These are my thoughts about the game I made for the Ludum Dare 26 compo.  I will focus on what I feel was the most successful aspect of the game and the two issues I feel were the weakest.

I wanted to develop something I felt was complete and I accomplished this.

I have been preoccupied lately with the idea of games as complete creative works.  To help me in this thought process I have been toying around with parallels between a painting composed of component parts and a game composed of component parts.

I wanted all of the component parts of my game to support each other so that the sum of the parts was something greater.  I am pretty happy with the end result.  I feel the game has a completeness to it.

There were a number of components I felt had to be addressed sufficiently to fulfill the goal.  Visuals, mechanics, audio, story, and dealing with the medium itself.

For visuals I wanted to integrate the idea of minimalism both on a surface level, in terms of how the game appeared and on a subtler level dealing with the theme and the method of delivery, i.e. the screen and boundaries of the game representing ideas and techniques from minimalist painting.  My dealing with the delivery of the game involved blurring the game border both in terms of visuals and mechanics.  I also tried to break the game area up in various ways to compliment the visual style as well as attempt to change the players perception of the game area.

As for audio this is one of my weakest areas.  I dedicated enough time to work on music and audio that it helped tremendously to have sound that felt intentional.  However, I think significant improvements to the audio can be done.

In terms of story and mechanics, I wanted to tell a story in a minimal way.  I decided to have the keys(letters) on the keyboard that were used for input, WASD, to also be the characters in the game.  I felt this helped complement the game as a whole and effectively deal with the issue of explaining to the player how to play.

In terms of the medium, I tried to resolve this in the visuals, story and mechanics.  I already touched upon this above.  I will just add that one of my main goals was to tell a narrative through interactivity.

What I would improve.

I failed to develop and implement the audio I wanted.

I wanted audio tracks that played in layers and were played at random times based on a weighting system.  Two things prevented this from happening.  One is that I did not come up with a sufficient way to implement this in the time I had.  The other is that I have little experience creating music.  I am still looking for a music creation program that suits me well.  With time and research I hope to resolve these issues.

I sacrificed controls for narrative.

The other improvement I feel is necessary is in the controls.

Infernal says …

Apr 29, 2013 @ 6:38am

The only problem I have is the little slide to stop that occurs when you stop input. In the tight spots between two bars, this can end in frustration as you try to park a letter to wait.

Otherwise, very artistic and clean!

I chose to have each character move to the head of the group when the character’s key was pushed.  This was intended to convey the story of a familial group, each leading when it was necessary.  In order to do this I created an invisible object in the world that was the “hub” for the group.  When characters moved it was relative to the hub.  The result of this was a slide when input stopped coupled with characters moving at angles at times; when the input and obstacles almost all existed as right angles.  These issues caused frustrating deaths.

While I still want to marry movement and mechanics to story, I feel I certainly dropped the ball by sacrificing gameplay and control for story.  While I don’t believe the choice is always one way, player frustration based off poor implementation is something I always wish to avoid, as for example a narrative can be ruined by control issues taking the player out of the game.

Overall I am happy.  I feel my understanding of scope increases with each game jam I participate in.  This has helped me to increasingly achieve the goal I set out at the beginning.

Thanks for reading.  You can find my Ludum Dare game here:  http://supersoul.co/files/Projects/LD26/LD26.html

Images used from web: Image 1 Image 2 Image 3 Image 4

Looking at Half Life 2 with new eyes

—or—

How come I can’t play games the way I used to before I started developing…

Well I started a blog. Then I did not write anything for months.

I am not sure if writing this article will jumpstart my blog activity again, but I am compelled to write something after finally playing Half Life 2 for the first time.

Some things to mention before I begin.

• I have never played the original Half Life.
• I have missed out on most of the PC gaming culture in my life, other than Jeopardy for Dos. (Great game!)
• After playing Portal and HL2 this past week, my Valve gaming experience is now Portal, HL2 and Left For Dead.
• I have played all of these games on Xbox 360.

note: HL2 is a fairly very large game. And I assume there are countless articles out there about HL2. My interest is to discuss one specific aspect of the game that I found one of the most successful and detrimental to my experience.

