This is a short video that I put together to showcase some of the stuff that I've done during my schooling, both in and out of class. Mission 16 and Decay were done in free time, the War map was my level design final project.
Check it out:
And as always feel free to leave your thoughts, criticism is good.
Thursday, May 7, 2009
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Controversy: Six Days in Fallujah
I think it's time that I spend a little time talking about the recent controversy over Six Days in Fallujah, a game that was recently dropped by publisher Konami. The game was being developed by Atomic Games.
The reason there is controversy over this game is pretty interesting actually. It's not the actual content of the game that's come under fire. It's an action game that takes place in Iraq, maybe not the most tasteful subject, but it's certainly one that has been done before. The problem comes from how the devs and Konami initially tried to pitch it. It was touted as a hyper-realistic game all about the seriousness of war. A big pitching point of the game was that the developers interviewed American soldiers who were actually in the battle the game is supposed to be about. You were going to follow one squad through the second battle for fallujah in a documentary-esque video game. I think that's a really great idea, executed right.
Now on the one hand they have it pitched as this intense realistic game about war. On the other hand you've got Konami marketing VP Anthony Crouts saying something like, "We're not pro-war. We're not trying to make people feel uncomfortable. We just want to bring a compelling entertainment experience. At the end of the day, it's just a game."
At the end of the day, it's just a game? Man, are you that out of touch? I tend not to get worked up about these sort of things, but this kind of ignorance is unexcusable from somebody who is supposed to be marketing this thing. If you think you're game can try and pretend to be a serious game about war, but really just be about mowing down faceless soldiers and taking clips of bullets to the chest unflinchingly, you are seriously mistaken.
Obviously, there was some serious bumbling on the marketing aspect of this game, Shacknews covered that really well and I'm not going to hammer the point in anymore, but I am going to point something else out. As soon as the controversy began, Konami immediately dropped the project. I mean this game wasn't announced more than a month before Konami washed there hands of it. Regardless of the legitmacy of the controversy, it raises an important question about publishers. If we want to make something of real merit with some controversy, not only do we need to worry about public reaction but good luck getting the industry itself behind you.
It's a little depressing for the Triple A side of things, but it certainly chalks one up for the indies.
The reason there is controversy over this game is pretty interesting actually. It's not the actual content of the game that's come under fire. It's an action game that takes place in Iraq, maybe not the most tasteful subject, but it's certainly one that has been done before. The problem comes from how the devs and Konami initially tried to pitch it. It was touted as a hyper-realistic game all about the seriousness of war. A big pitching point of the game was that the developers interviewed American soldiers who were actually in the battle the game is supposed to be about. You were going to follow one squad through the second battle for fallujah in a documentary-esque video game. I think that's a really great idea, executed right.
Now on the one hand they have it pitched as this intense realistic game about war. On the other hand you've got Konami marketing VP Anthony Crouts saying something like, "We're not pro-war. We're not trying to make people feel uncomfortable. We just want to bring a compelling entertainment experience. At the end of the day, it's just a game."
At the end of the day, it's just a game? Man, are you that out of touch? I tend not to get worked up about these sort of things, but this kind of ignorance is unexcusable from somebody who is supposed to be marketing this thing. If you think you're game can try and pretend to be a serious game about war, but really just be about mowing down faceless soldiers and taking clips of bullets to the chest unflinchingly, you are seriously mistaken.
Obviously, there was some serious bumbling on the marketing aspect of this game, Shacknews covered that really well and I'm not going to hammer the point in anymore, but I am going to point something else out. As soon as the controversy began, Konami immediately dropped the project. I mean this game wasn't announced more than a month before Konami washed there hands of it. Regardless of the legitmacy of the controversy, it raises an important question about publishers. If we want to make something of real merit with some controversy, not only do we need to worry about public reaction but good luck getting the industry itself behind you.
It's a little depressing for the Triple A side of things, but it certainly chalks one up for the indies.
Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Announcement: Boosh Studios
Hey all,
Quick announcement about some of those plans I mentioned earlier. Boosh Studios has been formed by myself, Josh, and Mark and we've started a development blog for our ramblings about flash development and games. Give it a read!
You can find the blog over at booshstudios.blogspot.com !
Quick announcement about some of those plans I mentioned earlier. Boosh Studios has been formed by myself, Josh, and Mark and we've started a development blog for our ramblings about flash development and games. Give it a read!
You can find the blog over at booshstudios.blogspot.com !
Thursday, April 23, 2009
What's In the Pipeline
It's been sometime since I had the time to get on here and write something up. The end of the semester has been pretty busy between our production beta, papers for other classes, finishing up our mod for a la mod, and some other side projects. Here's what I've got coming up:
1) As soon as I can I'm going to post up some screenshots and a download link to our completed a la mod project, Decay. It's a Half-Life 2: Episode 2 modification and it only takes about 25 minutes to play through. For the record, we did win a la mod!
2) Hypernova is a game that was conceptualized by my good friend Josh Terry who was kind enough to bring me on board this really cool project. Hypernova is a tabletop game of similiar ilk to Warhammer and Warmachine, except that the models you're commanding are space fleets. It's unique in that not only are the models made via papercraft (aka they're free if you have a printer and some glue) but the game takes into account the lack of physics in space such that your shifts can drift around each other while firing. Very cool.
3) Finally, Myself, Josh Terry, and Mark Desmarais have put together an (as of yet) unnamed production team for this summer to produce quality flash games for Kongregate. With the experience we've picked up from our Production classes and working on the a la mod project we feel more than up to producing something worth while for the masses of the internet. We'll see if I'm eating those words in a few months, but I don't think so.
So yeah, that's what I've been up to, and all of that on top of my other non-gaming classes. Stay tuned for more info on all of these projects.
1) As soon as I can I'm going to post up some screenshots and a download link to our completed a la mod project, Decay. It's a Half-Life 2: Episode 2 modification and it only takes about 25 minutes to play through. For the record, we did win a la mod!
2) Hypernova is a game that was conceptualized by my good friend Josh Terry who was kind enough to bring me on board this really cool project. Hypernova is a tabletop game of similiar ilk to Warhammer and Warmachine, except that the models you're commanding are space fleets. It's unique in that not only are the models made via papercraft (aka they're free if you have a printer and some glue) but the game takes into account the lack of physics in space such that your shifts can drift around each other while firing. Very cool.
3) Finally, Myself, Josh Terry, and Mark Desmarais have put together an (as of yet) unnamed production team for this summer to produce quality flash games for Kongregate. With the experience we've picked up from our Production classes and working on the a la mod project we feel more than up to producing something worth while for the masses of the internet. We'll see if I'm eating those words in a few months, but I don't think so.
So yeah, that's what I've been up to, and all of that on top of my other non-gaming classes. Stay tuned for more info on all of these projects.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Some Thoughts about Real Characters
Warning: The following blog post contains spoilers about an anime that was released in 1998.
I was talking with my friend the other day about the ending of Cowboy Bebop. At the end of the 26 episode show, the protagonist dies. That's right. You follow this characters story for hours and hours and at the end of it all, he dies. Strangely enough, that ending was fulfilling. In fact, it was far more fulfilling than having Spike Spiegel ride off into space. Instead, his character is satisfied with how how his life has come to this point, and he dies. Just before he leaves for the climactic finale he says, "I'm not going there to die, I have to find out if I'm really alive." Spike Speigel is a human being.
People love Spike Spiegel. He has a human beings flaws and emotions. He carries a past with good memories and bad memories just like anybody else and then he dies, just like every human being. That's what pulls you into the series and what makes you feel satisfied at the end despite a non-traditional ending. So why is our industry so obsessed with the exact oppisite?
