going to catch that. So why do it? Well, I am sure time and money was a factor... but didn't they take the easy and repeatable way out?

Most major game companies are here to make a profit. Very few people do this for free because it is costly, and time consuming, and people are willing to pay to play.

Many of these major titles that have come out are just repackaged sequels, adding little to the cultural value of the series, but as usual adding a lot in terms of income for the companies. Battlefield 4 anyone? Sure, the customization is better, and building crumble in your wake, but that is assuming you can even join a game server. EA's, Battlefield 4, servers have been overwhelmed to such an extent that players can't stay connected to games long enough to finish them. There are still customers who have purchased the game on the day of its release who are still unable to get a connection to a server 30 days later. EA's response? Release the first DLC pack in November while a good chunk if its player base is still incapable of connecting to the servers to play the damn game in the first place.

What does this say about gamification? Even prominent game developers are guilty of gamification. Their games can be rehashed with repeated scenes because it is easier than being original. They can create a sequel that adds little to the series or genre as a whole. They will sometimes make games that aren't for their fan base however they choose to advertise them, but are for their own financial betterment. In my opinion, that is the worst kind of gamification.

Game Lab.... YAH BOI!

Oh how I love game labs; especially the video game ones. I played some really interesting and relatively simple games that I probably wouldn't have played otherwise. The first one that I tried was, You Have to Burn the Rope. This was probably one of the easiest games I have ever played. This 2D plat-former begins in a tunnel where the designers have laid out instructions for the entire level. There is nothing to really discover. The hints tell you right off the bat that there is a boss in the next room, you can't kill him with weapons, and "you must burn the rope above" to destroy him. The only thing that isn't immediately obvious is how you will attain the fire. But this becomes clear as soon as you enter the room and jump up the wall, automatically picking up fire as you pass a torch. Your character is guided to success every step of the way, but the game is still insanely entertaining. Which is why I think the game serves more as a commentary on how difficult video games have become. The game doesn't need to require 3 months of your life to be beatable, and rewarding, and fun. You can get that same sense of satisfaction from a 1 minute game, especially when the credit song is twice as long as the game and its lyrics stroke your ego.

Eighty percent of the elephants died to gale force winds.

So, like the first game, This is the Only Level, had well... only one level. And much like my first game, was also relatively straight forward. You have an elephant, some platforms, a door mechanism controlled by a giant button, and a pipe/finishline. Each time you run your little elephant through that pipe, you get that warm feeling of accomplishment, YAY, I don't suck at everything! After that round screen ends, you confronted with the same level, but with new rules for how you must complete it. THIS made the game extremely interesting. I would have never though that there were so many ways to run that stupid little elephant through the same fricken level! I would be lying if I said I didn't have to watch the walk-through to figure out how to complete a couple of the rounds. Despite this, the game was still very similar to You Have to Burn the Rope; very simple, fun, and rewarding.

Not all the games I played were lighthearted and fun though. A couple of them were actually quite intense and disturbing. Playing Judith, for example, was a sickening experience. The story follows a couple that is having an affair (I say story because Judith has a very rigid narrative.) You play as an unfaithful husband who is secretly meeting his lover Emily; she just so happens to also be unfaithful. In a nutshell, you enter an abandoned castle, search for Emily who has gone missing, experience the gruesome revelations of the previous woman of the castle, watch her husband turn on her, and finally discover Emily locked in the same room the husband locked his wife in years prior. Phew, that is as simple as I can get it. This game.. is... creepy... as hell. You explore the abandoned castle in the first person. Each time you find something new, a book out of place that opens a secret passage for example, you unlock another scene in this twisted tale. What I found most interesting about this game, was how difficult it was to figure out what to do next. I found the secret passage out of desperation, after realizing all the doors were locked and there was no place to go. I wanted out. The clock in the bedroom was ticking, the music was eerie, and this little 8-bit game was scaring the crap out of me. I watched on in horror as the story unfolded, constantly asking myself why I was still playing. Even after the game is over, I am still thinking about it. I would say, that makes it a pretty successful game.

