Space of Possibility and Pacing in Casual Game Design

For this week we read an article about PopCap games. This article referenced the Spacing and Pacing within designing a casual game.

First of all I thought I would define what the article believes a 'casual game' is. "Casual Game = games that generally involve less complicated game controls and overall complexity in terms of game play or investment required to get through the game."
Because of this definition I can see that casual games are not necessarily of smaller complexity.

PopCap games are very popular due to their pick up and play appeal. The majority of their games make it possible for any player of any level of skill to compete when playing. The complexity of the games is often hidden from the players. The popularity of the games is also affected by the accessibility being very easy and varied.

Pacing: 
Crafting the players experience.

• Relaxation
• Tension
• Repetition

- Movement Impetuous:

This is and aspect that pushes the player to move on in a level rather than waiting around.

- Tension:

This refers to perceived danger.  It creates illusions for the player without changing the basic mechanics of the game.

- Threat: 

This is where the design has actual power and changes the mechanics of the game to create real danger.

- Tempo
This refers to the time that is taken between each significant decision that the player makes.

Spacing:

• If the spacing in game is limited then the choices a player can make are limited. Due to this the game can become prone to being easily solvable and this can induce boredom.
• However if the spacing is too large then the game play will be slowed. Therefore the game may become boring. With too many choices for the player then there is not enough movement impetuous.

Layering mechanics:

When a new mechanic is shown to the player, they use the new mechanic to progress, rather than continuing with the old mechanics. For example new upgrades, weapons, enemies, maps.

From doing this reading I know have a better understanding of the way designers can affect the players movement within the game by restricting their choices as well as increasing the number of decisions. I have also gained a better understanding in the way designers can directly and indirectly affect the mechanics of the game to put pressure on the player. 

Chance and skill

Last friday we read an article about chance and skill in games. We then discussed what each of the these do to the game experience for a player.

Why chance?:

• Chance offers opportunities for people of different skill levels to win.
• Chance offers more ways to win.
• Chance prevents absolute mastery.
• Chance is very good for adding drama.
• Chance means you cant always rely on the same strategy to mean the same outcome.
• Chance increases the replayability
• Chance makes the game more competetive.

Enhancing decision making:
The essence of most games is the decisions players make. Players of a game with no chance mean they know all the information and know the exact outcome of every decision they make. Therefore some of these decisions are not exciting.

Mechanics of chance:

• Dice
• Cards
• Random number genration
• Fog of War
• Hidden information

Elements of skill:
A good game is a series of interesting decisions. The success of decisions - whether mental or physical reaction- is a measure of skill.
good games also reward them with  immediate and obvious feedback for the decisions they make.

If a game is pure skill it can become boring and doesnt reward those players who are more skilled than others. They can sometimes be seen as unfair.

Blind decisions:
this is where you are asked to make a decision without you having any information on it. This will mean you are unaware of the consequences and also eliminates control.

Obvious decisions:
These are mostly things that should be automated as they are pointless options that dont need to be provided to the player.

Tradeoffs:
This is where there is no right or wrong answer. Just tactics.

-Tradeoff mechanics:

• Auctions - makes a fair way for players to gain an advantage.

Tools for Creating Dramatic Game Ideas

As games designers we must assure that our game will be dramatic, even when we don't have direct control over the narrative, a narrative that isn't scripted in advance, but emerges from the events of the game.

All drama originates from conflict and this conflict comes from contest.
We can only guide players towards this drama due to the lack of control we have. We have to make the players makes the decisions we want so they feel in control but the tension is still arisen.
To help enhance the drama within games, we have to add elements of uncertainty.

Uncertainty:
Making sure the outcome is unknown
- Force : Actually manipulating the game state directly.

• Positive feedback loops: A denoument --> reward to the reader.
• Negative feedback: Draws players together.

-Illusion : manipulating the player perception of the game state without actually changing it.

• Hidden energy: deceiving the player by thinking they're ahead when both players have the same bonus.
• Fog of war: You can only strategise over what you can actually see.
• Escalation: Increasing the drama coming to a climax towards the end.
• Declaration: Making competition to look closer than it actually is.
• Cashing out: A way to level out the competition by reducing the lead. 

Inevitability:
the sense that the contest is moving forward toward resolution.
This is used to show the game is drawing to a close.

Creating Bibliography

The task set was for us to experiment with 'Zotero' by creating a bibliography. I didn't have any luck with Zotero because the computer I was using was not very good and is just odd. However I had a look at the Harvard Referencing System to help me with typing up. So technically I haven't completed the task but I did the best that was available to me at the time.
Here is my attempt at doing so:


-Rosenweig, G. (2011) ActionScript 3.0, Game Programming University, 2nd Ed., Que.


-Koster, R. (2005) Theory of Fun for Game Design., Paraglyph Press.






-Salen, K. Zimmerman, E. (2006) The games design reader: A Rules of Play Anthology. MIT Press


-Peters, J. & Miller, B., 2011. Common Sense Game Design: Steal These Ideas 1st ed., A K Peters/CRC Press.






-Knowledge Quest. (2011) USING VIDEO GAMES TO EMBRACE INQUIRY: learning for life through fun. 40 (1): 66-69


-Turner, M.C., 2006. GAMES PEOPLE PLAY. Black Enterprise, 36(10), p.53.