The contents of this piece are brought to you by the lectures of Mark LeBlanc, whom I've had the fortune of seeing in person lecturing at the Game Developer's Conference. I will be referencing the ideas in this paper:
MDA: A Formal Approach to Game Design and Game Research
The last article discussed the common elements found across all games, and I described what I had in each of those categories at this early stage. The Mechanics / Dynamics / Aesthetics approach is what I will use to guide my choices as I continue development.
"The MDA framework formalizes the consumption of
games by breaking them into their distinct components:
Rules -> System -> 'Fun'
...and establishing their design counterparts:
Mechanics -> Dynamics -> Aesthetics"
"Mechanics describes the particular components of the
game, at the level of data representation and algorithms.
Dynamics describes the run-time behavior of the
mechanics acting on player inputs and each others outputs over time.
Aesthetics describes the desirable emotional responses
evoked in the player, when she interacts with the game
system."
"What makes a game 'fun'?...Talking about games and play
is hard because the vocabulary we use is relatively limited.
In describing the aesthetics of a game, we want to move
away from words like 'fun' and 'gameplay' towards a
more directed vocabulary. This includes but is not limited
to the taxonomy listed here:
1. Sensation: Game as sense-pleasure
2. Fantasy: Game as make-believe
3. Narrative: Game as drama
4. Challenge: Game as obstacle course
5. Fellowship: Game as social framework
6. Discovery: Game as uncharted territory
7. Expression: Game as self-discovery
8. Submission: Game as pastime"
By concentrating on the types of fun a given game is built for, mechanics, dynamics and aesthetics can all be interpreted in terms of those fixed goals.
As a tactical tabletop wargame, these are the Kinds of Fun I will concentrate on:
1. Challenge.
The game is built to support one player versus another player with a shared set of initial resources. The core of the game is pitting yourself against your opponent and seeing who comes out on top.
2. Fantasy
The context of the game is science fiction and represents a world far different from our own.
3. Fellowship
The game is built to support at least two in person players. This makes the social component important for the overall experience.
These three are the primary focus of the game. While there are other types of fun contained within the game, mechanics will be tested against the above fun first and foremost.
The emphasis on each element changes based on the mode of play. A campaign mode would highlight Narrative fun in seeing what happens to the players across multiple matches given a relative context. Tournament play highly emphasizes the Challenge element, while minimizing the rest in order to preserve balance. A Team mode would emphasize Fellowship as you work with your teammates to overcome the enemy. Having unassembled, unpainted miniatures would increase the Pastime emphasis of the game and adding a hobby element.
So the game should be challenging, should take advantage of the fictional elements in the setting, and should be responsive to the social aspect of tabletop wargaming.
With those tenets set, I'm going to lay out the base emotion the game should strive to create. At the core of the game, there is a specific feeling that the game can provide. For this game, it's going to be triumph - when you take a risk and it pays off, when you execute your plan perfectly or recover from a serious setback.
When I develop a mechanic, I will interpret the mechanic in terms of creating the sense of triumph. Mechanics that create absolute certainty, or that deny meaningful choice, will be discarded since they neutralize triumph.
These four pieces will be kept in mind going forward:
1. Triumph is the core emotion.
2. Challenge is the primary source of fun
3. Fantasy is the second
4. Fellowship is the third
No comments:
Post a Comment