Many of the industries famous protagonists are barely even recognizable as humans. Lara Croft, Master Chief, Link, Dante, etc. most of these characters don't even have last names. Even the ones who do feel more real, such as your character in Mass Effect or Solid Snake are rarely more fleshed out than the bare minimum necessary to keep the player engaged with the mechanics of the game. It's almost insulting as a player. As if my puny gamer mind can't comprehend characters more complex than the cardboard cutout cliche they throw at me.
One of the few games that felt like it had a "real" protagonist was Shadow of the Colossus. Through very simple cutscenes and and animations, the player gets a real feel that the character is a human being going through an extremely trying ordeal. He hardly talks and he is more human than 90% of the characters we see today. What are we doing out there?
There are some games that are excused from this critique, no doubt. There are some games where you aren't playing a human, or the intent isn't to go down that road. I don't fault Mario for not behaving like a real plumber with feelings and depth. But if you're trying to present a strong character in an interactive narrative, we have got to start giving our characters a little more depth.
P.S. I know that Master Chief is a rank, and his name is John, and he was taken from his planet and blah blah friggin' blah. I shouldn't have to read a novel to know the back story of my character.
I was talking with my friend the other day about the ending of Cowboy Bebop. At the end of the 26 episode show, the protagonist dies. That's right. You follow this characters story for hours and hours and at the end of it all, he dies. Strangely enough, that ending was fulfilling. In fact, it was far more fulfilling than having Spike Spiegel ride off into space. Instead, his character is satisfied with how how his life has come to this point, and he dies. Just before he leaves for the climactic finale he says, "I'm not going there to die, I have to find out if I'm really alive." Spike Speigel is a human being.
People love Spike Spiegel. He has a human beings flaws and emotions. He carries a past with good memories and bad memories just like anybody else and then he dies, just like every human being. That's what pulls you into the series and what makes you feel satisfied at the end despite a non-traditional ending. So why is our industry so obsessed with the exact oppisite?
Many of the industries famous protagonists are barely even recognizable as humans. Lara Croft, Master Chief, Link, Dante, etc. most of these characters don't even have last names. Even the ones who do feel more real, such as your character in Mass Effect or Solid Snake are rarely more fleshed out than the bare minimum necessary to keep the player engaged with the mechanics of the game. It's almost insulting as a player. As if my puny gamer mind can't comprehend characters more complex than the cardboard cutout cliche they throw at me.
One of the few games that felt like it had a "real" protagonist was Shadow of the Colossus. Through very simple cutscenes and and animations, the player gets a real feel that the character is a human being going through an extremely trying ordeal. He hardly talks and he is more human than 90% of the characters we see today. What are we doing out there?
There are some games that are excused from this critique, no doubt. There are some games where you aren't playing a human, or the intent isn't to go down that road. I don't fault Mario for not behaving like a real plumber with feelings and depth. But if you're trying to present a strong character in an interactive narrative, we have got to start giving our characters a little more depth.
P.S. I know that Master Chief is a rank, and his name is John, and he was taken from his planet and blah blah friggin' blah. I shouldn't have to read a novel to know the back story of my character.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Some Thoughts About Blame - Bernard Ambersino
The following post was written by a classmate of mine and I found it worthy of publishing:
As the video game industry grows, as with any other entertainment industry, it garners the unwanted attention of disgruntled parents and those looking to blame anything for society’s ills. The video game industry certainly is not the first to deal with such accusations, as this trend can be seen clearly in the past few years even just within the music industry. First heavy metal was to blame for increases in violence, and then there was that Eminem and his rap music. It seems it is the gaming industry’s turn to take the blame now, as games are often said to make children more violent and to lead to obesity.
