Monday, November 26, 2007

Week 12/13: Weekly Assessment

Dates for Meetings:

As usual, the team had our regular pre-class meet on Tuesday. Geri showed me a technique in Illustrator that will (hopefully) make creating digital images a lot easier. It's called Live Trace.


Accomplished this Week:

I have accomplished the following for this week:

• Continued working on the psychic room colour. It's about 95% complete as of right now.
• Worked on animation poses. So far I have the ninja and kung fu fighter done.


Tasks for Next Week:

Heading into the final weeks now. I'm going to try and get all my art done over the next 1.5 weeks. Geri will probably take care of the backgrounds, so I'm going to wrap up my character animation stills and splash pages. I'll probably also write small blurbs for each character profile and each item in the food inventory.

Monday, November 19, 2007

Week 11/12: Weekly Assessment

Dates for Meetings:

As usual, the team had our regular pre-class meet on Tuesday. Geri and I decided to work on some splash page art during class time.


Accomplished this Week:

I have accomplished the following for this week:

• Created digital versions of the food that the user can choose from. I’d like to add more coming weeks, maybe focusing on more Western foods. The foods currently drawn up are mostly Asian-influenced (ex: octopus dumplings (takoyaki), durian). See the sample image below.
• Went back on my word and started adding colour to the psychic room. I’m please with it thus far. See the sample image below.


Tasks for Next Week:

I’d like to finish off colouring the psychic room, as well as create more foods. Having more characters’ animations poses is essential too. I think if I work a bit on the art each day, I can manage to pull it all off.

Sample Images:

www.sfu.ca/~smyin/food.png -> food art
www.sfu.ca/~smyin/psychic-room.png -> wip version of the room

Sunday, November 18, 2007

Presentation Critiques #4 [end]

Aquila
Mechanics:
• Model: digital prototype, multiplayer over an internet connection. Use keyboard arrow keys to move airplane/soldier and click on enemy piece to fire at them.
• Rules: did not tell/show instructions to participants.
• Balanced game: I remember trying out their game in class. This incarnation of it was pretty hard, I thought –I was really outnumbered.

Dynamics:
• Strategy emerges –when would it benefit me most to move/use my airplane?
• Would be nice to see a variety of weapons from foot soldiers and planes; right now, all that is different is the level of HP each one has. Soldiers could use cluster bombs, assault rifles, etc while planes could have rpgs, etc.
• Problems: could pile up units on top on one another (the one behind would disappear); controls/enemy & player stats were confusing. What would be helpful is some coding that detects occupied positions and forces the player to move elsewhere. For the controls and stats, these are a matter of changing UI and including instructions at the beginning of the game.

Aesthetics:
• Power/strategy based game.
• Very basic-looking art presented via screenshots at this point, though I’ve seen the team’s more advanced game art (looks cool).
• Emotional response: the playtest group seemed to enjoy it, once they got over their confusion.




Legend of Chopstick Chung
Mechanics:
• Model: digital prototype. First person POV, objective is to kill as many flies as possible using the mouse to click on them. Series of mini games.
• Rules: unclear if they were mentioned to playtest group. Maybe they were displayed on the laptop?
• Balanced game: seems balanced, assuming the mini games get harder as the player goes on.

Dynamics:
• Fun, simple mechanic that is highly addictive and immerses the player.
• If the whole game is a lot of mini games put together, is there enough variety?
• Problems: needs better graphics; player could not identify with character; hard to control chopsticks. The graphics problem is understandable (it’s a prototype after all) so this is probably easy to solve. Identifying with the character could be helped if the team develops the story well enough, and controlling chopsticks is a matter of re-tuning the current system.

Aesthetics:
• Challenge/action -based game.
• Haven’t seen much art so far, only a screencap.
• Emotional response: the playtest group seemed to really enjoy it.




Deep Field
Mechanics:
• Model: physical prototype. Player (me!) pushes ball away to “repel” it (keep it from doing damage to self) then takes ball and throws it at the targets (gates) to score points. AI comes from four directions (N, S, E, W).
• Rules: explained face to face. 3 sessions, each revised.
• Balanced game: at times, the game gets hard, although this might be because it’s a physical prototype.

Dynamics:
• Hitting the targets as accurately and quickly as possible. My aim is pretty poor, so I had to throw multiple times to hit one target.
• Repelling the AI attacks as quickly as possible –level progression = more enemies.
• Problems: the game could use more variety. Each AI attack could, for example, have a different effect on the player (eg: slow down player movement).

