The History of Games: Super Mario 64

By Hobbit





With Super Mario Galaxy's release today (even though the store doesn't have my preorder yet) I thought this would be a good time to take a little look back at Super Mario 64!
Super Mario 64 was released alongside the Nintendo 64 on September 29, 1996 with great critical success; it is still one of my favorite games. It combined all the great platforming elements into one game and everything just seemed to flow together. The controls were easy to master and stayed the same the rest of the game.

The story: Peach invites Mario to her castle because she's baking him a cake. Mario shows up and Peach is gone. She's kidnapped by Bowser and Mario must unlock paintings to get stars to defeat Bowser. The gameplay is great with enemies to defeat, tough bosses, great puzzles, risky platforming, and plenty of good old fashioned jumping and it's all in 3d. You begin the game at Princess Peach's castle.

Inside, there is a room with a painting in it and you can jump into the painting to get into the first world. As you go along you unlock more paintings and secret stars which eventually lead to a final showdown with Bowser. The game has 15 worlds and 120 stars to collect total, though you can beat the game with only 70 stars. Nintendo added tons of depth to this game. Even after beating the game, many people would wander around and find many different things Nintendo had put in. Some of the great things I thought were good in this game are:

1. The Gameplay was phenomenal. It had the perfect mix of jumping, puzzles, racing, and fighting.
2. Everything feels like the same game. Nowhere does it feel like you're playing something different, yet it accomplishes this with still having plenty of new things you have to do
3. The game has an easy learning curve yet will challenge even the best of gamers to the very end.
4. It was a very fun game with lots of different things to do; something you didn't want to put down till you had beaten Bowser for the final time

Overall it was, and is, one of the greatest games of all time the amazing gameplay and easy controls make it that.

If you want to discuss this more please comment,
Till then,
Rawk on,
Nate

The Difficulty and Necessity of Redefining/Defining Genres

When you think of First Person Shooters, RPGs, or Adventure Games, which title automatically comes to mind?

Most likely the game that you're thinking of is a AAA title, and is exceedingly popular.

Developers are people, too. They think this way as well. If the game of the year is Grand Theft Auto III, then they've GOT to copy it because that game was popular. Looking back through the history of games, however, we see so many varying titles which were all popular. That means, no, FPSs are not the only good type of game and that there are infinities of other ways to make a good game without copying Halo 2.
Halo 2 was a good game. They followed one of the many paths to make a great game. Does this mean there is only one path to a great game? Of course not. Again, throughout the history of games there have been defining titles. Titles that everyone looked at and said, "That is a good game. We have to copy it." These games ranged from Platformers to Puzzle games, to RPGS. The list of genres goes on and on. There are so many awesome genres, why do developers have to make a Halo rip off? Because people love Halo.
But what makes their game better than Halo 2? Usually, nothing. There's nothing new in it. "Okay, let's shoot some aliens and have guts splatter here and there. Ooo! And let's name the main character Leaderchef. He's somewhat of a cook."
This doesn't cut it for me. I need originality. There's nothing wrong with making a new FPS, it's how you make it. It needs to be something a player has never seen before, with elements never even heard of in the FPS genre. Developers need to strive to redefine genres. They get too stuck on the fact that there's no way they can beat Halo 2 in the FPS section. But there is a way, and they have to find find a way. Developers need to strive to make their games better than the last best seller. They need to be constantly taking game development to a higher, newer level.

Now for some of my development insight.
What do we find when we look at most modern games?
I find three repeating principles which really bug me.
1. Constant fighting and violence. I'm not saying this is bad, but it's really worn out it's welcome for me. It's way overused.
2. The characters are almost always superhuman and have "awesome skillz". This doesn't relate to the player at all and they, of course, excuse it as fake. The point of a game is to pull the player in, and to do so they need believable worlds and believable characters.
3.Top-down camera views. Man I hate those.

Now, if these things were reversed... what kind of game would you have?
1. The mind is the greatest weapon. The player must think of ways to avoid conflict, using whatever abilities they have; stealth, cool items etc.
2. The characters are ordinary people cast into extraordinary circumstances.
3. A nice camera either smoothly following the character, or a First Person View.
These three concepts are the beginning of creating a game that I know I would really enjoy. If you apply enough uniqueness and "coolness" into the game, you're off to a good start. It just takes a lot of thinking. And when I say a lot, I mean a lot.

In conclusion, we shouldn't be afraid to bust the bubble of game development. We need to be constantly reaching for new ideas and a way to beat the previous game of the year. It only takes a good imagination... and a development team devoted and completely understanding of the game, and the world the game presents.