Canabalt was also an adrenaline pumping game. Although not as scary, I found myself still holding my breath as I drove the character over a cliff, hoping I wouldn't stumble on an air conditioning unit this time, hoping I could escape farther than I had last time. I didn't even know what I was running from and I still felt compelled to replay, over and over, until I felt I had run this guy as far as I could. I think the fact that there was no back story, added to the urgency of this game. WHAT WAS I RUNNING FROM? WHY WAS I ON A ROOF, AND WHO THE HELL LEAVES OFFICE CHAIRS ON TOP OF A SKY SCRAPER?! Yes.. caps were necessary... shhh. Oh while I'm on the topic of running....

Collapsing from shear finger exhaustion #YOLO 

QWOP!!! Everyone sucks at QWOP their 1st, 10th, and 100th time; that's a given. Controlling the calves with the O and P keys, and the thighs with the Q and W, you are tasked with getting an under-privileged, third world country Olympian to the finishline of the 100m dash. This is hard as hell! I have probably devoted a good 5 hours of my life to this game, and oddly enough, I find that I only do well when I am intoxicated. My best distance was about 75m which of course I am pretty happy with. I didn't feel like getting drunk today, so 23.8 was my best distance of the day. The BEST element of this game is the music! You could play this game a bunch of times before you ever move your runner fast enough to realize that the song, "Chariots of Fire," plays when you maintain a constant speed. OMG I about died when I realized this; SO EPIC.
So yes, I look forward to more game labs! If you ever want to challenge me to a QWOP-off, give me 45 minutes to get drunk enough, and I will show you how its done.

Word Worm: the Epic Grammatical Adventure!

My paper prototype of, Word Worm, the fast-paced word game, has developed a LOT over the past few weeks. This game has evolved drastically from a "shout out" free for all, to a refined, 2-4 player race to the end card game *cough* that's my core mechanic *cough*. Originally, to play the game, you needed the numbered probability tokens from Settlers of Catan. My first play session with Allie revealed that using these tokens was moderately restrictive. By removing the tokens and incorporating different types of cards instead, I was able to create thousands of card combinations that Word Worm's earliest version was lacking.
So let me back up here to break down the components of my game.

The Objective:

To eat your apples before the other worms eat theirs.

How the Game Works:

1) To begin, pick a worm avatar and a type of apple.
2) The youngest player draws a Syntax card and reads the structure of the round aloud before play begins.
3) Players are awarded one point per correct answer. If their answer complies with the round's Modifier card, the player will also receive the extra points displayed on that card.
4) When the round ends, the used cards go to the discard pile, and play continues clockwise with the next player drawing a Syntax card.
5) For every 5 points the player earns, their worm is able to digest 1 of their 5 apples. After all 5 apples are devoured, the game ends, with the fullest worm the victor.

The components of Word Worm.

The Game Pieces:

*Worm cards - 4 unique worm personas (Avatars)
*Score cards - 4 types of apples, ex: red, green, golden delicious, fuji; etc. The score cards will consist of 5 apple cores of the same type (taped to a score card), and 5 whole, uneaten, delicious looking apples cut-outs of the same size.
*Apple cards - Categorizes! These are the meat of the game. The apple cards have a unique category written on the back.
*Letter cards - Indicates what letter the Apple responses must start with to be valid.
*Modifier cards - Typically optional, modifiers give the player additional perimeters for their answers that earn them extra points if followed.
*Syntax cards - Explains the round rules, including how many Apple, Modifier, and Letter cards are to be used. These cards keep the game interesting by constantly changing up the rules.
*One-Minute Timer - Some rounds end when the timer runs out (depends on the Syntax card instructions).
*Paper and Pencils - Writing utensils are required for some rounds as indicated by the Syntax card.

Super simple! Curious as to how Word Worm evolved into the number one game in America? (Just pretend for my sake D: ) Well check out my play log to get an idea of what rules and mechanics have been altered.

Play Log:

First Play Session - Creating the game with Allie

Original Rules:

0.0 - Roll to see who flips over the first token
1.0 - Player flips over token and play begins
2.0 - Players race to shout out a word that starts with the letter at the top of the token, has as many letters as the number in the center of the token and as many syllables as there are dots on the bottom of the token.
3.0 - The player that comes up with a correct word first, wins that token and adds it to their stash.
4.0 - If there are still tokens to be flipped over, the play continues clockwise starting with rule one.
5.0 - When all the tokens are gone, the player with the most wins.

(Play)


First Iteration:

Modify
2.1 - The player can choose to supply an answer with either the correct amount of syllables or number of letters.

