Phase 1: Ideas & Planning

I'm currently in Phase 1 of development for my nostalgia-themed, contraption-based game.  This is concerned with getting the basic ideas in place, and testing whether the game is feasible.

EGGLES!

As identified in initial brainstorming, the aim of the game will be to set up a chain of events with the goal of hitting a final trigger point.  If any of the events fail, the trigger will not be hit.

The primary mechanic will be based on Weebles: small egg-shaped toys popular in the 1970s & 80s, they wobble around on their base but stay upright due to a low centre-of-gravity.  Available in a range of characters, they come with playsets allowing them to be used like dolls or (limited) action figures.

Weebles originate from America and are based on based 'Punching Clown' toys featured on a long-running TV show called Romper Room.  They were developed by Playskool toys (part of Milton Bradley and later Hasbro) but sold in the UK by Airfix.

Airfix Weebles had a very different appearance to their American cousins: rather than having a uniform egg shape, they were moulded to character designs using pink plastic.

Following a brief flirtation with "New Generation" Weebles, they appear to have reverted universally to the US version with clear plastic and flat faces.

I'm going to use the Airfix pink Weebles for my game, as they will hit the main nostalgia triggers for my older target audience, yet will be recognisable as Weebles to younger players.

The main inspiration for the whole game mechanic comes from my sister Julia's Weebles Daredevils Circus set.  This set included a spring-loaded cannon, hoops, see-saw, diving board, trampoline and stilts.  We would set these up -- with other toys, occsionally -- to form a contraption-style chain of events: the cannon Weeble would hit the stilts, knocking them over; this would then knock the diving board, which would topple a Weeble onto the to trampoline, etc.

Now, there is a slight problem with this whole concept ... and that is the name.  "Weebles" is trademarked by Hasbro, so I needed a new name.  After a fair bit of brainstorming and throwing out ideas, I came to settle on "Eggles".  My wife suggested a catchphrase, and the whole thing took shape:

Eggles waggle, but they don't fall 'ova'.

One of the key aspects of Eggles is that they don't tumble (not at least without a lot of help).  That means that they move by falling, sliding or wobbling (i.e. domino-style cascade of movement).

Planning

So what other objects would be needed to build a contraption?  I've drawn up a very short initial list of items which are immediately useful.  Obviously this will expand dramatically in later phases.

I'm using a finger to start the whole process rolling (no pun intended).  At some stage I'll try to find a more nostalgic alternative, but it'll do for now.

The Big Trak will form a tool to get longer horizontal movement. Again, to avoid trademark & copyright infringement I'll rename it as "Space Truk" and change the appearance a little.

Finally, for vertical movement I'm currently using an alien jumping toy (sprung-loaded with sucker, and with long wobbly arms).

Other items being considered include Evil Knievel's motorbike (which will need winding up -- the player could do this as live interaction), plastic parachuting soldier, the Weeble cannon, and others like see-saw, trapeze and domino toppling.

Having created a quick rigid-body physics test video on Maya, the next post will catalogue the final part of Phase 1 where I will create physics simulations in the Unity engine.

Contraption Game overview

I'm currently designing a nostalgia-driven, contraption-style puzzle game involving Weebles, Big Trak, and other items from the 1970s & 1980s.

I'll be posting more detailed development notes later this week, but the current plan -- in a nutshell -- is to work through five iterations of rapid development:

• Phase 1: Proof-of-Concept.  This involves checking how objects will move, and whether there is potential in this kind of game.  I need to establish this quickly, before putting in any heavy design work, because failure at this stage could kill the project dead.
• Phase 2: Draft Level.  This will be a very rough version of a working level, just to establish the playability and identify where any problems are likely to occur.
• Phase 3: Working Level.  This will be a proper prototype, allowing alpha testing to be carried out.
• Phase 4: Several working levels.  This will be a presentable version of the game, ready for beta testing.
• Phase 5: Release Candidate / General Availability.  This will be a final version of the game, able to be played by the general public.