Aesthetics:
• Challenge-based game.
• Art not seen (they disregarded it). It’d be hard to see art in a physical prototype as well.
• Emotional response: takes a bit of getting used to, but I found I really enjoyed it.




Dynasty
Mechanics:
• Model: paper prototype. Grid map, with the player physically moving their piece on the game board. Educational game, covers 5 dynasties of China. Looks a little like Minesweeper. Objective: complete the URL and go to the site.
• Rules: printed on an instruction sheet/told by team. 3 sessions.
• Balanced game: balanced. Looks simultaneously cute and fun.

Dynamics:
• Element of chance: random monsters pop up and the player would have to fight them.
• Maybe having a multiplayer co-op mode might be fun…ie: each person has to find 5 pieces of a puzzle and add them together.
• Problems: initially, the game looks complicated; a bit slow paced. The team could fix these problems by introducing a tutorial at the beginning of the game to ease the players into it, as well as make more create a more interesting story and missions in the game.

Aesthetics:
• Puzzle/adventure/story-based game.
• Cute art style typically found in RPGs.
• Emotional response: the playtest group had some trouble with the dead ends (confusion and frustration) but seemed to enjoy the game when they found pieces of the URL (rewarded).

Monday, November 12, 2007

Week 10/11: Weekly Assessment

Dates for Meetings:
We only had our regular Tuesday-before-class meet. On the art end, a few things happened –Geri took over the lineart for the jungle scene as well as we realised one critical thing: we hadn’t started the food art yet…wonderful. So, I’ll get started on that as part of my tasks for next week (once I’ve done drafts of some food).

Accomplished this Week:
I have accomplished the following for this week:
• Created digital versions of the animation poses for the monk, including the walking left/right poses, hit pose, and throwing poses (see link below). The team looks like they have some qualms about it (ex: walking pose and hit pose) so I’ll probably have to make a few adjustments.

Tasks for Next Week:
No word on the psychic room colour, so I’ll put that off to the side for now. I’ll be concentrating mostly on having food art done, as well as applying all the hit/walk/throw poses to the rest of the 13 characters. Things are on a tight schedule right now (I have things for due for my English courses as well) so it’s likely I won’t have a lot of character animation poses done for the digital prototype set for week 12.

Sample Image:
http://www.sfu.ca/~smyin/monk_anim.png

Sunday, November 11, 2007

Presentation Critiques #3

Stick Ninja

Mechanics:
• Model: paper model, using physical dice rolling and paper figures on a large board; 4 levels with a final boss level.
• Rules: attached to board.
• Balanced game: seems balanced. Operates on a power mechanic (blunt weapon/sharp weapon, physical characters/ethereal characters -> blunt beats ethereal characters -> sharp beats physical characters. Strategy involved.

Dynamics:
• Weapons have special abilities (from pic: lance + 2 strength(?))

• Obtaining weaponry/characters after defeating enemy ->
• Problems: test group confused about attack point system (weapons’ abilities made it more complex than hp vs hp), but as the game progressed they figured it out. The group seems to have no problems with the game at all, though continually testing early versions of the game might help make sure this stance is strong.

Aesthetics:
• Power/strategy/fantasy based game.
• Art is basic, though guessing by the title, it’s not a big stretch.
• Emotional response: initially confused, then gradual interest. Personally, I want to try this game too, as it seems rather fun.


Zodiac War
Mechanics:
• Model: paper based game, standard up/down/right/left arrow keys with mouse to attack. Digital version will be a 2D fighter.
• Rules: explained to test group (?)
• Balanced game: turn-based board game. AI/player controlled; choose action, present to other p. Very rock-paper-scissors: punch-kick-fireball. Overall, it seems balanced.

Dynamics:
• Special move: defeats all three attacks. Player will need to strategise when to use it.
• More wins = more points = more special move points.
• Problems: main problem is that there is not much variety in the attacks (limited to three). I think adding to these might help: sweeping lower kick defeats mid punch, for example. Other problems: keeping the game at a reasonable pace, and making sure the controls are clear.


Aesthetics:
• Power/strategy based game.
• Basic stick-figure-like art. The presentation and pieces were very clean and neat, I liked them.
• Emotional response: the test group seemed to grasp it fine, and were immersed overall.


Crack Quest
Mechanics:
• Model: digital game, standard up/down/right/left arrow keys; player throws syringes and crack grenades.
• Rules: 2 testers were given controls, 1 wasn’t.
• Balanced game: game seems to require more dynamics at this point; sort of imbalanced (too easy on the player’s part).

