Lazy Design

     I understand making a game is hard, but you seriously cannot cut corners during the process. It's called being lazy. Granted, laziness might have actually invented a few things (i.e. the TV remote), but so far it hasn't helped game design. From what I have seen, there are several ways a game can be lazily designed, and when it happens, the player's experience is dwindled down to absolute boredom from lack of engagement.

      Ever notice how a mob looks just like another mob, just purple instead of red? This is what we call a “palette swap.” The model isn't changed except for the color textures. In some games this is acceptable due to limitations, but the majority of companies can do better. They can have a different model built for the enemy, even if it looks a little similar. Giving them attack variety helps as well. Maybe make them do something crazy such as wield two weapons and attack twice as fast.

      Another example of being lazy is repeating boss fights. Sure, your typical first boss might go across the screen a few times, fall down, take a hit, then repeat the same mistake two more times before it dies, but this better not happen again. When it happens again with a very slight difference in tactics, it just becomes boring. You can kill that guy with a glazed over look on your face. You could probably beat him up with your eyes shut! Bioshock Infinite did something like this with a boss. They have you fight a spirit who sends waves of enemies after you and periodically attacks you herself. They have her show up once, and again, and once more. If her tactics were a lot more varied between encounters (or you only had to fight her once), she would be a good boss. However, she is remembered for the wrong reasons.

      Does that level look a little familiar? It has a night filter so that it takes place at night as opposed to the day? That is a level repeat. Keeping with the theme of the world is fine, but making it look virtually the exact same with a moon instead of a sun isn't viable. Just level repeating in general gets annoying. I noticed in One Finger Death Punch the scenery changes and the game modes have some variety, but there are a ton of Mob Rounds and too many levels to progress through. It is at this point I just want it to be over with.

      How about those mobs that die in one hit? You aren't necessarily overpowered. The AI just sucks. Terribly. They have bad accuracy, run straight for you, and take too long to aim. These enemies provide virtually no entertainment other than free potshots left and right. That gets old after five or so minutes. Don't be afraid to make the player have to change their strategy to win a fight. 

 

      Music? Yes, even music can be lazily done. Just look at the Rambo game that recently released. There is a part where this epic flourish of music comes in, then fades out only to repeat itself on an endless loop. Feels like the developers found an mp3 file with a nice part, ripped it out, then slapped it into the game with little though given. 

 

      Story? Even the story can suffer. In some cases, having a careless narrative hardly affects the game, especially if it is in a genre with very little emphasis on story. Story behind Pac-Man? Beats me. He munches on dot shaped crackers until he runs across a Power Pellet (a.k.a. Jawbreakers), then sends those ghosts back to hell? No clear narrative, but no one cares. It worked for that game. As for other games that try to rush the story or fail to explain certain events, those are the lazy narratives. Rushing a story might make sense in an action game where you need to know what is happening quick so you can jump back in the gameplay, but skipping critical details leaves the player lost. Best bet is to make the story simple and easy to convey. If it is meant to be deep and emotional, take things slow and carefully explain everything. Spewing out random words with no coherent meaning makes no sense and hoping the player will figure it out later doesn't help matters.

      Developers get lazy from time to time because either the game they are working on has a short window of time before it gets released or the employees might be working on a game they really dislike. It might be their job, but they're mostly artists. Artists are just naturally lazy and need a schedule to keep up their work. Even I get lazy and procrastinate with stuff I don't like doing such as making this model chair. As of writing, I have blueprints, but no actual model standing yet. Which reminds me, I should get to work on that... tomorrow.

List of Game Related Media now available in the Magale Library

Books

Bold Visions: the Digital Painting Bible

The Art of Blizzard Entertainment

Game Coding Complete

Digital Painting techniques

Game Design Workshop

Level Up!

Drawing Basics and Video Game Art

Reality is Broken

Challenges for Game Designers

Drawing and Painting Fantasy Landscapes and Cityscapes

The Mac is not a Typewriter (Graphic Design related)

The Non-Designers Design Book (Graphic Design related)

DVDs

The Illusionist: DVD

The Triplets of Belleville

The Secret of Kells

*An extensive e-book library of game related books will also be ordered soon.

