The Game Development Process

Game Design

Outline

The Creative Process Core Design Postmortems

Nurturing the Creative Process

Creativity is not intellectual anarchy Thoughts are associative generate new ideas by combining others (picture of lattice of association)
Trick is to notice patterns in association Say, similarity between post office delivery and network traffic routing

Facilitate creative process

Stuff head with concepts and associations How? Read (All great game designers?)

Cant notice association between Post Office and

Network Routing if dont know anything about either

Based on Ch 7, On Game Design, by Chris Crawford and Ch 2.2, The Game Development Process

Nurturing the Creative Process Read

Make reading a lifelong process Broaden your reading
More than SciFi and Fantasy books History, Religion, Politics, Culture Game Design books

Wonder as you read (Why is the sky blue? Why do some coins have serrations on their edges?)
Tightens up Web of associations

Find answers to wonders

Once you find why sky is blue, will tell you why sunset is red (tightens associations further)

Help build overall creative foundation

Based on Ch 7, On Game Design, by Chris Crawford and Ch 2.2, The Game Development Process

Nurturing the Creative Process Play Games

More than computer games board games

Columbia Games, Avalon Hill, RPGs Example: LOTR Confrontation, Reiner Knizia Even computer games, broaden
Pick titles you would not otherwise play Like FPS games? Fine. But try different genres Become a student of games. Learn from them. Bargain bin, even, maybe not great games but maybe great ideas

Based on Ch 7, On Game Design, by Chris Crawford and Ch 2.2, The Game Development Process

Nurturing the Creative Process Sources of Inspiration

Perhaps games not as broad as film
Shoot em ups like Alien RPGs like D&D Safe: Its like Medal of Honor but in Desert Storm how creative is that?

Draw upon wide range of sources for inspiration

Opera, Movies with subtitles, Random lectures, scuba diving anything to remove stale thinking

Originality in gameplay, story, setting, interface

Freshness to one, great game Freshness to all, new genre!

Stephen King originality when put familiar together in unexpected ways

Ex: vampire in pirate setting (turns to shark)

Based on Ch 1, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Nurturing the Creative Process Brainstorm

Brainstorming has been much studied, and

there have been found some common elements Intense emotional involvement
Care about problem

Creator struggles, mightily, but fails Quiescent period, creator is distracted Finally, brainstorm itself and solution leaps
to forefront
It may even seem obvious at that time
Based on Ch 7, On Game Design, by Chris Crawford and Ch 2.2, The Game Development Process

Having the Idea

How many industries can claim to deal in daydreams?
Dreams are where every game begins

With an idea, dont implement or tie down to technology Genius is 1% inspiration, 99% perspiration Edison
Enjoy the 1% because everything else is hard work

Think of many raw ideas to throw into game

May come up with hybrid Look at what can contribute to others so get emergent game

Based on Ch 1, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Nurturing the Creative Process Growing the Idea

Most ideas shouldnt grow further Be aggressive at this point in your own mind
in ripping into your own idea
Just because it is a creative idea, does not mean it is a good one

Then, when pushing the idea (to, say, a

Others soon will, so you should first

publisher) through to a concept, make sure can protect, perhaps with partner politically skilled

Based on Ch 7, On Game Design, by Chris Crawford

The Creative Process The Beginning

Once you have an idea

Is it really good? Worth spending time and money on? Even if rehash should bring improvement to original and new challenges Discuss with someone that can appreciate the idea

Based on pages 233+, Gameplay and Design, by Kevin Oxland

The Creative Process Define the Product Consider target audience Gather feedback from colleagues Think about core objectives List the challenges
Will help determine genre

Determine how player will interface Define unique features, essential to gameplay
Has features been done before? If not, is there a reason why not?

Consider theme (not graphical theme) Solidify in two- to three-page document

Based on pages 233+, Gameplay and Design, by Kevin Oxland

The Creative Process Involving Others

Never design by committee
The only useful document ever designed by a committee is the constitution But blend of like-minded people can be very effective

Meet with team with one-pager Keep early meetings focused on design and not on technical Write all ideas down, may come in handy later Incorporate changes into 2-3 page document Move on to Concept Document

Based on pages 233+, Gameplay and Design, by Kevin Oxland

Outline

The Creative Process Core Design Postmortems

(next)

Core Design

Topics
What is a Game Gameplay Interactivity Game Balance Look and Feel

Based on Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

What is a Game? (1 of 3)

Movie? (ask: why not?)
no interaction, outcome fixed

Toy? (has interaction ask: why not?)

no goal, but still fun (players can develop own goals)

Puzzle? (has goal + interaction ask: why not?)

strategy and outcome is the same each time
A computer game is a software program in which one or more players make decisions through the control of game objects and resources, in pursuit of a goal.

Definitions (from Ch 2.2): Play - Interactions to elicit emotions Game - Object that provides rule-bound play Frame - The border of a games context

Inside the frame is in the game Outside the frame is real life

Aesthetics - Emotional responses during play General enough to cover everything

Chapter 2.2, Introduction to Game Development

What is a Game (2 of 3)
A Computer Game is a Software Program
Not a board game or sports Consider: chess vs. soccer vs. Warcraft

Ask: What do you lose?

What do you gain?