I've been working today on Phase 1: Proof-of-Concept.  The main focus is the physics of Weeble movement, which presents a number of problems -- not least the fact that Weebles wobble, but they don't fall down.  Which means they don't roll easily, so they have to slide to get from place to place.

I'll reveal the full details in a later post, but I thought it would be a good idea to illustrate the grand overview of the project with some 3D animation footage I produced while testing the rigid-body physics for Weebles:

As you can see, using Weebles gives a very particular mechanic for movement.  I'm still working out the specifics of how the player will interact with all this, but the basic idea appears to be sound.

Long time, no post

It's been STUPIDLY busy at work these last two weeks (tons of paperwork until the early hours) so I've not had a chance to update the blog until now.

As a result, I've got a pile of not-quite-finished posts which need publishing!  So... you'll be seeing a deluge of posts from me as I "flush my buffer" (programmer speak).

Most significantly, last week saw a major change of focus after a meeting with ace course tutor Josh Taylor, It became clear that the pianola-themed game design was heading down a dead end, so I'm now working frantically on a new nostalgia-themed interactive puzzle game.  (You can read the details which led up to that, and the developments since, in the forthcoming posts.)

Please note that I'll be back-dating the posts to the dates they were written (or intended for publication).  I recognise that such time-twisting calendar-wrangling antics will probably unleash the Chrono-Cops on my sorry ass, but it's a necessity in order to avoid creating a gargantuan twenty-posts-on-the-same-day entry on Blogger.  (I'm not sure how this temporal deviance will affect email subscribers, so please check Strontium Blog online if things seem a little quiet the next few days!)

Puzzle: Initial ideas

As mentioned in the previous post, I'm now focused on creating a nostalgia-driven, contraption-style puzzle game.

This means starting to get down to the whole action of designing, which means following a design process.  With no specific deadline, I've decided to go for an organic process of development following the spiral model.

I started with a massive brainstorming process, drawing up lists of potential items which could be included in the game.  One of this things which stuck out was Weebles, which I'd previously identified as a possible candidate for the MacGuffin driving the narrative.

For those not familiar with these loveable, egg-shaped toys, their unique selling point (USP) is outlined in the advertising slogan "Weebles wobble but they don't fall down."  The eggs are weighted so that they always right themselves.

This introduces an interesting movement, as they don't roll properly.  I like this idea, and feel it is a good foundation for a game, and very much in keeping with my original intention to apply nostalgia not just to the aesthetic but to the mechanic as well.

As you can see from my early notes (below), the main focus of my initial development phase is trying to find a way to (a) genericise the brand (because Weebles is still trademarked, though thankfully their USP does not appear to be patented), and (b) work out how to use that in a game.

I found myself stuck on point (a) -- more work to do there -- but on point (b) I found there were a number of interesting contraption-based games which offer a model to consider.  Most interesting is that they are all 2D side-on games, making extensive use of physics & gravity.  This made me reconsider the viewpoint used in the game, which was originally going to be isometric 3D.

These ideas will be more fully explored in the next couple of posts, which will include the more detailed thoughts for interaction between objects, and examine the competition in the contraption-based puzzle game market.

Changing the project

Had a very productive meeting recently with MA Games course tutor Josh Taylor.

Problems with Pianola-themed game

As I outlined my progress of the pianola-themed game it became clear that the project was not where it should be, and starting to stumble.  As Josh pointed out, the pianola concept itself -- which had seemed such a good idea at the time -- was starting to lead me away further-and-further away from the key concept, i.e. the application of nostalgia in games design.

Even worse: as we discussed the primary mechanics -- a traversal-style platform game combined with programmable/pre-programmed sequences -- it became clear that these would work better in other contexts.

In short, the pianola has to go!

Deflection & programmed games

One of the things we discussed was an alternative idea I'd had for bouncing objects off piano keys, with a programmed key movement affecting the way the object bounced.

