Three Scientific areas of researching Videogames
a) Game Design "is the process of designing the content, background and rules of a game" at wikipedia.
"...conceiving and designing rules and structures that result in an experience for players" in The Rules of Play (2003)
Big concerns, analyse and develop new forms of gameplay and interactivity.
b) Video Game studies "is the still-young field of analysing video games from a social science or humanities perspective." at wikipedia
Big concerns, analyse textual and cultural meanings present in videogames. Special approaches at the moment are ludology and narratology.
c) Game Programming deals with programming and can "include advanced physics, artificial intelligence, 3D graphics, digitized sound, a custom musical score, complex strategy and may use several input devices (such as mice, keyboards, gamepads and joysticks) and may be playable against other people via the Internet or over a LAN." at wikipedia
Big Concerns, studying new forms of programming and new harware in order to deliver always the most powerfull capacities for graphics and AI.
junho 16, 2005
junho 14, 2005
Gamer's Manifesto
«
. Give us A.I. that will actually outsmart us now and then
. Give us a genre of game we've never seen before.
. Give me environments that realistically react to what I do
. Ban, Loadings.
. Ban, Superimposing on the screen.
. Ban Cinematic camera angles.
. Ban, Confusing, mapless floor plans.
. Ban, Unnecessarily difficult end levels.
. Ban, Patenting
»
excerpts adapted from Gamer's Manifesto, 2005 by David Wong and Haimoimoi
. Give us A.I. that will actually outsmart us now and then
. Give us a genre of game we've never seen before.
. Give me environments that realistically react to what I do
. Ban, Loadings.
. Ban, Superimposing on the screen.
. Ban Cinematic camera angles.
. Ban, Confusing, mapless floor plans.
. Ban, Unnecessarily difficult end levels.
. Ban, Patenting
»
excerpts adapted from Gamer's Manifesto, 2005 by David Wong and Haimoimoi
maio 30, 2005
Videogame Genres
. Action Adventure Game
. Adventure Game
. Driving Game
. Fighting Game
. Massively Multiplayer Game
. Platformer
. Puzzle/Rhythm Game
. Role-Playing Game
. Shooter
. Sports Game
. Strategy Game
as used by E3 Expo in 2005
. Adventure Game
. Driving Game
. Fighting Game
. Massively Multiplayer Game
. Platformer
. Puzzle/Rhythm Game
. Role-Playing Game
. Shooter
. Sports Game
. Strategy Game
as used by E3 Expo in 2005
maio 28, 2005
IGDA Awards Categories
. Best Game
. New Studio
. Audio
. Character Design
. Game Design
. Technology
. Visual Arts
. Writing
IGDA - International Game Developers Association
. New Studio
. Audio
. Character Design
. Game Design
. Technology
. Visual Arts
. Writing
IGDA - International Game Developers Association
maio 21, 2005
PlayStation 3
Graphic capacity, seems just like a beautiful dream.
Hardware specs unveiled at E3 presentation are just like something from outer world. You can take a look at the presentation here. You need to sign up to download and don't forget this is a video presentation of 1h50m and so 1Gb.
To be released in SPRING 2006
Hardware specs unveiled at E3 presentation are just like something from outer world. You can take a look at the presentation here. You need to sign up to download and don't forget this is a video presentation of 1h50m and so 1Gb.
To be released in SPRING 2006
maio 12, 2005
abril 08, 2005
Designing games for the Future
by Peter Molyneux
«
Clear Concepts. More than ever, Molyneux said, games need to begin with a clear, absolute concept. In Fable, for instance, the concept is: "Be a hero." In Grand Theft Auto, it's "Be a gangster." These simple but clear concepts are the key to a successful game idea.
Greater Accessibility. Once upon a time, gamers were willing to spend hours learning how to play a video game. But as gaming becomes a truly mass market industry, players demand ever simpler, ever more accessible gameplay experiences. Molyneux now believes that designers have about ten seconds to grab a player before the player will lose interest.
Simple to Understand. Along similar lines, Molyneux believes that players must be given a clear sense of what they can do and what they are supposed to do in a game. One of Molyneux's guiding principles is to create games with very simple, very concise controls that anybody at all could jump right into without needing a tutorial.
Deeper Interaction. As gameplay gets simpler, game depth needs to expand. When an interface reaches critical simplicity, a player must trust that those few available commands will lead to a great depth of possible experiences.
Morphable Gameplay. The success of games such as Fable and Grand Theft Auto, said Molyneux, is that they allow a player to both play through a game, and play in the game. One person's experimentation is another's gameplay ? so allowing for a diverse range of playing styles opens the field to attract multiple gaming audiences.
Cool Stuff. Lastly, Molyneux emphasized the important of continuing to think of new, cool things to attract gamers to games. In spite of the continuing technological and creative innovations in the industry, gamers ultimately play games because they want to have fun and do cool things.