If you wish to discuss this more, please comment.
Peace,
Trev

Different Types Of Fun in Games

By Hobbit

Everyone has their own opinion on what makes a fun game. That's why I'm writing an article on it even though Trev did already. First let's look at the different types of games and what makes them so fun.

What kind of games you like depends on what type of person you are. Let's say you're a guy who barely plays video games, you might sit down and play Wii Sports and have a lot of fun with it. Or let's say you're a somebody who plays games all the time; you might enjoy something more like LOTRO. The Wii, is a video game system that has a motion sensing controller so to play tennis you swing the remote like a tennis racket; that makes it very easy and fun for non-gamers to pick up and play. Whereas Lord Of The Rings Online is a massively multi player online role-playing game with lots of different things to do and more depth for more advanced gamers.

The Wii is obviously very fun just swinging around and playing tennis. Many people have bought it because it is so fun with it's motion sensing technology. There are also fun games out there that are not simple. Halo 3, a first person shooter, has controls that are a little complicated.

Now that we've looked at what kind of games are fun for different people and what is fun for everyone; let's look at some historically fun games. Super Mario Bros. This game was amazing! Jumping on goomba's and going in pipes was never as fun as this. Then there's Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time. This game had just the right amount of puzzle solving, fighting, and exploring to make it one of the funnest games of all time; even though, Trev's Mom thought it was to0 complicated. Then there's Donkey Kong 64. This game was also a great cross between fighting and exploring. Star Fox 64 had an awesome lock on targeting system and sweet boss battles. Add 4 or 5 different difficulties and a sweet multi player mode and you've got one of coolest and most fun games ever. And finally, Metroid Prime 3. This is a great FPS; to shoot you aim at the screen and pow! Plus a great storyline, tough bosses, and puzzles. This game rocked.

Well I've just scratched the surface of different games and fun; if you want to know more about this subject please comment.

See Ya Later

Hobbit

Trev's Animations: Robot!

By Guybrush Threepwood

This post was made on 11/3/07 by the young aspiring artist, Trevor Barton aka Guybrush Threepwood

Sorry for the late post. I was hoping to post this article three days ago, but my computer took ill and had to go to the hospital (Best Buy).

Anyways, I've been working here and there with some animation software called Bryce 6, and have finally finished a project with my limited animation skills. I call it "Trevor's Fifteen Seconds of Glory". Take a close look at the reflections in the metals and the menacing shadows.

I designed this robot for a game I'm writing. I'll post the original concept sketch later.

Enjoy!
Please feel free to comment and ask questions,
Peace,
Trev

Innovation: A Fresh New Look?

By Hobbit

Nowadays, it seems like six first person shooters come out every day and there are so many Tony Hawk games, we don't even remember if there ever was a start to the series. Too often it seems when making games developers tend to copy each other, and why not? They see a game selling millions of copies and they say "I'll make the same game with maybe a slight change to the storyline and it'll sell, too."

There's also the problem of making too many sequels. When you see number four or five, you usually think to yourself, "Good grief can't you think of something new?" Sports franchises are notorious for doing this. They add a little bit of new content every year and with updated rosters, it lures us sports fans back. I confess I have two Madden NFL games for my PC and one for my Wii; The Wii is obvious why I got the game, new control scheme and such, but for my PC I fell for the trap, and one had a lot better graphics.

There is still some hope though, games like Elebits, a game where you must track down Elebits, little power things that are the source of the world's power. To capture them you have to push, pull, lift and generally hunt for them.

Some people disagree though; They say "Why can't we have it where the only games we own are Madden 08,07, 06, and First Person shooter games?" Or, "What's the matter if they make a second Car's?", A Pixar Animations Film game, even though there was only one movie.

But I think there is a place somewhere inside us all that wants more than just one genre. A game that hardcore gamers (and when I say hardcore I mean you Halo freaks) and casual gamers alike can enjoy is Animal Crossing. Animal Crossing is a game where you start as a broke villager in a sleepy forest full of animals. You're given a house with a mortgage on it. What made the game so unique though was the Gamecube's clock. Time passed in real time, there were 24 hours in a day, and only one Christmas. I have seen many different types of people from my sister, to an Xbox 360 owning friend, sit down and enjoy it.

I'm not saying those games with so many spinoffs aren't fun. All I'm saying is every once in a while we need a little change. You could look at it like this, your life is never always the same. Just when you're getting into a comfortable pattern something totally unexpected is thrown into your life.

