The Doldrums

My blog normally sails along quite swimmingly getting updates every few weeks or so, but currently it's in the Doldrums.

Work, family, and friends are all calling as the holiday season starts to begin so my blog will see a little less love until  mid December.

I will continue to add some minor updates to the blog and to my website, but my blog posts are going to quiet down for the time being. So for everyone who hates reading, rejoice because I wont be writing; just changing things.

I have made some changes to my website and it's layout, but it needs more polishing and content updating. You should still come here for the latest news and such.

...and now I need to update My website

So yeah I'm pretty well into updating my blog... but...

My people are telling me I should really be updating my website; which is a shame.

Websites aren't really me. Blogs fit my "I have a concrete though that I want to share with the world" mentality better than a website. I can't get websites to look perfect. I'm just not in my element making a website-

But to be fair... it would be better to give my Web games a proper home. So my next mini project when I don't want to do work that I should be doing work on will have to be my website.

Speaking of things to do while I should be working: (if you have python...)

"that from the skies, and dived for in the deep waters connecting with it. Oh, thou clear spirit, of thy teeth-tiered sharks, and the band deck"

"humorously or in the sea after them; to some hurried order by the massacre made upon them a care-killing competency. But Death plucked down some elder"

"joy-- "The ribs and terrors in his rear is the present irrespective of all her keel and her bread, and beef, and bread, during which unexpected"

Markov Chains Based on the text of Moby Dick

If you are familiar with 'horse_ebooks' you are oddly familiar with what I'm talking about. Basically I'm using the same algorithm in python generate these sentences from the entire text of Moby Dick. Why Moby Dick you ask ? Markov chains work best with a large sample pool of text and Moby Dick is the largest-ish sample of text in he English language (it's comparable to the bible in size).

So well, that's what I seeded a modified Markov chain text script I grabbed from the internet with; It was a fun "30 minute distraction" project.

... now I just need to make it into a twitter bot...

TODO! updates on my blog are incoming!

Over the next week I'm gonna be adding some additional information and old work to the blog. So this means your gonna see some new and interesting things like...

Game Projects from Years Past!
Recent Game Projects!
A Pencil and Paper RPG I made!
A Pencil and Paper RPG I'm working on!
Other things of interest that I don't know what to call!

Stay tuned!

That being said you can help me by answering a simple question;
Should I doll up my 7DFPS game?
On One Hand - I don't want to lose the 'I made it in 5 days' authenticity that it has
On the Other Hand - There are some bugs and minor things I would like to fix...(its not my standard of quality)

Anyway, I will catch you on the flip-side.

Press 'E' to save the world (7DFPS game jam)

Hey, I recently participated in the 7DFPS and worked solo to create a fps in 7 days (with some lovely music provided by the wonderful and talented Dustin Kilburn ). Lets just say in 7 days when you do all the art and sound and design, well 1 day = about 1 second of content. Although I never feel more alive when when I'm doing a game jam so it was a very positive experience. This isn't meant to be a 7dfps postmortem so that's all I'm gonna say about that.

Press 'E' to save the world (7DFPS)

The game is very simple, very short, and very slipshod; however it serves to be a nice little proof of concept for what I was going for. I've been working on the concept of a single button game for a little while now; in the coming month or so I will probably convert over some work I have in another engine (that doesn't go to web very well) and I will get another post up for that.

Update: engagement curves and game jams

Hey, so, the engagement curve post is... well its less readable than I want. As such I'm thinking I may turn it into a PDF at a later date. By later date; I mean, after this next week. Why wait a week you ask? 7 Day FPS Game Jam!

I will be participating under the name tommyhanusa and I'm working in Unity3D. I've done a few game jams before but this one should be interesting as I've never done a game jam in 7 days before (normally it's 2-3 days). Should be fun.

So updates to the engagement curve essay will be delayed for 7 days; but i should have a game to show for it.

An Introduction to the Engagement Curve

First of all, my apologies to those who don't ‘play videogames’ or are not ‘gamers’. My trade and expertise is in games and I pull many examples from them; however I have tried to incorporate some other media in here as well. But you really should at least play a few games; saying you don't play any makes you look prudish and old. I mean the ideal answer is, “I don't really play games but I guess I played a little X” or “I’m not really into games but I remember having a lot of fun with Y”. I mean you don’t have to be a ‘gamer’ or whatever mass market trash name they have for those digital experiential enthusiasts. Nobody who matters will care if you are a nerd or not but to be honest, games are kinda hip and cool and the new design of expression for the 21st century. So, now is as good a time as any to start to engage with the new culture.

What is an Engagement Curve:
Alright, an Engagement Curve is a chart of the intensity of a book, game, movie, music album or really any experience. It shows the intensity of the moment over time. And while each experience is unique there is a target or ‘ideal’ engagement curve...

...And here is what it looks like:

The Ideal curve:
It is generally recognized that most media attempts follow the same ideal curve with the same basic components. Simply put the intensity of an experience ping pongs between down moments and up moments and slowly increases over time. Also beyond simple peaks and valleys there are several known moments through an experience:

Down/Up:

People become acclimated to the level of intensity of an experience. Therefore it’s important to provide alternating high and low points to prevent them from getting over acclimated to your high point.

Aesthetic intensity:

The Y axis is named the Aesthetic intensity of the experience. Basically people come to an experience because of the feeling they think it will evoke. Aesthetic intensity is the intensity of that target feeling. Keep in mind if you don't engage with a horror experience you aren't going to engage with haunted houses, horror films and horror videogames (in general of course). So as a designer of an experience you need to understand that you shouldn’t add horror (or other feelings) to experiences that people may not want.