»
at Gamasutra
I completely agree with Molyneux. Games of the future, are for the masses and so we need to think with a wide audience scope in mind.
We can add to this, Andrew view at grandtextauto
"Without well-formed experiences - efficient pacing, filtering out the 'boring bits' - games may not breakthrough to a mass audience. Most people just don't have the time to spend hours and hours playing a game for a few moments of meaningful drama. Games will need to be as "efficient" as movies, TV and books in this regard."
And then my last thought on conventions and transparency
"When we arrive at a point where the gameplay will be as transparent as film mechanics, stories will become the center of the experience." And so emotions will be diversified enough to build unforgettable art pieces that will last for decades and maybe centuries.
«
Clear Concepts. More than ever, Molyneux said, games need to begin with a clear, absolute concept. In Fable, for instance, the concept is: "Be a hero." In Grand Theft Auto, it's "Be a gangster." These simple but clear concepts are the key to a successful game idea.
Greater Accessibility. Once upon a time, gamers were willing to spend hours learning how to play a video game. But as gaming becomes a truly mass market industry, players demand ever simpler, ever more accessible gameplay experiences. Molyneux now believes that designers have about ten seconds to grab a player before the player will lose interest.
Simple to Understand. Along similar lines, Molyneux believes that players must be given a clear sense of what they can do and what they are supposed to do in a game. One of Molyneux's guiding principles is to create games with very simple, very concise controls that anybody at all could jump right into without needing a tutorial.
Deeper Interaction. As gameplay gets simpler, game depth needs to expand. When an interface reaches critical simplicity, a player must trust that those few available commands will lead to a great depth of possible experiences.
Morphable Gameplay. The success of games such as Fable and Grand Theft Auto, said Molyneux, is that they allow a player to both play through a game, and play in the game. One person's experimentation is another's gameplay ? so allowing for a diverse range of playing styles opens the field to attract multiple gaming audiences.
Cool Stuff. Lastly, Molyneux emphasized the important of continuing to think of new, cool things to attract gamers to games. In spite of the continuing technological and creative innovations in the industry, gamers ultimately play games because they want to have fun and do cool things.
»
at Gamasutra
I completely agree with Molyneux. Games of the future, are for the masses and so we need to think with a wide audience scope in mind.
We can add to this, Andrew view at grandtextauto
"Without well-formed experiences - efficient pacing, filtering out the 'boring bits' - games may not breakthrough to a mass audience. Most people just don't have the time to spend hours and hours playing a game for a few moments of meaningful drama. Games will need to be as "efficient" as movies, TV and books in this regard."
And then my last thought on conventions and transparency
"When we arrive at a point where the gameplay will be as transparent as film mechanics, stories will become the center of the experience." And so emotions will be diversified enough to build unforgettable art pieces that will last for decades and maybe centuries.
Conventions, Realism and Illusion
The way an actor smiles in films of the XXI century is different of the way an actor smiles in the classic cinema period. People accepted the accentuate characterization of simulated emotions as normal, because they were seeing a movie, a play or an opera.
After Stanislavsky and then Strasberg, characterization started to become more and more real like, because emotions in characters were depicted through true actor emotions. Actors should recall emotional situations in mind that could permit him to behave as expected in that moment. This was a shock in Hollywood (it stills not well accepted in some Europeans film and theatre schools). This type of characterization was seen as a distraction of drama, was seen as suspension of the dramatic moment, because it was so real that people would stand looking and feeling for the actor, forgetting the action in drama.
So for this to have a well effect wide accepted and formed in an overall film experience reception, we had to change also the way we direct, we edit, the scenarios, etc. Today we have a machine that produces a "type of reality", that we accept as true, so real as real. However, more than ever, films are not as real as real. We?ve developed a so good transparency structure, based in developed conventions, that viewer is never aware of that.
Stories are depicted through a filter, which maintains viewer interested through the constant development of emotional moments and spectacle sequences that manipulates the overall sensation of the viewer. A true tragic event is depicted in a movie enveloped by such an amount of dramatic characterization, that takes the viewer to a fulfilled experience of entertainment, and so that makes him feel as rewarded by the 2 hours he "lost" seeing that movie.
French Nouvelle Vague, tried to broke this transparency, without success. We can develop interesting points, however they are interesting by their uniqueness. This is a challenge for the developing of original artworks, breaking the accepted rules, the accepted conventions and looking for new visions. If these visions become to be wide accepted they are integrated in the old conventions, and that's how film language becomes to evolve.
The "Dogma Manifest" has also tried to broke completely these Hollywood conventions, however even following these rules, we come to understand that this is only a different type of depicting reality, and that this is so real as Hollywood in the end.
Film reality experience is an illusion.
Games that use storytelling, are still looking for these conventions, lots of what we have now is "remediated" from film/tv language. Players are still looking for experiencing innovation in gameplaying, because we have not arrived at a period where we can use a set of conventions wide accepted to tell a story. When we arrive at a point where the gameplay will be as transparent as film mechanics, stories will become the center of the experience.
