Designing for Meaning: When to Stop Laying Ground and Start Fractal

Ok, that is a hideous blog post title. I've been brainstorming all day and finally slowed down now at midnight enough to write. It would probably be nice if I would take more notes along the way. Discipline, damn it, discipline! Let me lay the case study on you before I go all conceptual.

Imagine you want to represent something with statistics. But, these statistics are going to be read by people, not machines. Ok, so we are going to work with integers on a limited scale. Check. Also, this is for a game that wishes to evoke meaning. Limit the statistics and encourage the descriptive text. Check.

How many statistics?

I don't know. I've been asking myself this question for a bit now. Made myself feel good by reading reviews of games that suck. I can imagine a list of six to nine attributes that will be numbered. Numbered so they can interact with dice and therefore help in adjudication when there is conflict. These attributes take the form of verbs, because they are actions that can have varying success. Also there are adjectives to bring in all the color, all the imagination. But what about wealth, fame, and status? I'm wondering about languages known, as well, but I think they could be covered with adjectives in a record keeping sense, like "English-speaker." Probably would only influence die rolls if it was a social situation and the difference between having the adjective "Native English-speaker" and "(non-Native) English-speaker" make a difference.

With wealth and maybe even fame it is tempting to imagine a numerical ordinal system for ranked comparison and even power balance. But in this elegant system that I'm chasing like a Platonic ideal numerical designations are only for verbs. Oh, but maybe you might want to have some kind of business or economic contest. Yes, but that would be some kind of verb, like "Deals," which would designate an aptitude and could then be rolled or challenged, not a fairly static measure of wealth or fame. You see, if characters or institutions or whatever are going to have an adjective like "wealthy" will there then be different but comparable adjectives, like "modestly incomed?" And if you do, then how is it in the economy of character creation, where there is a certain number of adjectives initially, to designate the difference between "modestly incomed" and "wealthy?" It doesn't have a rating system, the difference in the game is handled by the players' and storyteller's interpretations. But if those interpretations are going to have any credence by the participants then it shouldn't be that everyone is effectively "wealthy" because there is no non-role playing reason not to be (a more positive way of saying this is, you would be punishing those who want to role play a low social level character), or everyone effectively of the same wealth level because there is no mechanic to illustrate a difference. The rules need to elicit meaning.

Here is my yet unplay-tested solution: Status, or Status and Wealth for those settings where you can be a rich unskilled laborer or poor emperor, is designated by a single long adjective (yay for hyphens!) which may "cost" more than one adjective during character creation to balance it. So if no Status adjective is designated by the player the storyteller will bestow some appropriate adjective for Status such as "Serf" or "Cobbler." This character would have X + 1 adjectives, where "X" is the number of adjectives allowed for initial characters, where all X were spent on non-Status designating things and the extra one is the Status, which is evocative of the character concept, but equivalent of a relatively poor person of no significant status in the games imaginary society. Then the next scale up in said society's socio-economic scale would cost one adjective, where the character would have X - 1 adjectives designated for non-Status things, the "X-th" adjective being Status. The next highest in the scale would cost two adjectives, so the character would have a total of X - 1 adjectives, X - 2 for non-Status things, the "X - 1th" the Status. If Wealth is a separate statistic then there is some additional considerations on how many adjectives are available for non-Status, non-Wealth designations, but the concept is the same.

Part of what the post title is referring to is the question of how many attributes do you stop with for the base expression before allowing the rest to be expressed in the context and interactions of the game. I imagine in a well designed narrative system what happens after releasing to the permutations of creativity can be expressed graphically as a fractal. On one hand is clutter, over-complexity, and tediousness, on the other is lack of meaning.

Monopoly Revised

The Boardgame Monopoly has been around awhile, almost a century, and is quite well known, if not widely played anymore. I believe at the heart of its decline in popularity is the fact that it is an anti-social game. Not many people want to take the time to set up the board when they may be eliminated before play concludes. With judgement reserved on the joy of playing Monopoly, I suspect few would disagree that it is not fun to watch. However, there is something to its popularity, so much so that the McDonald's restaurant franchise has licensed the use of the Monopoly imagery for their occasional promotions, which makes it worthy of revision. Something to do with the social nature of the trading of properties, the presence of random threats such as landing on a highly developed property or going to jail, and the idea of improvement with a relatively short time before a return on the investment.