Entry level of engagement (red line):

This is what  the people expect as they enter an experience, you'll notice the engagement curve never drops below this line because the people are being constantly ‘surprised’ or having their initial expectation exceeded.

Intro:

The Introduction to an experience is about around setting the expectations of the audience and is about easing people into the experience. This is a short time before the hook to set the stage before anything intense begins.

Hook:

Very soon after the intro things explode into the hook; this is a moment of high intensity that grabs the audience and makes sure they want to stick around to see what happens next. It’s the first big high intensity moment.

Intermediate actions:

These are moments that bounce between low and high intensity and slowly increase in net intensity. While I show two in the example; there can be more.

Climax:

This is the moment of peak intensity; this is the big finish. This is the moment of most intensity in a media.

Denouement:

In stories this is where the main part of the story just wraps up; it’s not a point of high intensity, its just a point of bringing things to a close. It’s like the moments after last call in a bar, it’s your last drink and nothing more exciting is going to happen.

Timing is Everything:Experiences happen over time, so it’s important to take into account the speed of events in the the experience itself. This will help to inform you when things need to happen. Now these are not typically marked on an engagement curve; but they are needed for the creation of an experience. Remember this is an art not a science; things will not be exact.

Tempo:

This is the speed at which an experience happens. When reading a book hours can fly by, and in a car accident time seems to move in slow motion. This is the difference in tempo of the experience.

Take for instance games. Generally the slowest games are turn based, then followed by real time MMO esque RPGs, while faster games tend to be 3rd person Action Games and First Person Shooters and 3d and 2d Fighting games. While this could be measured in beats per minute (as in music) its most likely to be measured as the length of a beat.

Also look at Total War, its real time strategy combat is at a fairly slow tempo (like the turn-based overworld portion of the game) Conversely, X-Com : UFO Defense has turn based combat elements with real time overworld map which is slow moving (also note how both games with a real time element allow the player to dilate time; showing how slow that tempo really is)

Beat:

The smallest relevant measure of time. This is the amount of time it takes for people to measure a change in intensity of the experience. ie, if nothing happens for a beat (ie ‘you missed a beat’) the people notice that something is off. For the purposes of most experiences it should be measured in seconds.

(Sucker Punch (Infamous) stated that it took roughly 7 seconds for players to break concentration, while in Counter Strike the rounds are capped at three minutes and are often over before half of that, and hours just seem to sink away in turn based games like Civilization...)

Going Deeper:

There are some other axioms of the engagement curve remaining to be explained. I will do so, now.

Fractal

First the engagement curve is a fractal down to a small collection of beats (down to what would musically be called a measure or bar). What this means is every part of the experience you are attempting to design should follow the parts of the engagement curve. (as a moment, and as a whole)
Prelude
Secondly the engagement with the experience starts before the experience actually happens. People are thinking about and anticipating what will happen before they even start. When you hear your favorite band is coming to town for a concert you get your tickets and you get hyped and then you are counting down the days
.

The rule about breaking rules
Third some times media breaks it’s style, in music this can be a guitar solo, in games this can be a driving mission, sometimes it even incorporates a change in tempo as well. so if you’re going to remix the parts of your experience, do it in the middle. Its kinda misleading if it happens in the beginning, and really weird when it happens in the end. If you want have a misleading beginning, you may actually want to use this as a technique (Horror movies, Bioshock: Infinite, and many songs use this tactic).


Everything has curves
Finally every experience has a corresponding engagement curve. As a caveat, a structured experience dependent on player interaction does not always ‘go according to plan’. Let’s take a gander at these impending disasters...

“Overstays its welcome”

This is a common in experiences people DON’T enjoy. It even tries to be an engagement curve too; it just doesn't have enough interesting stuff. To be honest, this really just means your experience needs to be shorter; you are trying to make it live too long. For instance the obscure french film “Le Jettee” has a running time of 28 minutes and is told entirely with still images. Its basically the best slideshow you have ever seen. However if had lasted as long as “12 Monkeys”, a film 5 times as long, it would b

“This gets boring after a while.”

This is attempting to map the typical experience known as “Grinding” in the RPG community. This is basically doing the same repetitive actions for incremental progress and advancement often through extrinsic motivators (gold, exp, anything simply represented by increasing a number). The nuances of why this is bad is a whole post in and of itself. Also some people really engage with grinding; this curve is NOT representative of those people.

“That person at the party”

You’ve met that person, you know the one who’s really not that interesting. Sometimes they are really really cute so you wanted to talk to them; sometimes you were introduced and they won't stop talking; sometimes they are just plain weird... Yeah this is that engagement curve.

“Expectations are too high”
You need to market your experience correctly. If you promise people the world and you deliver them all of Eurasia, they are going to be disappointed (I was told there would be kangaroos and Mandrels, what is this crap?).

“It’s a great game/movie/ect but there is a weak start”

Some games are actually really good; but they have a slow start or punishing beginning or some films just take forever to get done with that backstory... for whatever reason this media is just slow to get going. Many times however the payoff is worth it, and often when you revisit the media do you only remember that, wow... that was slow to begin. This is also a very easy curve to make, basically string all your moments from least to greatest intensity.
Final caveat

The ideal engagement curve is kinda a lie. The ideal is almost always good but there are other engagement curves you could shoot for. For instance you may actually choose to have a slow start to mislead your audience to surprise them later. You may also may want to create a very high intensity experience and this has its own curve. It tends to work best if the audience has some expectations about what the experience is going to be and they don't need to be eased into it.

