Total Pageviews

Saturday, 30 March 2013

GDD: PROGRESS 28/03/2013 (FRONT PAGE / CONTENTS)

    Now that me, David and Nicolas have developed the ideas and polished them, I started developing the first pages of the GDD to plan the structure of the GDD whilst simultaneously nailing the consistent visual style. Now, this is a work in progress, so the name is not the name of the game, and the contents haven't been finished because I do not have David's or Nicolas's work, but I think it's turning out really nice so far!

I've messaged David and am yet to message Nicolas to request their work. I know David has his done (he texted me) but I have no idea how much progress Nicolas has made. I'll message him tomorrow. Anyway  have a look at them. 

 GDD FRONT PAGE - IN PROGRESS
by Christian Whelan
GDD CONTENTS PAGE - IN PROGRESS
By Christian Whelan

       Whilst working on my 5 pages, I've been pondering over some titles and a possible re-implementation of a game mechanic - synergy. Scrapped at the second meeting, I really think it brings the mechanics together and could potentially create some unique combat scenarios and player dynamics. I also think it would be a great name, I'm yet to discuss that with David or Nicolas but either way, I write it into the GDD to cover all ground for now.

NEXT POST: GDD - MASSIVE SETBACK

GDD: MEETING 26/03/2013

      Today, me, David and Nicolas had a chance to discuss the idea we had developed yesterday. After a good hour filling in Nicolas on the ideas to give him a good image of the game, we began to polish the ideas, ensuring all the details worked together, scrapping any ideas that didn't fit.

    In all, we now have the idea done! But most importantly, we began to delegate the work and develop a plan of action for this assignment- we wanted each person in the group to do the work they were most interested in so that we could get the GDD developed as efficiently as possible whilst ensuring everybody was passionate about there work.

    However, to me, it's incredibly important that the GDD is consistent, both in content and in visuals. So whilst developing my own pages for the GDD, I am to take everyone's work and organize it into a great looking design document. Hopefully, that's not too big of an undertaking considering the work for the other modules I have to complete.

    This is where micro deadlines are incredibly important  I'll get my work done and nail the visuals, but if David and Nicolas haven't got their work done by a time suitable for me, I simply won't have time to implement their work into the polished document. Regardless, the plan of action is below.

DAVID BARKER
  • The Story
  • Game play
  • Game Flow
  • Characters

NICOLAS PISKORSKI
  • Controls
  • Main Game play Concepts
  • Game play
  • Interface
ME
  • Front Page
  • Contents Page
  • The Mechanics
  • Enemies and Bosses
  • Digital Strategy / Competition
  • Selected Game Engine

     Yes, I do have the most workload, but I always like to set ambitious goals so that I can progress as both a student and a Game Designer. In addition, I love the practical side of games design, so developing the visual style of the GDD is important to me, I feel that itself can be a great way to communicate a theme, concept or individual idea. When it comes to the visuals, I'm going to go for some form blue palette, with a formal theme, whist implementing some form of natural imagery to evoke a totalitarian force in the future that deals with genetic evolution.

Hopefully it will turn out great! I'm going to get started now.

NEXT POST: GDD: PROGRESS 28/03/2013

GDD: MEETING 25/03/2013

      We had our first meeting today and it went brilliantly! Even though Nicolas couldn't make it, me and David managed to get the entire idea nailed on paper, and from it, I think we have a great game idea ready to be developed into a 15-16 page GDD. The downside however, is that because Nicolas wasn't there, he has pretty much no clue what the idea is.

    We contacted Nicolas and he said he's available tomorrow, so we're going to have another meeting them so that he's on the same page as us, and so that we can start developing this GDD. Hopefully we'll have t done within the week!

We still need some character names and details, but regardless, we have the concept down for each page of the GDD.

DAVID BARKER: GAME DESIGN BLOG

NICOLAS PISKORSKI: GAME DESIGN BLOG

NEXT POST: GDD: MEETING 26/03/2013

GDD: THEME AND BRAINSTORMING

      The final Game Design assignment of the year is finally here - work in groups of three to design a game and develop a game design document. I quickly paired with David and Nicolas (there blogs are below) to undertake this huge task but unfortunately  due to people not having any clear initial concepts, we were dictated our game's theme by the other teams (brilliant). My team (yet unnamed) has to work with a theme based around "Magic Spells". It's quiet vague, but we decided we didn't have to stick to the classic form of magic.

     With the idea of allowing ourselves a bit of freedom on this assignment, we started bouncing widely different ideas of each other. Nicolas went for classic fantasy, I used inspiration from an idea I had a couple of weeks ago, and David decided to strive for the less obvious "magic spells" variation. With these three in mind we came up with a great idea (we think) - Evolutionary Shapeshifting.

Our brainstorm ideas are below. I must note that at this stage, anything was agreed upon if it sounded fun, so the ideas on paper are quiet contradicting and in some cases, radical. 


MAGIC SPELLS - BRAINSTORMING NOTES

     We all agreed immediately that we want the player to have some form of shape shifting ability. I myself wanted these abilities to work together in synergy. The core concept however, was to ensure that the player feels like a one man army. After all, isn't that what you're supposed to do, make the player experience something they could never experience?

     So, the player would have multiple shape shifting forms, similar to prototype, but each form be radically different in it's theme, visuals and game play, rather than just having the obvious tank, solider, engineer and ranged classes (even though they would all in some way fit into those recognized categories). The twist is, these forms aren't independent of each other, you can string them together for different tactical advantages. If you have a winged formation and a fire formation, maybe you could use the wings after using fireballs to spread the fire around an area for added area damage (but less direct force).

The idea is a solid foundation, but I we need to flesh this out (obviously) and work out the cons. Anyway, we're all coming into university to get the idea down to a fine polish on Monday.

