Witch poem

I’m trying to think of ways to make IF puzzles less based upon lock and key object puzzles and more related to the mechanisms of the form itself, that is text. My first idea is to incorporate the various mechanisms of poetry (rhyme, meter, alliteration, stanza forms etc) in order to create a series of word objects that can be combined for various effects. It would function as something like a magic casting system, so you might have a rhyme word ‘cold’ and could make other rhyming objects cold. (cold gold, cold mould etc). You could combine these in poems that would have more complex effects. Not the most elegant solution to the puzzle problem but a step in the right direction I think.

Old sci-fi RTS idea

This game was partially the product of playing a lot of starcraft and trying to rethink the concept of RTS, and particularly how one might rethink strategy other than in terms of set unit attributes and knowledge of position. My idea was to build a strategy game based first and foremost upon AI, where the player used a relatively simple programming language to set up routines for all of the units. The player would further be limited to a single one of these units and so would have to trust the AI’s that they created to say defend a base, patrol an area, press a button at the correct time, or any number of tasks. The game would be well fitted to some kind of post-apocalyptic world, and I would be interested in exploring this game as a post-human world (post-human meaning in this context after the extinction of the human species). What would be the dramatic possibilities of an all robot world? What would be the uncanny echoes? How would the single and multiplayer work? I’m not entirely sure of these answers but it wouldn’t be too hard to build something like this I imagine – the scripting tools would be the majority of the work.

Review of Steve Jones The Meaning of Video Games

Despite the rather ambitious title, this book is a subtle investigation of various factors surrounding a video game text that have not been taken up in either the narrative or ludology camps. Jones makes cogent arguments that the meaning of video games is developed within the following structures:
The boundaries between different media and reality (chpt 1, chpt 4)
Fan groups and their
a) Drive to collect (chpt 2)
b) Their distributed knowledge (chpt 3)
b) Creation of new content (chpt 3)
Marketing, particularly when it crosses into its own entertainment (chpt 3)
The platform (and the concept’s necessary perspective through social construction) (Chpt 5)
Expectations and feedback from the audience (chpt 6)
While these are good reminders, and a useful frame, Jones is less helpful in helping understand how the meaning of games might differ from other types of media. He develops a few readings of games where the form and content are shown to be in harmony – and his reading of Katamari is quite an improvement over Wark – but overall there are few tools to do closer readings. This is not so much a problem of Jones text as the state of the art in which it appears – but in a book about context this is important.
A somewhat more troubling problem is that the image of textual studies Jones projects seems to have at its core a self-determining liberal subject who knows what kind of critical edition or game they ‘want’. Its hard to briefly trace this rather subtle assumption, but I think its the product of a change in perspective where the object at the center of the critical inquiry takes second place to the peripheral events. This is fine if it is openly acknowledged, but if not the question must be asked: why this object? why this center? Otherwise we end up with a particular text replacing the transcendent author as the source and structuring center of all meaning in a given field.
Overall however a useful series of questions that opens up the construction of meaning in games to a wider set of social acts.

Autobiology

There is a lot of talk about the narrative side of games which also seems to take it for granted that this is also the fictional aspect of games (Juuls). Fair enough, but it would be interesting to bring the whole question of autobiography into games, to force the question of what kind of representations are real – and what kind of rules are fictional (the question of cheating, soft rules, etc). To that end, the game would be an autobiographical one, where my own life and the decisions I made would be represented. However there would also be room to explore other possibilities – while the people I spent most time with would be most fleshed out, there would be the opportunity of interacting with less developed characters more than I did, or differently with those key people.

Review of Gamer Theory

McKenzie Wark’s ‘Gamer Theory’ belongs to a class of cultural criticism stemming from the concept of the simulacra, through post-structuralism, the situationists and Baudrillard, a genre that is often too highly rhetorical. The book wants to be a Marxist critique of contemporary culture, but sees a need to think through something like the subject position of the game-player. This in itself is not perhaps a bad approach, the construction of a ‘gamer theory’ seems like one among a number of tasks for critical theory. The problem is the approach which smacks of a cartoon perspective, like so much of this kind of criticism. Wark’s gamer subject is conceived as having lost an understanding of the historical perspective on culture (while seeming to maintain a good grip on abstract philosophical concepts), and yet this position is built up through a series of precisely historical differentiation (from the novel, the film, previous modes of production, genres etc). In a similar, perhaps even archetypal way, we are given over to a world of surfaces of pure signs and yet Wark continues to insist on the reality of the digital that underlies game-space. At times this is a legitimate tool, at others Wark argues that something like the code (or its analogical counterparts) forces things into the mould of the digital. This double move, of denying and continuing to assert something beneath the surface is part of the vulgarization of the more stringent philosophy that justifies it.