Dynamics:
• Story-driven game: trying to get player’s girlfriend out of therapy so she can continue to be a crack addict.
• Problems: ultimately the game is too easy –it requires more challenge for the players, as simply shooting is too easy. There needs to be more enemies that pop up and a larger variety of weapons would be nice. Skipping dialogue was also an issue raised. I think that this game could be greatly enhanced if the team added levels and more enemies as well as a boss at the end of each one (say, 3 levels in the game). It seems fun to play.

Aesthetics:
• Adventure-fantasy based game.
• Unique and bizarre art style –fits the narrative of the game.
• Emotional response: the test group seemed to want to get to the “meat” part of the game –that is, the gameplay itself, and wanted to skip dialogues. Overall, they found it straightforward and easy to grasp.

Sunday, November 4, 2007

Week 9/10: Weekly Assessment

Dates for Meetings:
As our team leader, Scott, was pretty sick this week, we didn't really have any face to face meetings other than our regular Tuesday meet. We all have our tasks laid out for us, and know what we have to do, so a meeting wasn't really necessary anyway.

Accomplished this Week:
I have accomplished the following for this week:
• Completed the lineart for the psychic room (see link below). I'll hand it off to Scott and Darrell (the programming guys) to see how they want to arrange the layout of the scene. We need a background and foreground, and I need some feedback from the two to see what should be changed before I go ahead and add colour.
• Started the lineart for the jungle scene.

Tasks for Next Week:
I will continue working on the jungle scene, and will most likely start adding colour to the psychic room. The way we're doing this is exporting the image from Illustrator as a jpg file and colouring it Photoshop or Painter, as I'm more comfortable with colouring in these programs.

Sample Images:
Original Art (supplied by Geri):
http://www.sfu.ca/~smyin/psychicdraft.png

Lineart:
http://www.sfu.ca/~smyin/psychic.png

Presentation Critiques #2

3rd Cloud
Mechanics:
• Model: digital game, standard up/down/right/left arrow keys with mouse to attack. Created in RPG Maker: turn-based. Influence: Earthbound.
• Rules: shown on an intro screen.
• Balanced game: semi-balanced at this point. More refinement is needed in order to make this more interesting for the user (see problems).

Dynamics:
• Event trigger: monsters randomly attack.
• Areas to explore and monsters to kill.
• Problems: no auto-equip (users thought weapons were equipped without them having to go to the inventory menu and selecting it); little interactivity with objects and people; not many things to do; not intuitive. A lot of these problems can be solved by having missions built in and making the game more realistic by allowing the protagonist to pick up objects, talk to people, etc. However, it is understandable if there is a limited amount of the latter –there is little time left in the course to implement such things.

Aesthetics:
• Power/discovery/adventure-fantasy based game.
• Cute, anime-style characters, though art is not original (game has built-in features to choose from).
• Emotional response: the playtest group seemed to be mostly confused (equipping of weapon, non-intuitive interface etc).



Food Fight
N/A…this is our team.



Drive-thru Tycoon
Mechanics:
• Model: both paper and digital prototypes. Assumptions for prototypes - Paper: physically moving food pieces; digital: using mouse to move avatars.
• Rules: instructions sheet. 3 sessions.
• Balanced game: overall, seems quite balanced. Learning curve is not too steep.

Dynamics:
• Getting the right orders to the right people. Gradually, the player must be faster as more cars come in.
• As stated in lecture, the game seems very influenced by Diner Dash, a fun, casual game.
• Problems: game needs more dynamics (ex: time limit); not enough variety. Vehicles could also move at different speeds for more challenge. In my opinion, having some upgrades might be beneficial (ex: speed boosts) for higher levels.

Aesthetics:
• Challenge-based game.
• Though the art isn’t final, it conveys what the team intends.
• Emotional response: the playtest group seemed to be pretty at ease with the gameplay mechanics.



Circular Strife
Mechanics:
• Model: paper prototype. Required remote-controlled cars, cardboard obstacles, bombs, bomb pickup locations.
• Rules: told by team (?). 4 sessions (last is a time trial).
• Balanced game: quite balanced and fun. Like any other game, it has its minor quirks.

Dynamics:
• As the players tried to encircle the buildings with bombs, they found that precision and good controls were necessary. Intuitive gameplay.
• Adding a multiplayer mode could mean more fun.
• Problems: game needs smooth handling and controls; having a brake/reverse function might help; whipping bombs around buildings could be easier. In my case, if I were playing this game, the controls aspect would be the most important –in some games, that feature is hard to handle.

Aesthetics:
• Challenge/action/strategy-based game.
• Haven’t seen any art so far.
• Emotional response: the playtest group seemed to be comfortable with the game fairly quickly.