DAVID BARKER: GAME DESIGN BLOG

NICOLAS PISKORSKI: GAME DESIGN BLOG

NEXT POST: GDD: MEETING 25/03/2013

JACK'S ASYLUM: JUSTIFICATIONS

    Unfortunately, I have no image of the board game (yet), as it's been handed in for marking (found out I got a first!). It was by far the hardest of the assignments yet. Not because the work was hard, but just because the workload I already had put me under a lot of time pressure. Therefore, even though I got a first, I'm not overly pleased with the final game. Either way, here are my justifications for the game Jack's Asylum.

SECTION ONE: GAME OVERVIEW

        Jack’s Asylum is a horrific, timed, game or survival and co-operation, where solving puzzles and collecting keys are your only means of escape from the twisted house of Jack the Killer. Through the anxiety inducing Illusion Spinner and the panic ridden Cells, players are dictated as to which room they enter to solve the puzzles dictating their life. If players survive the timed Cells, they collect a key. If players collect enough keys, they can escape – if you can at all.

    To enter Paradise, players need six keys, for six locks, from 12 rooms. Jack gives players no freedom, no choice, but plenty of fear. On each turn, player must spin the Illusion Spinner, enter the chosen room, solve the puzzle, collect the key and start the horror all over again, all whilst their timed death approaches – there is no rest, there is no safety. Whoever can unlock the door, enters Paradise, whoever fails to solve a puzzle, spends an eternity in Jack the Killer’s prison.

     Borrowing ideas and inspirations ‘Crystal Maze’ and ‘Hellraiser’ iconized, Jack’s Asylum borrows and combined anxiety fuelled concepts and generates a timed, panic induced game or survival and co-operation

Jack’s Asylum has five defining elements:

ILLUSION SPINNER – On each turn, “Subjects” must roll the die and turn the Illusion Spinner the corresponding amount to determine which cell number the player must enter. Once turned, the “Subject” must enter that room, to tackle the puzzle. This mechanic is repeated consistently with each “Subject” turn, consistently throughout the game.

THE CELLS – 12 horrific “The Cells” make up Jack’s Asylum. Each room holds 2 puzzles and a “Blood Stained Key”. Once a “Subject” enters the cell, they are trapped and a 2 minute timer starts counting down, prompting Jack’s arrival. “Subjects” are forced to complete a puzzle to win their life, and the “Blood Stained Key”. If subjects run out of time, they’re out of the game. If they complete the puzzle, they take the key and escape the cell.

TIMER – Two timers determine a “Subjects” death or life - one global timer that determines the games length and four cell timers (one for each player) that determines the time limit for the puzzles. When either run out, the “Subject” or “Subjects” die.

OWENERSHIP – 6 keys are needed to unlock the door to “Paradise”, collecting through successful puzzle solving. When a “Blood Stained Key” is collected, the puzzle solver owns that key and can possibly lose it (them) to another “Cell”.

SUBJECTS – Before each game, players can choose one of 6 “Subjects”. Similar to Cluedo, each have different names, stories, appearances and personalities to make the “Jack’s Asylum” personal and add to the theme.

         Jack the Killer is an inspired, turn based, timed, co-operative, anxiety inducing board game experience that will requires player co-operation. Replicating core trends in modern indie horror games, and borrowing themes from iconic horror experiences, Jack the Killer is a uniquely twisted horror experience. There are only so many “Subjects” and only so many keys. Can you survive long enough to earn your freedom, or will your lacking co-operation doom you to an eternity of Jack the Killer’s disturbed reality.

SECTION TWO: JACK’S ASYLUM MECHANICS

            “The Walking Dead — an adventure game that could rightly be interpreted as a casual game with its very approachable point-and-click interface” (Forbes, 2013) – a recent statement by Forbes.com Jason Evangelho. It’s 2012’s game of the year that has all the aspects of a hardcore game for the hardcore gamers (the story, the theme, the tones), but a game that is driven through common aspects of a casual game for casual gamers (minimal interface, intuitive mechanics). Its award and reception supports the idea of a casual horror game and thus, prompted and supports the idea behind Jack’s Asylum – a 16+ four player, horror puzzle board game, with hardcore themes, but repetitive, casual mechanics.

      There are six mechanics in Jack’s Asylum, each simple and intuitive whilst all adopting an overlaid hardcore horror theme – The Illusion Spinner, the Cell Puzzles, the Timers, the Blood Stained Keys, Ownership and the Subjects. Taking the logical route, the first mechanic, Subjects, will be discussed and justified foremost.

      Subjects are Jack’s Asylum’s answer to Monopoly characters. They determine no game metrics, offer no attributes and provide no variance in gameplay - they simply offer a method of basic interaction within the “world” and add personalisation to immerse players into the game’s theme, as Scott Rogers supports “Customisation will increase player attachment” (Level Up!, 2010) – Subjects simply place the players in the game world. This initial mechanic presents players with 6 characters cards, each adopting a stereotype - the blonde, the geek, the brute, the leader, the lover, the introvert. With this selection, players can choose a character that suits their personality, further adding to personal experience, but instantly enforcing a sense of ownership, prompting player co-operation, as Dan Ariely supports “Ownership increases perceived value to us”. As it turns out, co-operation is the games driving force.

     Now the players have chosen their subjects, are immersed in the ‘world’, and have a sense of ownerships. Players now read the rules and begin the game. Players place their Subjects on the corner podiums with no free movement - there are no spaces and no paths. This was done for two reasons, the make the player feel trapped (hardcore horror element) but also, to minimise interaction (casual element). Flow psychology justifies this the first goal with a direct quote supporting “…it is our assumption we should be in control of our life and move in any direction we want…the trap is a clear message we are not in control or have free will” (2009) and Train2Game supporting the second point, stating “a casual game has simple goals and rules…” (2010). These two quotes relate to every decision made within Jack’s Asylum.