We want everyone to stay in the game, so there is no elimination mechanism. There isn't individual currency piles, but a central bank from which every one is indebted. There is a debt limit which is equal for all players initially, then it increases as properties and improvements are acquired. There is no board, properties are randomly revealed when a player wishes to go to auction. When an auction is triggered the flow of play is interrupted until the property purchased or all players decline to bid. Bidding starts at half the properties unimproved value, bids can be raised by a minimum of one monetary unit and a maximum of fifty and goes around the players to the right (i.e. the opposite of turns). When a player expends funds cash goes from the bank to the player, signifying debt. Player income is represented by cash going back to the bank. Debt greater than current debt capacity sends the player to jail. Being in jail doesn't stop income nor random effects, but does prevent participating in auctions and improving investments. Random effects, think of the Community Chest and Chance cards, are checked for on each turn and happen on a sum of 9 or greater of two six-sided dice. Most of these will be additional costs, such as property tax, zoning infraction fine, building maintenance, et cetera, of course the iconic Get Out of Jail Free, and Go To Jail. Also, effects that modify other parts of the game, such as changing the cost of making improvements or changing the requirements to make improvements would be relevant and much needed spice to the rather dry fines that constitute most random cards in the traditional game. Checking for income happens automatically at the beginning of a turn by a six-sided die roll for each property. Each property will have a rating, modified by improvements, which is a number between 0 and 6 which shows what has to be gotten on a die roll, or lower, to garner income. A rating of 0 will not garner any, a rating of 6 will always garner. Additionally, there will be a corresponding income value which is also modified by improvements and is the amount the player's debt is reduced.

The game ends when the bank is void of all cash. Points are based on positive relationship with the value of assets and an inverse relationship with the amount of debt. Being in jail at the end penalizes points.

© Michael Mosher 2012

Inspiration Wednesday

Taken from here:

What skills does EA look for??

There is no set route to becoming a Game Designer. However, this is not an entry level role. Game development is a highly complex, intensive process which can last two years or more, so the Game Designer must be able to work closely with teams of programmers, artists, project managers, writers, musicians, and many others. The Game Designer usually has a reasonably high level of industry experience and knowledge. EA usually expects to see a portfolio of work, which can take the form of completed game projects or written game design documents and proposals.

Game development is a collaborative process involving multi-disciplinary teams. Designers must be able to communicate their vision to artists, programmers, producers, marketing staff, and others involved in the development process, and accept feedback on their work. This involves presenting their ideas both verbally and on paper, for which they need writing and basic visual design and drawing skills. They should also be reasonably fluent in a range of 2D and 3D graphics and animation packages, such as 3D Studio Max or Maya. Good technical knowledge is required, with some programming skills at least at ‘scripting’ level and awareness of the various games platforms and technologies.

A common route to becoming a Game Designer is to get experience as a Game Tester and/or in Quality Assurance (QA) department for a games company. This offers a good grounding in the development process, access to software and tools, and insight into the different job roles in development.

When looking for Game Designers EA values a thorough understanding of gameplay theory. Excellent communication and presentation skills are a must, along with storytelling and narrative development skills. The ideal candidate possesses information design and user interface design skill. They must be able to work both as part of a team and independently. Last but not least, they must display systematic and strategic thinking as well as imagination and creativity.

As far as educational background, Game Designers can study a range of subjects, from the sciences and humanities to art and design. There are also a growing number of games-related degree programs and courses available for study, and a degree in this type of program would be a plus. Prospective Game Designers should check the content of courses, particularly the balance between programming, game art, and game design. Designers need basic programming and 3D design skills, and preferably some drawing ability. It’s also very important to have excellent communication and presentation skills.

Sounds like a road map to me. Quite exciting. I happen to be two degrees of separation away from a game designer who runs figure study drawing meetings. Maybe time for the old "two birds, one stone" trick, eh?

Time for more games in education. Here is an example of a pioneer having a lot of fun and a lot of success:



That is it for me, now you share what is inspiring you...