While Wark cannot stay within the image of gamer thought it projects, there is also a cartoon vision of the singularity of that mind. Games to Wark exude into public space as if through osmosis until it is saturated while the lines of force of other media are characterized as obsolete, decrepit, non-existent. What then one might ask is the exact function of the numerous quotations Wark makes from contemporary theory? Surely they are not meant to explain arguments, and we are left with prime examples of the continued force of writing. At the same time as games become the model of reality, individual games are viewed as unnable to affect that world a rather callous assertion. Again Wark continually devalues the sign, as if its lack of origin made it meaningless. Not only meaningless but quality-less, this is surely making an already stretched concept do too much. Who really believed in the divine origin of the color blue? To take one example he states that pornography and critical theory are formally indistinguishable. While I won’t deny similarities – I have never been reading Derrida only to realize I was actually watching Ron Jeremy.

Beyond the striking problems, there are a number of conceptual difficulties that can be seen next to occasional moments of truely useful analysis. What really gets me though, and perhaps why this post might seem vitriolic is that the book seems so promising as a source of close readings. What is it about video games that stops people from treating them in all their unique density. Anyways there are a few worthwhile moments.

Problems: the assimilation of the virtual to game-space and the absence of psychoanalytic phantasy, the location of primary difference between the analog and the binary, the adoption of Caillois’ game typology and its values, the rather careless use of the link between topos as topic and topos as space, the confusion in the concept atopia, the lack of ground for the use of space and time (does the historical production of game-space and clock time destroy the other modes? do they continue in a Heideggarian mode? are they parasitic on another time and space as 1st world nations are parasitic upon 3rd world nations?) The under-developed concept of art (particularly with the use of Adorno throughout). The use of boredom, the view that it ever was the province of the young or the idle rich, attendant upon all the simplifications highlighted above.

Useful notions: the use of allegory, allegorithm, algorithm etc, and particularly the continuation of allegory as some kind of return of difference. The reading of America and history in Civ 3. To a degree, the link of genres with historical concepts of space. The hints at the end of atopia about critical theory and heidegger. The reading of Rez and its relationship between triggering, time, and death (though not its generalization to all of ‘game-space’). The somewhat slipshod analysis of Deus Ex that nonetheless provides the first convincing generalization.

Old Board Games

Here are a few old board games from my last blog:

1. Slippery Slope
This game is for two players, played on any x by x board (chess board of 8×8 dimensions would be pretty standard)
Each player has X pieces (8 for a chess board) and places them in the row closest to them.
Each piece can move one square initially forward-backwards and sideways.
After the opponent takes a piece, all of the players pieces get an extra move:
so with 7 pieces left, each moves 2 squares
with 6, 3
ect…
Finally, so that the attacking player isn’t at a total disadvantage, pieces move diagonally when there are an odd number of them,
and straight when there are an even number.

Could easily arrange a board of icehouse pieces too.

2. Forests
Two to Four Players
Played on a 8×8 chess board using IceHouse Pieces (15 per player, 5 small, 5 medium and 5 large)
One counter is needed to represent the direction of the sun.

-On each turn, all players place, or grow one ‘tree’.
-Trees start out as single small icehouse pieces and grow -> medium -> large -> small on large -> medium on large -> small on medium on large
-At the beginning of each new turn, the sun moves counterclockwise around the outside of the board
-The players then determine whether trees are in the shadow of another tree (trees cast shadows either one space, or the number of spaces high they are)
-Trees in a shadow are reduced by one size, starting from the side opposite the sun.
-Players may grow another players tree with their move, but the tree remains the originators
-The first tree to full height wins

Also trying to think of some additional ‘forest fire’ rules which would damage trees connected to each other.

3. aMaze (?)
I was thinking it would be fun to have a roll the dice, get to the end board game where the board was being built as the players moved around. Sort of a cross between the tile-based carcasonne games, and more traditional snakes and ladders style.