      This inability to move focuses players on three things, the Illusion Spinner, the Cells and the Blood Stained Keys – the Illusion Spinner is the focal point. With one die each, players take turn to role and enter a room. When a number is rolled, that player must turn the spinner, a spinner that dictates the room the player must enter. In Jack’s Asylum, players need keys to escape. Keys are found in cells behind puzzles, and cells are opened using the Illusion Spinner. Every turn, a player enters a room thus every turn the player must use the Illusion Spinner. It’s a common, understandable, and obviously tactile mechanic, which players will understand. Its relation to the chance of a die roll only further indicates their lack of control. This lack of control only has puzzles as a savour – the only place the player determines the outcome.

      Once in the room, the player is trapped and an egg timer is activated, giving players 2 minutes as they’re presented with one of two randomised types of puzzles – a themed Tangram or a riddle. These two puzzles are relatively simple and easy to understand, ensuring the player always knows what to do to obtain the key. However, the 2 minute timer (limited although lenient) pressures players, with Michael DeDonno of case western university stating "If you feel you don't have enough time to do something, it's going to affect you." (ScienceDaily, 2009). It is at this point that players feel out of control even though they are in fact, in control. This constant excitement persists. The win lose scenario is determined by whether or not they can complete the puzzle and obtain the key in time. This leads onto the next mechanic – Blood Stained Keys.

      Named to fit with the themed and give a nod to the Resident Evil franchise, the player would take these keys back to their podium, where they claim ownerships. The twist is that every time players enter a cell, they take all of their keys (a maximum of three). If they already have three, then they are granted safety by Jack the Killer. If they do not, then failing a puzzle knocks players out of the game and traps the keys, along with the pending key, until other players can retrieve them. This twist is where the game generates player co-operation and player motivation. Do they leave the keys because the puzzle is too hard? Or do they risk there life and keys and bring back two? These are the questions players will ask themselves, considering scenarios involving other player’s abilities. Do they risk their life if the other player has no keys? It’s a double edged dynamic that has benefits on either end, but the goal is still simple and the keys may still be in high quantity. These are simple goals, simple rules but pose a possibly hard decision depending on the type of player making the choice. One more mechanic enforces player dynamics, motivations and co-operation – the global timer.

      Along with the cell timers, the game itself will have a deadline – 30 minutes. This ensures the game isn’t too long, as casual gamers “…aren’t interested in grinding away at a game for hours.” (Scott Rogers, 2010). But once again, the timer does two things, it reflect the idea the player is never in control and two, it applies time pressure and prompts player dynamics. Once 6 keys in total are collected (or more) the surviving player can use them to unlock the sanctuary door, of which offers them freedom until the next time they play, with new puzzles.

      In all, Jack’s Asylum has a simple goal, with simple rules and simple challenges. It’s the theme itself and the player dynamics generating through the passive and repetitive timers that cause the real challenges. It all comes down to co-operation when tackling simple puzzles - an ability people of all ages can handle.

SECTION THREE: PATTERN IDENTIFICATION

    The game has been discussed and justified as a casual game (primarily), with overlaid hardcore horror themes. However, the task here was to design a casual game based on a consistently repeating pattern – Jack’s Asylum needed to be simple, accessible and understandable. “Puzzle games are based on logic and pattern completion” – a statement by Scott Rogers that indicates using puzzles as a main mechanic, suits the goal of this task. Along with this, the game has to be casual (even with the hardcore theme), and with puzzles on the most part being targeted at casual gamers, as Train2Game supports “These games appeal to a wider-reaching audience; they are intimately connected to the casual market.” (2010), then you have a basis for a game that is both entertaining as it is suitable for the goals of this task. The success however, lies within how well the player identifies the pattern. Where would they identify with it? How will they identify with it? These are questions that will be discussed in this section.

      The player spins the Illusion Dial, enters the cell, completes the puzzle, and takes the key – the pattern of Jack’s Asylum. As discussed quondam, three crucial elements make up the repeating pattern in Jack’s Asylum – The Illusion Spinner, the Cell Puzzles and the Keys. In no more than two player turns, players would understand the pattern (a simple thematic one at that) consistent throughout the game (it’s the dynamics that make the game so varied). Once reading the instructions and rules, player should understand the concept, but in developing the game, three aspects where considered, they are core to the games design – meaningful sequences, ordered information and recognisable objects, all enforced through the interface.

     The first and most important, is how the immediately evident sequence of collecting the keys has an evident outcome. It’s important in any game for the player to know why they are doing it, otherwise any clear goals don’t make sense and seemingly, have no meaning. The quote “goals are a representation of your inner desires; desires which motivate you in life.” (Celes, Personal Excellence, 2009) is a statement of life, but relates to games. As Scott Rogers, lead designer of the Maximo series puts it, “Games offer player a chance to be someone they’re not and experience something they can’t”. So, the rule applies to games, if there is no clear outcome and meaning towards the action, there is no motivation. When extrapolated to the idea of patterns, if the sequence of patterns that leads toward the goal isn’t clear, then the motivation towards the goal wanes. In order to ensure the goal of Jack’s Asylum was understandable, only a couple of aspects are used independent at any given point to reach that goal. It’s a short stage by stage pattern that repeats itself, which leads onto ordered information – crucial with casual games.

      Some games throw information at players, those games are for hardcore gamers who expect such complexities, but casual games and thus casual gamers, need to be eased into an experience of few working parts, giving them information when they need it, bottom line – they should have one piece of information to apply to one situation in order to progress. When this is considered, you can see how Jack’s Asylum follows this praxis. They’re told to roll one die, see a number, spin the dial with that number to receive a cell number, move to that cell, see the puzzle and solve it, receive the key and go back. And it all starts again – stage by stage, simple isolated situations, where information is given on a need to know bases for that situation, in the order the pattern needs to be fulfilled.