What’s the Use?
So what do you actually use an engagement curve for? it’s cool and all but how do I turn it into an actionable item? It’s not that bad. Start by making a list of moments then arrange them by their intensity. But how do I figure out how intense something is? Simple; guess and test it. Make a big guess and try out your experience. Make changes and adjustments to how you ordered things and maybe do some things differently. Iterate. I can almost guarantee things will get better. And that is why you should use the engagement curve; it gives you a baseline to measure against so you can iterate and make an experience better in an informed manner.

Exercise:
First, listen to some records by your favorite band. Analyse how they form the engagement curve in each song and through each record (not all records have a good engagement curve; if you can find them try and figure out why).

Now, make a playlist of your favorite band (or bands, but try and stay in the same genre), but this time instead of smashing together all the songs you love and putting them on shuffle, order and arrange them to form an ideal engagement curve. You may find yourself picking out some songs you didn't expect. This should be roughly 40-60 minutes in length.

Extra Credit:

Go to a concert and listen to the engagement curve generated from the set list.

In closing

So this is the first iteration of this document that I’ve written; so I want to hear what you have to say and I will make updates and changes as needed. Please comment and tell me what you think.

Nothing new to post...

I haven't had anything new to post lately.

Honestly I was knocked out for three weeks with jaw surgery. After I kept busy starting on a game project in Unity3D for the next year (turn-based games are not that hard). I also have been musing over some war-games as of late (some digital and some traditional and some more stuff). I think there are some notes and rules of thumb I want to write about... but that blog post will have to come after I have some concrete data, right now I think I just have some ideas. Basically stuff is happening but it's nothing worthy of post yet.

However I'm compelled to write something, I finally have time now, all the time in the world and I want some of it to be here. I've tried websites and blogs and honestly I don't have much in terms of multi-media website stuff to show. Basically I feel most comfortable with a blog; writing a page or five, organizing my thoughts on various topics.

And as I write I'm getting more ideas for posts. So guess the best cure for a blog slump is simply to start writing (funny how that works). I hope I will have something to post in the coming weeks.

Bioshock Infinite Reveiw

I’ll be honest, I’m not quite a fan of BioShock Infinite. To be fair it did many things right, and in the end people who play video games should play this game. Now as some people have not played the game yet I will do what seems to be the polite thing and talk about combat first, then go to the mechanics I found skillfully executed, and finally talk of the games plot. Simply put the more you read the more damning the spoilers will get (This is your spoiler warning).

The weapons of Bioshock are nothing too unexpected. Shotguns, Rifles, and Heavy Weapons all fall into place as expected with variations on those concepts. The most interesting weapon was probably the Skyhook, which turns a punch into an industrial accident and making the player a walking OSHA violation.  The sky-rails were kinda cool (more than I expected), but they honestly peaked in the middle of the game, once the game started introducing enemies that electrified the sky rails, they seemed more of a burden than an actual awesome thing. The enemies themselves  and combat counters kept my interest but the encounters were not that different. You had generic soldiers and then something special like turrets, pyro-soldiers, flying turrets, heavy soldiers, crows, and the heavy melee guys. Most of the encounters were generally the same (few were actually memorable). The vigors of the game were useful, but I quickly found myself only really using the possession vigor and then maybe something else. In a way this was an indicator of how all combat was for me. I found a style to combat that worked for me and I pretty much stuck with it though the whole game. I've heard people who go through using different combat styles and getting through just fine. In short as long as you won, it really didn't matter all that much about how you did it. In this sense the combat is well balanced, but on the other hand, it doesn't give you the affirmative feeling you get from other systems. For instance other games try to reinforce particular archetypes of play (stealth vs brawn) and this system never allowed that to happen. This ended up with me feeling like I got through, but not that I was “doing it right”. I've heard people say that combat was the worst part of Bioshock Infinite I’m tempted to agree, I wasn't having the most engagement with Bioshock when I was killing.

A balanced combat system is not easy to make and when that same devotion and fervor is put into non-combat elements those other elements stand out and blend to create a very different experience. However the main character Booker DeWitt is a violent character who solves his problems down the barrel of a gun. In a way the comparatively lackluster combat reflects the banal tone the character has developed towards violence. In a way it’s his addiction, his lowest form of action, his “I give up! I’m doing this the quick way, the easy way, the way that I know works. I’m doing it the wrong way.” Booker’s personal vice is his violent nature, and Bioshock’s unfulfilling combat is a reflection of that. I’m not having fun with the combat because Booker isn't having fun. I’m just doing what works because Booker is just doing what works. I never got to a point in combat where I was “doing it right” because whenever I was in combat that's when I’m “doing it wrong”. It’s when he’s showing compassion and patience, when he's feeling emotions and even frustrations is when he is “doing it right”.

I think this is what people really liked about Bioshock Infinite. “Doing it right” wasn't about being a violent murder, it was being a person. For the longest time an FPS was about solving problems looking down the barrel of a gun. In Bioshock Infinite that preconceived notion of the  first person perspective game is turned it on its head. It uses the first person perspective to show poignant emotional moments through the eyes of a man. It builds a relationship with a character that is deep and caring. It does what the first person perspective has been the best at in other media, It shows a world through the eyes of a person. And Bioshock takes it a step further, it uses the preconceived notion of an FPS to reinforce the experience of being Booker. It puts you in a constant struggle between violence and virtue just as the game revolves around combat and character.

