Embedded Files
LJ:
discussion - LOTR Shadow of Mordor Nemesis System
how our choices affect game endings - multiple endings and "good"/"bad" ends
[play Brothers: A Tale of Two Sons]
MDA analysis (Death Stranding):
M - shift cargo weight left and right using keys to keep balance, scanning tool
D - transport cargo safely and manage resources
A - lonely
skill atoms - in Catan 'Obtaining Resources': the action is to roll the dice, the simulation is the dice landing on a number with a corresponding tile, the feedback is drawing a resource from said tile, and the synthesis is understanding that rolling the dice results in collecting resources that can be used to build settlements (next atom).
good feedback is constructive criticism - targeted and specific; clear, does not contradict the designer's goal
useless feedback is vague, irrelevant, contradictory to the game's intent e.g. not target market
does the feedback meet the designer's intent - is it useful/relevant?
I heard about skill atoms for the first time this week, and I was interested to know how they work. I was expecting something more along the lines of a breakdown of what skills are, and a little bit of psychology behind real-life uses for skills we learn from games. It was a surprise to learn that they're about how skills are gained instead.
We also went over what good and bad feedback looks like. This was very important for me, because I sometimes struggle to identify constructive criticism as a good thing. Learning that good feedback, even if it's negative, can help make a project better was something I think is necessary for everyone. It was reassuring to be taught that criticism is only worth anything if it's specific and balanced; being told that your project is terrible, without being told exactly why or how, is worthless feedback.
I had a question about the difference between skills and actions, and was a little confused about whether they were the same thing or not. Skills refer to the atom as a whole, and actions are the things the player actually does e.g. push a button or roll a dice. My questions for next week's class:
Is it acceptable to have any basic assumptions about a player when designing a game (like do they understand that pushing a button may trigger something in the game), or is it best to not have any assumptions at all?
Are skill atom chains an efficient way of mapping out an entire game when designing it?
I plan to apply the information I've learned so far to analyse the games I play. I want to be able to take notes on what makes them enjoyable and engaging so that I can use that info later on when designing my own game. Having said that, it's also just interesting to know how these games work at a fundamental level.
Cook, D. (n.d.). The Chemistry Of Game Design. Gamasutra. https://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/1524/the_chemistry_of_game_design.php?print=1
Pre-class notes - Skill Atoms:
"one part polluted gameplay with three parts market voodoo" - what does the author mean?
testable models of human psychology
argues that games can't be looked at from a purely logical, mathematical point of view; we must understand human psych and structure our game around it to make a meaningful experience for the player
Player Model:
"The player is entity that is driven, consciously or subconsciously, to learn new skills high in perceived value."
Skills:
an action or behaviour the player learns in order to successfully interact with the world e.g. reading a map or hammering a nail
Driven to learn:
humans play instinctively
rewarded for learning
the brain releases endomorphin when we learn something new - the 'aha' moment - and we're wired to constantly crave it
Perceived value:
"Players pursue skills with high perceived value over skills with low perceived value"
from an evolutionary perspective, we play to learn skills in a safe, nonthreatening environment that we use later in more practical ways
we stop when we don't see any real-world use for our skills
perception of skill value is more important than actual value
we tend to rely on our gut feelings when making decisions
action:
the player does something to interact with the game e.g. pressing a button
simulation:
the game simulation is updated according to the action e.g. a door opens
feedback:
the game lets the player know that the simulation has changed, through auditory, visual or tactile clues e.g. the sound of a lock clicking and the door swinging open
understanding/synthesis:
the player processes the feedback and reacts. If they feel they have made progress or gained a new skill, they feel pleasure. If they feel they have not, they may feel frustration.
Typically, skill atoms require more than one pass before the player forms a mental model of the function - observing that something interesting happened and then testing your theory of how/why.
Atoms feed into each other as the player learns more and more skills
Eventually, you can map an entire game by linking together enough skill atoms, and build a detailed network of every predicted outcome
Humans can't predict more than a few atoms down the chain
skill atom
Status of atoms in the chain:
mastered - recently completed
partial mastery - still working on this skill
unexercised - yet to attempt
active - using as a stepping stone to the next skill
burnt out - lost interest in pursuing this skill
early stage - when the next atom in the chain is never reached because the player has burnt out the foundational ones
later stage - when a burnout occurs further down the skill chain and devalues active skills
Burnout is a good way of identifying and measuring which elements of the game are not working for players/not keeping their interest
Page updated
Report abuse