      So now the players understand the goals, and the sequence that could take pace, they need to know how to get through this repeating sequence, this is where recognisable objects comes into play. This very much leads onto HCI theory and how interfaces, both diegetic and non-diegetic lead player to the designer desired outcome. So what do the players need to understand how the sequences relate to the goal? They need a die, a spinner, a room number and a key. Using the rules in conjunction, players will understand what all of these objects are and where they are through recognisable objects and effective HCI. The die is the method of playing, simple enough, as Tricia Ellis-Christensen supports “the board game may have tokens, stones, dice, cards, or other pieces that are used in specific ways throughout the game” (WiseGeek, 2012). The spinner sits in the middle, takes up the majority of the board and its obvious practical nature emits importance thus, the player knows its immediate use. The cell numbers share the same font and colour as the numbers in the cells. The puzzles sit next to each cell with the textual affordance of “Key Puzzle” on them, and the keys are marked with bold red squares and a key graphic.

      With these three design goals implemented into Jack’s Asylum, the players know what the goal is, what the sequence to reach such, how and when to get there, and where the information to do so is found. Its three techniques that allow the constant, consistent, simple and repetitive pattern mechanic to be understandable and therefore experienced by the players, and in doing so, Jack’s Asylum is a casual game set in a hardcore thematic setting.  players identify the pattern within the first two identically structured turns. It’s a casual game that uses a repeating pattern for player to progress understandably.

NEXT POST: GDD: THEME AND BRAINSTORMING

Thursday, 21 March 2013

GENETIC MUTATION / EVOLUTION GAME IDEA

        I've been jotting down a few ideas for games of all types over the year (future blog posts), but my brother had a concept he'd been developing in a day dream whilst stuck in traffic. He called me about it, we discussed it, and brainstormed a few ideas in an attempt to give the concept some meat. Although it unintentionally borrows inspiration from many games, books and films, I'm really excited by its setting and main USP - synergistic powers and a metropolis prison dome. 

The quick overview is as follows;

Earth's population has reached its climax, crime has reached its apparent apex, and natural selection has introduced genetic mutations, handing those selected, seemingly synergistic powers. A now totalitarian government enforced the law - "You commit any crime, you are jailed. You show any sign of powers, you are jailed". A metropolis-esque super dome holds Earth's criminals and mutations serving life sentences  leaving them to fend for themselves. Children are born, mutations work for and against, and inmates rule in this prison dome. You, an accused mutation, are thrown into this prison, forced to deal with its rulers and demons.

     The idea behind the setting is one, because its just cool (lets be honest guys). And two, it allows players to feel free, whilst enforcing a restriction that isn't just simply "Oh, sorry mate, cant go any further, we have invisible walls and shit". I like it, and we both think it's has great potential for multiple environments (divided space environment?). Maybe the prison foundations? A shanty town? A modern metropolis?

     The idea behind the synergy of powers is to flesh out the tried, and usually failed attempts, at super powers in games (Infamous and Prototype are an exception) whilst adding variety to game play and player motivation to experiment. It also offers some unique co-op game play possibilities. Why have two people fighting in a room when you can have two people using each other to fight? Army of Two is a notable comparison and as I'm aware, not many games have really attempted it have they? At least not well.

Here are some other ideas that came up in the conversation;
  • Primary antagonist secretly powered.
  • Powers work and compliment each other.
  • Evolution facilitates payer progression.
  • Player starts in shanty town area?
  • Dome guarded by intense military security.
      There are countless more ideas, so rather than write it down here when I don't have much time. I'll spend tomorrow brainstorming ideas  as nothing is really set in stone (I'll post them in a future post, along with the concepts over summery). However, over the summer I'm definitely going to work with my brother to get some environmental concepts, and maybe some user interface designs completed. 

Can't wait to get stuck in!

NEXT POST: PATTERN GAME: JUSTIFICATIONS

Thursday, 14 March 2013

REPETITIVE CASUAL GAME: INITIAL CONCEPT AND IDEAS

      Considering this is my final assignment that I truly work independently on, I wanted my final prototype to encapsulate the majority (if not all) of the knowledge I have learnt over the year. I want to demonstrate that I know the theory and can execute it effectively  So, rather than simply designing a boring causal game (that will bore me), I want the challenge of taking a hardcore theme (horror), and make it accessible, thus casual. 

    I've been playing a lot of indie horror games recently. I love the way each of the games has an isolated and simple setting, with puzzles directing the game play and the scares creating the dynamics. I want to replicate this in a board game.

    The small and simple setting would be the board. The game play directing puzzles would be common, recognisable puzzles (maybe), and the scares are yet to be determined. But I need to find a way of tying all of this together with a obvious repetitive mechanics. The puzzle may not achieve this yet.

Anyhow, some of my ideas are below. I am to iron out theses dilemmas tonight and create a fully working mock-up.


POSSIBLE MECHANICS

CLUEDO CO-OPERATION – Players can optionally call players to their room (if linked) to help with a puzzle
SHARED TIME – If a player calls another to help with puzzle (each player has individual time limit) then player must continue with own puzzle with same time left
DARKNESS – Players can only see their immediate surrounding (possible chase mechanic instead).
TILES/CARD – Players reveal room as they enter with randomised benefits and disadvantages and timers.
END GOAL – Players work toward one end goal, only certain players.
CHARACTER CARDS – Players can choose actual in game characters for personalisation.
DIAL – Players move dial with time limit to add tension (repetitive) mechanic
PICTURES – Pictures of rooms on cards
MULTIPLE ENDINGS – Depending on how many characters survive, the ending is different – motivation to co-operate
DUMMY ROOM – In rare cases, players will have to call another player for help, only to battle for survival.