Lose: 1) physical pieces, 2) social interaction Gain: 1) real-time, 2) more immersive, 3) more complexity

A Computer Game involves Players

No, Duh. But stress because think about audience. The game is not for you but for them. Dont just think about your story or the graphics or the interface, but consider the players. Ex: complicated flight simulator (say, you are a flying geek) but audience is beginner

Based on Tutorial: What is a Good Game?, by Mark Overmars

What is a Game (3 of 3)
Playing a Game is About Making Decisions
Ex: what weapon to use, what resource to build Can be frustrating if decision does not matter Want good gameplay (next major topic)

Playing a Game is About Control

Player wants to impact outcome Uncontrolled sequences can still happen, but should be sparing and make logical Ex: Riven uses train system between worlds

A Game Needs a Goal

Ex: Defeat Ganandorf in Zelda Long games may have sub-goals Ex: recover Triforce first, then Sword of Power Without game goals, a player develops his/her own (a toy)

Based on Tutorial: What is a Good Game?, by Mark Overmars

What a Game is Not (1 of 2)

A bunch of cool features
Necessary, but not sufficient May even detract, if not careful, by concentrating on features not game

A lot of fancy graphics

Games need graphics just as hit movie needs special effect but neither will save weak idea Again, may detract Game must work without fancy graphics Suggestion: should be fun with simple objects

When a designer is asked how his game is going to make a difference, I hope he talks about gameplay, fun and creativity as opposed to an answer that simply focuses on how good it looks Sid Meier
(Civilizations, Railroad Tycoon, Pirates)
Based on Chapter 2, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

What a Game is Not (2 of 2)

A series of puzzles
All games have them But not gameplay in themselves Puzzles are specific, game systems spawn more generic problems

An intriguing story
Good story encourages immersion But will mean nothing without gameplay Example: Baldurs Gate, linear story. Going wrong way gets you killed. But not interactive. Interaction in world all leads to same end.

Based on Chapter 2, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Games are Not Everything

Most important is it fun, compelling, engaging?
And these come from a superset of games

Computers are good at interactivity

Allow for interactive fun Interactive Media and Game Development

Examples:
SimCity - very compelling, but mostly no goals. More of toy than a game, but still fun. Grim Fandango - good visuals, story, etc. But need to do puzzles to proceed. Could have skipped to just watch story. Would still have been fun without the gameplay.

Core Design

Topics
What is a Game Gameplay Game Balance Look and Feel

Approaching Game Design

Used to be thought that could not teach game design more of an art
But you can teach art! (AR1000 + )

Even to art, there are technical disciplines such as in music, film, poetry So, consider computer game designs as are an art form
Game design practices can be taught

Chapter 2.2, Introduction to Game Development

Game Theory

Some designers approach Game Theory thinking it will help design games
Rather, it is a theory about games are played Game theory is Branch of economics Systems governed by rules Mathematically analyzed to determine payoffs of various end points.

Game theory assumes rational players

Abstract model players not real people

Always try to maximize their potential utility Solve problems using pure logic Always fully aware of the state of the game

Chapter 2.2, Introduction to Game Development

Gameplay

Gameplay
Collective strategies to reach end points of game theory Specific to game activities What the player does

Includes
Utility - A measure of desire associated with an outcome Payoffs - The utility value for a given outcome Preference - The bias of players towards utility

Note, gameplay is not everything

Choice of car in GTA is not always about payoff, but about what is fun Software doesnt have to have gameplay to be entertaining consider SimCity

No one expects gameplay in movies or plays

Who says: Hey, where is the gameplay in Hamlet? Rule 1: It should be fun (entertainment) Rule 2: It should be interactive (make use of computer, else perhaps use film) Rule 3: It can have gameplay (but that is choice)

Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Gameplay Example (1 of 2)
Adventure game: knight, dwarf, priest, thief During combat, knight and dwarf in front, thief fires arrows Priest casts spells (assume all cost the same)
E-bolts (do damage equal to sword) Band-aids (heal equal to sword)

Which spell should Priest cast?

Ask: against single opponent (they are equal) Ask: against opponent with 6 arms (bolts) Ask: against many opponents with weak attacks (bandaids) Can always decide which is better

Not so interesting

Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Gameplay Example (2 of 2)

Now, suppose
Band-aids still affect single target but ebolts have an area affect E-bolts do less damage, but armor doesnt make a difference Answer isnt as easy. Interesting choices. Good gameplay.
A game is a series of interesting choices. - Sid Meier (pirates, civilization)
Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Now, which spell should Priest cast?

Implementing Gameplay (1 of 4)

Choice Outcome
A question asked of the player The end result of a given choice Represents the set of possible events A landscape of choice and outcome

Possibility space

Chapter 2.2, Introduction to Game Development

Implementing Gameplay (2 of 4)
Choices must be non-trivial, with upside and downside
If only upside, AI should take care of it If only downside, no-one will ever use it

Note, this is only regarding game theory

Ex: Could have ray gun that plays music. Cool, but soon gimme the BFG Ex: Nintendos Smash Bros has Taunt ask: what for? Ask: other examples from popular games?

Gameplay value when upside and downside and payoff depends upon other factors

Ex: Rohan horsemen, but what if other player recruits pikemen? Ex: Bazooka, but what if other player gets out of tank? Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Implementing Gameplay (3 of 4)
Well-designed choice
Often desirable and undesirable effects Should relate to player goals

Qualities of Choice (from book, Ch 2.2)

Hollow lacking consequence Obvious leaves no choice to be made Uninformed arbitrary decision Weighted good and bad in every choice Dramatic strongly connects to feelings Immediate effects are immediate Long-term effects over extended period Orthogonal choices distinct from each other

Chapter 2.2, Introduction to Game Development

Implementing Gameplay (4 of 4)
Should be series of interesting choices

Ex:

Use of health potion now may depend upon whether have net for capturing more fairies Having net may depend upon whether needed space for more arrows for bow Needing arrows may depend upon whether killed all flying zombie bats yet

Hence, well designed game should require strategy Game must display complexity
But doesnt mean it must be complex!