Educational Game Collaboration

me: The framework. You'll have to put in the details, as I don't have a schema of your curriculum

sodijusey: talk about an untapped market

me: Ok

We'll collaborate :)

sodijusey: that's what we could do!!!!

:)))

totally

me: triple chin!

sodijusey: we'll be RICH!

me: LOL

That sounds good :)

sodijusey: no seriously though

I've been to English teacher conventions...and you wouldn't believe the market for stuff to sell...

and games is an untapped market

if you're serious...I'd love to work on something like that

me: Yeah, we should definitely collaborate on that.

sodijusey: over time

me: I am serious

sodijusey: I am too

that would be sooooo cool

Christina could do the artwork

me: And it would be good for both public and private schools, so it would be desireable to a wide audience

Right, got to get her craftiness in there, too

sodijusey: I was thinking of some of the beautiful cards of Dixit

me: Ok, done super excited

sodijusey: :)

me: Yes, I think DiXit is a great game for your class room, get their creativity flowing

sodijusey: good thing you're so creative and smart and intelligent and motivated and driven and entrepreneurial and..

SEXY

me: You could have a custom DiXit deck where the images capture particular stories

sodijusey: kissing your sexy parts

oh that would be interesting....allowing for supplemental plots

me: So, you read Mice and Men and you have immages of peopel walking along the rail road with the dry hills in the distance

sodijusey: but familiar characters

me: The rabbit

The barn with straw bed

sodijusey: a gun with blood on it

me: Right, familiar characters to the story

sodijusey:

me: There you go

That would be great. It is both a game and a visual component to the narrative

Sent at 10:51 AM on Wednesday

sodijusey: or an author pack...with a blend of characters, settings, plot artifacts from several of the author's pieces

what if Othello and Juliet were stuck in an enchanted forest?

me: Do you think team play, where the whole room is playing the same instantiation is more popular in education circles than small clusters?

sodijusey: no...I don't think it's really doable that way

I've never seen a classroom playing one game together unless it was jeopardy or something like that

me: I mean for games in general, not just a picture card game

sodijusey: depends on the game, really

me: Right, that is a system where you need someone to arbitrate, the teacher.

Sure. But what I'm asking, as a designer, is what would the market prefer.

sodijusey: I think I would prefer traditional board game choices to be played in smaller groups

me: Are multiple clusters bad because it requires the teacher to have to explain the same thing five times and is afraid some clusters are going to break down and stop participating?

sodijusey: Though, I think something whole-class could work as well...

No...you would explain it once, model it...and then they would play

if they're all playing the same game

me: Would you as a teacher be interested in team competitions where they are competing for extra credit points?

sodijusey: on the other hand...if you had some fantasy role playing game going on...it could involve more people right? How many can it handle?

yes...students get very competitive over games in the classroom

me: Well, if you can maintain the pace it can scale very well.

I guess bragging rights are enough, don't need to bring grade points into it.

sodijusey: maybe a game where it's the same type of game...but you have 4-5 different "plots" going...the first group to accomplish their task wins.

like mini paks within the same game

designed for simultaneous game playing but with a twist in their plots or something like that

me: Interesting. I like the idea of modules that string into a larger narrative

sodijusey: but they all have to eventually make it to the castle or something like that

me: Very cool. I've got my designer brain working overdrive

sodijusey:

me: Too bad this is off the record, LOL

I'll have to copy this text into a document

sodijusey: I think deciding on an educational objective...a learning target would be beneficial. Then it would help us streamline the type of game...the things they will gain by playing the game...whether it's content, review, creativity, imagination, creative writing boosters, etc.

me: Yes, I was thinking the same

sodijusey: for instance, if you were designing a game for American Lit it would look very different than a generic "storytelling" game

I would want specific content

Games Detrimental?

So I'm at on this high, seeing games all around me, either being played, whether the participants would call it a game or not, or potentially played. I go to the coolest game store I've ever seen, End Game of Oakland, where they not only survive in an urban core, but thrive, going vertical and offering a strong venue for game players. Then I watch this TED talk by Barry Schwartz where he decries incentives as the proverbial "carrot" in a "carrot/stick" dichotomy tempting leaders and others in fiduciary roles away from the just, right, and good choices.