POSSIBLE PUZZLES

RIDDLES - Riddles would tie into the horror theme, whilst being incredibly recognisable with some affordance.
HANGMAN - Again, a puzzle everyone knows that fits the horrific theme of the game.
CROSSWORD - Another recognisable puzzle, one that could reveal parts of the story to add to the horror experience.
PICTURE PUZZLE - Again, a simple jigsaw puzzle that could reveal character or story aspects of the game.

NEXT POST: GENETIC MUTATION / EVOLUTION GAME IDEA

Wednesday, 6 March 2013

TWISTER INTERFACE: INTERFACE DESIGN AND JUSTIFICATIONS

       Research for this assignment inspired changes in the final mock-up interface for Twister: Kinect. In fact, it even inspired changes to the mechanics of the game. Ideas considered interesting were scrapped due to unsuitability, whereas other ideas where refined and eventually, the final interface was developed below. I must note; the graphical prowess of this interface inst outstanding, but it is supposed to be a 'mock-up'.

TWISTER: KINECT - INTERFACE MOCK-UP
by Christian Whelan

       Designed by Charles Foley with success in 1966, Twister is the classic and nostalgic, physical party game. It’s physically demanding spotted mat is identifiable with the game’s name, rules and even memories. Thus, when replicating a twister experience digitally using Kinect, it’s important not to just replicate mechanics, but rather the spirit of Twister – laughs, comedy and memories. This goal ensures digital Twister is faithful, whilst offering the new through nostalgia and hardware. First – research.

SECTION ONE: RESEARCH ON UI DESIGN AND FEEDBACK

             Before designing the interface for Twister, it’s important to research examples within the same genre – Party Games. Two games will drive this research, Buzz and Wii Party - games that prove incredibly popular amongst its audience, an audience Twister: Kinect shares.

    Two statements ring true with examples below - “truly great user interfaces are the ones that are engineered to stay out of the way” (Teamtreehouse, Sollenbourger. K, 2012) and interfaces “…keep the user entertained” (Toastytech, 2007) through feedback and variety. Looking at the interfaces of Buzz and Wii Party, today’s HCI objectives are noticeable. Buzz and Wii Party are party games focused on the players. Instantly (which is important), three things are noticeable about the interfaces – affordances, pop out effects and simplicity. All are in effect within the “safe frame” (Level Up! , R. Scott, 2010) - information is presented in a thematic and fun way, whilst working in seamless co-operation to assist players in actually playing the game.

   Party games are multiplayer focused; therefore crucial aspect is distinguishing players between one another and highlighting which player controls which avatar. Here, the character’s avatars are paired with their attributes so players can keep track of theirs and others ‘personal’ stats. It’s a great idea that is undoubtedly achieved through images, text and attributes – these are HCI affordances. Affordances to be utilised in the Twister interface.

  The second aspect is the way pop-out effects are used to enhance affordances. Colours, borders, text colours, fonts and weight are key in facilitating gameplay as Sollenbourger states, “The size, color, and placement of each element work together, creating a clear path to understanding…” (2012). Buzz uses it to facilitate controls, whereas Wii Party uses it to distinguish the players’ avatars – both concepts needed for Twister that uses colour as a primary mechanic. The final aspect is the colour pallet – a rule of three comes into play, ensuring the interfaces are consistent and understandable as Sollenbourger supports.

   The final aspect of the user interfaces is simplicity. Only details that are crucial are visible as Sollenbourger continues to support “Does the user really need this?” (Teeamtreehouse, 2012) when discussing what should be asked when designing interfaces. This answer is exaggerated in the images to the right. In Buzz, all the players require, are attributes that highlight progress, information needed to progress, and information that determines the game. In Buzz, there’s the player information, questions / answers and the timer. In Wii Party, there’s the HUD avatar, score and timer. There is a praxis, one to be adopted in Twister’s interface.

    Visual, Aural and Tactile feedback is a trio that bring interfaces to life, keeping entertainment flowing and enhancing the game’s “feel”. Buzz and Wii Sport use the aforementioned. Visual effects, sounds and animation for buttons, successions, progressions and failures show that every single action has all three to increase polish as Sollenbourgh supports that “Your interface should at all times speak to your user, when his/her actions are both right and wrong or misunderstood.” (Teamtreehouse, 2012). Rogers also supports that “…there can never be too many fireworks!” (Level Up! , 2010). There is never s a second that goes by without a sound playing as a result of a player’s actions - effects such as shaking buttons, highlighted borders and sweeping sounds add to the games feel. It is incredibly important when Twister: Kinect has no physical controller – the entirety of Twister: Kinect’s feel will have to be reflected through discernible animations, visuals and sounds – diegetic, non-diegetic and spatial, as an interface is not just the HUD, it’s also the game environment.

         Conclusively, as Twister: Kinect has no physical controller; the game’s success is down to the interfaces and feedback– it has to be simple, readable and discernible. By researching Buzz and Wii Party, it is clear what works in interface design and what doesn’t. With feedback, more is better - even the subtle details adds to the experience.

SECTION TWO: COMPLETE UI DESCRIPTION

              Taking the interface and feedback research carried out on Buzz and Wii party, the Twister: Kinect’s multiple interfaces began development with many iterations and versions, changing as the mechanics informed the design. In the end, multiple modes required multiple interfaces and forms of feedback, all of which are consistent in theme - Twister: Kinect became familiar, but something new, adopting the entertainment show setting of the popular Buzz titles. In-game, the interface adopts the design of the game show, with the centre stage and contestants illuminated in strobe lights, and the HUD projecting key game attributes and properties (lives, character names, coloured spots).

    The most logical way to explain and justify the interface is it categorise the elements into diegetic and non-diegetic design aspects whilst referencing the mock-up interface design, concluding with an explanation of feedbacks that would give Twister: Kinect the polish many party games have. Foremost we have the diegetic design elements.