It might play something like:
Players roll to move, and then place a 3×3 grid tile, with various rules, or letters corresponding to variable rules on the them.
Players don’t know which way they’re going initially, the ‘exit’ wouldn’t be there at the beginning.

To make it more strategic, players might get 2 or 3 pieces? Winning would be the first to get either one or all of their pieces out and dice rolls could be split between them.

4. Mountaineers
Mountaineers!
The game consists of a number of thin wooden tiles, in curved edge pieces and square tiles.
The game progresses as players draw tiles from a bag (ala carcasonne) and build a relief map of an imaginary mountain range.
There are six colors of tile and each player is given one or two colors depending on the number of players.
Any player can play any color tile, the colors determine where the player with that color is allowed to play.
A player playing a tile on an existing mountain must play the tile on the lowest level where a tile of his color has an open slot next to it.
At the end of the game, tiles only at the highest height are scored (with bonuses for different heights). So players try to play higher than other players, while simultaneously forcing the others to play on the lower levels.
Finally, any player can always start a new mountain, but height 1 mountains don’t get scored.

Haunting / Guardianship

The idea for this game is in many ways similar to what inspired the ideas for Never Forget, particularly finding a way to make a compelling emotional game without drawing the player into the emotional situation (from which a lot of problems develop in terms of how to deal with all the myriad possible responses and indeed how to understand the players emotional state. However that kind of maping might be a powerful tool in another context). The idea with haunting would be to create a ghost character who is somehow tied to a person in the world (who has no idea of the ghost’s existence). The ghost character has some minor means of interacting: moving objects around, locking doors, maybe reading and changing peoples minds. The ghost character also is made aware of dangerous situations to the player prior to them happening. However the ghost doesn’t have a particular investment in either the happiness or sadness of the main character, as a simulator the poles would be something like benevolent/sadistic. The ghost character may or may not have their own issues to deal with in the ghost realm. Some of the motivating tensions for the game would be

- A question of what the meaning of fate would be if it existed (does it merely become the free choice of another agent, in this case the ghost)

-The tension between the characters’s and the ghost’s interests

-A question of why this particular ghost has been singled out, and why to this particular person

There would be a voyeristic pleasure in the game, and a certain kind of omnipotence which would be a satisfaction to a childish fantasy.

Kinetic/Potential

So one major source of inspiration for games seems to be changing around different types of physics – people adjust gravity, space, time, but has there been a game that has exploited Newton’s third law of motion: that forces have an equal and opposite reaction. This could be made into a very interesting design principle, obviously objects that didn’t have any reaction would be boring (and further already exist as unaffected areas. What would be interesting is some kind of mechanism where the player could postpone the reaction – either giving or absorbing energy for a certain period. This could be used to, say, push a block over for a while and then have it accelerate over thin air. Or, absorb a certain amount of damage/impact in order to generate more powerful moves. Further, this seems like it would be a pretty simple physics system to create.

Voracious Gardener

Trying to think about 2D games that would be possible with the Game Maker engine and that would have some unique gameplay. Something about trying that and playing the Legacy of Kain games made me feel like game mechanics are such a small selection of the possibilities.

Voracious Gardener is an attempt to turn platformer style gaming on its head. First, there would be few if any enemies to encounter. Second, levels would be designed for both horizontal and vertical progress. Third, you would return to each part of the level many times over. Finally, there would be a number of puzzles to solve in different ways. The mechanics would essentially be finding and collecting seeds, watering your plants, digging up roots, collecting more seeds when plants bloom, and using their special properties to move your way through the level. There might also be animals that could help you, or have secrets etc. Much of this would be based on level designs.

Never Forget: Elephant Simulator

Thinking about games with emotional mechanics, this came to me as an interesting way of distancing the player from the personal interaction and dialogue that might be particularly difficult. An elephant simulator!

Never Forget is a game designed to highlight some aspects of time, memory, and memorialization. It is a slow-paced game where the player controls and interacts with a herd of elephants as they live their lives. Four elements make up the crux of the thematic and design elements: 1) The basic life-cycle of the elephants which includes: feeding, drinking, traveling, excretion, sex, birth, nurturing, predation and death. 2) The emotional interactions between the elephants and with their environment. 3) A puzzle solving engine reminiscent of old item based adventure games. 4) A post-apocalyptic world. The core goal of the game is the creation of meaning by the player through acts of memorialization of the dead. These acts have a game-play value as well as an emotional one – serving as some kind of beacon.