Dont make too many rules. Less if more. Real world example: termites place one piece of mud.
Results in hive, with cooling vents, etc.

Emergence from interaction of rules

Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Ex: Priests convert, but not if already in combat (Me: see what game) Ask: examples from popular games?

The Dominant Strategy Problem

Articles with 10 killer tactics or ultimate weapon
Ask: what are these doing? Taking advantage of flaws in the game design!

Should never have a option not worth using

Dominated strategy

Should never have an option that is so good, it is never worth doing anything else
Dominant strategy

Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Near Dominance
Worth looking for near dominance, too
Near-dominated useful only very narrow circumstance Near-dominant used most of the time

Ex: stun gun only useful against raptors, so only useful on raptor level (near dominated)
Do I want it used more often? How much effort on this feature? Should I put in lots of special effects?

Ex: flurry of blows most useful attack (near dominant) by Monk

Should we spend extra time for effects?

Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Avoid Trivial Choices (1 of 2)

Horsemen Horsemen (picture) Archers Archers Pikemen Pikemen Horsemen
Transitive, not so interesting

Ask: what game does this look like? (rock-paperscissors) Intransitive, more interesting Ex: from LOTR Battle for Middle Earth

Horsemen fast, get to archers quickly with lances Pikemen spears hurt horsemen bad Pikemen slow, so archers wail on them from afar

(Will look at game balance in depth, next topic)

Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Avoid Trivial Choices (2 of 2)

A beats B, B beats C, C beats A (could hardwire)
But could also have how much better 1) Single horseman can beat any number of archers: Horseman Archers (g) 2) Single horseman barely beat an archer: Horseman Archers (1.1)

Ask: Which is better?

Trick question! Both are bad
Case 1) equal number of each, all others lose Case 2) doesnt matter which you choose

Dont want to hardwire. Sometimes A way better than B, sometimes a bit better, sometimes worse
The answer should depend upon the game situation, weather, terrain, time also what opponent is doing

Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Environment + Rules = Gameplay

Battle of Hastings, 1066 A.D. King Harold tired, mostly infantry Duke William more archers, cavalry
Archers beat slower infantry
http://www.battle1066.com/

game over

Not quite Harold on hill (arrows less effective) and defensive mode
Archers tire game over

Not quite William also smart, cavalry approach, but retreat. Infantry break ranks since they are frustrated, charge
Arrows now shred Infantry Harold loses, game over

Point: ways to change balance between different troop types. A good commander isnt the one with the best
army; he is the one who knows how to use it best

Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Ensuring Interesting Choices (1 of 3)

Ex: Elite (early 80s, ask: who played?)

Accumulate wealth by trading When 1000 credits, trade lazer for better lazer and have 400 left over for trading. No brainer. Always a win. What if could buy lazer with 600? Then no credits left over. Decision is tougher.

Point: keep difficult choices in hands of

player Ask: other examples?

Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Ensuring Interesting Choices (2 of 3) Kinds of choices in gameplay can involve options:

1) Should sometimes be taken, sometimes not 2) Timing is critical and depends upon context (upgrade armor or build more troops) 3) Makes little difference whether taken or not 4) Always worth taking (target nearest) 5) Never worth taking (remove armor, pay guy for tapestry in Vici)

First and Second most interesting Third valid, but really only chrome Fourth should be handled by AI Fifth should seriously consider removing

Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Ensuring Interesting Choices (3 of 3)

Interesting choices require good judgment

on the part of the player

Aim as designer, ensure circumstances dont

stagnate and have only one right way to win No method for finding best choices
Thats where creativity comes in (art)

Correct choice must vary with circumstances

Still, some tips

Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Toolbox of Interesting Choices

Strategic versus Tactical Supporting Investments Versatility Compensating Factors Impermanence Shadow Costs

Strategic versus Tactical (1 of 3)

Strategic choices affect course of game

over medium or long term
Tactical choices apply right now Ex: build archers or swordsmen (strategic) Ex: send archers or swordsmen to defend against invading force (tactical)

Strategic choices have effect on tactical

choices later
Ex: if dont build archers, cant use tactically later

Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Strategic versus Tactical (2 of 3)

Ex: StarCraft
Strategic choice: 1) upgrade range of marines, 2) upgrade damage, or 3) research faster fire Which to choose?

If armored foes, Protoss Zealot, more

damage If fast foes, Zerglings, maybe faster fire

Other factors: number of marines, terrain, on offense or defense

Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Strategic versus Tactical (3 of 3)

Ex: Warzone 2100 (ask: who played?)