Cutscenes: When are they necessary?

     Cinematics are stunningly pretty. Just look at Pixar; they make pretty 3D movies all the time. Games implement cutscenes in the form of cinematics just like Pixar, just not throughout the entire game. That would be absurdly expensive. Cutscenes are implemented as a storytelling device. They can look like an animated movie in some cases, but they have this little habit of stopping gameplay. 

 

      The worst cutscenes happen frequently throughout the game. It ruins pacing by acting like a roller coaster that goes up, gets stuck at the top, then falls down and goes up another incline, stops, then falls down again. I'm certain that the attention span of the player plummets much like this roller coaster when the cutscenes show up. Not to say that cutscenes should just be removed from all games, but if the scene stops gameplay for too long, the player will start to lose interest and put down the controller. You want to remind the player that they need to keep their hands on the controller just in case they need to start playing again. 

 

      The best cutscenes I have seen are in Half-Life 2. There isn't any widescreen black bars showing up at the top and bottom, control does not leave the player unless there is a real reason for it such as the character being immobilized, and the dialogue goes with subtitles and explains what is happening in a clear and concise manner. Sure, the action part of this acclaimed shooter might not be happening during this cutscene, but the player still assumes control of Gordon Freeman. Movement is still as free as it is during normal gameplay and shooting is still allowed (just don't shoot poor Eli Vance).

      Another good example of cutscenes done right is Final Fantasy 9. Cutscenes are basically still in game with dialogue boxes and characters move wherever they like. Once the dialogue ends, a little white gloved hand appears on top of the main character and the player immediately knows he/she is in control again. This game has very few cinematics and requires no vocal dialogue to convey the story.

      A bad example of cutscenes would be Okami. As much as I love this game, it has this big gaping flaw: the introduction. Okami tries to explain its premise and setting, but takes way too long to do it. It takes over 20 minutes to elaborate on what is going on! Not only that, the entire sequence cannot be skipped! The best way to fix this is to cut it down to 3-5 minutes, then let the rest of the game explain what is happening. The strange thing is Okami even repeats itself throughout the game, constantly reminding players of the story behind Orochi and the 100 years that have passed since Shiranui took Orochi down. If a cutscene is too long, the player will get frustrated and might even consider skipping everything (or if they cannot, just to quit altogether). 

 

      The point is this: cutscenes can help convey a story, but don't overdo it. Too many cutscenes makes it feel like a movie and a long intro will derail the entire thing. The best way to tell the story of a game is to let the player just play through it. Provide some dialogue for necessary parts and maybe use cinematics for anything that could be plot critical such as a major twist in the plot. Cutscenes can help, but are not always necessary.

RPGs

      Rocket propelled grenades are... eh. Wrong RPG. Let's start again.

      Role-playing games are exactly what it sounds like: a game in which the player assumes roles. Any game that has the player take on the role of fulfilling a specific duty qualifies it as an RPG. By this logic, all games are RPGs. You're playing a game about a treasure hunter who follows clues around the world to find something that may or may not actually be real? Uncharted has you playing the role of a treasure hunter. Are you taking control of an airplane that moves vertically and horizontally across a horizontally revolving screen? That means you are playing as a pilot in Resogun.

      However, the term RPG generally refers to games that have the player controlling characters of multiple roles. Most of these games happen to take place in a fantasy universe such as Dragon Age or Final Fantasy. The most common roles played involve some basic archetypes such as the Warrior, the Mage, the Archer, or even the Cleric. Many RPGs have branched from these archetypes to make their own character classes, but the base formula is present in all existing RPGs. 

 

      The thing about classes in most RPGs is to see which characters the player feels most suited for. Let's say you are the kind of person who feels like you could take on the world. If someone looks at you funny, you just want to sock them in the face and let them know that you keep your hair messy on purpose! That is the personality of the Warrior. Warriors typically rush into the heat of battle, can take as much damage as they can deal, and are just so intimidating and unstoppable. Or maybe you like to fight from a distance and want to dispatch your enemies without causing too much of a ruckus. Archers are great at that. You like to deal damage from afar and can run away when things get too hectic.

