Week 11: Readings

GDW Chapter 4: Working with Dramatic Elements (pages 102—125)

Play: The play is the freedom of actions in which the players have within the restrictions of rules and prodecures of the game. While play gives the players enjoyment and is usually associated as being less serious, it can also help the players in developing useful skills. In addition, play can help push boundaries and allow a space for experimentation. There are also different types of play, categorized by sociologist Roger Cailois: Competitive play or agôn, Chance-based play or alea, Make-believe play or mimicry, and Vertigo play or ilinx. Depending on the experience in which the designers intended to give, one type of play can be explored more in depth than another. In addition, there are also different types of players. For me, I tend to be the explorer and the artist, where I like to walk around and look at all the environments and experience the many atmospheres that the game has to offer, as well as appreciating the designs and the aesthetics of the character designs. Moreover, the level of engagement of the player is also an important part of the dramatic element. This counts the player's participation, but also the spectators that can enjoy watching the game. I myself enjoy being a specator to certain types of games more than the being the player as well, so I feel that it is really important to make the game as enjoyable to watch as it is pleasurable to play.

Premise: The premise establishes a setting for all the elements within the game and make the abstract concept or system of the game more digestable to the players. This premise can be as simple like in Pacman, where the player was given a character, as well as the enemies being ghost chasing after the player, so that instead of abstract shapes moving around on screen and some numbers counting up or down, the players can understand the game easier and faster due to the characterization and setting that is more familiar to them. The premise acts as a familiar metaphor for the players which ties the formal and the dramatic elements together.

Character: The charcater connects the player to the game's story and objectives, allowing the player to be able to emphasize with the situation within the story of the game more. The charcater can be a reflection of the player's intention, as well as of a certain concept or a group of people. The depth of the charcaters comes from the method of characterization, which explains all of the charcater traits. Dynamic characters that show emotions and changes in personality throughout the game are "round" characters. In my opinion, round characters that show that they can make decisions will create a more believable personality, which in turn makes the story of the game more enjoyable for me. On the other hand, "flat" charcaters are one that only display one trait with little to no change in personality. When I think of flat characters, I tend to think of those NPC towns people where they only have one or two lines of dialogue and are only there solely for the purpose of speaking those dialogues. Some characters in game come with elaborate backstories, while others are avatars whose appearnces changes with each player. I don't think that one is better than the other, but rather that they give off a different experience and depending on the person, they might prefer one over another. An example that I can think of is to compare the two FromSoftware games: Bloodborne and Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice. In Bloodborne, the player can customize many of the physical appearance so that their characters look the way they want them to. I think that this allows the players to treasure and emphasize with the character more because it is their creation and may be a reflection of how they see themselves in the game as well. On the other hand, in Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice, there isn't really any changes the player could do the the character's physical appearance. However, the character, as well as the other main charcaters, does come with a detailed back story in which plays a significant part in how the game's conflict unfold. With this, I think that the player's were able to sympathize with the characters more, and care for the characters which, in turn, affect the choices they would make within the game.

WorldBuilding: WorldBuilding is the design of all the aspects within the fictional world in order to make that world believable and cohesive. The more worldbuilding is done, the more depth and less loopholes there will be to the story of the game. While all of the aspects of the world may not be explored in the actual game, world building can help create a cohesive environment and give explanations to the things in the game. As a designer, having a good worldbuilding makes it easier for myself in designing the elements that will be in the final version of the story, since they all would have a concrete reasoning and story behind the. Morever, as a player, good worldbuilding can make the world more immersive, resulting in a higher level of engagement to the game, as well as simply making the game more fun.

The Dramatic Arc: Just like in any stories, a game's main conflict is one of the dramatic elements that make the game engaging. The role of the conflict is to keep the players from achieving their objectives too easily, and also to create a sense of tension and emotional connection to the players. There will be exposition and rising action before the conflict, just like in other art forms. The conflict will rise from the appearance of an obstacle which opposed the player's main goal. What makes the conflict of a game different from that of a book or theater is that the player will be the deciding factor in whether or not the conflict will be surpassed so that the resolution can follow. In many games, I found the overcoming-the-conflict part to be when the player beat the final boss part. This is because, along with the rising line of the story, the difficulty of the game correlates to the rising action as well. As a result, rather than one big, smooth curve leading up to the conflict, I think that the line for many games would include many smaller version of the big graph within the rising line, as the player will face a lot of increasingly challenging tasks before finally reaching the final conflict.

GDW Chapter 6: Conceptualization: Sidebar: Experimental Gameplay by Richard Lemarchand (p171)

Experimental Games, just like the name suggested, are the products of experimentation and innovation in an attempt to push boundaries and discover new things that can be used for game design, or even a new game genre. In my opinion, places like school, or smaller game studios, can allow more freedom as to create experimental games and make new discoveries, since there's less financial loss compared to a big company investing in experimenting a risky mechanic that may or may not work. However, this doesn't mean that they don't experiment with creating games at all. I think that, all games, even the very common genre within modern video games, were products of experimentation at one point in time and were so successful that they become common aspects of games now. Experimental Games also allow for a space where the games themselves can become art forms along the same level as the other fine arts. When I think of projects like this, the first thind that come to mind is Ian Cheng's Emissaries Triology (2015-2017) which was displayed at MoMA. This project is a playerless, evolving simlation made with a game engine, featuring the many aspects one would expect a game to have, all except the player. While one can argue that, without the player, this project isn't a game at all, I think that it is a good example of how experimentations during the game-making process can lead to intersting and meaningful results.