Build factories to spawn war machines If build in level, then spawn quickly but factory only used for that level If build at base, spawn slowly (have to ship to front lines) but factory can be used in subsequent levels

Lesson: Good gameplay should have different

choices leading to different kinds of payoff
Reduces the risk of trivial choices Increase scope for good judgment
Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Supporting Investments
Often game has primary goal (ex: beat enemy) but secondary goals (ex: build farms for resources) Some expenditures directly impact primary goal (ex: hire soldier), while others indirect (ex: build farm) called supporting investments Primary goals are one-removed
Ex: improve weapons, build extra barracks

Supporting goals are two-removed

Ex: build smithy can then improve weapons Ex: research construction lets you build smithy and build barracks (two and three removed)

Most interesting since strategic

Payoff will depend upon what opponents do

Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Versatility (1 of 2)
Rule of thumb is to ask what is best and worst about choices:
1) This move does most damage, but slowest 2) This move is fastest, but makes defenseless 3) This move best defense, but little damage 4) This neither best nor worst, but most versatile

Most should be best in some way Versatile good for

beginners flexibility (against unpredictable or expert opponent)

Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Versatility (2 of 2)

Ex: beam can mine asteroids and shoot

enemies

Speed is common way for versatility If a versatile unit is also cheapest and
most powerful no interesting choice
(See Compensating Factors, next) Dont make fast units best

Versatility makes it good choice

Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Compensating Factors
Consider strategy game where all units impeded by some terrain
Ships cant go on land, tanks cant cross water, camel riders only in dessert

Assume flying unit that can go anywhere (Ask: how to balance?)

1) Make slow 2) Make weak, easily destroyed 3) Make low surveillance range (unrealistic) 4) Make expensive

Note, last choice common but uninteresting since doesnt change tactical use Choice should be clear to player. Dont make a gamble before they know.
Ex: pick troops (cold weather) then find in jungle

Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Impermanence (1 of 2)
Some permanent (ex: you get to treasure first), others not (ex: I got storage near mine, but you can grab it off me) Really, another kind of compensating factor
I.e. impermanence can compensate for something being really good

Can be used for interesting choices

Ex: choice of medium armor for rest of game or invulnerable for 30 seconds?

Advantage (or disadvantages) can be impermanent in number of ways:

Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Impermanence (2 of 2)
(Examples mostly from Magic the Gathering Battlegrounds)
Can be destroyed (enchantments, ex: gratuitous violence makes units tough, but can be destroyed) Can be stolen or converted (ex: threaten steals or converts enemy for short time) Can be applied to something you dont always have (ex: goblin king gives bonus to goblins, but must have goblins) Certain number of uses (ex: three grenades, but grenade spamming) Last for some time (wears off, ex: Mario invulnerable star)

Common in games, but deserves special attention

Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Shadow Costs (1 of 2)

In a game, continually presented with costs

and trade-offs. But not all direct.
Ex: soldiers for gold, but need armory first for weapons and barracks for soldiers Called shadow costs for supporting investments Can make flow chart mapping shadow costs

Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Shadow Costs (2 of 2)
Ex: Age of Mythology has wood and food. Food is inexhaustible, wood is finite
Charioteer

Costs 60 wood, 40 food and 40 seconds to spawn Shadow costs vary over game

Early on, food and wood expensive, spawn doesnt matter Mid-game, much food and wood, spawn makes it harder to pump out new units End-game, no wood, spawn is priceless

Use variability to add subtlety to game. Vary environment and vary shadow costs (ex: more trees to vary cost of wood)
Challenge for level designer Expert players will appreciate

Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Review: Use Tools from Toolbox of Interesting Choices

Strategic versus Tactical Supporting Investments Versatility Compensating Factors Impermanence Shadow Costs Groupwork:
Use 1-2 in a game about graduating from college. Discuss.

Synergies (1 of 2)
Synergies are interaction between different elements of players strategies (note, terms may be different than ch 2.2)

Positive Feedback Economies of Scale the more of one type, the better (ex: wizards draw strength from each other) Economies of Scope the more of a set, the better, or advantage of combined arms (ex: trident and net, infantry and tanks)

Negative Feedback Diseconomies of scale first is most useful, others have less benefit (ex: diminishing returns from more peasants entering a mine since get in each others way) Diseconomies of scope (ex: mixed troops go only as fast as slowest)

Synergies (2 of 2)
Ideally, all go together at once, but can emphasize
Ex: Chess is a game of positive feedback Small advantage early on, exploited to crushing advantage

Game of negative feedback needs other ways to keep interesting

Ex: trench combat makes a catch-up factor, or as get far from base, supply long grows, game lasts a long time Ex: Super NES NBA Jam catch up setting as an equalizer

Be aware of each

Final Word on Gameplay

Need to make sure choices interact

Ex: no fun winning just because out-optimize guy on resource production Ex: no fun if winning just because know right thing to do else lose no game, just forgone conclusion

Want choices to interact with choices of

opponent, want it to depend

Interactivity versus Gameplay

Gameplay is important because it allows you to take the experience someplace Ex: Kick the soccer ball around, practice headers, bicycle kicks, etc. (interactivity) Play a game of soccer on the pitch (interactivity + gameplay) Can you have gameplay without interactivity? Maybe. But even so, gameplay without interactivity could be fun (ie- television), but would start wondering if time is better spent doing something else Interactivity is more important that gameplay Interactivity without gameplay can be fun

Ex: Black and White, Sims

Interactivity is the heart and soul of entertainment software

Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Kinds of Interactivity (1 of 2)
Can interact in many ways game designers sometimes restrict themselves to facts
Ex: if you hit w/BFG, do 50 points damage

Think broadly. Player could potentially:

1) Directly control characters (Ex: move Laura Croft) 2) Affect world (Ex: make Stronghold guys insane) 3) Influence characters actions at one remove (Ex: give weapons, like Zeus to a hero) 4) Influence at two removes (Ex: provide inspiration, like a Muse) 5) Decide who to follow, rather than what to follow (Ex: observer mode) 6) Select what parts are interesting and give more time to that (Ex: like a child with a bedtime story, Saahil likes the hero build up and powers most)

Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Kinds of Interactivity (2 of 2)
(Ask: others?) In the above list, how many are done?
1 most everything, 2 for changing difficulty

But many not done:

Why cant you say to computer opponent:

Hey, lets build up a big army before we fight or Dont attack me since Im having fun building

Or, why cant you switch sides in a battle?