At the core of Bioshock doing things right is the character Elizabeth. The blend of mechanics, both simple and extravagant come together to make her the most realistic companion in an FPS and one of the most enchanting characters seen in video games as a media. The extensive work that was put into letting Elizabeth go to any environment and stay engaged with the world brought to life a playful companion enthusiastic about the world around her. As the player searched environments, she searched as well, providing currency to the player in his times of need (particularly after searching an area for items, or visiting a vending machine and not making a purchase). Even when Booker was at his worst and in combat she still aided the player, helping by providing needed resources such as salts, health and ammunition. These minor touches made her presence felt, and more importantly, not felt, for the moments she was taken away. She even helped lead and guide the player always staying toward the path the player needed to go. Elizabeth did this with emotion as well, being joyful with freedom, angered with betrayal, and resolute with revelations. I’m truly excited to see where things can go if characters are treated with the same attention to detail as Elizabeth was.

The attention to detail in this game was not limited to characters, the plot itself was quite well executed. Irrational has a tendency to draw from 20th century literature for its narrative inspiration in the Bioshock series. Here, instead of a critical objectivist narrative poking at the smartest economists in the room, the team moves their sardonic eye from philosophy to american exceptionalism painted on the backdrop of an existential tragedy. If “Atlus Shrugged” by Ayn Rand was the literary inspiration for the original Bioshock “Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead” by Tom Stoppard is the literary inspiration for Bioshock Infinite. Honestly, the parallels are stunning, especially compared to Lutece sibling’s overly witty dialog, to their most determinist coin flipping, to the important choices the player makes.

To put things bluntly, both Bioshock Infinite and “Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead” are both existential nightmares. Guildenstern and Rosencrantz can’t do anything to alleviate what will be their eventual death. The choices made will not affect the predetermined outcome. It doesn't matter if you throw the ball at the Vox Populi. It doesn't matter if you choose the bird or the cage. It doesn't matter if you want to be non-violent or not. It doesn't matter if you use the shotgun or sniper rifle. It doesn't matter which vigor you use, what style of game you play. It doesn't matter that you know the door code is “0451” you still need to pick up the piece of paper. It doesn't matter that you know you have no choice you still have to make the motions. You are trapped in a strictly determined cage of causality.

This is why I’m not a fan of Bioshock Infinite. It’s because I believe the choices you make determine your character and how you deserve to be treated. I disagree with this game on a purely philosophical basis (honestly it’s a first). However it’s execution of its experience is better than what I imagined it could be. It’s a sarcastic sacrifice of every freedom a person could have in laputan city of american exceptionalism.  And yet even for my disdain of its philosophy, I find myself captivated by its charm.

I definitely recommend this game even at its $60 price tag. A must play for fans of single player shooters and easily one of the best single player experiences of the year.

My Jams

As I migrate the stuff from my website I figured I should add a post from a part I called "The Back Page".

It's about music.

I like music, but I have no idea what it is about how it works or any of that stuff. It's complete magic to me.

So here are some links to bands that I have seen in concert and really enjoyed:

Reignwolf at Bumbershoot '12 and The Neptune Theater
This guy is a jazz/metal combo that is unexpectedly accessible.
Basically this guy teaches the devil how to play the guitar. His shows are something amazing. You need to be there.

M83 at Bumbershoot '12
I'm a sucker for bright flashing neon lights, and these guys put on a good show.
My friends and I almost died getting crushed in a crowd, but it was worth it.

LIGHTS at Bumbershoot '12
Probably the best artist you haven't heard of yet. If you like pop music; definitively check her out.
She has 2 albums out and her most recent album completely bucked a sophomore slump, with a dirtier more dub-step sound from her first album.

The Hives at Showbox Market
The garage band that needs no introduction! Their live show has so much energy. It's great.

Bloc Party at Showbox sodo
OK so the opener was... on a different wave-length; but the live show was great. They really know how to do a great show.
I was gonna take someone out to this show but they flaked; apparently though all my friends are Bloc Party fans so we all met up during the opening band's set. It was a pretty awesome turn of events.

The Grizzled Mighty at The Neptune Theater

They aren't the first band you would name with a guy on a guitar and a chick on drums. However this duo really creates an unforgettable show. Some of the best Rock I've seen in a good while.

The Young Evils at The Neptune Theater
With a name like The Young Evils and songs like "Dead Animals" I bet you aren't expecting to hear a catchy indie-rock doo-wop song. But you really should, it's great. 

A War Games Essay

This is an essay I wrote for one of my classes regarding war games and serious games. While I normally despise such academic papers as overly formal and dry, I very much enjoyed the topic and research involved with this paper.


The use of war games for the development regarding strategies and people.

War games have been a popular hobby for many gamers. From digital games such as Star-Craft to the traditional fantasy war games such as War-Hammer 40k they have provided endless hours of entertainment. However, there is another much more serious side to this pastime. This essay reviews the origins of war games, their evolution and steadfast popularity in the development of strategies and training for the military and more recently business. While some may scoff at the idea that one could 'play war' and have it translate to effective real-world battle strategy, the military and defense departments around the world do not. 

An important concept regarding war games is the size and scope of the war game. The history of war games generally expands in size and scope as countries are able to bring more and more people into the conflict. As the size of the battle being represented though the war game increases the mechanics of the war game start to change. More things must be simulated through the games mechanics such as environmental characteristics, economics, even the politics of surrounding nations. The earliest of these games generally only dealt with military intelligence, objectives and resources. By the 1800s to the 1930s war-games generally concerned themselves with the environmental, logistical and economic impact the actions in the war game could effect. By the 1950s war games started to become much more in the scope of global affairs, and included political motivations and additional sides besides just the attacker and aggressor ( Weiner 13). 

