conquest dynamics – Page 3

Immersive, Connected, Asynchronous

So, there are two types of gameplay I imagine in this game. And this may increase the game far beyond initial scope. Immersive Play This is closest to console-type play. Someone churns their way through 20 levels of combat and research, at varying difficulties to get to the end game. This is enhanced with later … Continue reading “Immersive, Connected, Asynchronous”

So, there are two types of gameplay I imagine in this game. And this may increase the game far beyond initial scope.

Immersive Play

This is closest to console-type play. Someone churns their way through 20 levels of combat and research, at varying difficulties to get to the end game. This is enhanced with later multiplayer and, I would hope, special co-op levels as well as death match style play. But the gameplay is all immersive. It’s real-time tactics which will suck in the attention.

Asynchronous but Connected Play

This is the gameplay done when you only have two minutes or thirty seconds. It’s not enough to immerse you entirely and it may open the gameplay to other platforms (maybe even including emails, push notifications). Have to think a bit more about this one.

more about messaging and supply lines
shared missions ( “I can’t move forward on sigma sector until you blow that bridge” )
passing of information ( “Anyone seen the Derps in Downtown” )

The closest things I can compare this to is using other channels outside WoW to plan raids. What if the online component required people to do things for each other. Think of that segment in the Matrix sequel where they had to hit things within a certain time frame to get through a door. Very silly, the whole sequence. But the idea being that in a war, even a guerilla war, there are sacrifices, feints and advances. In order for Cell B to advance, maybe Cell A has to lead an extremely difficult mission against some major component of alien infrastructure. If they don’t achieve a certain score, then Cell B has a much harder time of it.

One Lump or Two, Vicar?

I’m left to wonder then; is this one game or two?

I’m intrigued by something Willem Kokke said to me earlier this week about starting out with a simpler game to get started. I think that an Asynchonrous Connected game could work as a standalone. As an iPhone game that would be a companion for an iPad strategy game. I already watch TV while using my phone and iPad so why not play a game? Maybe there’s an entire untapped market there. Some console games use phones to help track inventory, to provide in-game information. Why not affect gameplay?

So that’s a simpler idea, that feeds into the development of the story, that can provide story elements in and of itself. It looks like I’ll need to open a new area of the wiki.

Musing on the communication of culture

the game’s systems encouraged team play supported by strong communication via text, which meant that teams were generally segregated by language. Implementing a communication system is much more complex than enabling a text chat, even if you’re within a company and not just playing games with strangers on the Internet. In two major corporations where … Continue reading “Musing on the communication of culture”

the game’s systems encouraged team play supported by strong communication via text, which meant that teams were generally segregated by language.

Implementing a communication system is much more complex than enabling a text chat, even if you’re within a company and not just playing games with strangers on the Internet. In two major corporations where I have worked, the adoption of a common language wasn’t actually much help in communication. Where things improved was in the recognition of similarities in culture. We understood that Jean from the south of France preferred to have our weekly Friday meeting over by noon so he could spend the afternoon “drinking sweet wine with his friends”. Was his productivity affected by this? Certainly – but for the better. The difficulty in passing over the non-verbals in both language and culture (both being filters for communication) mean that for the most effective communications we may have to pare back the layers to the most basic. A few years ago, a tabletop RPG called Og presented a limited way of communicating where, similar to Twitter, you were limited in your ability to complete communications. In this case it was a limited vocabulary and a limited number of words you were permitted to use. You still had to interact, to solve puzzles and achieve objectives, but communication was artificially limited to allow for creative expression in other ways. It’s also possible to use tools like Rory’s Story Cubes to facilitate this sort of communication and I’ve previously used Everway vision decks to boost understanding and imagination.

The game mentioned in the article reminds me of the Wii method of communication. When playing Super Mario Kart Wii, there is no free-form communication. There are a number of emotes that you can select for our character which are language specific and therefore easily translated. This has two effects – it makes it really easy to permit my kids to play online as there is no way to see inappropriate content and there is no way for a player to feel alienated by the language.

Of course you can have entire conversations using “emotes” (visual verbs) and a strong visual library with appropriate translation can enable meaningful conversation even without a line of text being passed.

Crowd funding Investment: I have a bad feeling about this.

From Gamasutra: Newsbrief: In the wake of Double Fine’s astonishingly successful Kickstarter campaign, industry trade body UKIE called for legislation changes that would allow UK video game companies to use crowd funding to finance their projects. UKIE explained that the UK’s current legal and regulatory framework puts too many restrictions on crowd funding, and the … Continue reading “Crowd funding Investment: I have a bad feeling about this.”

From Gamasutra:

Newsbrief: In the wake of Double Fine’s astonishingly successful Kickstarter campaign, industry trade body UKIE called for legislation changes that would allow UK video game companies to use crowd funding to finance their projects.