Avoid making mutant versions of films, novels or even board games

Use imagination for interactivity

Based on Chapter 3, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Concentrate on Why not just What

Doesnt have to be about what happens

Ex: ER. Noah Wylie is avatar. With a sick patient does he follow rules, give experimental drug, play basketball? But not only way to be interactive. Instead, follow Noah, switch to patient, go to other Dr., back to Noah (learn about characters, the Why)

Drama unfolds because of understanding of characters

True in non-interactive drama, so true in games, too

Ex: D&D dungeon, series of rooms w/monsters. Much richer if why behind scenes. Why were dwarves there? Why did they die? How orcs break in?

Goal of entertainment is to make audience care

Use interactivity as a way to powerful technique to help this

Core Design

Brief, since overlaps material in Topics

IMGD 1000. Critical Studies of Interactive Media and Games What is a Game Gameplay Game Balance Look and Feel (Overmars + Ch2) (Ch 3) (Ch 5) (Ch 6)

Based on Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Game Balance - Introduction

Beauty in balanced games
Like Rolls Royce or Ball Machine in Airport

Game without balance often unsatisfying and wasted effort (parts not in balance not used, so wasted effort) Broadly, game balance includes:
Player-Player advantage only in skill (can be luck, but should be equal to both) Player-Gameplay learning curve matched by reward Gameplay-Gameplay Composite longbow does twice damage, should cost twice $

Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Mini-Outline

Broadly, game balance includes:

Player-Player Player-Gameplay Gameplay-Gameplay (next)

Player/Player Balance (1 of 2)
Ex: Virtua Fighter (ask: who has played?)
Say, Sarah Bryant beats Lion every time? Does that mean unbalanced?

No, look more closely

Suppose friend said could beat everyone as Sarah Bryant all the time. Would say prove it
Would only be a problem if beginner as Sarah always beat expert as Lion And if could choose characters? Sarah versus Sarah?

Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Player/Player Balance (2 of 2)
Allow to arrange victory by skill and judgment Avoid results mostly as stroke of luck
Right from the start or magnified as game progresses (ex: start close to gold mine provides escalating advantage)

Simplest way is to have symmetry

Same weapons, maneuvers, hit points (sports do this) (But note, not always the most interesting. Want different moves on fighters, say. More later.)

Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Symmetry - Example
Two heroes square off for duel, poised in kung fu stance Hours pass. Days pass. Breeze comes by, spec of dust in ones eye Blinks, frowns then bows Know result without fight tiny asymmetry enough to decide outcome If breeze or dust decided game, is that ok?
No youd want your money back!

Dont want to decide by factors out of control

Keep symmetric

Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Symmetry

Symmetry is fine in abstract games (ex:

chess, even basketball) In realistic games, would be problem (ex: U.S. versus Iraq, game symmetry would be bothersome since not realistic) While easy, kind of an insult
Ex: LOTR BfME Wargs same as horses but Wargs can bite in book/movie!

Better is functional symmetry that is not

obvious
Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Symmetry in Level Design

Can avoid obvious symmetry
Ex: each player has impassible region on flank (water or mountain range)

Knights and soldiers cant cross Later on, advanced units can cross Choice of unit depends upon barrier

Mountaineers to storm, ships to cross sea Or bluff, and then go up middle

Players can choose asymmetric start location

Should not be deciding factor (Ex: you choose downwind port, so you lose) Avoiding making start location critical decision Ex: potential mines in many spots, so not critical

Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Symmetry in Game Design (1 of 2)

Make all choices for players functionally

the same

But even slight differences make

interesting

Ex: Warcraft 2 humans have griffons and orcs have dragons; both flying toughies.

Just broken asymmetry easier to manage

than total asymmetry (can compensate)
Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Ex: Warcraft 2 orc players runes explode, making use in mountain passes good

Symmetry in Game Design (2 of 2)

Making choices for players different, yet balanced is tougher Ex: Starcraft: Protoss, Zergs, Terrans all very different (Same with Command and Conquer Generals)
Imagine the hours of playtesting! Recommend only for deep pockets Starcraft is often a benchmark against which to judge other RTS game balance

Also, if re-creating historical simulation, tradeoff between fairness and authenticity

Ex: Conquistadors vs. Aztecs Aztecs are doomed, but may be no fun. Certainly not symmetric

Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Mini-Outline

Broadly, game balance includes:

Player-Player Player-Gameplay Gameplay-Gameplay (next)

Player/Gameplay Balance Introduction (1 of 2)

Means remembering that the business is

Ex: If had to tune the T.V. every time channel surf, would not do it much Likewise, should not struggle for small reward

about interactivity think about players relationship to the game

Ex: Baldurs Gate (ask: whos played?)

