Wednesday, April 29, 2009
The Future of RTS
My favorite genre is Real Time Strategy Games, a field where user generated content is already employed quite liberally. As we discussed in class balance issues have arisen in RTS content, from Warcraft II's lack of random player placement on custom maps, and has been resolved... mostly, in more recent games such as Starcraft and Warcraft III. So where does user generated content go from here? With the push for consistent worlds a whole new structure in RTS could arise. Player created maps are uploaded at their creation, in a manner similar to Spore creatures. These maps become small planets that spawn randomly several places in a vast universe. Once A player conquers a map it becomes part of their "permanent" empire, A player can fight any player on any map to try to win that map from another player. Maps that are battled more often are perceived as more popular, and thus more iterations of that map will be spawned in the universe. The end result is a universe with self regulating map selections that is completely user generated.
Tuesday, April 21, 2009
World Building
The tool set of Bruce Branit's World Builder and Little big Planet are comparable,the main difference lies in the interface. The Little Big Planet world builder interface is somewhat limited because it's input device is a Playstation controller. Given this limitation however, the interface is intuitive and creative. The problem for dealing with a third dimension with an input device that is not designed for such a task is solved by creating three planes each of which are two dimensional levels.
In Banit's video, the interface is holographic and utilizes touch controls to create 3D environments. Although "buttons" are still utilized, most of the creation is done through gestures and motions. The nature of the holographic world makes three dimensional editing easier on a conceptual level because it is much easier to understand how the vertices relate to each other in space when it is a simple task to walk around the object, but upon closer inspection, this interface is not too different form Little Big Planet.
The button commands are very similar, of course, mapped commands accessed by touching a designated spot. The menus that display various texture options are also very similar, both by design and function. The main difference in interface would appear to be the analog stick "smearing" of objects versus the elegant gesture commands in the video. Conceptually though, an analog stick is little more than a very basic tracking device to determine the position of the player's thumb, and track it's motion to commit it into game commands. The interfaces are nearly identical in design, but Banit's world adds another level of depth and sophistication.
As for the aspect of world building, I'd have to say yes, these activities to be world building on the grounds that they create environments that can can be interacted with. When one gets philosophical on what it means to inhabit a world, or what constitutes a world's existence, the answer could be as simple as a doodle on a piece of paper is evidence of an entire world in which that drawing is a part of, or a world could require every detail to be addressed.
If the latter choice is selected then every step towards realism requires an exponential amount of effort, from randomly generated wind currents that have a minimal effect on physics, to the position of the sun in the sky relative to the season, to the presence of small rips or cuts of specks of dirt on character clothing as they interact with the environment; the world is never really "complete".
Therefore the most defendable position, in this author's opinion, is to simply accept any creation as evidence of it's own possible world, and thus an act of world building.
In Banit's video, the interface is holographic and utilizes touch controls to create 3D environments. Although "buttons" are still utilized, most of the creation is done through gestures and motions. The nature of the holographic world makes three dimensional editing easier on a conceptual level because it is much easier to understand how the vertices relate to each other in space when it is a simple task to walk around the object, but upon closer inspection, this interface is not too different form Little Big Planet.
The button commands are very similar, of course, mapped commands accessed by touching a designated spot. The menus that display various texture options are also very similar, both by design and function. The main difference in interface would appear to be the analog stick "smearing" of objects versus the elegant gesture commands in the video. Conceptually though, an analog stick is little more than a very basic tracking device to determine the position of the player's thumb, and track it's motion to commit it into game commands. The interfaces are nearly identical in design, but Banit's world adds another level of depth and sophistication.
As for the aspect of world building, I'd have to say yes, these activities to be world building on the grounds that they create environments that can can be interacted with. When one gets philosophical on what it means to inhabit a world, or what constitutes a world's existence, the answer could be as simple as a doodle on a piece of paper is evidence of an entire world in which that drawing is a part of, or a world could require every detail to be addressed.
If the latter choice is selected then every step towards realism requires an exponential amount of effort, from randomly generated wind currents that have a minimal effect on physics, to the position of the sun in the sky relative to the season, to the presence of small rips or cuts of specks of dirt on character clothing as they interact with the environment; the world is never really "complete".