     There are only two diegetic design elements in Twister: Kinect - the projected player avatar and the in-game twister mat. Both of which are set in the game show themed environment and crucial in allowing the player to play the game. Foremost we have the mat. This is without a doubt, the most significant aspect of the interface, as players will reference it constantly throughout the play session, because of this, just like any other game avatar, it is central in the interface, illuminated by surrounding strobe lights – players will naturally be drawn to it as it’s their game environment. It is their means to success, just like the physical mat would be in the classic game of twister. Equally as important, is the avatar, the player’s themselves will be projected into the game environment using Kinects motion sensor technology. With these two diegetic design aspects, players would know where to move, where they are and how to get there, but there is still a lot missing - players do not know who they are. Colours are a crucial part of the solution, along with many other details. This is where the non-diegetic design elements come into play, with layout, colour, scaling and affordances.

     Player attributes, player properties, the spinner and the scores – the four crucial key elements that make up the non-diegetic interface of Twister. It could be said that because of the theme of the game (game show) that the in-game avatar are aware of these aspect, thus they create a diegetic interface, however, considering the in-game avatars are in fact the player’s themselves, the interface is still non-diegetic – it’s a required fourth wall, that just happens to be tied into the game’s thematic world.

     At this point, players have a virtual mat, an avatar and a virtual environment, but now player need a mechanic to the play the game – the spinner. This second half of the classic Twister game is again, central in the screen but remains for the majority of the game half its usable size, never hidden and never faded due to its constant use. With each player turn, the player would shout “Twister Spin”, bringing up the spinner, then automatically spinning. Once the spin is completed and colour and a limb is selected for that player. It’ is important to note that the spinner adopts the same design as it always has – four sections with the twister colours and an arrow. It is from this point the character attributes make themselves noticed to the players.

     In each corner for each player (one to four) everything the player could possibly need is contained, organised in a hierarchy of importance as Rogers states “use hierarchy to organise your HUD” (Level Up!, 2010). First is the player gamer tag gamer picture – the two aspects that the player will instantly identify with. These are also the largest of the elements. Following, in the same section, are the player’s lives, determined by how many slips the player has during the game. Why do the lives sit here? The reasoning rests in its importance, considering the lives determine the win/ lose scenarios, the player will want to have this information instantly, thus it is grouped with all the other important player information. Finally, as an offshoot from this section but still within the same corners, the colour circle sits, large and more central to the screen to highlight its importance. Once the spinner returns to original smaller size after the spin, this is the UI element that will tell the payer where they are to go next.

       Moving onwards, the player attributes and their positioning around each other was decided at an early stage. The positioning around the screen however, had seen iterations. It was all about ensuring the layout was simple, intuitive and understandable but on the most part invisible, as Rogers states “the HUD should be practically invisible” (2010). Only when the player needs information should they see the HUD, so in response to this fact, the player attributes where scattered to either corner as far as possible and minimised to a small but readable size so the player could focus on the action.

     With everything in the position and size it needed to be, it was all about using colour to offer affordances to the players – players need something to identify their avatar with in co-operation with their attributes. Thus, taking the colour scheme of twister and applying a colour to each player meant they instantly knew who they were, as the avatars share the same colour. Simultaneously, players can find their own information easily using colour association swiftly adopted due to the simple interface. It’s a simple but effective technique, that caries the bold theme whilst facilitating the gameplay – a goal from the start of this process.

    Finally, the score is central and adopts this colour coding technique. In Twister: Kinect, players are in competition, so the score it the focal point at the end of each game. Therefore, the scoreboard s both central and colour coded, the players can find it and recognise the scores relationship with each player.

        Now that the literal design of the UI has been explained, the feedback needs to be detailed. Feedback is incredibly important in Twister: Kinect. It gives the controller lacking game the feel the common controller provides. Therefore, literally every action has a sound, animation and accompanying graphic as Sollengerger supports “always provide feedback so the user doesn’t get bored” (2010).

    Starting with the obvious, music continuously plays as the game plays. As the game progresses and the positions increase in difficulty, the music’s tempo quickens to increase tension and excitement for the pending fall. At this point, it suddenly stops as crowds cheer, only for a new track to start and to add variety. Notable, is that as soon as the player falls or loses a life, a recording of the fall / slip plays whilst simultaneously showing snapshots of the players face as he / she does. It’s an entertaining bonus that could provoke falling just for that captured memory. Additionally, as the capture replays to the player, the in-game audience laughs with them – these subtle effects add to the feedback. The most commons sounds and effects however, are during the balancing act of staying in the game. As player desperately balance and change positions, buzzwords shoot on screen under the appropriate players attributes with the commentator shouting them – “Watch out” or “Great work!”. Various other sound bites play as fireworks set off and glitter falls off the screen. It’s an attempt to reward the player for their every move, something classic physical twister cannot provide. In doing so, the player can feel the game interact with them – theirs and the games actions are discernible.

Eventually, as stated, they fall. When this happens, the spinner is activated through a voice command. When the player activates the spinner, swooping sounds take over followed by the creaking and cracking of the turning wheel as it activates, speeds up and slows down to a halt to land on the limb assigned colour. When a colour is select, it shoots out of the screen with fireworks and the commentator dictates the next move. It then falls back to the players attributes with a crash and the spinner minimises with yet more swooping sounds. It is at this point where the game is at its most quiet – the player is attempting to reach the next position as players watch the screen.

      So, after an entire game of swopping, fireworks, shouting commentators and audience cheers, a player is left standing, wining the round or entire match. At this point the HUD swiftly zooms off screen disappears, the camera zooms in, the player is prompted to hold a winning pose as the game takes a photo and compiles it with the match’s best bits. To top it off, a chosen custom song plays for him / her whilst people begin for the next match. It’s a final reward for the victor that is personal and incredibly unique whilst fitting with the part atmosphere, keeping the party going and in turn, keeping the games going. It’s a feedback feature that Twister: Kinect owns.