Attributes are 3-18 (ask: why?), can re-roll if dont like. So, re-roll until all 18s. Ugh. Test of endurance!
Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Player/Gameplay Balance Introduction (2 of 2)

Player/Gameplay balance entails balancing challenges against players improvement curve
Many RPGs have monsters get tougher with level

Ex: Diablo 2 does this But boring if that is all since will feel the same

Want widening options, too

Ex: character gets more abilities

Three rules
1) Reward the player 2) Let the machine do the work 3) Make a game that you play with, not against

Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Reward the Player

Player will have to learn. Will make mistakes (discouraging). Want to offset with reward when do something right Ex: Virtua Fighter, takes longer to learn complicated moves
Sarahs backflip. Reward comes from seeing flip (eye candy) and punch in kidneys (payoff)

Best when expand game options

Ex: Now with backflip, I can see new use for reverse punch

In general, better to reward player for something right than punish for something wrong
Punishment makes players not want to play

Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Let the Machine do the Work

Interface should show player the world and let him/her manipulate Computer is tool to take care of wide-range of tedious tasks If tasks are not fun, dont make player do them There is a blur of boundary between chore and game feature RPG could provide graph so player can manually draw map as explore but is that fun? Ex: In D&D, can tell D.M. we go back to the dungeon entrance. Easy, fun. What if a game makes player walk back over map that has been seen? Boring, no fun. Ex: Myst provided lightning bolt move to avoid tedium (Ask: other examples?) Also, if game option is no-brainer, consider AI taking care of it

Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Make a Game that you Play With, Not Against

Consider great story, graphics, immersion but only progress by trial and error is this fun? Ex: crossbowman guards exit
1. Run up and attack. Hes too fast. Back to save point (more on save points next). 2. Drink potion. Sneak up. He shoots you. Back to save. 3. Drop bottle as distraction. He comes looking. Shoots you. Back to save. 4. Drink potion. Drop bottle. He walks by you. You escape! Lazy design!

Should succeed by skill and judgment, not trial and error

Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Specific Example The Save Game Problem (1 of 2)

Designer talking about RPG
Designer: Ive got a great trap! platform goes down to room. Player thinks treasure but really flame throwers. Player is toast! Tester: What if player jumps off? D: Thinks its a loophole Ok, teleport in then toast T: What is the solution? D: There isnt one. (surprised) Its a killer trap. It will be fun. T: So, theres no clue for player? Charred remains on platform or something? D: No. Thats what the Save feature is for.

Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Specific Example The Save Game Problem (1 of 2)

Should be used only so players can go back to their Real Lives in between games
Or maybe to allow player to fully see folly of actions, for exploratory and dabbling

Dont design game around need to save

Has become norm for many games, but too bad Ex: murderous level can only get by trying all combat options

Beginner player should be able to reason and come up with answer

Challenges get tougher (more sophisticated reasoning) as player and game progress, so appeals to more advanced player But not trial and error

Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Mini-Outline

Broadly, game balance includes:

Player-Player Player-Gameplay Gameplay-Gameplay (next)

Gameplay/Gameplay Balance
Challenges when balancing aspects of gameplay?
Want variety of interesting choices, rather than single, dominant choice Best choices depend upon choices of other players (or on AI) Not easy to see how frequently different choices will be worth making, but need to know to balance game

Sounds like catch-22? Can use simple concepts to make first guess
Then lots of play testing to fine tune!

Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Component Balance

Two levels to balancing: component and attribute Component balance deals with relative values (ex: cost and strength) Attribute involves interaction of abilities (ex: speed versus hit points) Talk about component first, attribute later Establish the value of each game choice For game balance, each choice must be reducible to simple value and factors must even out Ex: Pirate game Dreadnoughts > Galleons > Brigantines All have identical functions If Dreadnoughts 2x powerful, then (for balance) Galleons should take time to spawn

Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

What if Not Easily Reducible?

Ex: Starcraft
Mutalisks fly over any terrain, but cannot fight other fliers Wraiths are not as tough, but can attack other fliers Observers can see enemy, but not fight There is no expression for values since different things!

Ex: Pirate game

Dreadnoughts slowest, Brigantines fastest Interesting from gameplay, but what about balance?

Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Attribute Balance
Involves not the relative values, but the way the choices interact
Ex: How important is ship speed relative to combat strength?

Envision as a set, where relative values based on one factor only:

Speed: Brigantines > Galleons > Dreadnoughts Tuffness: Dreadnoughts > Galleons > Brigantines Range:

Can then combine to get average set combining all factors Then, adjust component values (often, through play testing) so all units are useful

Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Component versus Attribute Balance

Mnemonic to remember:
Component choices are about artifacts

Ex: Hmm.

Should I use the ion cannon or laser?

Attribute choices are more abstract regarding use:

Ex: I should sneak past troll or take extra health

Attribute balance is harder (set of all problems) But if can get approximate picture of better strategies, can tweak component costs to get game balance

Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Intransitive Game Mechanics (1 of 5)

Rock Rock Paper Scissors 0 +1 -1 Paper -1 0 +1 Scissors +1 -1 0

Payoff, match your choice with opponent Suppose I always picked rock. Then opponent would notice and pick paper. Then I would start to always pick scissors, then
spiral to center of triangle where all options equal only break even, like thermodynamics

Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Intransitive Game Mechanics (2 of 5)

Suppose scissors costs most, rock costs

least
May use rock more often, scissors less But wait, that would mean paper less useful, too what is optimum choice now?

Suppose scissors costs 3 ki, paper costs 2

Rock Rock Paper Scissors 0 +4 -7 Paper -4 0 +4 Scissors +7 -4 0

ki, rock costs 1 ki and hit does 5 ki damage

Ex: I choose scissors, you choose rock. Ki diff is 2. Plus damage is 5, so 7 total.

