Nautical Nonsense

Week eleven's The Play's the Thing

2007-01-10T08:39:00.000-08:00

Having read this weeks task I feel like the topic is an absolute minefield of different opinions and factors. To many, gameplay incorporates an experience of the game as a whole, including characters, to background design, music and the relationship between the player and the game. Other people may like a game or rate the gameplay purely on the fact that it happens to be in the same genre as other games they like, so they rate the gameplay like any other game they have played, excluding the notion that it might actually reek.

On the other hand, if the term "gameplay" means the "overall experience of a game excluding graphics, sound and storyline" it leaves us with the concept that innovation and ideas are the most important aspect to any game, and i strongly agree with this.

However, i'm not saying that other aspects to games aren't important either. There is nothing worse than a game that has a good idea and then manages to ruin it by using something cliched and dreadful. Gameplay must include great ideas but they also must be put over correctly to the player. For instance, I have played many a game that has left me thinking - "What a briiliant idea!" and then felt really jealous because I hadn't thought of something like that first. As I clicked on some of the links for this weeks task, I found that the experimental gameplay was just so interesting. Some of the games looked farmiliar, like Katamari Damacy, Electroplankton and Wario Ware - Mega Party Games! Below are some screenshots of Wario Ware. The object of the game is to complete small tasks in a 3 - 5 second time frame. It then speeds up, increasing the difficulty. Whether you are a barber shaving someone's head to a bionic fish, a fun time is to be had by all.

Most of the mini - games and tasks are quite surreal and innovative, many classic references to games like the original Metroid, Duck Hunt, Donkey Kong and Mario. In terms of gameplay it is such an interesting game to come across, mainly because the set - up of how you play it is so manic and hasty that it has you completely hooked, and your ultra - competitive side comes out, so you may lose a few friends but I never said it wasn't a harsh game!

And to me that's what gameplay to me should be about, the ability to effortlessly entertain and make whoever plays it realise it's new, fresh and exciting.

Game Design

2006-11-22T07:30:00.000-08:00

Gameplay and everything that goes into it, be it graphics, storyline or the characters ( the most important aspect though - whether or not it is enjoyable) are important to the overall charisma to any game. Essentially, gameplay is EVERYTHING.

It used to be that games designers would develop cracking games and take most of the design responsibility on themselves. Below is a screenshot of a Sega Mega Drive game, The Immortal. Most of the art direction and design was taken on by Will Harvey, and then EA published it. Back in the day, EA would suppport these "Bedroom artists" and offer to publish them, creating a much more personal and individual approach to game creation. The gameplay is terrific, but of course you can always pick faults with the oldies, like the hand - to - hand battle with the dungeon monsters are heart - stoppingly funny, but after the 5th fight witht the same looking dungeon monster it can get a wee tedious, but if you want to play a well crafted game it's worth a look. So, with teams nowadays that could probably stretch from here to the maginot line, including artists, art directors, level designers and programmers, and then a huge cheese at the top making sure everything isn't going wrong, I'd like to raise an entirely new question. With so many people, is game design becoming less innovative and more buisness driven?

Will Harvey's The Immortal for the Mega Drive

Now don't get me wrong, I'm all for progression in gaming. I reckon all of this advanced technology is worth the faff. But it's how it is used that now sometimes I don't get. And to be honest I don't want to get into the rhetorical line of questioning about what people think make brilliantly designed games. It's all about what you look for and enjoy in a game, as individual as you. But it is in no doubt that different genres of games require different design principles. The main one being aesthetics. I was reading a link that had to do with this task and I was quite taken with Ralph Kosters' Why Games Matter talk. It said that different parts of the brain engage with different things - if we take a gamer and put him/her in front of a game the associative part of the brain would work. The first thing a gamer notices when playing are always going to be how things look. Call me wrong, but a We Love Katamari style first person shooter would look just plain weird. Silly and weird. (Not that it doesn't already!)