HL2 gives the player a wonderful feeling of choice and freedom for such a linear experience. There are numerous ways the game elicits this, a few being: branching paths where all lead to one place or only one path/option moves the game forward, the choice of whether to fight or run (no corridor waves for me thank you) and finally the confidence Valve gives me, that I can solve the puzzles without them holding my hand.

This last characteristic of HL2, the confidence in me as player, is what I find the most intriguing aspect of the game. To expand the thought further, I am given a somewhat ambiguous situation and asked to hypothesize what I need to do to progress and then find a way to interact with the world to realize my hypothesis thereby discovering the answer.

To illustrate this point I will use 3 case studies from the game and discuss their relative strengths and weakness.

Case 1: A simple test in buoyancy

Somewhat early on in the game the player is traveling through the viaducts on a waterboat. The player gets to a point where the path forward is blocked by a wall. A ramp must be used to jump the wall, however the ramp is out of position. To solve the problem the player must collect a number of floating barrels in the water and place them under the ramp to reposition it and move forward.

Strengths:

• HL2 does a great job of introducing ramps before this point both as a way to become airborne and then as a method to progress forward.
• The puzzle is in a fairly small area, and does not require long traversal to test the hypothesis “can I use these barrels”
• A path next to the ramp leads to a lone barrel which overlooks the puzzle, giving importance to this barrel as something necessary and framing it in the location it needs to be used.
• Swimming has already been established.

Weaknesses:

• The area leading up to this puzzle is quite large and takes a while to fully explore.
• Many times the player must find a small entrance or climb something to progress. In such a large open space the player may feel overwhelmed as to what the answer is and spend an inordinate amount of time driving around looking at walls.
• The idea of swimming down with a barrel, and barrels ability to modify the game world, has not been established. (At least in my playthrough)

Overall I felt this puzzle worked fairly well. I did not backtrack and instead investigated the area solving the problem rather quickly. Because the game gave me the freedom to discover, the payoff was very rewarding to me.

Case 2: I actually operated a tower crane once!

Later in the game the player is driving a buggy. This area feels very similar to the waterboat sequence. Both feature large open spaces gated by areas that must be “completed”. At one point in this game sequence, the player finds themselves forced to leave the buggy and proceed on foot as it is the only option to progress. A depot with enemy soldiers stands in between the player and their goal and a large crane stands prominently in the scene. The solution is to use the crane to knock over a bridge and then lift the buggy up onto the platform.

Strengths:

• The player has already seen one of these cranes, how they operate, and that they can lift the buggy up onto and off of platforms.
• Because the bridge is up, the player is effectively led to the crane ladder and subsequently the crane.
• The payoff of discovery is very rewarding. Knocking over the bridge and lifting the buggy are nice gameplay one offs.
• Operating the crane is very enjoyable: it presents a different perspective on the world and a different game mechanic.
• Operating the crane gives the player power not otherwise experienced–moving objects normally too heavy to move.

Weaknesses:

• There is a lot of area to traverse if the player is unsure of what to do: i.e. considerable amounts of running with little to no action.
• As a player used to contemporary games, I did not think to pick the buggy up with the crane because it seemed too “far fetched”. By this I mean many FPS games I have played recently explicitly tell the player what to do, which I guess has conditioned me to eliminate options that do not seem “reasonable” (whatever the hell that means ?!?)
• It can be a bit tricky to operate the crane which means the time it may take a player to test a hypothesis is quite long.

Overall this was one of my most memorable events from the game. I wasted a good bit of time after knocking over the bridge running around before realizing I needed to use the crane to pull the buggy up. I chalk this down to two things: One is that I just assumed the game would not have me do that, (it requires a bit of faith by the developers) and two the area above the crane did not look buggy friendly and so I assumed the buggy could not be there. Once I did solve the puzzle I had a great feeling of accomplishment and respect for the way the game lets me play it.