UKIE explained that the UK’s current legal and regulatory framework puts too many restrictions on crowd funding, and the group promised to release a report that outlines the ways in which the laws should change to better suit game developers and the entertainment industry at large.

I view this with some discomfort. There is nothing stopping UK video game developers using crowd funding to finance their projects. Nothing. Beginning their position with a straw man argument sets the scene for a document filled with repetition and obfuscatory prose.

The restrictions of the UK’s current legal and regulatory framework are in place to protect people from shysters. It’s not always possible and some people get burned but it’s the best thing for everyone.

There is nothing stopping Kickstarter from being in the UK as-is. But this paper from UKIE is attempting to effect serious change in the way securities are dealt by permitting crowd funding from “small holders” to purchase securities in bulk and I’m extremely wary of it for two reasons:

they’re using Kickstarter as an example. This is disingenuous in my opinion as its saying “look what donations/pre-ordering can accomplish, now let us sell shares this way” and nearly every discussion seems to revolve around selling investments. Kickstarter proves this isn’t required. And their opening argument is utterly defeated.
in my own investment dealings (helping to advise local companies), I’ve had to deal with venture capitalists who have been nothing short of shysters. Term sheets which could drive their own truck through them, legals which are not only different to the terms laid out in the term sheet but actual opposites which, when discovered are resulting to more more than an apology.

So, the mother of all unintended consequences would be to permit this and allow investment managers to punt junk companies on the Internet for pennies. In effect, doing a pre-IPO IPO. With the number of companies out there and the number of potential investors, this becomes an administrative nightmare. While the fund managers laugh all the way to the bank, you have thousands of shareholders wondering why they bothered considering the bulk of the money goes on fees and you’ve got such a micro-percentage of the company that you can’t control anything anyway. Ending up with a heap of shares in a worthless company isn’t the only potential outcome. Are they seriously going to have shareholder meetings with thousands of shareholders when a company is worth £100K?

I might be spending too much time worrying about the motivations of strangers. In my opinion, these people are not to be trusted.

The Sky Is Rising

A report on the boom in the media industry despite the worst recession in 70 years. Related posts: cultureTECH: What I did… Holidays in England All I needed to know about games… Humans FTW! Sky-Bully FTL!

A report on the boom in the media industry despite the worst recession in 70 years.

Show me the MMOney

Making money in when making games used to be a simple equation. Make the game and then sell the game. You allow for money for people to do the mechanics, the art and the publishing and distribution but the remainder is yours. And so the world continued in peace for millennia. Then the world changed. … Continue reading “Show me the MMOney”

Then the world changed. It didn’t start there but the largest and most noteworthy of the change was World of Warcraft from gaming stalwarts Blizzard. World of Warcraft quickly dwarfed the other Massively Multiplayer Online games in terms of scope and sheer weight of numbers, building on an audience who had succumbed to Warcraft I, Warcraft II and Starcraft. World of Warcraft adopted elements from their other successful IP, Diablo and mixed it all up into one tasty morsel which soon developed a population dwarfing several real world nations.

The players didn’t pay up front for this game, the MMO, they paid for it and the online services associated with it with a monthly subscription. Every month, small amounts of money, which amounted over the months to many magnitudes higher than they could have sold the game for, would be processed into Blizzards bank accounts.

In response to this, other MMOs would begin to compete on several levels. They would reduce prices, adopt (expensive) third party licenses to attract users and attempt other ways to differentiate themselves from the Blizzard juggernaut.

The problem was not that people would not buy games, the problem was that there’s a finite number of hours in a day and humans have a finite amount of time free from family, sleep and career with which to play the game. Getting someone to part with a small monthly subscription is just one part of the the puzzle. There’s also getting them to spend more. Blizzard also manages this with premium items (such as their sparkly rainbow pony).

So, when making a game and planning to be around long enough to make a second game, you have to think carefully about the sources of revenue you have available. Zynga has shown that it is possible to offer a game free of charge, while nickel-and-diming customers with pre-pay options and affiliate deals and make a heap of money (while at the same time screwing over early risk-taking employees).

In order to attract people to your game, especially if you’re aiming for a longer term revenue model (because, you’re not EA or Activision and can’t make $775M within a week of release), you’re going to adopt a Free 2 Play model. But if it is free to play the game, then how do you make enough money to keep your servers running never mind making enough to afford all of the sex workers and illicit drugs that your game designers are accustomed to.

Do you lock out features such as chat? Or upgrades such as the BFG? Or maybe lock out normal features like the ability to heal? Is it better to allow people with money the ability to progress quicker? Gain more experience? Heal quicker? Do they get better rewards or easier quests? Is your game a sunken investment trap (like Magic: The Gathering, or World of Warcraft)? Do you have an active secondary market for your premium items? Do you even want one?