Josh suggested looking at Reflexions by YoYo Games, is an interactive puzzle in which the player toggles mirrors to deflect a ball at right angles: guiding it from a start point, through waypoints, avoiding traps, to a final goal.  You can play it online here.

It's fun to play and, unlike the programming-based games I'd previously examined, involves real-time problem-solving.  This really appealed to me, because I dislike the notion of having to spend too much time setting a game up before getting to the fun part.  (That's one of the reasons why I detest Kerplunk!)

On a side note, YoYo also produce the GameMaker 2D game engine, which I use with my first year students.  It has its faults -- and is hideously overpriced for HTML5 & mobile app development -- but is relatively easy to use.

If you play the online version of Reflexions, you may notice that GameMaker's HTML5 export is very choppy.  The much cheaper Construct2, an upstart competitor, produces far better HTML5 (easily ported to Android & iOS) but unfortunately suffers from one of the most illogical & impenetrable user interfaces I've ever seen.  GameMaker still seems to be the best tool around for learning to produce 2D games.

Going back to pre-programmed games, Josh also introduced me to Whizzball.  This is similar to the Cow Maze type of game: the player must lay out a fixed series of pieces into a playing grid; when the game begins, these will deflect a ball as it travels from start to final goal.  You can play the game online here.

This game has a number of very nice touches.  First is the gorgeous isometric view -- a very pleasing aesthetic, yet just the right angle to ensure that everything is easy to see.  Great colours and very clear metaphors.

The second nice touch was the handle on the 'flinger', which can be set to different strengths to adjust the distance the ball is thrown.  This makes a pleasant change to the usual drag-and-drop-and-press-go operation of this kind of game.

The final feature which caught my attention is the fact that most of the puzzle levels are designed by players, which means that (a) the game is not restricted by the game developer's project time constraints; (b) new levels will keep appearing all the time; and (c) it fosters a sense of community.

The puzzles are self-rated on a scale from "very easy" to "very hard", and players give a five-star rating to feed back on the quality of the puzzle.  Presumably, with this aimed at a kids' market, the usernames and titles are moderated; otherwise, this is a low-maintenance way to extend the number of puzzles available.

Of course, creating user-designed levels for other people to play is a very old idea (recently given a major boost by LittleBigPlanet) but it doesn't always work well.  Here, they seem to have nailed it.

New project direction?

We discussed the idea of having some kind of Whizzball-inspired puzzle controlled by music, maybe filling in missing notes with actions at set times.  Using nursery rhymes or popular songs (subject to clearance nightmares).

Another consideration was contraption-based games, with set goals such as those found in the old TV show The Great Egg Race.

The legendary Professor Heinz Wolff.

A contraption-based game would re-connect back to the core nostalgia theme: we could make use of all kinds of objects, including spring-and-sucker toys, slinky, Big Trak, Weebles, parachute soldiers, model railways, etc.

The idea of connecting Whizzball with nostalgic items appealed greatly to me, and I could visualise the ball rolling onto a Big Trak which would transport it across to another platform; using a spring-and-sucker toy to launch the ball into the air.  This certainly had potential.

Josh suggested titling this "Dad's bedroom" -- for the father this is a proud trip down memory lane; for a kid it's a chance to laugh at how stupid & 'sad' his dad's childhood must have been.

As we talked I realised that I had a number of things I wanted from this game:

• Live interaction, just like Reflexions; if necessary, have a 'wind-down' delayed start to allow the player to start positioning items.  I want the player's adrenaline to be going.  This also increases the player's feeling of smugness, having beaten a 'live' opponent.
• No time to plan in advance.  Thrown in at the deep end.  That way, the player is likely to feel challenged rather than frustrated on their first turn at a level, giving them an emotional reason to beat the game.  This can be linked to flow as the player's skill develops, and their experience increases.
• Pause, with game hidden.  (To my mind, 'pause' is a vital part of entertainment.  "Live pause" is a big selling point on modern digital TV recorders.  Why?  Because real life suffers from interruptions, and a game is just a game, and not life-or-death.)  If the player pauses, they can't use this to gain an advantage in planning strategy.  Adds to the challenge.