Nowadays, we have the X-Box. There is now X- Box live arcade which invites mini developers to come in and design for free. When I first heard about this I thought it was brilliant. Maybe now a bit more of an individualistic approach would be introduced. I'm not just into the looks of a game at all, gameplay for me is important for me when I buy or look to buy a game. I like to look into interesting ideas for a game, innovation and enjoyment. I'm currently playing Phoenix Wright : Ace attorney and it is absolutely great. The storyline has never been done before, it's funny and quite alarming at some points, and it's a game that you could easily fritter away the hours to.

BEWARE OF THIS MAN

2006-11-16T05:30:00.000-08:00

Answers to the name Hurricane Balbdome, with a keen interest/fear of fingers. The best thing you can do is just keep away.

Writing about games

2006-11-14T08:56:00.000-08:00

"Games journalists are stupid because they don't have time to think."

Kieron Gillan, there.

What a crock. Why is it that games journalists always think they are saying something completely profound and astute but in actual fact it's rubbish as they never justify themselves. What does that even mean? Fair enough everyone's busy, but they should realise that in todays society gaming has never been more important and I personally don't expect my £4.50 for my mags to be going to someone who's going around saying that they're stupid, that's just barmy.

In my very humbled opinion, there are little to no games journalists now that have anything too exciting to say, young men with Converse flip bags, hi - tops and hair. Except Mr. Biffo.

Anyways, the issue here is something much deeper than this. The topics regarding gaming have changed so therfore, so must the journalist. Reviewing games is very important to the consumer, and more often than not that is why a magazine is bought. Features and actual games tests are the most prominent selling points of a magazine, and this is where people start to make there own mind up about games, and whether or not the journalist has done a good enough job to sell it them.

The good points to games journalists are they painstakingly wade through games releases and put you on the right track to whatever is actually good out there, but, it's hard to find a games journalist that you might even think about taking the opinion of seriously before any money changes hands.

I think the main issue is typically their style of writing that doesn't interest me very much, nonsensical at times with a twist of bad commentary about nothing we haven't already heard before. With humour as subtle as a sledgehammer and as funny as one to the head, is the interest in games writing diminishing? And do people just want to play for themselves now? Probably, if the future in games journalism is the Sun newspaper.

When I write, I suppose I like to take opinion into account just as much as fact, depending on what I'm trying to explain. Maybe if games journalists project their personalities ( and I'm not talking, "Oh look at me I've got a knife stuck in me head, It's really funny butI think I'm dying but it's alright I'm doing it mainly for ironic and humourous purposes...") over a bit more then we could have another Dominic Diamond. He ruled. But the way things are, we'll probably end up with Pickle from Knightmare.

Doo doo... da da dada doo.....

2006-11-07T14:51:00.000-08:00

Soon, it shall be. I will re - own the entirety of my favourite game in the Zelda series, Links awakening. Originally for the Gameboy, I plan to own it on the SNES again (with the Super Gameboy cartridge) as I recently found it in Leicester.

How excited are you for me?

2000's and beyond/Game...Game...Game... (Are you gaming yet?!!)

2006-11-07T05:58:00.000-08:00

So, what about now? Gaming has become a multi - million pound industry thanks to company backing, and huge demands from the consumer. Well, that's just great you might say. However, now, gaming has become a cut throat world and companies like Sony and Nintendo face a massive battle to achieve success in their fields. And they both do, so much so that the games industry is probably bigger than the film industry.
More recently, I bought a Gamecube. It has to be said that this console is quite underrated. And from the first game I played on it, I believe it was Wario Ware Mega Party Games, I believe the SNES got pushed under my bed for quite some time.

I just want to take time out to muse upon the PS3 and the whole hooha about realism in games. Why?

Do games have to be realistic anyway? Sure, a lot of people buy into it but you have to look at reality everyday. I think the whole idea now in my opinion is to make games as real as possible not for the consumer's enjoyment but as a sales foothold - The more real a game looks the more copies of a game you are gonna shift, especially in this country. Sad but true.The PS3 in the Next - Gen of consoles is trying to focus on realism and the whole thing in my opinion is getting a tad boring, with the same ideas over and over again. For example, the pad. Now the old design I found confusing enough... 2 sets of L and R shoulder buttons, with two analogue sticks and a D - pad, as well as your basic start/select buttons. Oh, and four of your triangle, square, cross and circle buttons. However, PS3 have brought out the same controller for their next venture. Despite faults with a lot of the features in the pad Sony was still ready to release something that to be fair, was blindingly mediocre, and more importantly soooo done before.