The exact origin of war games may be impossible to pinpoint, however M.G. Weiner describes that there are four commonly accepted views as to how they most likely got their start. His first opinion is that they started from generals and their advisers drawing into the sand to plan the major moves of an operation. They may even have elected someone to act as an opponent and create counter moves to the battle plan. Another related way that war games could have come about was through similar scrawls in the sand to describe to troops and commanders of their role in military operations. It is also possible that war games originated from a more game like scenario where they were developed to keep generals skills sharp and to occupy their time. The fourth and final way is that war games completely originated from leisure past times initially derived from enjoyment (Weiner 2-3). What is known for certain is that by the 1st century ad Romans used ‘sand tables’ to predict possible military scenarios for their military strategies (McLeroy).

One of the first documented war games appeared in Europe during the Middle-Ages in the form of chess. The way chess was played at the time was very similar to the way military conflicts of the day played out. However by the 17th century most war games were modifications of chess, but were not useful for military training since warfare had changed and they were lacking in the critical quality of realist conflict resolution. Simply put the game mechanics of these early war games did not reflect the mechanics of warfare.

By the early 19th century Prussian/German military commanders who studied actual battles started developing war games that had game mechanics that mirrored the situations and outcomes of actual battles (Dunnigan 190-91). Roger Smith, Chief Scientist and Technology Officer for the Army's Program Executive Office for Simulation, Training, and Instrumentation, stated that some of the greatest innovations of German war games was how they used statistics and numbers to resolve battlefield actions instead of more traditional methods (McLeroy).

The military's initial documented use of war games started with the German/Prussian military's creation of paper war games. These war games started with a military writer in the 1700s by the name of Gerog Vinturinus. His initial game had 3600 squares on a board with different squares representing different types of terrain. He also published a very detailed 60 page rule book as to how his game should be played. The next Prussian game of note was made by Georg Leopold Von Reisswitz, the Prussian war counselor of Breslav in the year 1811. This transferred war-game rules to a sand table at 1:2373 scale and had rules for troop movement that was unrestricted by squares. In 1824 his son, Von Reisswitz Jr. came up with his own war-game. Von Reisswitz Jr. is often to be considered the father of modern war games with his innovations such as red and blue square units as well as commander units, the use of dice, an umpire, and rules for unit command. When the chief general staff of the German army Von Meffling was initial told of this game he was skeptical, but after a demonstration he became of its largest supporters. However, the game itself was long and tedious to play (Weiner 6-7). These games proved their effectiveness as an aid for military training in the six weeks war with Austrian in 1866 and the Franco-Prussian war in 1870-71. After these wars other countries started taking note of the Kriegspiel variants that were being used by the Prussian military (Michael 52). In 1876, Von Verdy du Vernois simplified the rules and allowed for greater player freedom. This created division between rules heavy ‘ridged war game’ vs. tactical freedom and experienced umpire based ‘free war game’. These divisions still exist in the war games even today (Weiner 7).

After World War 2 operations research was the main type war-game played. This was generally larger scale and included logistics instead of just battle scenarios (Dunnigan 192). For determining the outcome of battles rigid war games that did not need a experienced general as a referee became favored to moderated ones since they offered a degree of consistency that free-form war games did not. Developments in computing made in the 1950s made it possible to carry out detailed computations quickly to do multiple computations of a game thus preventing the games from becoming to tedious (Weiner 6-7). operational research war games were also being developed such as ATLAS. This computer OR program was run by the Department of Defense in various versions starting in the 60s and continued to the 1980s (Michael 53).The RAND Stratagey Assesment Center (RSAC) was developed in the 1970s to evaluate the possible outcomes for scenarios in which the Soviet Union wished to enhance their prospects as a nation and the United States was to deter nuclear war at the lowest effort possible.(Davis 7).

RSAC purposes to do this with automated war gaming (Davis 12). Automated war games are played out through AI and have distinct advantages over traditional war games. The four main issues with non-automated war games were, the time it took to play, lack of interest after several iterations, distaste for highly structured rules, cost of maintaining humans and experts. Have lead to the need to develop automated war games (Davis 16). Previous to 1983 computers were not advanced enough to be used for war games, but by 1983 AI could be used for this for several reasons. Rule based programs could be developed in which cause effect relationships between the moves, stratageies and components of a large scale war game or operational research could be evaluated. Computers also had developed complex enough pattern matching software to try to guess how a country would react to given scenarios via their past actions. This was important because larger scale conflicts of the period required strategies that could take into account the actions of multiple players in a given or purposed conflict. Computer languages had also advanced to the point where it was easier to train and develop people to write programs for computers even if they did not have a programming degree. Finally chess playing computer algorithms provided a basis for computers to make semi intelligent decisions based on sorting through all the possible moves and outcomes and choosing the best move (Davis 18). The Advanced Studies department of the Raytheon Missile Systems Division also created a simulation of air battles, space missions, missile exchanges, disarmament inspection systems and international political-economic competitions during the 1960s (Michael 53).