That's why the Wii is so successful. It's innovation. but we're not going to suddenly take a vow to never play anything except Wii again, it's just innovation and change that makes it very fun, besides the fact that it's very easy to pick up and play. The Innovative games are usually very fun and sell well, but we still need Halo and Madden. So innovation is a usually a refreshing new look on gaming that makes us appreciate the developers for doing something new!

If you want to discuss this subject further please comment

Till then, Rawk On!

Nate

Back to Basics Part One: Smaller = Bigger = Better

By Guybrush Threepwood

It is common nowadays to see a game with fifty playable characters, twelve worlds, seventy-five maps along with split-screen and online multi-player capabilities. What does this tell me? Some people had a lot of time on their hands. They probably don't feel too good when they see that their game got a 3.5 out of 10. "But it was BIG! It had fifty characters!". Right there is the whole problem. Where does the game get it's uniqueness with fifty characters? How can you possibly tell an emotional story with fifty characters? How can the player get drawn into a world with twelve different worlds?

This is where many games fall, one after the other every year. It's too big! We think things need to be as technical as possible in this world, where really, it's the little things that count. Players cannot relate to a world with twelve different worlds and fifty playable characters with superpowers. It's just not believable. We live in one world, with usually a pretty small group of friends.

There is so much more to explore in one world, than in twelve.

Taking this one world and making the opportunities for exploration and discovery nearly endless would draw you in closer-- way closer than having multiple worlds with very little time put in to making them believable and alive.

Bellow: The game "Beyond Good & Evil is a great example of making a game smaller, and thus, more detailed.

Maybe look at it this way; you're spreading some nice golden butter across a pancake. When the butter is first applied to the pancake it covers a small area and is "massive". As you spread it out, it thins out until it is nearly invisible. This is true with game worlds. The smaller the world, the thicker the butter. The bigger the world, the thinner the butter.



Remember, the player's view of the world and of the game must be preserved; the world must always seem mysterious and full of unexpected surprises, and so must the game.

Now, moving onto the characters. It is easier, and way more efficient, to have fewer playable characters. Preferably one, in my opinion. Focusing on just one character's point of view and emotions will attach the player to the character in a way not possible with multiple playable characters. It will make the story deeper, and the sense of mystery even more abundant.

It's amazing how a game can become absolutely incredible if one focuses on the smaller things. One world and one playable character ultimately equals one big world and one big playable character.

If you wish to discuss this more, please comment,
Till then,
Peace,
Trev

Graphics Vs. Fun

By Hobbit


There is a lot of division over this topic; which is more important fun or graphics? My personal opinion is fun I mean, you can have either great graphics and a sort of fun game or not so good graphics and a really fun game.

The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time is still considered today one of the best games ever and look at it's graphics. It's considered great simply because it's so fun. By today's standards these are terrible graphics. Just Look at Tony Hawks Proving Grounds. Amazing Graphics-- it almost looks like real life! Yet it's not half as much fun to play as Ocarina of Time.


Let's look at what other people think of graphics vs. fun. The Wii, as of 10-20-07, was outselling the PS3 266, 329 units to PS3's 107,930 units and Microsoft has sold 180,177 Xbox 360 units. The 360 came out on 11-22-05, the Ps3 on 11-17-06 and the Wii on 11-19-06. While the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 are big consoles with amazing graphics, the Wii is smaller with the emphasis on fun not graphics. It still has good graphics just not breathtaking like the other two.

Also good graphics mean different types of games. While 360 and PS3 have more adult games, Wii has more family oriented and games for younger players, like Wii Sports, compared to Halo 3, a sci-fi First Person Shooter game for 360 and Metal Gear Solid Four, a Third Person adventure shooter game, for Ps3. When we look at graphics vs fun we're also looking at different types of people. The people who tend to like graphics more are usually 18 to 30 year old males who like violent and gross games with great graphics; whereas the more fun oriented people are like kids and older people who are just looking to have a good time.

In my opinion more people want fun than graphics, but there are those who love realism over fun. Whether your fun or graphics, there are options for both of you. I personally would rather play a really fun game than a great looking game. I just hope video game makers will continue to cater to both audiences so we can all play video games and enjoy them no matter who you are.

Tell me if you want to discuss this more.
For now Live Long and Prosper
Nate

Hobbit: A New Member

By Hobbit

Hi, I'm Hobbit and I'll be posting on this awesome blog by Guybrush. Okay so first a little bit about me; I'm a Nintendo fan over Sony or Microsoft. My Top ten games are
10. The Hobbit
9. Mario Kart 64
8. Madden 07 Wii
7. Star Fox 64 and Assault
6. Super Mario Sunshine
5. Halo 2
4. Super Mario 64
3. Animal Crossing
2. Metroid Prime 3 Corruption
1. Super Smash Bros Melee.

