Game Play Log 6

8/4/2016

Game Play Log 6

Never Alone

Of the key narrative elements discussed so far in the course (interactivity, level design/linearity, moral choice/non-linearity, character), which do you think is the most prominent, important or interesting in your chosen game?

In the game Never Alone I think the level design and linearity of the game is the most interesting. It has beautifully designed winterscapes that add to the charm of the 2-dimensional puzzle platform game. It introduces subtle metaphors through the art and it’s level design aids well in giving direction to the linear story narrative. 

In one of my last game play logs I made a comment about the game having a ‘slow reveal of what’s happening’ and about how the mini puzzles kept coming up one after the other. Those I still think made the pac of the game a bit slow but when I thought about it more I realised that maybe thats what the creators wanted. They wanted the player to really admire the levels design and how much information could be gained from it. For instance, the art for the levels and the puzzles. Its chilly winterscapes and engaging puzzles blended well with the traditional Inupiaq storytelling techniques. The helpful and unhelpful spirits were drawn in a way that looked like cave drawings. It helped introduce the Inupiaq culture in such a simple and aesthetically fitting way that you need to kind of stop and study it for a moment. The puzzles in the game also are a way to give direction to the player in how to transcend the level while also taking in as much of whats around them as possible. For example when Nuna and the fox are trapped with the polar bear in the ice cave, the player has to utilise foxes agility to roam around the cave to figure out how to deal with the bear before it gets Nuna. 

The design of the level also guides the player in  Once you start playing the game you immediately know that you have to make Nuna run forwards towards the right of the screen and are travelling at a constant speed. The story also follows the level design quite well, as you reach a certain level an event changer happens such as being chased by the polar bear or the mans layer. This change in the game makes you traverse through the levels quicker but also makes the player think quicker in terms of how to get past the obstacles to get away without getting caught. On a side note I want to also mention how the game never really deals with ‘death’ of a character (except maybe for the fox) because you never really kill anyone in a sense which makes a nice change. 

The use of subtle metaphors are also well engineered into the game. They reflect hidden meanings to the environment of the game and the Inupiaq culture. 

“The folklore take on conventional cold-weather survival wisdom is also evidence of that. Winds that can blow you off platforms must be resisted by hunkering down and scary, clutching ghost versions of the Aurora Borealis are also metaphors for how suddenly the cold can snatch life away without proper precaution.”  - Evan Narcisse

In conclusion I found the level design interesting because of how it showed of the culture of the Inupiaq in a subtle way and how easily the game play flowed linearly along with it. It appeal was strong with the extra depth the visuals gave the game. 

Reference:

Narcisse, E. (Author). (2014). Never Alone: The Kotaku Review [Review]. Retrieved from: http://kotaku.com/never-alone-the-kotaku-review-1659789150

Upper One Games. (Developer). (2014). Never Alone [Video game]. United States: E-Line Media

Game Play Log 5

3/4/2016

Game Play Log 5

As the player, do you interact with a character or an avatar and how does this affect your involvement in the narrative?

Grim Fandango

For my chosen game I played Grim Fandango. I found the gameplay was slow and difficult to figure out what needed to be done in order to proceed the narrative. As the player I feel I interacted more with a character than an avatar. According to Jessica Aldreds chapter on character, people’s definition of an avatar can vary itself from it being

“the locus of the player’s actions within game space,” or a “stand-in for the player within game space.”

Much like a ‘digital persona’ of the player, to which allows them to move around the game space, whereas a character is a fixed entity within the game world.

Going with that understanding of what ‘avatar’ and ‘character’ are, in Grim Fandango, Manuel ‘Manny’ Calavero is a character the player plays as instead of an avatar. He is a character in the game rather than an avatar because he is a fixed entity in that game world. As the player you can not do much in terms of modifications or creating things because he is already created for you. The player’s only option is to go through the motions of the game. 

In the game the use of character limits the amount of ‘you’ you’re projecting in-game. If you were to create your own avatar instead, as the player you are projecting a part of yourself into the game.

“Waggoner proposes it as the central criteria for distinguishing between those video game characters that function as true”avatars”, and those which only serve as controllable “agents” for theirs user.”

For the game Grim Fandango, the character of Manuel ‘Manny’ Calavero is an ‘agent’ with whom the player controls throughout the game.

Reference:

LucasArts. (Developer). (1998) Grim Fandango [videogame]. United States: LucasArts

Aldred, J. (Author). (2013) Characters from: The Routledge Companion to Video Game Studies Routledge [Book]. Retrieved from: http://animation.onlearn.co.nz/pluginfile.php/2711/mod_resource/content/0/Characters.pdf

Game Play Log 4

25/3/2016

Game Play Log 4

How does morality influence the choices you make in the game?

Wolf Among Us

I found the game ‘The Wolf Among Us’ enjoyable with a good story. The characters I found relatable and at times felt empathy with them. When playing the game I found that morality was imbued within the gameplay choice situations. Many of the choices given were either negative or positive. E.g. aggressive choice or passive choice. It was then depending on what you choose determines how the story would then progress. Your choice also determined how NPC’s would behave from there. e.g. the game gives little pop ups like ‘(character) will remember this’. 