Therefore the most defendable position, in this author's opinion, is to simply accept any creation as evidence of it's own possible world, and thus an act of world building.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
The Future Soon (with all due respect to Mr. Coulton)
In ten years there will be rocket cars, but of course no on would use them when teleporting is so much cheaper and easier. We will hover along perfect glass walkways adorned with floating illuminating orbs.
Really? 10 years? I can't see things changing all that much. If Casternova is right then MMO's will take off and I'll have my dream job of creating game art professionally. The government likely won't change all that much in 2 and a half presidents. Digital games will hopefully be protected as speech, and games will be simply accepted to have a voluntary self regulated rating system like film.
The real fun of this assignment though comes from the wild speculation about the internet; and if our reading has thought us nothing, it's that wild speculation is the way to go. So We will browse the internet as Avatars, with privacy settings that allow a figure to be anonymous until identified. Anyone on a website could talk with anyone else on that website, and discuss it's content. Perhaps spaces could be established where users could chat, I think I will dub them "chat rooms".(For those of you who did not read, Casternova speculates how players will be represented by "avatars" in the future)
Bottom line is not much changes in 10 years. We will think the fashion, technology, and music from the previous 10 years will be laughably bad, and insist that the current generation of fashion, technology, and music is truly inspiring and fantastic. That pretty much sums it up.
Really? 10 years? I can't see things changing all that much. If Casternova is right then MMO's will take off and I'll have my dream job of creating game art professionally. The government likely won't change all that much in 2 and a half presidents. Digital games will hopefully be protected as speech, and games will be simply accepted to have a voluntary self regulated rating system like film.
The real fun of this assignment though comes from the wild speculation about the internet; and if our reading has thought us nothing, it's that wild speculation is the way to go. So We will browse the internet as Avatars, with privacy settings that allow a figure to be anonymous until identified. Anyone on a website could talk with anyone else on that website, and discuss it's content. Perhaps spaces could be established where users could chat, I think I will dub them "chat rooms".(For those of you who did not read, Casternova speculates how players will be represented by "avatars" in the future)
Bottom line is not much changes in 10 years. We will think the fashion, technology, and music from the previous 10 years will be laughably bad, and insist that the current generation of fashion, technology, and music is truly inspiring and fantastic. That pretty much sums it up.
Wednesday, April 1, 2009
Diablo II: Lord of Destruction
Why Diablo II: The History of Diablo II Lord of Destruction
Diablo II was the sequel to the popular RPG Diablo, released November 30, 1996. A third party expansion was released for Diablo entitled Diablo: Hellfire on November 24, 1997. Diablo II was released June 29, 2000, less than 3 years later and its expansion, Diablo II: Lord of Destruction was released June 29, 2001. With Diablo III in development, but still yet to be announced as of April, 2009, Diablo II: Lord of Destruction presents the longest run of a Diablo Game without being amended by an additional expansion, or replaced by a sequel, ever.
The Persistent World
What separate the Diablo series from most MMORPGs is the nature of the persistent world, and the dynamics of the in game interaction. The games utilize Blizzard’s Battle.net online gaming system which stores player information and hosts games directly on a region specific server. Unlike most MMORPGs however, there is not a finite number of preset server worlds for players to choose from, instead the players choose to join a world space or “game” created by another player or they create their own game that other players may join. Within all world spaces several aspects will always be persistent: the town layouts for all five towns will always be the same, and the basic non playable characters will always exist in the same location, as well the player’s “stash” which functions as an additional area to store gold and items. The layout of the outside world also maintains a degree of persistency; the order in which the different areas connect is always the same, but where those connections are, as well as the areas themselves are generated semi-randomly each time a game is created. This brings us to the next unique facet of Diablo II: LOD.