Also top 5 games I'm anticpating most.
5. Star Fox Wii
4. Super Mario Galaxy
3. Mario Kart Wii
2. Animal Crossing Wii
1. Super Smash Bros Brawl
I would also list The Legend of Zelda games except for the fact that my parents won't let me get them because they think they could have some satanic stuff in them. I personally have no problem with them, I've played them a little and they're a lot of fun. So I'm just telling a little bit about myself I'll start posting articles soon.

The History of Games: Star Fox 64

By Guybrush Threepwood
Star Fox 64 is, and will most likely always be, one of my most favorite games ever. Everything flowed together perfectly; the controls, the story, the characters and all those other "invisible" elements that mysteriously come together during game development. Here are some notes I've taken on several things which help define it as an overall amazing game:

*The controls stay the same all the way through and the learning curve is very easy to overcome. You get used to the basic controls very quickly and efficiently. You'd expect no less from a game produced by Shigeru Miyamoto.

*The pace is always the same throughout. As I've said before, consistency is very important. It succeeds in keeping the action fast and intense all the way to the credits.

*The story is delivered to the player in a very smooth way, that doesn't exasperate the player with those evil entities known as cut scenes. The story is told nearly entirely through the dialog between your wingmen, and, even better, through your enemies. Take that cut scenes.

*Everywhere feels %100 authentic. The levels fit perfectly into the world of the protagonist, Fox McCloud, and are each unique to themselves as well, without the player ever thinking, "This DOESN'T belong here...".

*The game sticks to it's core principle in every single level, so nothing ever feels like it's being thrust upon the player, Everything you'll need to know is right there at the first level and remains the same till the end.

*Perfect character emotions. It portrays every basic emotion, which I feel is necessary in making a game successful; Love, Joy, Surprise, Anger, Sadness, and Fear.

Overall, this is one of the those games that has really made an impression in the game industry and in my life as well.

Let me know if you want to discuss this game further,
Till then,
Peace,
Trev

Ethics in Games: Designing a Truly Fun Game

By Guybrush Threepwood

First off, we should start by figuring out what exactly fun means. Everyone most likely has their own ideas of what is fun, but often people will agree on major things that are truly fun. First, let's take a look at a dictionary definition of "fun".

"amusing: providing enjoyment; pleasantly entertaining; "an amusing speaker"; "a diverting story"; "a fun thing to do"

This is just the core of what fun really is. There are all kinds of different combinations that equal an ultimate output of fun. Think through what makes a game an enjoyable experience for you. Take note of everything that seems to add to the overall fun-ness. Whatever the result is, you have started to figure out what your game ultimately needs to be fun and catchy. Once you finally have the "fun core" for your game, you have to stay consistent! To me, a game must have consistency. It can't change faces half-way through. It has to keep up with the expectations of the player; that the game is going to be both fun and fulfilling all the way through. This is easier said than done. Most developers agree that "it's not hard to decide what to put in a game, it's hard to decide what not to put in a game." Again, you have to stay consistent, and balanced. Think about how that cut scene will affect the players view of the game, or how that level distracts from the overall game. Eliminate unnecessary elements, and try to add something that is equally as exciting as the beginning of the game to continue spurring on the players enthusiasm and enjoyment with the game.

Discerning Forms of Fun
Again, there's that word. Discernment.
How do I discern right from wrong?
Discernment is somewhat of a natural process. We already know what's right and what's wrong. It's not too hard, just think about what's right for a while.
Sometimes the line between right and wrong is very fine, an example being;

Is it ethical to shoot someone in a game?
Some people will say, "Of course, it's just a game". While others will say, "Games are too violent and are teaching our teens how to kill."

Both of these are somewhat wrong, and somewhat right. It is permissible to include this stuff in a game. It just depends on how you do it. If you're character is fighting for a good cause, such as defending the defenseless, or rescuing someone (revenge doesn't count), then that is for a right, ethical reason. However, if your character just kills "for fun" or "for judgment" then that is the wrong reason. Players won't get nearly as attached to a violent, evil character as they would with a noble, giving character. This is just built-in human nature.