What does this have to do with games? Well, games can change the world, as Jane McGonigal has thoroughly argued in her book, Reality is Broken, and others cited on this blog have argued similarly. Games do this in primarily two ways, either they provide a simulation of the non-game world, where a problem to be solved resides, which can then be played to find solutions, or non-game life becomes game life to steer us toward better behavior, such as the Prius automobile and the gas mileage display on the windshield encouraging better driving to reduce petroleum based fuel consumption. The latter comes about with incentives. You aren't consuming less petroleum based fuel because doing so is the equivalent of spending money to put carbon dioxide in the air and heavy metals in the water, but because it is exciting to get that short-term confirmation that something you did had an impact on something tangible, in this case the digital display.

Are games detrimental? Is there certain places, and certain ways, games shouldn't be?

The Value of Randomness

The scenario: the tension has built during the course of the game and you've developed a strategy that is clever and potentially a game changing or finishing one, the moment of execution comes and the result is left to the toss of dice or drawing of completely random cards. The result can be very disappointing and not at all rewarding to those who come up with exciting moves. Do we want to leave such things to complete chance, holding great ideas to the same level as mediocre and even bad ones? 

Randomness can be a good challenge in a game, for example, when determining your resources, such as who will go first in turn based games, or which tiles will you draw in Settlers of Cataan. It can also be a fun way of determining  your obstacles, such as which property will you land on in Monopoly after they have all been purchased or which monster will be revealed in the Adventure Tile System. There are times when randomness provides a challenge because of unpredictability, the lack of information which I've discussed previously, but also the uniqueness of each game, and thus its "re-playability." But these are all very different than the unexpected and the not (directly) controlled nature of another persons decisions. 

In Chess or International Football, the field and the tools are set before the game begins. The tools being the pieces you'll be using, chess pieces and a football, respectively, and the mental and physical capabilities of the players. Also, the rules are a kind of tool, as well. Some games offer different rules depending on the role, resources, and scenarios the game is experienced by a given player. Yet, these games are exciting because it is unknown exactly how a given player will respond under specific, but yet to be determined, circumstances. In Apples to Apples and DiXit the outcome of your choices is determined by deliberate, but unknowable beforehand, decisions by other players. The rules explain the abstract conditions for winning or the effects of resolved conflicts, such as:

The object of the game is to checkmate the opponent; this occurs when the opponent's king is in check, and there is no legal way to remove it from attack.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chess, October 11, 2011.

However, the specific scenarios are created and evaluated by the players. Chess rewards strategic thinking because the rules are clear and the outcome of a given move is never in question. Likewise, in Apples to Apples a clever choice of word based on a careful evaluation of the judging player is rewarded because the rules are clear and, although the judge will decide subjectively, that subjective adjudication has internal logic. The same with DiXit where a well laid card based on the psychological assessment of all the players, except the storyteller of that round, will be rewarded because the rules are clear and the internal logic of the other voters.

What do you think of randomness in games?

Mind Games

Drum roll please...the name for the new website is: purposeful-play.com Thank you all for your feedback and conversations. I am still working on the programming of the site, trying to decide the best way to present it, but the domain name is purchased and associated with my server space. In the course of preparing the site I've realized that my aptitude in some programming isn't where I would like it to be. Which means I can use new knowledge, practice for underused skills, and concrete problems to avail.

What I realized was in my excitement to prepare the site and share not only these blog entries, but other new aspects of the site, that this drive was inadvertently encouraging me to go through motions which would lead to my learning and improving skills. Isn't this the beauty of games? To review my definition for games, "an endeavor which has the goal of overcoming challenges, but the value is primarily in the action, not the outcome." I want my web presence for game design and game-play to be found on purposeful-play.com and I want it to be more than a blog. I could pay someone to do that for me. But, because I have chosen to make it myself, to have total control, I'm finding all this joy in the endeavor itself, and that is propelling me through the challenge of learning new skills.

For a great view of what and how games can and are influencing our behavior watch this video a then tell me what positive things you've gotten from recreation.

Wii Games - E3 2012 - Guitar Hero 5