      In all, the feedback in Twister: Kinect ensures that there is never a moment that passes where nothing is happening. Because of this, entertainment is prolonged, enhancing the twister experience, offering something familiar but something new. When it comes to the UI, User Interfaces should primarily facilitate gameplay - it should be informative, accessible, understandable but simple. Scott Rogers best summarises a game UI’s by stating “…the goal of these screens is to communicate clearly and efficiently to the player” (Level Up! , Scott Roger, 2010). Game interfaces share the same theory of the common computer interface, but they shouldn’t be the focal point of the experience – they create the fourth wall and become a double edged sword. The interface designed for Twister: Kinect follows this praxis, much like Buzz or Wii party. And the fourth wall, that is inevitable, is meaningful used to enhance gameplay. But players need controls to play the game. What are the Kinect controls and why us Kinect?

SECTION THREE: CONTROL SCHEME WITH OVERLAID INDICATOR

      In Twister: Kinect, controls have to be a seamless social activity, not an isolated activity as social play is the heart of Twister – the “interaction of multiple players.” (Zimmernman, Rules of Play, 2004). Thus, intuitive, discernible and entertaining are the three goals when designing the controls of Twister: Kinect. Two things make this possible – hand gestures and voice controls that should be “intuitive to the player” (Rogers. S, 2010). Too many motion controls and affordances can confuse for players, so blurring the gap between intention and physical action is key - “motion controllers should be broad and mimic reality” (Rogers. S, Level Up, 2010).

     Two questions needed answering through Kinect controls - how do players navigate interfaces and how do players play. With interface navigation, there are two options – twister positions (for added entertainment), or hand gestures and voice controls (selectable on start-up). If the player chooses to use Twister poses to navigate menus, each selection presents players difficult comedic poses, these poses are shown using non diegetic silhouettes (see below) coupled with the menu selections so players would instantly recognise their relationship. In addition, it increases entertainment as getting to the game is a now spectators sport and therefore, entertaining for all.  On the other hand, if players choose the standard gesture and voice controls, controls are less ‘obviously’ fun, rather they are simple and effective when you consider feedback and that Twister: Kinect only requires three gestures and intuitive voice commands. Again, it comes back to the Roger’s statement that “motion controllers should be broad and mimic reality”. Players will face four points of interaction – selecting, quitting, pausing and recording.

      To select, the player would place their hand over the selection and continuously wave until the selection smashes and takes the player to the next screen – quite standard. To quit or go back, for example, going back to the main menu from the House Party interface, the player would perform a bold swiping gesture from left to right, rolling a twister mat over the screen the reveal the next interface, similar to a smart phone. The reasoning behind this interaction is through a statement that rings true, especially now touch screens are as common as they are now, as Scott Rogers states “consider emulating control schemes” as it is “familiar” (2010) and therefore, less confusing. Pausing is more complicated, the only time the player would pause is during an in-progress game of a twister, which with hand gestures would definitely interrupt the game’s flow. Naturally, players would use voice controls to pause the game with the “Pause Game” voice command, but in order to do so physically, all players would have to put one arm straight in the air, which although impractical, would be an entertaining form of social co-operation. Of course, this specific gesture would be explained during the loading screen and in-game through affordance hints. Through three simple gestures, the player can navigate the entire interface, but make use of all the hardware.

  Voice control is the third and most important of the three control methods. It’s enabled throughout the entire game and most the efficient control method in-game due to its seamless and intuitive nature that prevents player frustration. It works exactly like it should, by accepting a variety of literal voice commands. If players wish to select the “House Party” mode, then the player would state “Select House Party” and so on. Microsoft used the Xbox dashboard, the most important interface of a console, as the promotional demo for Kinects voice control – Twister: Kinect shares the same intuitive voice control functionality. Most importantly however, is the voice recognition used to control the spinner, the primary mechanic, in which case the players would shout “Twister Spin!” when ready for the next move. At this point, the spinner would zoom and centre and animate accordingly. The variety of voice commands are detailed below.

    When playing the game, controls are passive and unintentional by players. The Kinect’s joint recognition would compare player’s position with the in-game twister mat. If there one or more limbs leave this zone, players loose a life. Likewise, if the player’s hands are on the mats circles, then they are safe, allowing the game to continue on. Couple this passive background control with the voice and gesture controls and Twist: Kinect is a game that utilises Kinect to its fullest whilst remaining intuitive enough to not interrupt the heart and soul of the game.

SECTION FOUR: CONTROLLER JUSTIFICATION

             Kinect is a “controller-free gaming experience using physical gestures and movements, replicating them onscreen” (Gadget Show, 2009). In comparison, Twister revolves around physicality. Considering Twister requires full body movement, the PlayStation’s and Nintendo Wii’s controllers aren’t appropriate for Twister: Kinect. 

       At the core of Twister: Kinect is a faithful digital recreation of the classic game. There is a plethora of controller options available, but it seemed Twister’s iconic rules and gameplay prompted at only two viable options – a connected physical mat (replica of the common twister mat), and the Kinect motion sensor. In the end, it was the mechanics and ideas at the design stage which prompted Kinect to overshadow the normally, equally viable mat option - physical controllers are designed for other gameplay styles, they would physically prevent players from playing twister, thus, preventing immersion and damaging what makes twister so fun. These four mechanics are joint recognition, gesture recognition, voice control and video and image capturing. 

      Firstly and most significantly, we have joint recognition as James Rivington states “your body is the controller” (TechRadar, 2010) when discussing Kinects main unique selling point. When twister revolves entirely around the body and Kinects main USP revolves around recognising the body, it is clear that Kinect is the suitable choice when Twister: Kinect’s main mechanic is considered, as Rivington continues on to say “It measures the positioning of 48 key joints in your anatomy and by tracking the movements of these joints, it can work out exactly what position your body is in.” (2011). It is the only controller that registers every joint, and outputs the desired response – it is designed for physical games like twister. But the physical mat peripheral can mimic this functionality at an equally entertaining level, it’s the other mechanics of Twister: Kinect that highlight the physical matt’s shortcomings.