Above: The new PS3 pad. So what's new?

And this is the problem. I think the biggest challenges that the game industry faces is invention and originality to keep things fresh and new. Not to churn out something that is a sure - fire money mandrill. Pressure in the industry nowadays goes far beyond the days of making games more than just recognised. Affordability, enhanced hardware and software, marketing as well as graphics all have to be taken into consideration.

I suppose I would like a lot more interesting ideas in games for me to buy them now. I'm not talking style over substance, but different approaches to gameplay itself. From an artistic point of view, I think cell - shading and some of the older aesthetics of games appeal to me a lot, but I'd like to a see a much more modern twist to them like Killer7 for the Gamecube.

Dogfingers Rides Again...

2006-10-26T12:36:00.000-07:00

http://dogfingers.blogspot.com/ Nice little site.

Gaming: 80's - 90's (Part 2)

2006-10-22T11:34:00.000-07:00

The way a game looks, as all game artists try to strive fo,r is very important. Around this time, developers were trying to make games more sophisticated and styles of the way in which they were presented changed. There were a lot of gaming milestones in the 80's, perhaps too few to mention, but the 1st 3D game I think is very important. Taking a new approach to gaming, 3D Monster Maze was a first - person perspective, making there way through a, yes, maze without being eaten by a massive dinosaur. To be honest, I saw some screenshots for this and I found them genuinely scary. I remember being very young and playing a game like this on the spectrum called Tanks. It was black and white as well, which added a very grim aspect to it.

Prior to this, games had typically been 2D and a bit monotinous, and then in 1983 we were introduced to a game with full motion video, i.e it moved, (Dragon's Lair) and everything else after that, development - wise seemed to happpen relatively fast.

Pac Man came on the scene and this game became one of the first games to reach a world wide audience on a popular level. And likeable characters became a very significant tool in marketing.

Then in 1985, came the NES, or the Nintendo Entertainment System. With titles like the now massive Super Mario Bros. it became a bit of a gaming phenomenon. And other cosoles started to emerge like the Sega Master System, which I was party to owning. Games had found a niche in home - entertainment and now very popular games like Dragon quest and The Legend Of Zelda were readily available and to be played at home. I think the thig that would have appealed to me as far as home consoles go were the D - Pads. Wich is quite an important point. This new, much more stylish and compact way to control a game only added to the charm of gaming.

Christmas day, 1992. I'm seven. Santa doesn't let me down. I get a SNES. Oh yeah , a Super Nintendo Entertainment System. And after that I can dare say I haven't found much in the way of anything being able to better it. The design was great, (although I could pick a few holes in the game cartridges though) but the D - Pad is still as new today as it ever was. But more importantly the games were fabulous. The one that stands out in my mind was Super Mario 3, which in my opinion is one of the best games ever made. In true testament to this I played it constantly when I first got it.

I steadily got into gaming, tackling other Mario Bros. titles like the impossible Lost Levels (I don't know anyone that has completed it...) and Mario Kart. And aided by my older brother Simon, we found there were great games, and not - so great games. Like Battletoads. At about 12 or 13, I got my mitts on a Super Gameboy, allowing you to play Gameboy games on the SNES. This made me realise one of my favourite games ever. Zelda: Links awakening.

These new consoles saw a dramtic fall in popularity with arcade games and many places closed down.

However, gaming had come on leaps and bounds. Speaking from a technological and art based perspective games were able to tap into a much more widespread market. The fame acquired by the newer, much more charismatic characters became a real selling point and made gaming very recognised.