By the 1980s the military started using networked games to allow soldiers to work with each other and against each other in teams for training purposes. From this not only flight simulators were created but also tank and Humvee simulators (Michael 55). However by the turn of the millennium the defense department started turning to the entertainment games industry for additional technology to use in their military simulations. DARWARS, a defense program, has developed war games such as modifications of commercial games to train soldiers how to survive convoy ambushes (Michael61). According to business development manager at MultiGen-Paradigm Inc, Juliana m. Slye, there is greater sophistication in military products than in the games. The military’s war games also are focused differently than consumer products. Consumer products are often only concerned with the end engagement and have a very limited scope. They also contain many optimizations and are focused on the fun factor. When converting these games to military simulations there is trouble with the fact that the games are made with technology optimized for only the end engagement. Thus this means that flight simulation technology isn’t made to work with first person shooter technology and there is no technology developed for the advanced logistics required by the military. For instance there is no game technology that integrates the logistics of launching an f18 military aircraft from an aircraft carrier. Also military simulation needs to show the interaction of a large number of systems such as the ship, the airplanes, and also the tanks and vehicles on the ground. Also no commercial games simulate all the preparation and down-time and logistics in a real battle. Off the shelf technology developed for games has reduced the cost it takes to develop for these technologies but it still requires full scale development to develop a state of the art military simulation. Rear Adm. Fred Lewis (ret.) executive director Nation Training Systems Association states that there is no guidelines as to what should be taken from the civilian entertainment field which makes the integration of such technology difficult to gauge. Tim Palmer chief technical officer of CG2 states that the technology is changing so fast that it is out pacing their predictions (Drumheller).

By the 1990s and millennial era the technology for advanced war games became accessible to more than the US military. War games, with modified mechanics to represent the corporate world are also used to play out scenarios in US business. For training, these war games let managers implement strategies they have only hear about in class room training courses. These also help to enlighten the lower level workers with regards to what their management is dealing with in regards to things like unproductive work or cutting costs (Marshall). While these war games do not replace business consultants, they are able to help in rapidly prototyping new business strategies. Also, just like their military counterparts, these war games are increasingly becoming automated and being used for training of lower level business people who need to understand the logistics. These war games allow the employees to understand the kinds of logistics they may be dealing with as well as the sort of random occurrences and natural disasters that can impact sales and profits. These kind of simulations also track the strategies used and try to get ‘smarter’ from tactics that have been enacted. They also include the possibility of inputting real world data into the war game to be used as a simulation tool. The users of these war games and simulation programs do stress however that they do not want to take the decision making out of the hands of the people. The cost of these war games is also very expensive in excess of a million dollars for some larger companies like AT&T and $100,000 for corporate war games on the low end (Bulkeley). War game development evolution shows no signs of slowing down as its small but important consumer base always needs to gauge and simulate all manners of conflicts.

War games have had a steadfast popularity for a multitude of reasons, but there is always one main reason that they will never go out of favor. They are cheaper than full scale operations or, in the military’s case, wars. The time, money, and resources are much smaller than the cost it takes to run a full scale military training exercises (190 Dunnigan). Beyond this one simple and undeniable fact Weiner in 1959 outlines some additional reasons as to why war games have uses. He first identifies them as valuable training aids which can help with multiple tasks to-days military must undertake. One is communicating orders and procedures to troops as well as calculating planning and logistics both of which current simulations are designed to help. He also denotes that the use of time weather and local conditions are an important factor that make war games important as a portion of training. The second reason he believes that war games are are important is that they allow the military commanders to see things in a different point of view and play from the side of the enemy. Weiner believes that this allows people to see holes in their operations they may not have considered. One of the most important reasons Weiner has for war games being needed by the military is their ability to plan for new tactics, doctrines and military systems. Through the use of hypothetical war games relationships of units and systems can be discovered to help in the creation of new strategies and tactics. Through playing the same situation over again with one major change to see the difference in outcomes it can help project the needed forces for future scenarios. Deployment of plans and strategies can also be tested in multiple scenarios allowing the testing of tactics without the threat of losses that are normally incurred. All of this coalesces into Weiners’ final point that war games can be used to develop theory. War games allow commanders to see the greater structure in war that most generals only could learn otherwise by fighting large scale wars (Weiner 25).

The RAND Strategy Assessment Center (RSAC) does exactly what Weiner has purposed. Simply put they develop AI, or a process of strategies to play automated war games under multiple conditions to determine the most effective strategies. They then use this information to formulate actions in the field. This is a cheap and effective way for the United States to test strategies multiple times, under multiple conditions to determine their effectiveness. This system is also used to test concepts and strategies with regards to possible enemy actions if certain scenarios are enacted. These type of things were used to help predict soviet actions during the cold war and test the possibility of escalation between the countries (Davis).

From war games vast history, evolution and continued use we can see that war games are in fact an important part of planning for large organizations. The analysis here proves that war games, while a popular leisure for some gamers, is also a very serious form of entertainment. 



Biliography:

Bulkeley, William M. "Management: Business games attract big warriors. " Wall Street Journal 22 Dec. 1994, Eastern edition: National Newspaper Abstracts: 3. ProQuest.com Web. 11 Feb. 2011.

Davis, Paul K., and James A. Winnefeld. The Rand Strategy Assessment Center Santa Monica, CA: Rand, 1983. Print.

Drumheller,Michelle. "Military simulations: More than entertainment. " National Defense 1 Nov. 1999. ProQuest. Web. 11 Feb. 2011.

Dunnigan, James F. Wargames Handbook, Third Edition: How to Play and Design Commercial and Professional Wargames. San Jose, Ca.: Writers Club, 2000. Print.

Marshall, Jeffrey and Maselli, Marigrace. "Computer Simulations Offer War Games' for Bankers. " American Banker (pre-1997 Fulltext) 23 Jan. 1989 ProQuest.com Web. 11 Feb. 2011.

McLeroy, C.. "History of Military Gaming. " Soldiers 1 Sep. 2008: Research Library, ProQuest.com Web. 11 Feb. 2011. 