(Play Continues)


Second Iteration:

Add
3.1 - Players that shout out incorrect answers forfeit one of their tokens to their opponent.
3.2 - The Settlers of Catan Robber is dubbed the Wizard, a piece that can be played to win steal tokens
3.3 - When a red 8 or 6 appears, player who wins that token receives the Wizard.

(Play Continues)


Third Iteration:

Modify
3.21 - The Wizard cannot steal a token, but instead protects your tokens from being stolen.

Add
3.4 - The Wizard can be stolen during any given red token round.

(Play Continues, Lab Ends)

What Needs Improvement?
Too much repetition, add a mechanic that changes it up.
Rigid play, find a why to increase combinations of characters, letters, and syllables.
Give players more time to think up answers.

Second Play Session - At home with my boyfriend and dad

To address the areas that needed improvement, tokens were swapped out for cards. The Wizard was removed from the game entirely, and focus shifted toward Worm theme instead.
Result: Different, yet similar rules and objective.

New Refined Rules:

0.0 - Pick a worm avatar and an apple themed score card, youngest play starts first.
1.0 - Draw a Syntax card to determine rules of the round, as well as how many of each card type needs to be in play.

The four worm avatars of Word Worm.

2.0 - Follow the direction accordingly until round ends as indicated on the Syntax card.
3.0 - Talley your points when the round is over, removing an apple piece from your score card for every 8 points you earn.
4.0 - If no worm has finished eating all of his apples, the play continues clockwise starting with rule one.
5.0 - When someone has consumed all 5 of their apples, that player has won and the game is over.

(Play)


First Iteration:

Modify
3.1 - Players can remove an apple after 5 points are earned, down from 8.

Remove
In General - Several Modifier cards are removed because they do not work well with certain Syntax scenarios.

(Play Continues)


Second Iteration:

Add
In General - Variable Syntax cards added to include verbal rounds to accompany written.
In General - Different types of Modifier cards were added to award players for achievements (ie: Having a unique answer that is not shared by opponents, having the longest word, incorporating consecutive consonants or vowels

(Play Continues)

What Needs Improvement?
Technical categories are challenging for some players; incorporating more playful ones could make it more fun.
Pulling the theme together by possibly tying in avatars with fun avatar specific syntax cards.


Monday's Paper Prototype Official Play Session - With Morgan and Cat

Final Rules:

0.0 - Pick a worm avatar and an apple themed score card, youngest play starts first.
1.0 - Draw a Syntax card to determine rules of the round, as well as how many of each card type needs to be in play; read out loud before play begins.
2.0 - Follow the direction accordingly and play until round ends as indicated on the Syntax card.
3.0 - Talley your points when the round is over, removing an apple piece from your score card for every 5 points you earn.
4.0 - If no worm has finished eating all of his apples, the play continues clockwise starting with rule 1.0.
5.0 - When someone has consumed all 5 of their apples, that player has won and the game is over.

(10min of Play)

Analysis:
It really helped to play my game with Morgan and Cat; two people who had never played my first version. They found the Syntax cards to be interesting and enjoyed the constantly changing style of play. I discovered that we all had varying degrees of word proficiency, and that this definitely affected play. I will swap my 1 minute timer out for a 3 minute one, and add easier categories to ensure all players are accommodated. Some of the cards weren't as cohesive as I would have liked, so I will remove the modifiers that can't be applied to ALL Syntax cards, and replace them with more ambiguous ones.

Conclusion:
Overall, I am please with how my game turned out; it was fun, interesting, engaging, and challenging. I will make the changes necessary to improve it further, and apply the method of iteration to all of my future game design endeavors.

Game Lab #1: Board Games!

Board game lab, yay! I never thought I would say that. Before our game lab, I had usually only referred to physical, tangible games, as "Bored games" because unless your power is out or you're at your mom's house, pretty much anything is better than playing one. I would have to be pretty fricken bored to be coerced into it; unless it was Settlers of Catan of course. Settlers of Catan is so complex and thought provoking, I never turn down the chance to play it. But my opinion has changed a lot since starting my game studies class (thanks James :D ). Board games and video games are essentially the same thing! The message doesn't change, only the vehicle. So I looked at our game lab a lot differently than I would have had I been playing Pit with my mom and sister, and actually had a lot of fun!

White card from Cards Against Humanirty.