The Random World
In lieu of static maps with units spawned at specific points, Diablo II: LOD utilizes semi random generation of enemies and terrain to create unique worlds each time a game is started. Although some enemies like act bosses and other super uniques remain constant throughout the game, many of the other monsters are chosen from a pool of possible monsters and spawned randomly throughout the maps. The “drops”, or the gold and items that a monster drops when it dies, are also significantly more random than in most MMORPGs. The drops from monsters are based on Monster Level, which determines the quality of equipment that can be dropped: Elite, Exceptional, or Normal, and the enchantment level of that equipment, Unique, Rare, Set, Magic, or Normal. The enchantments on all Magic and Rare equipment are also randomly generated. Thus getting better equipment requires killing higher level monsters, and multiple qualities of the equipment dropped will always be randomized from an incomprehensibly large pool of possibilities. The level of randomness is item drops, combined with the existence of items that can only be used by effectively by specific classes, or players with specific skills and the unusual economy of Diablo II presents itself
The Economy
Gold in Diablo II is essentially useless. The economy focuses entirely around the bartering and trading of useful items. Relative value of items vary dramatically form player to player, and as there is no real set currency, the trading games are often unpredictable and require the player to possess a certain level of out of game bartering skills. The game is made more interesting by the extremely limited carrying space on characters and stashes and the lack of any formalized item storing, transferring, or trading systems outside of one on one player trade windows. To compensate for this scarcity, many players create “mule” characters, or characters that are only used to store items. The lack of a formal system of transferring items to characters on the same account leaves players with two viable options for transferring their stored goods. They can either trade the goods to an intermediary, sign off, then sign back on with a different character then trade the goods back, or a far riskier approach. The player can sign on and create a game with a password, then stay in the game for a few moments until the game is set properly in the server for permanence, then drop their items and leave the world, and sign back on with a different character and join the empty world. If the player does not return to the empty world fast enough, it, and all of the items in it, will be deleted when the server clears the memory. All of these factors keep the marketplaces of Diablo II: LOD vibrant and unique from day to day.
Core Mechanics
Examining the parts of a game does not do justice to the game as a whole; the pieces of Diablo II: LOD create an experience that is unique even in the MMORPG crazed market of today. The games brilliance lies in its simplicity. There is no leveling up gathering of herbs, or gaining proficiency in creating medicines, nor is there weaving fabric, or making armor. The core mechanic of the game is to go out and kill monsters. The monsters are always different because of the semi-persistent, and semi random world. Your economical prowess is directly proportional to your character level because item drops are dependent entirely on monster level and higher monster levels require higher leveled characters. Furthermore players cannot cheat the system by taking a group of 8 players up to fight monsters of a much higher level because the world automatically readjusts the difficulty of the world based on the number of players present. In other words, if there are more players, there will still be the same number of monsters, and those monsters will still drop equipment of that monster level, but they will be harder to kill, and drop enough equipment for all the players.
The Social Experience
Diablo II: LOD takes a unique stance on social game play. The game has a fully functional single player mode, as well as the ability to play LAN games with friends using single player characters all stored on the player’s computer instead of the Battle.net server. By design the game can be beaten through all three modes (Normal, Nightmare, and Hell) with a single player. However, the relative uselessness of gold from selling powerful items to vendors, versus the returns for trading items with players strongly encourages a more social experience, involving trading with other players. Furthermore many character abilities, like Paladin Auras, or Barbarian War Cries provide bonuses not only for the player, but also for fellow party members. A casual glance at the game lists of Diablo II: LOD will reflect the social aspects of the game, from games entitled “MarketPlace” or “Trade” to “Kill Baal” or “RescueCain” (specific quest in the game).
Diablo II was the sequel to the popular RPG Diablo, released November 30, 1996. A third party expansion was released for Diablo entitled Diablo: Hellfire on November 24, 1997. Diablo II was released June 29, 2000, less than 3 years later and its expansion, Diablo II: Lord of Destruction was released June 29, 2001. With Diablo III in development, but still yet to be announced as of April, 2009, Diablo II: Lord of Destruction presents the longest run of a Diablo Game without being amended by an additional expansion, or replaced by a sequel, ever.