Michael, David. Serious Games: Games That Educate, Train and Inform. Boston, MA: Thomson Course Technology, 2006. Print.

Weiner, M. G. "An Introduction to War Games | RAND." RAND Corporation. RAND.org Aug. 1959. Web. 11 Feb. 2011. .

Block (An FPS in Zero)

I like FPS games. Yeah I know about Call of Duty, and Yes it does totally dominate the genre.

However, my work at DigiPen has me make games, and when I got the chance to make whatever  wanted I decided to make a puzzle FPS called block. And it was the first FPS made in DigiPen's internally developed Zero Engine. So I wrote a lot of code from scratch and honestly the controls were not as good as I hoped. But for a game made in a month or so with little to go off of, it was a good proof of concept. I have some fond memories of the project.

(P.S. This was from my website, if you saw it there before)

Game summary
Block is a game where the player manipulates the world through placing and removing blocks within the environment Using this ability they need to navigate challenges and puzzles withing the game world.


Playtest results
The game simply was tedious in its first iteration; it was a long slog of block placing because simply people saw the answer to the puzzle and then needed to sit back and built it. This is hardly idea for a super awesome puzzle game.


What I changed
Simply making the player build less seemed to be the correct answer. the action of placing blocks themselves is not an autotelic experience its simply a means to an end. Therefor I made changes to minimize and speed up the block placing as well as fine tuning the controls.


What went right
The game has a wow factor; people look at it and immediately get a sense of wonder an possibilities This was by far one best parts of working on this game since it was just cool to work on. Also defining blocks to regions helped guide players as to where they were supposed to be looking and helped subtly lead the players to their goal.


What went wrong
The block placing and regions internal code wasn't flexible; it was hard to make changes and get things working the way they should've. Often small changes meant large rewrites of code and lots of wasted time.


What I learned
Simply this was a project where there just wasn't time to further refine where the mechanics needed to be for the concept to be viable. Also the level design challenges would've bogged down development considerably. Also I believe there is a way for this mechanic to work but the production schedule just doesn't allow for more time to experiment and iterate at this time.

MDA: Going Beyond Alchemy

Some say game design is an alchemy, a blend of art and science. However, others dare to question that sediment! I am not one who questions the inevitable evolution of design to a chemistry, but the application of a science with such an entropy. Regardless, there is a benefit to those creators, those authors of games, in the study of such an imperfect chemistry. 

So here is an old start to an essay regarding MDA (if you're panicking as to what that is just read the intro below). Ideally I was going to write much more on the topic; however my passion for game development outweighs my minimal dislike of how some used of MDA. I live for what I love, not for what I mildly dislike.
Luckily, I don't have to worry so much about it as one of my friends Victor Cecci is on the case. While here I have a slightly critical take, he is currently in the midst of writing a paper on the topic. I've gotten to look at where he's taking it and it's really going much farther for him than I hoped to deliver.
I'm positing this however to really try to increase the exposure of MDA and hopefully generate some interest in his work. Honestly, I have found MDA as a great (even if imperfect) language to talk about games. I hope you find this brief overview interesting and pursue more on the topic. (Also start bothering Victor to finish his paper, He's gonna do a great job and I want to watch him panic a little as he starts to realize just how helpful and informative this paper will be to designers, developers and critics of video games.)

Here is the old post from my website:

Intro:

I study games in a production oriented game-school. Much of the analysis done there is based around a particular understanding of the MDA framework (from seeing and reading about Marc LeBlanc talks about MDA I feel that this understanding is different from his own). I think that this understanding of MDA as it has been presented is vague, is somewhat impractical for the realities of development.

As harsh as it sounds, my goal isn't to remove MDA from the curriculum; it’s to change the way MDA is being presented and help it become stronger and more useful. Simply the current form is imperfect, and I want to try to improve and refine it. As a matter of fact MDA as it is currently presented is useful, just not for a production environment.

A diamond in the rough (MDA theory):

MDA strands for Mechanics (the rules of a game), Dynamics (those rules in motion; groups of mechanics interacting), and Aesthetics (what emotions and feelings players get from the dynamics). The summation of a game's Aesthetics are a breakdown of why it is “fun” or “engaging” to play. This allows for a specific description of an experience beyond a simple metric (ie it was kind of fun).

Essentially all game designers approach games by building mechanics which create dynamics which create aesthetics. Players experience games in reverse; they feel the aesthetics, understand the dynamics and (maybe) understand the mechanics. Players often have a very hard time seeing all the mechanics behind the dynamics and aesthetics that are experiencing. Game designers have a hard time seeing how mechanics will affect the dynamics and aesthetics of the games they are creating (mechanics do not translate 1:1 with specific aesthetics).

MDA can be used to break down and describe what a game is (or even what a genre is). Once a game or prototype is created and its prominent Aesthetics are identified you can make changes to the Mechanics and Dynamics to accentuate these features. This will make the game more appealing (better) to people who enjoy that aesthetic.

Each game has 2-3 core aesthetics

A game will create certain aesthetics in greater proportion than others. Thus players who want these aesthetics will like the game. Most games or game genres have 2-3 core aesthetics or aesthetics that are consistently reinforced through the game. Other aesthetics may appear from time to time; but in the end

The Mechanics, Dynamics, and Aesthetics can all be described as discrete parts.

A game’s Mechanics are essentially described as your rules. In an RPG his would be your stats and your derived stats, in a it’s how fast you move, it’s the particular set of rules by which enemy detection happens.