Over the years there have been countless attacks on the values of games, often led by recently disbarred attorney Jack Thompson. Cases have been made that Mature rated games like Grand Theft Auto and Mortal Kombat have taught children violence and changed their temperament. Earlier in the year an ad was run in the UK depicting a child slumped on a couch playing a video game with a tagline that states “Risk an early death, just do nothing” (http://www.gamepolitics.com/
Clearly society’s problems would remain if video games suddenly disappeared, as they have existed since before games were commonplace. While the general public is quick to jump on the next big thing to turn into a scapegoat, it would behoove them to take responsibility for the issues themselves. If Mature rated games are getting through to kids, then perhaps the parents should be questioned as to why they would buy these games for their children and allow them to be played. The fast food industry and general attitude of the average person must not be the sole reasons for the obesity rate but maybe, just maybe, they have more to do with it than video games. I live in everlasting hope that at one point society will stop blaming whatever seems to be convenient and decide to start tackling these issues and take responsibility for them. Unfortunately, this seems like a distant dream.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Some Thoughts About Genre
I hate genres in gaming. Anybody who has had a design class with me can tell you, there are few things I dislike more than genre. I have two major criticisms of the current genre system in games:
1) Design Ruts - As soon as a developer or a publisher says to themselves, "We are making an RTS" or "We are making an FPS", their heads are immediately filled with expectations for the genre. Specific little things that those games are "supposed" to have. I.E. resource management in a Real Time Strategy game.
2) Mechanical Classification - The system we currently has classifies games based on their mechanics, rather than their style or substance. As far as I can think of, we are the only medium that does this. Sure, maybe those more technically informed about films might refer to them based on the mechanics of the cinematography, but for the most part a film is referred to by its content. I.E. Drama, Comedy, Romance, etc.
I'm not going to blame the industry for this, or the game journalists, or anybody else associated with the medium. Traditionally, games have only been about the mechanics. Stories, characters, and context were so abstracted that they didn't really matter or could be summed up in a quick sentence. Truly, mechanics were the king.
Chess is about a war between two factions. Super Mario Bros. is a game about a plumber rescuing a princess and so on and so forth. It made little sense to categorize these things by their visual style or their thematic elements.
But now, we do have a lot of these things. Games have themes and visual styles, and I would call for a move away from the genres of yesterday. Naturally, that's an easy thing to say and much harder to do. I don't have a ready made list of categories to classify different strokes of games ; Ian Bogost at Gamasutra wrote this article about a style he would call "Proceduralism". I agree with many of the things he says, and disagree with some of them, but this kind of thinking will be an extremely useful tool for us designers as we go forth in an effort to make something new.
1) Design Ruts - As soon as a developer or a publisher says to themselves, "We are making an RTS" or "We are making an FPS", their heads are immediately filled with expectations for the genre. Specific little things that those games are "supposed" to have. I.E. resource management in a Real Time Strategy game.
2) Mechanical Classification - The system we currently has classifies games based on their mechanics, rather than their style or substance. As far as I can think of, we are the only medium that does this. Sure, maybe those more technically informed about films might refer to them based on the mechanics of the cinematography, but for the most part a film is referred to by its content. I.E. Drama, Comedy, Romance, etc.
I'm not going to blame the industry for this, or the game journalists, or anybody else associated with the medium. Traditionally, games have only been about the mechanics. Stories, characters, and context were so abstracted that they didn't really matter or could be summed up in a quick sentence. Truly, mechanics were the king.
Chess is about a war between two factions. Super Mario Bros. is a game about a plumber rescuing a princess and so on and so forth. It made little sense to categorize these things by their visual style or their thematic elements.
But now, we do have a lot of these things. Games have themes and visual styles, and I would call for a move away from the genres of yesterday. Naturally, that's an easy thing to say and much harder to do. I don't have a ready made list of categories to classify different strokes of games ; Ian Bogost at Gamasutra wrote this article about a style he would call "Proceduralism". I agree with many of the things he says, and disagree with some of them, but this kind of thinking will be an extremely useful tool for us designers as we go forth in an effort to make something new.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