Animal Crossing : A Far Cry From Reality

2006-10-19T05:23:00.000-07:00

I'm just going to take time out to muse upon the game that has had me hooked for over half a year - Animal Crossing : Wild World for the DS. For those of you who may not know what this game is about, I'll tell you. Basically, it's a simulated town in which you can interact with others (animals who live there) and basically lead a stress - free existance all the while collecting fossils, fish, insects, furniture and, uh, art. No - one warned me before I bought this game how attached you could get to the animal residents in your town. You get eight in total, I have a cow called Patty, a dog called Goldie, two ducks (Woo!) called Maelle and Drake, a rabbit named Tiffany... oh, and a squirrel called Peanut. But my main guy inthis game is a mouse... his name... Limberg. He's quite the little carmudgeon.

Yeah, life in my town is pretty sweet. Should you want a little insight into the perfect life click > http://www.animal-crossing.com/wildworld/

2006-10-18T15:24:00.000-07:00

More shnizzle for yer nizzle...

2006-10-18T15:18:00.000-07:00

Take a look at this....
it's a pretty cool site.
http://www.vintagecomputing.com/

2006-10-16T10:57:00.000-07:00

It's always been widely regarded in listening to others that early computer games were boring or rubbish. Maybe they were, but I will always disagree. Our generation can't be expected to make a statement like this and expect that we all don't suspect that their PSP's are cutting off the circulation to their brains. Taking into account early computer games looked great and were, o.k, sometimes a bit shaky, overall they provided entertainment and as much enjoyment as they do now. But as with everything, it all boils down to opinion. And that was mine. I personally was shocked to discover that the first computer game was invented in the 1950's. Who'd have thought it? In the same year they invented brylcreem and Elvis. They must have been knackered. I being much of an assumer, thought that it was Space Invaders, which I then found out wasn't invented until 1977. Oh well...

I much liked reading this though. Apparently the game I was referring to, y ' know the first game ever? Was called "Tennis For Two" Only if you have a heart of steel could you not even be tempted to not want to have a go. This particularly twee name won me over in an instant, and immidiately I felt like spreading the word about it. That feeling soon left me. I was dooped! Lampooned! Isn't it just Pong? Anyway, all of this programming on to vaccuum tubes and oscilloscopes was going brilliantly until some smarty - pants invented the very first game to be played on a television set in 1967. Pretty cool, especially considering colour television had only been around a year or two earlier. But for me, I think the gaming milestone came about in the 1980's when arcade machines popped up mercilessly like acne and provided easy access to gaming. They were everywhere from diners to amusement parks, and because of this you could play games like the now iconic and ever dutiful Pac - Man. Then came games like the Mario bros. series and then the rest as they always say is history.

I think the original inventors of these very early examples were the ones who decided computers can be fun, then distributed it to others the best they could. Why else would they invent this concept? Anyway if they hadn't have invented the idea, surely someone else would have, wouldn't they?

Blogging is for pirates.

2006-10-10T09:48:00.000-07:00

Having browsed through many people's blogs I'm quite amazed at how detailed people can actually get into the workings of their mind. I find it quite strange that many people can put their inner thoughts on the web for everyone to see. However it's something that I'll have to get accustomed to. So I'll shut up.

I've taken particular interest in Mr. Biffo's blog, Biffovision who I remember writing for something... can't remember what, but he was great at reviewing games. Anyway I've browsed around his page and he has quite a few images of comedians and weird stuff that i really like as well so I thought, great! I think there is no doubt that blogs are an outlet for talking about anything that is particularly bothering you and things that interest you, so for a reader reading someones blog it is quite personal. Like a diary or something. I just hope I can get to grips with these computers, speaking as a complete ludite.

Mr Biffo seems to post comments quite regularly and talks about what he is up to and what part of the country he is in. (He travels a lot) I quite like his style of writing. He's quite sullen and to the point. If everything goes to plan which I hope it does I want to write quite similarly, but I could use some practice in the art of lingual dexterity. If you want to see some Biffovision, well, here... http://biffovision.blogspot.com/

My lovely little blog.

2006-10-10T05:31:00.000-07:00

I have to confess, about two weeks ago, I didn't know what a blog was. Now that I have one, I feel a number of things. First hostility, then grievance now happiness. Yes.