A game’s Dynamics are how your rules work together. In an RPG this could be things like character builds, or in a fighting game combos, or in an RTS it can be the interplay of limited resources requiring expansion/extermination/exploration to control more resources.

A game’s Aesthetics are the feelings that players have when playing your game. For instance particular games may be constructed to recreate the fantasy of sailing a boat; having dynamics to simulate the weather, the state of your rigging, and an environment similar to the ocean or coastline. An aesthetic or feeling of challenge may be created (regardless of actual difficulty) when a game becomes time limited, requires multiple objectives to be completed, and perhaps has additional consequences for failure.

A list of Aesthetics

Provided below is a list and description of specific aesthetics that games have been identified. There is the possibility of additional aesthetics (names used by the paper ‘MDA: A Formal Approach to Game Design and Game Research’ will appear in parentheses if they differ, an asterisk will appear if the aesthetic is unique to this particular interpretation of MDA).

Sensation

The Aesthetic of Sensation is created when a game has a strongly desirable component based upon the 5 senses. Often this is a visual and/or auditory component of the game that is particularly desirable. Some games that use sensation as a core aesthetic are Superbrothers: Sword and Sorcery EP, BIT.TRIP BEAT and BIT.TRIP RUNNER, and Dear Esther.

Fantasy

The Aesthetic of Fantasy is created when a game tries to recreate the fantasy of a particularly cool persona. Often this is the “Hollywood version” of a particular job, like a special operations soldier, of fighter pilot. It can also be something actually fantastical like fighting in a giant robot, piloting a spaceship against all odds, being a vampire, slaying dragons or attending an idealized version japanese highschool with magical powers. This also includes games that are simulations; or try to accurately recreate a specific experience (like conducting a train, or being a pilot) or simulate a fantastical experience like a zombie apocalypse. Many games have a Fantasy element, but examples would be Amnesia: The Dark Descent, Ikaruga , ARMA and Day Z, and DEFCON.

Narrative

The Aesthetic of Narrative is created when a game contains drama surrounding their characters. essentially the interactions between the characters (and possibly the player) make up a significant desirable component. Simply you want to see what happens next with the characters as you progress through the game. Some games with a strong Narrative Aesthetic would be Catherine, Neverwinter Nights 2, Dragon Age, Metal Gear Solid 4.

Challenge

The Aesthetic of Challenge is created when a game creates perceived difficulty in the tasks the player is asked to perform. This may not be actual difficulty the player just needs to feel as if they are completing a difficult task and the completion of the task is rewarding in and of itself. Examples of games with a heavy Challenge Aesthetic would be Portal, SpaceChem, Super Meat Boy, Legend of Grimrock.

Fellowship

The Aesthetic of Fellowship is created when a game fosters a team work or community focus. You often see this in games where players are massively working together. An example of this is in most if not all ARGs and MMORPGs, However you can specifically see this in a lot of Co-op modes in games.

Discovery

The Aesthetic of Discovery is created when a game features finding things that are new. Often you see this in games that require actual exploration of new territory. However it can also be about finding new characters, items ect. While all games contain some elements of discovery, it’s most often a core Aesthetic if you find yourself wondering, what’s over there? I wonder who/what that is? Metroidvanias fall into this category as does Myst, or the Hexen series; I would also argue that dungeon crawlers with random maps or roguelikes also fall into this category (A Valley Without Wind is another good example).

Expression

The Aesthetic of Expression is created when a game focuses on the creation of a personal identity. This is generally seen when you create a character that the world responds to, even if these wishes aren't completely in line with what the player themselves might do (the character takes on a life of its own/ the player starts role-playing). The later Elder Scrolls series typically does this (as does Fallout 3), as does Dragon Age Origins and to an extent the Mass Effect series.

Abnegation (submission)

 The Aesthetic of Abnegation is created when a game focuses on the player doing repetitive actions for an incremental improvement or reward. Essentially the player gets rewarded from working an assembly line fashion. Games like Borderlands, Castlevania: Harmony of Despair, and Dungeon siege 2 are an example of this.

Competition*

The Aesthetic of Competition is created when a game focuses on the players (controlled by other people or a computer) working against each other to complete a goal. Basically it’s a game with multiple players under the same or similar rules where one player or group of player “Wins” and others “Lose”. Most fighting games, and multiplayer shooters and racing games have Competition as a core Aesthetic.

Dominance *

The Aesthetic of Dominance is created when the strict rules of the game create a struggle between the player and “the game” or the rules of the game. This is often seen where the often absurd difficulty of the game itself is seen as intentional and a part of the game. Examples of this would be 'I wanna be the guy' or Dark souls.

Kinesthetics *

The Aesthetic of Kinesthetics is created when the game causes the player to extend into actions of the game. Much like driving a car, in which the car becomes part of one's identity. Simply the physical actions are tuned in such a way that the player begins to innately identify with the games avatar or the actions. Examples of this would be DDR or Mario Bros.

Mastery *

The Aesthetic of Mastery is created when the game enforces replayability by setting up the game so that the player does better during each session through. Essentially practice makes perfect. Often this can be seen with competitive games, but also with games that have a difficult execution challenge (ie have a large difficulty). Examples of games that include Mastery are Rainbow 6: Vegas 2, Counter-strike, Starcraft, and Chess (Many sports fall into this category too)

Growth *

The Aesthetic of Growth is created when the game has the player watch and effect something that develops over time. Generally there is a sense of indirect control (or unknown control) of a things progression. Examples of this would be the Sims, Harvest Moon and those Tamogachi from years past.