My final thought was to replace the ball with a nostalgic item, such as a Weeble.

A designer needs to design!

This was a good meeting, because it stopped me heading further down a dead end, and got me raring to go in a new direction.

However, Josh had one last thing to say: "Get some pencil and paper!"

Yup, I forgot the golden rule of Games Design.  A designer must design.  There's a place for research, but the emphasis this term is very much on design practice.  So I'd better get on with some!

Alternative project ideas

I'm continuing to explore the application of nostalgia in game design by focusing on themed games which are based on a specific nostalgic entity.

This has been going on in the background for three months, but I'm aware that I haven't published anything about it and felt it was time to bring it back to the foreground.

Potential subjects

I started by drawing up lists of childhood associations from different eras.  Selected highlights include...

• Pre-1950s: hula hoop, spinning top, fairground shooting games
• 1950s: Dan Dare, Meccano, cowboys & indians, pogo stick, model railways.
• 1960s: Thunderbirds, Scooby Doo, old-style police uniforms (e.g. traffic policemen with striped sleeve bands), Ladybird books, Spangles
• 1970s: Space Hopper, Chopper bicycle, Rainbow TV show, Jamie and the Magic Torch, spud guns, toy miniature chocolate dispensers, Space:1999, Tonka toys, Lego, fuzzy felt, Stickle bricks, action/war comics, walkie-talkies, Weebles, ViewMaster, Evil Knievel toy, Lucozade, Monster Munch
• 1980s: Rubiks cube, Transformers, Smurfs, VHS tapes, Trolls / My Little Pony / Strawberry Shortcake, He-Man, Simon electronic game, Big Trak, Gary Numan, Adam Ant, old skool hip-hop, Cabbage Patch Dolls
• 1990s: Pokemon, Power Rangers, TMNT, POGs, Super Mario & 4th/5th generation consoles, Teletubbies, Tamagochi, Tickle Me Elmo
• 2000s: Tweenies, Ben 10

The list is endless, and these represent only a fraction of the suggestions available.

Longevity issues

First thing to notice is how many of these items span a number of decades, such as Lego, Power Rangers and Super Mario, and we are still bombarded with advertising images for them.  Their longevity implies that manufacturers are clearly aware of their popularity.  As such there is limited emotional affect attached to them.

Some long-lasting toys are past their peak and maintain a diminishing (often minimal) level of popularity, and are not prominently advertised.  Examples include Space Hoppers or model railways. This provides better scope for emotional reaction.

There is a niche opening for stronger nostalgic reaction when talking about a specific variant -- e.g. for Lego, old-style people (with bendy arms) or original faceless mini-figures (with blank faces and solid legs).

Others have already been rediscovered & resurrected, and are being used specifically for their nostalgic effect.  Examples include Transformers (recent movies earned $2.7 billion collectively at box office), The Smurfs ($560 million), and 'retro' releases of old products such as Super Mario All-Stars or Big Trak.

Thus the long-lasting and the rediscovered products offer limited potential for releasing a strong emotional reaction, due to their existing prominence in the marketplace.

Copyright nightmare

There is a second issue common to long-lasting and rediscovered products, and it is an issue which has much bigger consequences for my research: copyright & intellectual property (IP) rights.

Probably 80% of the items mentioned in my subject list are trademarked or covered by some kind of copyright.  This is far more wide-ranging than most people realise -- some of the most basic, generic toys are still legally protected in some way:

• Hula Hoop -- the name is trademarked by the Wham-O company (1958).
• Lego brick -- protected by patent (and legally dubious trademark) up until 2005, when a ruling in Mega Bloks' favour finally broke Lego's monopoly on Lego-compatible plastic bricks.
• Frisbee -- name trademark owned by Wham-O company (1959).