 

      That's the great thing about these kinds of games. Any role you want to try and fulfill, the character classes allow you to do just that. Granted, not every RPG branches far beyond the base four types, but if you play enough, you can find your niche. I personally like the guy who is extremely hard to kill. I do not mind not being able to deal monstrous amounts of damage. I just want to make the enemy focus on me whilst the rest of the team slips on by and completes the objective. That's why I play a Prot Paladin in WoW. Very hard to kill, draws in the animosity of the enemies, lets the damage dealers bring extreme prejudice upon the colossal abominations that are raid bosses, and I feel as if I control the tide of the fight. But hey, if anyone dies, it was that stupid Shaman's fault. 

 

      RPGs usually limit a player to choosing one class and sticking with it. There are several games that allow the changing of roles in the middle of the game. Any strategy game such as Final Fantasy Tactics has characters with numerous class options. The characters themselves may be stuck with one class, but you as the player can control all of these people. Dislike all those Squires? Consider training one of them to be a Knight. If Knight is more to your liking, make all of those Squires into Knights! Maybe even let one be a Monk and see how that works out.

      Another good example is Team Fortress 2. This game has nine total classes categorized by primary role: Assault, Defense, and Support. Scouts, Soldiers, and Pyros are all Offense. Let's say you want to try the Soldier. Big commander looking dude with a rocket launcher, a shotgun, and a shovel for good measure. However, he feels slow to you. You keep dying to everybody. Fortunately, you are not stuck with the Soldier forever. Once you die, you can select a new class to try. You pick the Scout, notice he runs insanely fast, has a double jump, a shotgun, a pistol, and a metal baseball bat! This guy feels more your style. Tired of the Scout? Try the Heavy and see how long it takes for everyone to take you down!

      Roles are the most important aspect of a role-playing game, but another essential to the genre is stats and progressions. Stats (also known as “attributes”) affect the parameters of your character. The higher your stats, the more effective you are. Most common stats include Attack, Defense, Health, Mana, Speed, and Luck. These branch out and get complex in some games such as Dark Souls, but they all stem from these common base stats. Attack governs damage done against an enemy. Defense affects how resistance the player is to damage taken from foes. Health governs how much damage the player can take before they die. Mana is usually an energy source for special attacks. Speed can affect movement speed or attack speed. Luck is the most ambiguous, but it most commonly represents chances of success with critical damage. 

 

      As for progression, this works differently for RPGs. Traditional progression in games is done through levels. In almost every other genre, these levels are literally brand new maps and stages. In RPGs, these levels are given to characters themselves. Players will start at level 1. Sometimes it's higher and sometimes they start at level 0, but level 1 is the most common starting point. As the player gains experience points they gain levels. Experience points (EXP or XP) is frequently acquired by killing enemy monsters. Sometimes experience can be gained through exploring a new area. Once enough XP is gained, the character gains a level. Gaining a level gives stat boosts to all of the character's parameters. 

 

      Some systems get creative such as with Chrono Cross. Chrono Cross has no levels, but there is still stat progression. When a boss is killed, players gain a Growth Star. Players can then kill more monsters to earn more stat gains. As more monsters are killed, the bonuses gained from each fight suffer diminishing returns until no more stat gains are made. This encourages players to grind a little bit after a boss fight, but it also does not punish players who don't bother to grind at all. I think XP might be too focused on monster killing. It should be allowed to branch out into other activities such as exploration or story progression. Which brings me to the most vital aspect of RPGs: the story.

      RPGs have gained a reputation for having excellent stories. Games such as Final Fantasy, Valkyrie Profile, Chrono Trigger, and even Borderlands have well executed storylines. Most are to the point that they are all the game focuses on. Some of these stories are so long they require multiple discs to hold everything! The average playtime invested in an RPG stands at 40 hours. The story will usually take up to 12 of those hours. The rest is side quests, exploration, and grinding. That isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I think I would make the story a bit longer and have the grinding take up less time.

      There's a lot more to RPGs than I can list here, but hopefully this gives you all some idea of what I think of this genre. It's my favorite genre of all games. It's kind of getting melded into other game genres, so finding a good standalone RPG is hard right now. Hopefully I can make my own RPG someday. Until then, somebody better make a really good one soon!