After Stanislavsky and then Strasberg, characterization started to become more and more real like, because emotions in characters were depicted through true actor emotions. Actors should recall emotional situations in mind that could permit him to behave as expected in that moment. This was a shock in Hollywood (it stills not well accepted in some Europeans film and theatre schools). This type of characterization was seen as a distraction of drama, was seen as suspension of the dramatic moment, because it was so real that people would stand looking and feeling for the actor, forgetting the action in drama.
So for this to have a well effect wide accepted and formed in an overall film experience reception, we had to change also the way we direct, we edit, the scenarios, etc. Today we have a machine that produces a "type of reality", that we accept as true, so real as real. However, more than ever, films are not as real as real. We?ve developed a so good transparency structure, based in developed conventions, that viewer is never aware of that.
Stories are depicted through a filter, which maintains viewer interested through the constant development of emotional moments and spectacle sequences that manipulates the overall sensation of the viewer. A true tragic event is depicted in a movie enveloped by such an amount of dramatic characterization, that takes the viewer to a fulfilled experience of entertainment, and so that makes him feel as rewarded by the 2 hours he "lost" seeing that movie.
French Nouvelle Vague, tried to broke this transparency, without success. We can develop interesting points, however they are interesting by their uniqueness. This is a challenge for the developing of original artworks, breaking the accepted rules, the accepted conventions and looking for new visions. If these visions become to be wide accepted they are integrated in the old conventions, and that's how film language becomes to evolve.
The "Dogma Manifest" has also tried to broke completely these Hollywood conventions, however even following these rules, we come to understand that this is only a different type of depicting reality, and that this is so real as Hollywood in the end.
Film reality experience is an illusion.
Games that use storytelling, are still looking for these conventions, lots of what we have now is "remediated" from film/tv language. Players are still looking for experiencing innovation in gameplaying, because we have not arrived at a period where we can use a set of conventions wide accepted to tell a story. When we arrive at a point where the gameplay will be as transparent as film mechanics, stories will become the center of the experience.
abril 06, 2005
CUTSCENES and INTERACTIVITY
In game storytelling
Final Fantasy vs. Doom 3
Cutscenes in Final Fantasy are really important, not only for the storytelling but for the overall "game" experience. The same happens in Max Payne, with no "comic" cutscenes, would the game have the same feeling?
However using, pre-fabricated elements from other arts and insert them in a game could seem, a lot like "cheating". In Film you must be able to tell things through a composite audiovisual. You can use everything from text, to photography, paintings, music, and comics. But any of these pre-fabricated elements must be mounted into a new film set were no one will be prevalent upon the others. For example music can?t carry all emotions and meaning of a sequence. Music must be mixed within a complete film sequence, must be only one part of an all. Music serves as an emotional guider in the sequence, not as a producer of emotions or even as an intensifier. In a way, music must be transparent as all the other components, and then let form an overall experience.
So if we translate, the use of music in film to the use of cutscenes in games, we should have something like: cutscenes must be used to guide the emotional storytelling experience, not to produce or intensify that experience.
Comparing Final Fantasy X, and Doom 3. We can see differences.
Final Fantasy uses cutscenes to tell the story, to produce emotions and in the end they come to be almost the centre of interest in playing the game.
In Doom 3, cutscenes are used to introduce us to the playing sequences, to prepare our emotional mood for what is to come interactively. The interaction is more interesting than the cutscenes.
In game storytelling
Final Fantasy vs. Doom 3
Cutscenes in Final Fantasy are really important, not only for the storytelling but for the overall "game" experience. The same happens in Max Payne, with no "comic" cutscenes, would the game have the same feeling?
However using, pre-fabricated elements from other arts and insert them in a game could seem, a lot like "cheating". In Film you must be able to tell things through a composite audiovisual. You can use everything from text, to photography, paintings, music, and comics. But any of these pre-fabricated elements must be mounted into a new film set were no one will be prevalent upon the others. For example music can?t carry all emotions and meaning of a sequence. Music must be mixed within a complete film sequence, must be only one part of an all. Music serves as an emotional guider in the sequence, not as a producer of emotions or even as an intensifier. In a way, music must be transparent as all the other components, and then let form an overall experience.
So if we translate, the use of music in film to the use of cutscenes in games, we should have something like: cutscenes must be used to guide the emotional storytelling experience, not to produce or intensify that experience.
Comparing Final Fantasy X, and Doom 3. We can see differences.
Final Fantasy uses cutscenes to tell the story, to produce emotions and in the end they come to be almost the centre of interest in playing the game.
In Doom 3, cutscenes are used to introduce us to the playing sequences, to prepare our emotional mood for what is to come interactively. The interaction is more interesting than the cutscenes.
Subscrever:
Mensagens (Atom)