The Persistent World
What separate the Diablo series from most MMORPGs is the nature of the persistent world, and the dynamics of the in game interaction. The games utilize Blizzard’s Battle.net online gaming system which stores player information and hosts games directly on a region specific server. Unlike most MMORPGs however, there is not a finite number of preset server worlds for players to choose from, instead the players choose to join a world space or “game” created by another player or they create their own game that other players may join. Within all world spaces several aspects will always be persistent: the town layouts for all five towns will always be the same, and the basic non playable characters will always exist in the same location, as well the player’s “stash” which functions as an additional area to store gold and items. The layout of the outside world also maintains a degree of persistency; the order in which the different areas connect is always the same, but where those connections are, as well as the areas themselves are generated semi-randomly each time a game is created. This brings us to the next unique facet of Diablo II: LOD.
The Random World
In lieu of static maps with units spawned at specific points, Diablo II: LOD utilizes semi random generation of enemies and terrain to create unique worlds each time a game is started. Although some enemies like act bosses and other super uniques remain constant throughout the game, many of the other monsters are chosen from a pool of possible monsters and spawned randomly throughout the maps. The “drops”, or the gold and items that a monster drops when it dies, are also significantly more random than in most MMORPGs. The drops from monsters are based on Monster Level, which determines the quality of equipment that can be dropped: Elite, Exceptional, or Normal, and the enchantment level of that equipment, Unique, Rare, Set, Magic, or Normal. The enchantments on all Magic and Rare equipment are also randomly generated. Thus getting better equipment requires killing higher level monsters, and multiple qualities of the equipment dropped will always be randomized from an incomprehensibly large pool of possibilities. The level of randomness is item drops, combined with the existence of items that can only be used by effectively by specific classes, or players with specific skills and the unusual economy of Diablo II presents itself
The Economy
Gold in Diablo II is essentially useless. The economy focuses entirely around the bartering and trading of useful items. Relative value of items vary dramatically form player to player, and as there is no real set currency, the trading games are often unpredictable and require the player to possess a certain level of out of game bartering skills. The game is made more interesting by the extremely limited carrying space on characters and stashes and the lack of any formalized item storing, transferring, or trading systems outside of one on one player trade windows. To compensate for this scarcity, many players create “mule” characters, or characters that are only used to store items. The lack of a formal system of transferring items to characters on the same account leaves players with two viable options for transferring their stored goods. They can either trade the goods to an intermediary, sign off, then sign back on with a different character then trade the goods back, or a far riskier approach. The player can sign on and create a game with a password, then stay in the game for a few moments until the game is set properly in the server for permanence, then drop their items and leave the world, and sign back on with a different character and join the empty world. If the player does not return to the empty world fast enough, it, and all of the items in it, will be deleted when the server clears the memory. All of these factors keep the marketplaces of Diablo II: LOD vibrant and unique from day to day.
Core Mechanics
Examining the parts of a game does not do justice to the game as a whole; the pieces of Diablo II: LOD create an experience that is unique even in the MMORPG crazed market of today. The games brilliance lies in its simplicity. There is no leveling up gathering of herbs, or gaining proficiency in creating medicines, nor is there weaving fabric, or making armor. The core mechanic of the game is to go out and kill monsters. The monsters are always different because of the semi-persistent, and semi random world. Your economical prowess is directly proportional to your character level because item drops are dependent entirely on monster level and higher monster levels require higher leveled characters. Furthermore players cannot cheat the system by taking a group of 8 players up to fight monsters of a much higher level because the world automatically readjusts the difficulty of the world based on the number of players present. In other words, if there are more players, there will still be the same number of monsters, and those monsters will still drop equipment of that monster level, but they will be harder to kill, and drop enough equipment for all the players.
The Social Experience
Diablo II: LOD takes a unique stance on social game play. The game has a fully functional single player mode, as well as the ability to play LAN games with friends using single player characters all stored on the player’s computer instead of the Battle.net server. By design the game can be beaten through all three modes (Normal, Nightmare, and Hell) with a single player. However, the relative uselessness of gold from selling powerful items to vendors, versus the returns for trading items with players strongly encourages a more social experience, involving trading with other players. Furthermore many character abilities, like Paladin Auras, or Barbarian War Cries provide bonuses not only for the player, but also for fellow party members. A casual glance at the game lists of Diablo II: LOD will reflect the social aspects of the game, from games entitled “MarketPlace” or “Trade” to “Kill Baal” or “RescueCain” (specific quest in the game).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)