Case 3: WTF

Okay. I know HL2 is from 2004. And I know making games is a tremendous endeavor. I also know that what I am about to harp on is a progression technique we are using for the game we are developing for the University of Kentucky. All things considered…

Sometimes I felt the free nature of puzzles and progression in HL2 was its greatest curse. At one point in the game I was storming the prison, Nova Prospect. Alex was leading me through and I got to the point where I was clueless as to what to do and ran around for a considerable amount of time. Turns out all I had to do was pick up a damn turret.

Strengths:

• Again the game gives the player the freedom to play it.
• Turrets have already been introduced as something to pick up and place.
• The area is not very large, so trying to find possible solutions exhausts itself in a reasonable amount of time.

Weaknesses:

• I found no reason to pick up the turret. Alyx was leading me and established that role of order and obey. She did not order me to pick up the turret (unless I missed it) and no enemies were around or incoming so I felt no motivation to set up defenses.
• There were a few areas that were hard to access but could be accessed with the gravity gun and crates, which I spent a great deal of time trying to access as I thought these places were the way forward.
• Picking up a turret to move the game forward when there is no reason to pick up the turret just sucks

This last case illustrates my major issue with the way HL2 gives the player freedom through developer confidence. By this point in the game I had come to expect 2 things: One that any possible solution should be considered and two, that generally solutions make logical sense. I found this case to be problematic because of the first rule and break the second rule. I had used so many devices to solve puzzles up to this point I was trying every possible means to move forward. I saw the turrets early on but because I found no reason to set them up I did not consider this the way to move the game forward.

Numerous times in the game my sense of immersion and enjoyment was broken by a confusion on how to progress which devolved into me running around looking in every corner, stacking every box, retreading ground over and over to find the one thing necessary to progress.

As a game developer my takeaway is the question of balance. How can I design game situations for the player to minimize the fracturing of immersion while presenting the freedom of playing the game as I want to, as opposed to the developer forcing me to play their way (even if it is mostly an illusion).

I found HL2 to be an amazing game. I am critical because I want to be a better developer and game designer. Writing this helps me work out thoughts in my own mind. I also hope some others may chime in for feedback, comments, criticisms.

Hats off to you Valve. Just don’t make me pick up a hat to progress a story without logical reason.

Pjchardt

Based on feedback from players, a number of improvements have been made to the game since last weekend’s Louisville Arcade Expo:

1. - Each player’s ship has color enhancements making it easier to track which ship is yours in the middle of intese gameplay.
2. - Overall graphical enhancements to explosions and various game events.
4. - Energy cubes are gravitating toward nearby ships, making them easier to pick up which has improved gameplay pacing.
5. - Slick intro and outro scenes have been finished for cooperative gameplay, adding more polish to the beta demo version.

John and Richie have been operating on little sleep and lots of caffeine the past few weeks getting the newest update to Compromised ready for PAX East next weekend, the largest gaming conference on the east coast. So far though, the hard work has been paying off as player response has been overwhelmingly positive and encouraging!

More pictures coming soon!

Super Soul was the only Lexington developer in attendance, demoing their latest and greatest multiplayer update for Compromised. It was a great opportunity to gain exposure for their Indie game and they were encouraged to see numerous players bringing their friends back to play the game with them.

John “Tony Stark” Meister (left)was busy explaining the controls for Compromised to the many gamers who came to play despite having a small malfunction with his new arc reactor implant. However, a disappointment to many attending was when Super Soul brainchild and playboy Richie Hoagland (right) locked himself in the hotel room with a coffee pot to crank out more code for the game–despite many female attendees requesting to have their picture taken with him.

The coolest exhibit at the expo by far, and honestly worth the price of admission alone, was the Console Room. Walking through that door was akin to being paid a visit by the ghost of video game consoles past. They had practically every console you could possibly imagine from your childhood (as well as many you most certainly didn’t even know about), with working games you could play, all in chronological order starting with the year 1977.