Of course, the answer to this is genericisation: creating an imitation product which is recognisable as the original but different enough (or parodying it, which is protected in many countries) to avoid lawsuits.  There are a few cases where this may prove difficult without losing the defining appearance of the product (e.g. Rubik's cube) but generally this is a good solution to the IP issue.

Patterns in Game Design (part 3)

In part 1 & part 2 of my look at the book Patterns in Games Design, I documented a framework for activity within a game and the roles of major game objects.

In this part I look at game mastery.

---

Mastering a game involves a number of factors:

• Empowerment.  "Players must feel they can affect the events and the final outcome of the game"  Wise words -- if you're just a passenger then you might just as well be watching a movie.  Let the player 'gain' access to items by skill, and make these items critical to later success.
• Timing.  Knowing when to do something can be learned from experience.  However, this should be appropriate to the existing skill level of the player.  This can take the form of dodging moving objects or enemies, or timing a double-jump.  This also applies to rhythm-based movement.
• Memory.  This is where players benefit from remembering facts about the game or its state.  This is readily apparent in many room-by-room adventures, which I personally find incredibly tedious.  I suppose the key here is to get the amount of memorising right for the audience: not too much (boring), but not too little (easy).  This may be something which is heavily gender-influenced.
• Inductive reasoning.  In other words, puzzles.  This can also frustrate players in the wrong context.
• Luck.  This one surprised me.  I usually feel that luck is a bad thing in games, as it takes control away from the player.  However, the book suggests that cheating, i.e. "loading the dice", can make the player feel luckier, and lead them to take risks they might not otherwise take.  (I explored this in a previous post, looking at how casinos use this to manipulate players.)
• Predictable consequences.  You can use experience to judge what actions to take if you have some idea of what should happen next.  That's one of the reasons why killing a boss the first time is so hard -- the number of hits required & enemy movement are new to the player.

These points are certainly interesting and worth noting for future reference.

Patterns in Game Design (part 2)

In part 1 of my look at the book Patterns in Games Design, I documented their framework for activity within a game.

In this post I'll be looking at the different types of game object and their significance.  Rather than an exhaustive list, I'm going to focus on the items that I find fascinating or important.

Patterns for game objects

The authors break the list of objects into four categories: game world, objects, abstract objects, and locations.

The game world defines the spacial relationship between objects, i.e. the environment.  This could be a board game layout, or the environment within a level of an FPS.  The world is often based on a grid structure, allowing easy referencing and modular design (e.g. tiled graphics, modular building construction).

One of the interesting topics in this section is the notion of inaccessible areas.  These are regions which the player cannot deliberately enter, such as the corners in Ludo.  These act as safe havens or spawning points, and can be unlocked and made accessible at later stages in the game if desired.

(I came across this issue when building a prototype of the dodgeball game: when the player spawned, there was a significant chance that an enemy ball would collide with the player before they had a chance to move.  I had tried to dynamically postpone spawning until a suitable moment, but this proved to be complex due to the maths required to predict a ball's trajectory (including bouncing).  Yet a zoned area (which the enemy could not enter) would have solved this problem in a stroke.)

Game objects are the entities which are manipulated by the player, such as avatars, or the entities which dynamically affect the game state, such as enemies (including bosses) or obstacles.  This can also include tools such as pick-ups (like health bonuses or a get-out-of-jail-free card) or clues.

Abstract objects are things like the score or number of lives.  These may be critically important within a game, as they provide a goal or a limit on the overall gameplay.

Finally, locations refers but to things which control the game, such as strategically-important positions (for example, the centre position in noughts-and-crosses, or the corners in Othello/Reversi.

Analysing the structure of games allows us to assess how much different elements affect the gameplay and motivation of players.  Although it is a very dry subject, it is essential to finding a consistent approach to game design.