ShadowDance

Trip wrote:Нямам представа дали е за тук, обаче товае страхотно. Онлайн курс (вече приключил) на гейм дизайнер на тема "Game Balance". Преди това е водил друг, на тема общ гейм дизайн. Нещата не са толкова мистични, та да не ги разбирам аз, но ги е систематизирал и обяснил чудесно, докъдето съм стигнал (Level 3).

Martix wrote:Ето още малко game design. Правейки си годишната проверка на campaigncreation.org, попаднах на доста интересна тема от легендарния modder IskatuMesk. Темата като цяло е за следващия му проект(stand alone UDK remake на Loladins of Legends), но има интересни разсъждения на тема general game design в частта "Actual & Implied Concept", както и доста интересни разсъждения за развитието на гейминга като цяло.

http://www.campaigncreations.org/forum/ ... =63&t=5370

Spoiler: show

I like to think of my cats when it comes to games. Most humans would like to think of themselves as intellectually superior to cats, but I often find that I can predict the mentality of game playing oxygen-consuming bags of wasted flesh to furry, cuddly hairballs with razor-sharp teeth. Cats are often easily amused, but get bored easily. If we tackle the cat's mindset when they are at play, we can see some very basic traits very often, almost always, echoed by humans. For this example, we'll assume that our polar to the cat is an actual human and not a mindless, skinless, casual refuse.

The first element of our considerations is Gratification as a whole. Gratification could be considered a sensation of accomplishment, but in our design we classify it as "an emotional response", e.g. extracting some kind of genuine response from the player. In this specific instance, the cat feels gratification when it gets a hold of the toy (in this case a long string). But the elation of that satisfaction depends on many elements. First, how "new" is it? The cat becomes increasingly disinterested in a string dangled in front of it the longer it's dangled. Repeditive actions draw upon what I imagine as a resource pool of attention and "giving a shit". It's very easy to bore a cat by just dangling a string in front of it. But some cats, like all casuals, are easily amused because they are either dumb as bricks or have the attention span of a gnat. They may look away, look back, suddenly realize there's a string, and flail at it, forgetting they've repeated this exact same action for the last 15 minutes.

Не е много по темата, но не съм сигурен, че има достатъчен интерес за отделна тема за дизайн.

edit: Продължавайки да чета открих, че освен дизайн в статията са засегнати и други неща.

Spoiler: show

"Telling" the audience what's going on would be using Actual elements to Actually tell them what's going on. By implying things, through action, dialogue, and other elements, we allow people the breathing room to think. Alice does this in many ways because it presents the worlds and your unrelated challenges in conquering them. Curiosity for the worlds and the means behind their twisted demeanor gives room to think about Alice and the challenges she's facing as she fights her own mind. This is implied storytelling at work.

A tell-tale sign of weak storytelling overall is when you can't make a bad decision. Starcraft 2 is a good example. It rewards you even if you make the "wrong" decision. There is no "wrong" choice. That's not how the world works, it breaks realism and is a hollow effort to make casuals feel happy about themselves. - it is instantly gratifying you until you realize that you couldn't lose at all. I made the wrong decision when I tried to copulate with a wood chipper and I paid the price. SWTOR, a very sloppily written/voiced MMO by Bioware, gets pretty close to this level of awful storytelling on its own even though Bioware, back in the days of Neverwinter Nights and before, was once considered a company capable of strong writing. When you begin your project you must enter a mindset that you are not telling a story, you're presenting a story.

Spoiler: show

But it's hard to define elements of sophisticated maps as "Implied". The definition for "Implied" would be more or less to say, "here's a realm, you have X objective, go get it tiger." While the "Actual" design would be, "Here's a realm, you need to kill 10 guards to alert the defenses so they move away from N objective, push X switch, walk down corridor, avoid the fire traps, don't get hit by the spikes," ect. with alerts for each and every single thing.

But the latter could be construed as briefing or summary material as well, this depends on the deployment. Other than the warning about obvious environmental hazards. Where we draw the line in this regard really depends on how stupid we think our audience is. I would expect most people to avoid something that is sharp, pointy, on fire, coated in blatantly acidic or dangerous substances, contains the Apple logo or was made in China.