Intransitive Game Mechanics (3 of 5)

Say payoff is R, P, S and frequency r, p, s
Want to know how often used (r, p, s)

Net payoff R is (0 x r) + (-4 x p) + (7 x s)

1) R = -4p + 7s 2) P = 4r 4s 3) S = -7r + 4p

Sum must be zero (zero sum game, whatever one player gains other loses. Both cannot have net gain.)
R+P+S=0

All costs must be equal else would favor (remember, triangle example)
R=P=S

Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Intransitive Game Mechanics (4 of 5)

Solve: (3 equations in 3 unknowns)
(eq1) -4p + 7s = 4r 4s (eq2)
11s = 4r + 4p s = (4r+4p) / 11

(eq2) 0 = 4r 4(4r+4p)/11
0 = 44r 16r - 16p 0 = 28r - 16p p = (7/4)r

(eq3) 0 = -4(7/4)r + 7s
0 = 7r + 7s r=s

Ratio

r:p:s = 1 : 1.75 : 1

Rock and Scissors used 27%, Paper about 46% Probably not what expected. Often result if one option more expensive, others are most affected
Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Intransitive Game Mechanics (5 of 5)

Can use technique to adjust costs Ex: if it turns out too many tanks relative to infantry Enhance to more choices. Ex: could do combination moves.

Rock + Scissors + Scissors = Garden Shears Could be countered with Paper Weight Strategy becomes complicated

(Can also use to justify spending more artistic assets on paper!) Fine, all is balanced. Players must avoid predictability because clever opponent will exploit. But that is barely above where have only 1 choice! To balance so interesting, must have attribute factors that interact (remember, the Battle of Hastings)

Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Other Intransitive Relationships

Can extend RPS? Sure (otherwise not useful) More than 3 options Table 5.3 and Case Study 5.5 Less regular are 4 options Table 5.4 Figure 5.7 discusses another 4-way relationship
Infantry dominated But, looking further, infantry only one that doesnt have to move

Can hold territory! (In game that needs that)

Ex: In AoE, could teleport supplies by building base. Didnt need to hold territory. Infantry useless. Even making them cost less doesnt (expansion pack). Still great game, but didnt need.
Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Combinatorial Explosions
How many attributes should there be to make interesting?
Too few? Then becomes trivial (Ex: in Hastings, only way to change power base is to put infantry on hill) Too many? Then too hard to have skilled play

Rule of thumb: N factors that could modify core mechanics, and each boolean (hill or not, rain or not ) 2N possible combinations explodes rapidly
Err on the side of caution

In Populous (EA god-game), should have lots of characters or half-dozen? Noticed would be easier to understand game experience with few, versatile units rather than many specific ones.
Richard Leinfellner, Exec in charge of Bullfrog
Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Design Scalability
Intransitive designs are inflexible
If have 5 way relationship and remove one, will have dominated strategy Ex: RPS and remove R always choose S

If project lead says behind schedule, so dont include 5th orc type
Elegant design falls like a house of cards

But is relatively easy to add components

Doesnt have to be symmetrical, can be redundant or useful in only a few cases

Ex: scout, or special spell

Lesson, if you are going to scale, scale up not down

Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

A Game Balance Checklist (1 of 3)

Player-Player ensures game is fair.

Increasingly important as multiplayer increases. Symmetry works for this, but asymmetry may be needed or more appealing (try just broken). Make sure any asymmetry doesnt magnify imbalance as game progresses. Golden rule: a player should never be put in an unwinnable situation through no fault of their own

Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

A Game Balance Checklist (2 of 3)

Player-Game ensures player never

becomes frustrated. Continually brings player back for more. Interface should not present obstacles. Small rewards are needed to guide player (fancy animation or new powers). Best rewards widen options. Golden rule: The game should be fun to learn as well as to play, and it should be more fun the more you master it

Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

A Game Balance Checklist (3 of 3)

Gameplay-Gameplay makes sure no element redundant or useless. Can do briefly by making factor table for each attribute (fire, range ) Make sure each best at something. RPS ensures each component dynamically best rather than statically so. Oblige player to alter tactics. Dont have to have every component equally useful. But cost, availability and ease of use should reflect value. Get right through playtesting. Golden rule: all options in game must be worth using sometime, net cost of each option must be on par with payoff

Based on Chapter 5, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Look and Feel

(Me: consider skipping this whole section) Create a sense of alternate reality
Immersion

Ambience Interface Storytelling

Based on Chapter 6, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Ambience
Everything that contributes to innate look and feel of game
Not just spiffy graphics - GLFOPS and trilinear filtering Rather, how graphics are used

Two fighters on bare stage. Fine. How about dirty street, realistic crowd hooting and hollering. Dark skies
Ex: Fiery hell when battling boss in Battlegrounds

Ambience is about providing background for story Broadly Sound, Vision, Touch

Based on Chapter 6, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Sound
Wistful guitar in Diablo Ethnic rhythms in AoE Stirring call to arms in Warcraft Whimsical in QBicles Best does ambience plus gameplay
Ex: Thief

Come out taffer, looking for you Just a rat, you are safe Stirring music when level nearly over (but can still die!)