People who don’t pay something are not just a drain on resources. You have to consider whether their presence in the game is enough to attract more people to play the game and whether paying something offers enough of a competitive advantage for players to consider it. This can be an edge against AI elements in the game or against other players in a competitive game.

Do you offer features to the player or the character? Each has a separate set of needs and wants, even though they are the same person. Selling experience points to make the character better has a different game effect to selling energy points to allow the player to pay more often.

In conclusion: when creating a game, there is a careful balance in implementing not only purchase price, in-app purchase and advertising models. And there are a dozen other ways to monetize a game. Make sure you’ve considered all of them.

Special thanks to @bkgStatus for his wisdom when compiling this blog post and to Gamasutra for their recent article on payment models.

Natural (Language) Interfaces

This blog post is not about Siri, sorry. I remember when the best way to control a games console was like this: But over the years, controllers started to look like this: From a single red button to a plethora of buttons, triggers, D-pads, joysticks, joysticks which act as buttons and switches, it’s no wonder … Continue reading “Natural (Language) Interfaces”

This blog post is not about Siri, sorry.

I remember when the best way to control a games console was like this:

But over the years, controllers started to look like this:

xbox-360-wireless-controller-20050513052444937-000

From a single red button to a plethora of buttons, triggers, D-pads, joysticks, joysticks which act as buttons and switches, it’s no wonder that there was a bit of a “revolution” when this hit the market:

But everyone has been a little fascinated with this for the last couple of years. And not surprisingly – this is one of the interfaces that we use to control the world. It seems natural to use it for direct manipulation.

And despite the fact that the hardware is obviously capable of it, games designers haven’t been making use of one of the other obvious interfaces. One that we humans excel at.

This isn’t the same as using a headset to bark commands at team-members, but using defined commands to instruct a game element. Yes, these games exist (Shouter being one of the most well-known) but the sophistication is low.

What I’m looking for is the difference between Newton and Palm, but in terms of voice. Newton tried to recognise your handwriting while Palm made you learn a certain alphabet. For games, at this stage, we need to create a basic control set that can be easily recognised by a language processor. Whether that is in understanding actual words or whether it is mapping wave patterns – it doesn’t matter. The point is to use our voice to control games.

The instructions can be short, they can be words, they can be screams and cries. When I call “Retreat”, my units should start to retreat back to base, making a tactical withdrawal. When I order “Advance”, they should use cover and opportunity to advance upon the enemy position. And when I shout “Charge”, you get the idea.

(images not used with permission)

Technical Co-Founders

From JeffreyTalajic.com One of the chief problems with being non-technical and starting a technical startup is that you can’t evaluate talent or evaluate the work that’s been done. A technical co-founder can do that for you, but recruiting one is more than just finding a tech guy with legit chops. He needs to share your … Continue reading “Technical Co-Founders”

From JeffreyTalajic.com

One of the chief problems with being non-technical and starting a technical startup is that you can’t evaluate talent or evaluate the work that’s been done. A technical co-founder can do that for you, but recruiting one is more than just finding a tech guy with legit chops. He needs to share your passion and vision and be a true co-founder, not just a hired CTO.

Technical co-founders are not there really to write code. They’re present to help put together the proposal and costings. They’re important when doing the first technical hires as they can spot bluffers and talk to the talented.

In Crucible Design, I was the “technical co-founder”. In Mac-Sys, it was the same. I was the guy who knew the bits and bobs about the product or service even if I didn’t know everything about the business. And in both cases it stood us well because I’m pretty competitively curious when it comes to things I’m interested in. For Infurious, I was no longer the technical guy and I think I felt redundant because of that.

But for the next venture (whether that is Alien Salvage, Furukontakuto or whatever), I’m likely to be the product guy and only partly the business guy. But I will need some sort of co-founder and I’m thinking they need to be more into design than code. I’m still looking.

Game Prototype development quote needed

I’m looking for a prototype of a RTS game on iOS developed. Just a single level, basic graphics. 2D sprites on 3D isometric plane. Happy for it to be done in Unity and/or another rapid development environment. Would be nice for combat (ranged and melee) and some pathfinding for units. Can be SP, MP or … Continue reading “Game Prototype development quote needed”

I’m looking for a prototype of a RTS game on iOS developed. Just a single level, basic graphics. 2D sprites on 3D isometric plane.

Happy for it to be done in Unity and/or another rapid development environment. Would be nice for combat (ranged and melee) and some pathfinding for units.

Can be SP, MP or 0P. For the prototype, I’m not fussy. It’s not necessary to have full functions.

Email would be lovely but you can also tweet me.