   If a physical mat was utilised for a basic remake, there would be no benefits to using the Kinect over a physical peripheral, but when players switch to the conventional controller to navigate interfaces, there is a fourth wall – one that classic Twister avoids. Kinect however, has gesture recognition, it “uses the camera and microphone to work out what you're doing” as Rivington continues. Players use gestures to navigate menus – it’ a seamless experience.

    To enhance this point, gameplay in Twister: Kinect starts before the game begins (the menu), the traditional controller’s analogue sticks do not offer the athletic, tactile feel Kinect offers in this mini-game – players actually make the poses required to select a menu option and as Scott Rogers states, a game should “keep the gamer playing” (Level Up! , 2011). Considering the game’s USPs match the USPs of the Kinect, the physical mat or conventional controller has blatant downfalls. Additional mechanics of Twister: Kinect also justify Kinect use.

    Penultimately, as Rivington supports, Kinect has voice control. It was specifically promoted for navigating interfaces or enhancing gameplay by breaking the fourth wall. Mass Effect 3’s dialog and the Xbox dashboard are notable examples. Considering the point made regarding other controllers lacking suitability for Twister, it made sense that Twister: Kinect would have optional voice controls so players never stop playing. They could say “Spin the spinner” or “Record” to control the game. Other controllers could provide this, but they pose a physical barrier.

    This leads onto the final justification for Kinect use, one that also further justifies voice controls – the Snapshots mechanic. Automatically or when prompted, images and the last 10 seconds or 3 minutes of gameplay are recorded, saved and ready to be shared. It’s a mechanics that solidifies the spirit of Twister – fond memories. It’s a key mechanic that is utilised every time a player falls and plays on the non-diegetic interface for further entertainment. Without this, the game would not be as entertaining, as it provides reward from failure. There’s only one controller that allows this whilst still retaining the benefits a digital Twister needs – Kinect.
      
      Clearly, Twister: Kinect was inspired by and designed around the Kinect motion controller. It fully utilises its gaming benefits to enhance the Twister experience. Now, players don’t just play Twister, they play Twister before they player Twister, record and picture themselves playing twister, and share their memories with family and other Twister players. It’s the enhanced, modern Twister, which focuses on what Twister is about - controller free, unique family fun, only possible by Kinect.

NEXT POST: REPETITIVE CASUAL GAME: INITIAL CONCEPT AND IDEAS

Monday, 4 March 2013

TWISTER INTERFACE: MOCK-UPS


         Replicate the classic party game Twister on a games console - the task of the 9th assignment of the year. When handed this assignment, I instantly thought of Kinect. Although I'm not a massive fan of the device, it seems only suitable that a party game that requires free hands, uses a platform that gives you freedom of movement with your limbs. So, rather than the Wii Controller, the Move Controller or the Xbox Controller, Kienct seems the perfect choice. Especially when it can recognise depth, augment reality, distinguish between limbs, and provide accessible voice controls.

     To me, simplicity, decoration and being faithful with the classic game is important. I want to embrace the nature of a party to facilitate laughs and therefore entertainment value - exactly the reason Twister is so popular. I shall justify these aspects at a further stage when I discuss the mechanics and feedback systems, the below designs are purely basic mock-ups.

    So, I've chosen three modes - Party Mode (in the room), Online Mode and Endurance Mode (Single Player). This was in hopes to cater for all audiences whilst retaining twister's physical spirit central to the games mechanic (again, I shall justify this at a later point). I want to take a handful of mechanics, and re-use them in different contexts to change up the game-play. Anyway, have a look at the mock-ups drawn over my ancient television.

TWISTER: KINECT - INTERFACE MOCK UPS
by Christian Whelan
TWISTER: KINECT - MAIN MENU MOCK UP
by Christian Whelan
TWISTER: KINECT - DIAGETIC MOCK UP
by Christian Whelan
TWISTER: KINECT - NONDIAGETIC MOCK UP
by Christian Whelan
TWISTER: KINECT - ENDURANCE MODE MOCK UP
by Christian Whelan

MAIN MENU - Simplistic, thematic, functional. Players won't be spending too much time on the menu, the chances are, they would play the game at an event or party to get straight to the instantaneous physical fun.

PARTY MODE - The classic and most popular family fun mode, so therefore the first choice on the Main Menu. Here, two or three players would go head to head on screen using an augmented reality twister mat. Maybe they have lives, or lives for each limb? At the moment, I am brainstorming the possibilities of the lives mechanic and what it can bring to the game.

ONLINE MODE - The same as the Party Mode, only players will compete online, taking advantage of Kinect's ability to augment reality. The players are augmented onto each others screens using collision detection, visual effects and feedback to restrict movement (like in the classic mode).

ENDURANCE MODE - To cater for those who want exercise and fun alone, Endurance Mode is the Single Player mode of Twister: Kinect. The Spinner is AI controlled and random, but its speed and difficulty begin to increase as the game times how long you last in this berserk, limb twisting endurance mode.

        I feel I have a good foundation for an Xbox 360 Twister clone. Its the same classic game, but it also adds features to generate new laughs, thus increase the replay-ability value. Hopefully, once the feedback systems are in place and the pretty visuals are overlaid to "Juice" the game up, it should be a realised and successful concept. My fiancée already said "Oh my god! I want to play it now", so that a good sign I guess (unless she was being sarcastic to shut me up... as she usually does).

NEXT POST: TWISTER INTERFACE: INTERFACE DESIGN AND JUSTIFICATIONS