Ex: LOTR

Based on Chapter 6, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Vision

The "look" of the game Concept art Broad strokes, not pixel

finished detail Rough sketches of characters or settings

- Paolo Piselli

Based on Chapter 6, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Vision Example

Concept Art

Movie

Touch
Not really touch, but physicality of games look and feel handling of game
Ex: early animation characters did not move right Disney pioneered with physical attributes that felt right, moved with weight

Contrast
Ex: comic-book acrobatics in Smash Bros Ex: bouncing vehicles in Mario Kart Ex: realistic crashes in Mid-town Madness Ex: super-players in Lego Soccer Ex: realism in Madden (actually, guys 1.5 times faster)

Based on Chapter 6, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Interface

Ideal is transparent
Ex: LOTR BfME novel way when click expands with choices Ex: Status can be in formation or appearance (not health hit-points, say) Ex: racing game expects dash Ex: flight sim interface can look like cockpit Ex: less is more (small square more annoying than framing with interface)

Doesnt have to be invisible

Can enhance look and feel

Based on Chapter 6, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Storytelling
No need of story? After all, supposed to be interactive.
If you want to tell a story, write a book. Bah. Consider choose your own adventure

Ex: Doom two factions

1) Strong setting and backstory enhance game 2) Story? We dont need no stinking story!

Action takes care of itself

Interactive can help user create story

Ex: Half-life

Stronger want to suspend disbelief of user but need to make them want to suspend
Ex: Starwars merely some sword fights and vehicle chases. Need to know who Luke is, why hes in the spaceship. Why the battle

Based on Chapter 6, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Toolbox of Storytelling Techniques

Best

facts Details revealed to audience let them figure it out Get emotional involvement from audience Storytellers knew tricks for creating good stories long before Shakespeare Game Designers should employ
Obstacles, Plot Points, Foreshadowing (More next)

not chunks of action with static

Based on Chapter 6, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Obstacles

Old man runs to hero in inn.

on hill. You have to kill it.
Poor

Says Vampire

Old man enters inn.

Avoids hero. Purchases crucifix from another. Mumbles you better have one if you are in these parts.
Not great, but better. Has obstacle

Viewer must find out himself/herself Tricked into level of acceptance not
obtained if just told, too artificial
Based on Chapter 6, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Foreshadowing

A story depicts the intrusion of the world

on status quo

Foreshadowing occurs early, before

intrusion, hints at what is to come

Ex: AoE settlement grows to large city Ex: Total Recall construction worker spy

Ex: AoE small bandits come, fought off Ex: Total Recall dream of spy

Based on Chapter 6, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Personalization
Novice author Ex: save the world, because big
But not compelling, so only you can save it Still weak

Need to add person reason so audience cares

Ex: you have two hours to save the world versus you have two hours to find your niece lost at sunset Ex: Luke told must save galaxy. Why? Drawn in by personal (Princess Leia)

Careful not to make personal hook in backstory might skip

Based on Chapter 6, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Resistance

Back of mind saying it isnt true Ex: Bruce Willis, drinking at dingy strip
Need to pull them along

club. Two suits say you must save president from terrorist. Does he jump up and get to work? No. Snarls Im retired. Takes another drink.
We want him to change his mind. Rooting for him before main character does.

Based on Chapter 6, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Plot Points (1 of 2)
Importance of confounding expectations
Ex: Gandalf on quest to Mount Doom. Boring if that is exactly what happens

Gets killed early on (and comes back), not expected

Adventure games benefit most, but can do for other games, too Aristotle reversal, discovery, calamity
Ex: trying to save kid, causing her death (reversal) Ex: finding Swiss account number on victim (discovery) Ex: bomb going off, killing hero (calamity)

Based on Chapter 6, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Plot Points (2 of 2)
Games, too.
Ex: strategy game find cliff so army built up wont work (reversal) Ex: tunnel for small commando force (discovery)

Whammo every 10 minutes, turn story in different direction

Big ones (Luke, I am your father) divide into levels or acts

Movies - setup, conflict, resolution

But games whole season (40 hours), not one movie Best if can integrate in game without cut-scenes

Early plot points deepen mystery, later clear it up (not always completely) Overarching structure, hierarchical in plot points

Based on Chapter 6, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Suspense

Ex: Unbeatable foe (Gorgon, only beat by

lure to trap). With save game let hero try. After 9 times, try something else.

Instead, provide clues, suspense.

Death of lead character destroys illusion

Bodies, rotting, see NPC get eaten. Hear sounds. Can see gorgon survive rock crash.

Based on Chapter 6, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Dialog
One picture worth a thousand words
Dont have needless dialog when visual will do

Good dialog serves more than one purpose

Ex: telling about bomb. How long? Plenty of time smoke cigarette, call mom dont read War and Peace. Reminds of mortality.

Dont tell what know, but also reveal

Do you expect me to talk? No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die

Surprise

Based on Chapter 6, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Resolution
Should be:
Hard won no reward is satisfying if too easy (most computer games not this) Not obvious dont want ending one been seeing for 10 hours (yet should still make sense looking back) Satisfying usually morally (hero wins) but could be aesthetically (tragedy) Consistent with character, style development Achieve closure resolve story

Many examples of stories/games where above fails

Diablo 2 defeat Diablo then 60 seconds to end. Might and Magic 2 long struggle, mystery. Very end, control panel 15 minutes to decode Fourscore and seven years Solved it, asteroid missed, thank you and go home Ex: A Christmas Story decoder ring drink Ovaltine

Based on Chapter 6, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Change

Stories set in interesting times

No Sir Gawain shops for bread. Rather, marries hag, one week until green knight chops head off Sometimes, return to normal No Frodo lives in Shire with friends, rather learns of evil, innocence to selfknowledge
Based on Chapter 6, Game Architecture and Design, by Rollings and Morris

Inner change is often point of story

Whats Next?

Art (2d, 3d, audio) Architecture Wrap up