Tuesday 20 October 2009

Gaming Patterns – the price of entrance to enjoy a game? - Part 2

Going back to my experience with “PixelJunk Monsters”, I’ve never previously played a tower defence game before but yet I learned the core mechanics and understood the goal of the game (rules) pretty quickly of building towers (turrets) with strategic placement to protect the village from wave after wave of enemies with own attack patterns. Although the game’s purpose/focus is simple in nature but progressively becomes quite deep and involving (in the hidden behind the curtains type of way) as you learn more about the specific turrets pros and cons against certain enemy types, the currency (money) to either use for upgrading current placed turrets or buy completely new turrets altogether and so forth. What I find interesting about this game is the way these rules are very obviously communicated to you as a player via interacting and engaging with enemy waves/patterns and there’s no misconception of what you have to do to overcome/defeat these enemies with their paper/scissors/stone damage aspect but that’s where the fun lies is preparing for these enemy waves trying to master and predict the pattern of the level.

I find this game to be very addictive and engrossing as the game has clear defined rules making the experience feel very coherent and you feel never cheated by the game system itself, when you fail its always your own fault and you can clearly see where you went wrong, learning from it making you willing to try again with a fresh different approach. The game is actually pretty difficult but when you successful complete a level, it feels rewarding mastering and forecasting the enemy patterns which continuously force you adapt to new situations coming up with new tactics/approaches to counteract these enemy waves, you feel pretty smart and good for it. The game also feels rewarding for its sense of rhythm and flow as you progress through the game you can start seeing a pattern in the enemy waves like the 1st wave of enemies are usually “pines” who are easily counteracted with cannon turrets then 2nd wave are usually “spiders” who are counteracted with cannons and arrows turrets and so forth but over wave 3, the enemy types/attack pattern become far less predictable becoming a game about unpredictability within a predictable box. Due to this you feel yourself growing as a player of the game being “in the zone” with carefully constructed enemy patterns which never betrays the flow and rules and logic of the game system and world itself. In other words, each level feels familiar but yet different which never alienates you but always feels fresh and challenging. For an example, here’s a song from one of favourite bands at the moment that has unique sound but yet very familiar song structure and rhythm (I realise that this type/style of music isn’t everyone’s cup of tea but please have a listen anyway to see what I mean):



What makes me wonder about a song like this, does the artist write the rhythm and beat first or do they write the lyrics first (context) and base the rhythm/sound around that? It doesn’t matter either way, but what I find interesting is how these two aspects fit together so seamlessly and looking at pixeljunk monsters, it’s done the same thing with it’s combined aspects of its game play of tower defence and the structure and flow of enemy waves introducing the player to a rhythm of patterns.

Its one of the few games which I play to directly engage with patterns for the achievement of mastering them like a shoot em’up I guess. As an industry I believe we are too hooked up on the contexts and themes which are our games explore rather exploring what patterns/lessons we can teach through our games. Sure the context/theme is what makes games initially appealing for audiences as we all judge things at first glance although we all know that we shouldn’t but we do. With the underlying design towards the flow of patterns, games can be enjoyed despite the context by broader audiences, for an example with old retro games like “Pacman” or “Tetris”; does anyone question where the blocks come from? Or feel alienated by it’s concept? Did people have to have prior gaming knowledge to enjoy these games? People would argue that I have a groundless argument due to the fact that we are in a different era of gaming which has never been so successful with mainstream before but I think that these principles are as important as today as back in the day as I firmly believe games can be used to teach us as well as entertain us.

Playing a game which puts me in the zone, feeling the flow and learning more and more as you keep exploring and experiencing the game is a wonderful feeling which in my eyes makes a rather beautiful game. Answering my question from previously what is my “price of entrance” to enjoy a game? A game which I can connect to that truly challenges and engages me for mastering and learning something, isn’t that what everyone wants from video games?

Jonesy

1 comment:

Desiree said...

hm, well i guess they keep wrapping the same candy in different wrappers, cus its easier to come up with a new wrapper than a new candy.
Recycle...repackage...thats what we're all doing at the moment
like 70s clothes, but instead of orange and brown, lets have them in blue and green and suddenly everyone loves them again because the candy is familiar and therefore easy to swallow.


I think people dont want to learn lessons (new games) that are too hard to too complicated to get into..like you said, we shud be able to plug and play, whatever level player you are.
Im sure thats where the wii has problems. the technology limits the complexity of the controls and so the games have to compromise to suit the wiimote etc etc but then the experienced gamer is 'left out' becuase the whole experience ends up being too simple.

well.....just to reword, the candy is the gem. come up with a new game base rule like paper/scissor/rock or tetris and you've got a winner that will entertain for decades.
I think the problem also is our technology, which is too advanced.
If we werent able to build such beautiful and engaging atmospheres, then we wouldnt easily be able to "rewrap" the candy (likey they do with FPSs, as u mentioned before) btu had to instead, come up with another candy to keep people entertained (just like in the 8bit-pixel days).
There is no neccessity to invent a new game and so nothing new is invented.

About gamers being time wasters:
well, tv or movie watchers are just as much time wasters (for all who dont know me....i devour films!).
I think it has more to do that gamers enjoy aspects of games that movie watchers maybe wont. Maybe gamers like to look at teh rendering, the modelling, the character design, the voice overs, the acting, the landscape etc etc whereas a non-gamer maybe doesnt care for character design.
In this case I'm putting gamers and people who love animation movies in teh same box....maybe we are all visual people??? well....thats only one aspect, there are many more (theme/story....interactive/passive...)

hmmm...evidently u got me scratching my head...thanks :D