My heart skipped a beat when I noticed the Radio Shack TRS-80 (affectionately coined the trash 80) computer. This was my first ever personal computer and where I learned my first programming language, Basic. Well, I really just skipped to the back of the Basic books that came with the computer and copied the programs written there to see what they would do. I can remember going to the last program in the book as it was the longest, spent 5 hours typing it in, only to see 3 geometric shapes appear on the screen. I was so disappointed.

Super Soul received a great response from gamers of all ages, many of whom wanted to know where they could buy the game (available here for PC, and on the Xbox Live Indie). Click here for the image gallery from the event. Next up on the Compromised Multiplayer tour is the Lexington Comic Con at the Lexington Civic Center this weekend.  Are you going?  Of course you are.

The event, which is $15 a day or $35 for the weekend, will be in the Triple Crown Pavillion at the Ramada Plaza in Louisville, KY and will be open from 2pm to midnight on Friday, from 10am to midnight on Saturday, and Sunday from 10-4.  Be sure to come by the Indie Arcade Section and say hi to your friends from Super Soul (just look for the paparazzi and flashing lights), who are continuing their whirlwind Compromised road tour leading up to the PAX Gaming Conference in Boston. You’ll be able to play the two brand new multi-player modes (Cooperative and Competitive) of Compromised before it’s released to the public.

Just in case they do have Punchout, impress the ladies and be the envy of your friends by following this helpful guide to knock that wife-beating, ear-eating, tiger loving bum out the first time:  Watch out for the first two minutes of the first round, as this is where he throws constant punches that will knock your ass out after 1 blow. You can’t even block it so don’t try, all you can do is time your dodges carefully. If you’ve made it through the initial onslaught, he’ll start to wink which foreshadows hooks from both sides that are easy to dodge. He’ll also throw a series of jabs that you’ll need to jab. When he goes back and stays still, nail him in the face for a star. Then when he’s stunned, go for it! Beware his super punches a few more times. With a few stars, you should put him out late in the third round.

Watching other players has allowed us to discover and fix some minor bugs such as players slipping through walls and enemies continuing to chase players after they’re dead and have disappeared.  When players complained that after they died it wasn’t easy to see where they re-spawned, we created a new spawn bubble around the player’s ship that lasts 5 seconds, making it easier for spawn location discovery and ship protection.

Since the launch of the game, ship bullets were controlled by the weapon directional stick and the missiles were controlled by the ship direction stick.  Player feedback made us reconsider the missiles direction to be in line with the bullets stick, so that all projectiles are controlled by one unified control. Other feedback from the multiplayer coop mode has made us consider making each players ship design different as well.

All in all, it’s these little game design elements that add up to a positive player experience, and events like Shave and a Haircut allow us to get the feedback necessary to ensure that we are creating a game that players will enjoy!

In conjunction with Mommy’s Best Games’ release of “Serious Sam Double D XXL”, Super Soul will be debuting the new beta multiplayer version of their top down shooter Compromised.  In Compromised, you are Aero, a lone defender struggling to protect your world from invading alien forces. Stranded in the wastelands of Se-Da, you must survive the enemy assault and destroy massive bosses. Collect energy and weapon upgrades to overcome the staggering odds against you as you defend your world and all that you hold dear.

Inspired by the games of yore on the like Super Metroid, Geometry Wars, and Super R-Type, the team at Super Soul have crafted a truly engaging and competitive shooter game that has gotten rave reviews from both local and national press.  With stunning graphics, responsive controls, and a heart-pounding soundtrack, Compromised provides white-knuckled action topped with adrenaline laced boss battles.

So tell that girl you have better things to do on Friday night, and we’ll see you at the Market Street Barbers!  And then of course call her back on Saturday and leave more messages.

Super Soul Article

A review of Compromised was in the weekender section of the Herald Leader as well. The online version is here:

Compromised Review

Our beta trailer on IndieGamerChick
http://indiegamerchick.com/2012/04/03/indies-in-due-time-is-back-april-3-2012-edition/