Now I'll take a look at it from the other perspective; Yes, violent games are teaching players to kill, but this is a hypocritical statement. The "teens who are being taught how to kill" are also being taught that a man is only accountable to himself. With that being taught, it uproots the entire need to be ethical. If we're accountable to ourselves, then why can't we do whatever we want? This right here is the major cause of ethical downfall, and has opened up the gateway for games such as Grand Theft Auto and Manhunt 2.
Yes, there is a fine line between right and wrong, and this line is being crossed to the latter way too often.
True fun is the feeling of happiness being brought on by games like Animal Crossing and Warioware which give us a chance just to goof off every once in a while, or even, in some cases, First Person Shooters that focus on protecting those in need and fighting for freedom, and numerous other games that lift your spirits rather than lower them with unethical and obscenely violent game titles.

These are all important things that should not be overlooked by game developers. In this age of best-selling bloodbath titles, developers need to remember that games do not have to be dark to be fun, but rather to entertain the player through exciting acts of valor and even just by good-ol' wholesome goofing off.
I hope everyone can get something from this and start thinking of what makes a game a truly fun

If you wish to discuss anything, please comment. I try to check daily.
This whole subject of making a fun game is just soo vast and I've only scratched the surface of it, I will most likely discuss this subject again as soon as I've thought through it some more.

Till then,
Peace,
Trev

Ethics in Games: A Few Basics of My Design Philosophy

By Guybrush Threepwood

Revenge, Love, Redemption, Betrayal, Peace, Despair; These are only a few themes that are included in most games. These are not bad-- if they're used right. But, what discerns "bad" from "good"? It all rounds down to the common word, ethics. Some people may argue that ethics are none-existent and we are free to do whatever we want to do if it feels good. Does this justify murder? You would most likely say, "no".
Good job, you just discerned right from wrong. This is just a small look at the big picture. My belief is, yes there is RIGHT, and yes, there is WRONG.

In this muddled modern culture we have to keep a clear head to what is right and what is wrong. If you do something for a good reason and a good cause, it always will feel better than doing the wrong thing.

This is true, too, in games. If there's one game which deals heavily on making right or wrong decisions, it would be Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic. In almost every piece of dialog, the game delivers the option to do good or evil; doing good will not only give you points towards the "light side" but will give you a feeling of nobility, whereas doing evil will give you points towards the "dark side" and there will probably be a time where that decision will make you feel like dirt.

The point of a game is to tug at a players emotions, it's not about clobbering a bunch of guys, it's to authentically create emotion. Most games nowadays stray far and wide from this concept, right onto the bandwagon of poor reviewed games.

Throughout the years, there is evidence to the importance of "emotion tugging". More often then not, a game gets a good score and a great player reception by playing with their emotions. If the character is angry, the player needs to be angry, if the character is sad, the player needs to be sad. Here are a few games that have seemed to hit the target with this philosophy;

Final Fantasy VI (Not to mention pretty much every other Final Fantasy, but this one is unique in my opinion.)
Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic
The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time (One of the most beloved of the franchise, it really introduced emotionally storytelling to the series.)
Star Fox 64 (Probably my favorite game of all time)
Fire Emblem

And many others.

One very unique game that has a way of playing with your emotions is Animal Crossing.
You may not think of it as a very emotional game, but the way it begins to become "your second life" is one of the most brilliant aspects I've seen in a game.

Let's move on to something I like to call "Emotional Consistency". You cannot have a game that has strong emotions at one point, then they stop abruptly and everything is okay again. You cannot have a character mourning a character who he didn't even have a relationship with. This may seem like a no-brainer, but this mistake is repeated over and over again.
If a character dies, this character shouldn't disappear from the entire game, but be remembered by the other characters, and each character needs to have their own ways to deal with this grief. The easiest way to think of "Emotional Consistency" is to think over the character's personality and think of how he or she would realistically deal with the problem at hand.
Also, think logically. Don't just think about the character, think of how you would respond to this event.

The next thing I want to discuss is character realism. No, this doesn't mean how real the character looks, but how believable they are in their world, and even, in our world. If the character is a person, it needs to act like a person, and needs to have the personality of a person. If it's an animal, it needs to act like an animal and have a personality like an animal. If there's a person walking down a street, and you run into them, would they just keep walking? No, they'd probably yell at you. If you started breaking things in a city, the people would all run or avoid you, and the police would come and pick you up.

Graphics can be traded for realism. Or even better, why not focus on them both. It may take a while, but the result would be worthwhile. My view, though is that realism should come before graphics. I've seen games that have the best graphics, but fall short on actually being believable.

That's all I have for now, but think over these things today. Think, too, of how you can make a game believable, truly fun, emotionally balanced and ethical all at once.

I'll talk more about what makes a game "Truly Fun" in my next article.
Please, leave some comments if you wish to discuss this article further.

Till then, peace,
Trev