The game also forces you to make moral choices quickly, which could result in either something good happening or something bad to happen. For example, when you have to choose between going to Toad’s or going to Prince Lawrence’s home. By choosing to go to Lawrence’s home in the game you have potentially saved him from death, but if you were to make the choice of going to Toad’s and then to Lawrence’s after, you would find the latter dead on the floor instead of sitting in the arm chair. 

Though you are playing the game with your own morality in mind you also have to consider the character you are playing as too. In the game world the character of Bigby is known for being aggressive and angered easily. As the player controlling Bigby you have to consider what he would do in the situation and how he would react to certain NPC prompts. In a way you end up ‘role palying’ Bigby and empathise with him. This influences the morality of the choices made because you aren’t just playing as yourself anymore, you are now playing as another character in a world that differs from yours.  

Telltale Games (Developer).(2013).Wolf Among Us [Video Game].United States:Telltale Games

Game Play Log 3

17/3/2016

Game Play Log 3

Do the choices you make in the game contribute to the sense of meaningful interactive moments?

Fahrenheit

In the game when you were choosing what to say it was too fast. The time for responses went by too quickly, making the player choose hastily. Through this you could really feel the fast paced ‘speed action’ of the game as it followed a somewhat ‘real time’ gameplay. Even though it is the type of game it was made to be the reaction time to certain dialogue choices were too quick paced,  which made for a stressing time as the player since you need to make lightning fast reactions to a supposed ‘real time’ game situation. 

The choices also lacked much in information as the only thing the player has to go by are in the form of short, singular word prompts. Not to mention the fast timer that pressures you into making a split second decision before fully realising the choice you made as the player. 

In my opinion I think in terms of the ‘sense of meaningful interactive moments’ depends a bit. At the start as you play as Lucas, once you get out free and away from the crime scene there is a sense of achievement and relief. Its because your actions have (if done right) made Lucas less actions resulting in the player being less anxious. This ‘sense’ makes it more meaningful as the player feels one with the character. Whereas during conversation sequences when selecting suitable dialogue to respond with has less of a meaningful interaction. With the use of short word prompts and quick fire timing the decisions are hastily chosen without much knowledge of what could happen as a result of what was said. I quote from the reading by Domsch, he said that “choice situations differ in the amount of information that is given about the consequences of the different options,” which makes sense in that if theres less information you can not judge precisely about the consequences of the choices you make.

Game Play Log 2

11/3/2016

Game Play Log 2

Did linear storytelling in your chosen game(s) engage and excite you as a player? Explain why or why not.

Prince Of Persia

The game itself I found boring and hard to engage with even though I was watching someone else play. It was a very narrative based game with a story that the player followed closely while playing. During the game after completing a certain action a cutscene appeared to lead the player to the next move but I found the combination of visual clues and the cutscenes drew the player away from discovering things for themselves. In other words most things were spelled out to the player and lacked a sense of ‘exploration’. At certain points in the game the player was required to follow certain prompts otherwise they couldn't proceed to the next stage. The controls were also annoying and uncomfortable, possibly because I often don't play computer games but I felt it would be more comfortable using a ps3 remote or something of the like. For the camera, the control seemed simple enough, just use the mouse to move/ control the camera but during the games it would move itself to weird angles that did not benefit the player and ultimately drew the player out of their immersion of the gameplay. 

The game itself I felt followed a very ludus structure. A ludus game, as defined by Marie-Laure Ryan “are strictly controlled by pre-existing rules accepted by the participants as a part of basic game construct.” I felt that this was definitely the type of game ‘Prince of Persia’ was. There were pre-existing rules that the player was to follow and was accepted by player in order to proceed through the game. 

In conclusion, the game ‘Prince of Persia’ did not excite me and was hard to engage with during gameplay because of control factors and a controlling linear narrative that lacked any creative pleasure to the player. 

Game Play Blog 1

3/3/2016

Game Play Log

How does your game tell it's story? Is it successful?

Never Alone

The game tells it story through narrations at the start of each chapter and sometimes in between game play when the player has reached a certain 'checkpoint'. Along side the narration at the start of each chapter it has an animated part of the story in the traditional Inuit art style playing with it. The visual story telling establishes the story, character and it's setting. The controls so how you control the characters give it a different feeling when you're playing. Its realistic movements like how the character jumps and runs add to the experience of the game. When the player finishes a certain ‘chapter’ they are offered an option to watch an ‘insight’ or to continue with the game. The insights provide more information about the games background. Showing the viewer more about the people, their culture and where they live;lifestyle from where the game is based. 
   

I think the game is successful to an extent. When you start the game you are given the story, so what is happening in the current time line of the game. You know, after a bit into the game that as the character Nuna and her arctic fox, you are initially going out to search for something during a blizzard, but then as you go back to the village there is a man there that stands among burning remains of a village. He then proceeds to chase after Nuna. At that point as the player you know you have to run away from him but afterwards it becomes a puzzle adventure game. It’s more the game is giving you one mini puzzle after another until you reach a certain point on the game. It feels like a slow reveal of what’s happening. 

That's not to say I didn't enjoy the game. I found the visuals created an extra depth in the game and made for a good experience and enjoyable.