What game did we play? The redheaded stepchild of Apples to Apples--CARDS AGAINST HUMANITY!
This game is offensive. Now, Apples to Apples can be offensive, but only if you intentionally go out of your way to play rude combinations. Cards Against Humanity on the other hand, gives you mostly obnoxious, sexual, profane, and generally rude cards to play with. You can view the rules HERE. For those of you who don't know the rules and are too lazy to click that link, Cards Against Humanity is a game in which all players are dealt a set amount of white cards, in my case 7, and players take turns drawing a black card. Essentially, everyone wants to play a card from their hand that they feel best fits the subject of the black card and/or the tastes of the person who drew said black card. During any given round you could encounter penis jokes, gay jokes, racism... this is pretty much a game you would never play with your grandparents.
Why play it? What the hell did this game teach me besides how dirty my classmates minds can be? Well, I would definitely say I practiced the art of prediction. The whole point of the game is to predict what your opponent would find the most amusing or the best match to ensure they will pick your card and award you the winner of the round. Conversely, as the player who drew the black card, you want to avoid picking the card of your biggest rival; you also accomplish this through prediction as well. You wouldn't want to pick John's card if he is only one round away from winning, would you? Prediction is crucial--predict wrong and you might have just lost yourself the game!

During game lab #1 with my classmates. Daw look at me socialize.

What I really like about this game is the rigidity. Yea sure, you have an infinite number of offensive responses at your finger tips, but the game has a clearly defined end. You play till someone reaches an X number of wins, and its over, you're done, you can now exit the magic circle and go do something more productive (like leveling you sneak and lockpicking). Who really feels comfortable being sexually explicit and racially inappropriate for longer than 10 rounds anyways?

Video Games... the Next Water Cooler

Xbox One reference anyone? If you happened to be hiding under a rock for the past couple of months and have no idea what the Xbox One is, watch the video below and you will have a pretty solid understanding of all of the glorious things it has to offer. But seriously, as disappointing as the Xbox One's much anticipated unveiling was, Microsoft was right to compare their system to a water cooler. Yes, their console has already proved to bring people together and has become a heavily discussed topic, but not for the reasons its creators would have liked. Gamers of all ages felt a variety of emotions after the next-gen console was announced. Some felt betrayed by the new restrictions Microsoft would later remove due to consumer backlash; others were angered by the price, outdated hardware, and lack of innovation expected from a next-gen system. The important thing to note is: most people felt something. Regardless of which end of the spectrum these emotions are from, our generation displays powerful reactions when it comes to altering our video game experiences (if you are reading a video game blog, it is probably safe to say you are part of the generation I am talking about).

Question: Why do proposed changes to the way we play video games evoke such emotional responses?

Answer: As a result of growing up immersed in technology, we have become dependent on our virtual experiences to fulfill our social and entertainment needs. Changing the way we play games jeopardizes our possibility of satisfying our needs.

Shocking, right? Not really. Essentially, video games have actually become the water cooler of our age. Like our parents' peers met in the break room to socialize over a chilled Dixie cup of water, video games provide us with a modern day alternative. We are held together by our shared desire to stay "connected" with one another, and video games play a major role in facilitating that on a 24/7 basis. MMOs, LAN Parties, Candy Crush invitations, System Link, mobile apps--all allow us to communicate and compete against each other in lieu of physical interaction in a way that previous generations couldn't comprehend.

"I can't grab dinner yet, I'm in the middle of a raid, Mom," earns quite a confused and sympathetic look from one's mother.

(Our idea of hanging out with friends pictured above.)

What Moms don't seem to realize is...

1) You are working as a team with your peers.
2) You are learning essential social skills that could help you develop and improve work and personal relationships.
3) You are having a shit ton of fun while challenging yourself and competing against others.

Now, I am not suggesting our generation supplements everything through technology, I mean, we do have to crawl out of our parents basements every few days to stock up on our raiding snacks and orange tang (that counts as physical interaction right?), BUT, what I am saying is, video games are an important and rewarding part of our generation's lives. We freak out when companies like Microsoft try to drastically change the way we buy, play, and sell games because it would have a monumental impact on the way we socialize. Alter our game culture in a way that inhibits our ability to share and interact, and you have taken away the entertainment factor and destroyed what makes our generation such loyal video game consumers.

Besides, real interaction? Come on. Ain't nobody got time for that.