Physics as AI

I don't think any element of a game design can tap into the natural desire to do well than the addition of simple physics. In many ways it is the ultimate form of AI because it pits the player wholly against their environment. If something goes wrong they only have themselves to blame.

This is a major part of the attraction to golf and billiards. Only through years of practice can the player learn the subtleties of the friction along the felt of the pool table or the precise angles and speeds of a pitching wedge.

When we first started developing [absorb] we were looking at games like Flight Control where you would draw out a full path for an object. While it works extremely well for Flight Control, it just didn't feel satisfying for a game like [absorb] and also made the game far too easy.

We could have added some kind of AI to [absorb], but instead we gave a simple physics implementation a shot. It adds a very dynamic feeling to the game, and also requires practice by the player to learn the "feel" of the game. Once the player does get the feel of the game and is able to get orbs into the gate with repeated success, it's much more satisfying than if we had included no physics and gave the player 1:1 control.

(1:1 control on touch screen devices is an issue that I believe deserves its own post. I'll come back to that at a later time.)

If your game is not difficult or satisfying enough and you start considering some form of AI implementation, consider for a moment how physics can make your game more difficult. There's a good chance it will also make it more fun.

Everyone is a Game Designer

One thing I notice more and more is that everyone is a game designer. You probably did it all the time when you were a kid. Give some people a deck of cards and some drinks... You'd be amazed at what kinds of games are designed, by people that don't even consider themselves game designers.

-On the court you played PIG instead of HORSE to make the game go a little quicker, and to make it easier for a younger brother to play.

-In school you changed the fortune's of your cootie catcher so they would be more interesting to your friends (e.g. "You will marry Zack Morris when you grow up!")

-Tetherball may devolve to everybody hitting the ball clockwise, just to see how fast you can make it go.

Let's look more closely at this process. Say you have 5 people and you want to play a game of football. Doesn't sound very realistic, not to mention a huge problem staring you right in the face: the group can't split into evenly sized teams.

So everybody in the group without realizing it puts on their game designer hat and someone presents the following new rule:

"One person plays quarterback for both teams"

Making some progress, but this presents a couple of new problems. Immediately one of the other players uses his game designer intuition and presents the following amendments

"The quarterback is not allowed to run the ball."

"The defenders aren't allowed to touch the quarterback"

These even the field quite a bit more, even though the teams are lopsided. They are pretty common sense rules. While not as fun as a full game of football, they've at least put in enough utility to get the game started.

The rules and goals in these examples have been modified by the players themselves. They have been modified for a specific purpose and situation, making the game more enjoyable for the majority of players involved. You as a "video game designer" should take heed of their example, put yourself into the game and become a player first, game designer second. The end product will be all the better for it.

Here are the questions:

-What are some more examples of game designs you've created or modified as a game player?

-If everyone is a game designer, what tools and skills do you bring to the table that makes your involvement so crucial to the game's success?

From Rules to Goals

Last time we looked at a couple of abstract rules, a game design at its most primitive. This time we will look at how those rules were built upon to create Absorb.

As a refresher, here are the rules we set up in the initial post:

1. In the game universe there exists several objects.

2. Each object has a color.

3. Objects that don't share the same color are destroyed if they touch.

4. Objects that do share the same color are combined if they touch.

To these we added five more concrete rules and modifications:

5. An Orb is an Object that moves in to the game universe at ever decreasing timings.

6. An Orb's velocity can be interacted with by an outside force.

7. A Gate is a special Object that is stationary and will absorb Orbs of the same color that pass through it.

8. If a Gate is destroyed, it can be rebuilt by combining 5 individual Orbs of that Gate's color.

9. If all Gates in the game universe are destroyed, the game is over.

With these rules in mind I felt like we had a pretty good starting point. Our Game DNA felt pretty solidified. Just thinking about how this would work felt pretty interesting. So we started implementing it.

Naturally as we implemented Absorb and could see it running on the screen, some questions arose that were answered with even more detailed rules. More importantly at this time we came to a great realization: This game is at least somewhat fun, but what is the point?

In our case we entertained the thought of this being a "get the high score"-style arcade game. Boooring!

We liked the idea of having levels to progress through. I also really liked the idea of having a very consistent game world, where the levels were more about seeing what could be accomplished given the set rules. Much like how the rules started building, we came up with several styles of levels. Here's an example of a level along with a sneak peak of Absorb.

(I apologize in advance for the video quality)

No questions today, but as always would love to hear your thoughts! If you like the post make sure to share it with your friends.

Transforming The Rules

Rules are the most basic of building blocks a game has. Rules are to a game what DNA is to a person. They tell the game how to behave in every basic scenario. Rules create the underlying character of the game. It doesn't take many rules before the game starts taking on a life of its own, and as such rules are a great place to start your game's design.

But also like people, DNA is only part of the equation. It takes a good upbringing to turn interesting rules into a great game. This is one of the game designer's most crucial tasks.

Depending on how the basic rules are nurtured you could end up with:

-Checkers instead of Chess

-Golf instead of Croquet

-Tetris instead of Space Invaders

I find this process to be extremely interesting and inspiring.

The game I'm currently working on was born from a few basic/abstract rules:

1. In the game universe there exists several objects.

2. Each object has a color.

3. Objects that don't share the same color are destroyed if they touch.

4. Objects that do share the same color are combined if they touch.

-What game would you dream up given these extremely basic/abstract rules?

-How many rules and goals would you need to add to turn this into something more interesting and challenging?

I'll be sharing some of my own results in more upcoming posts. In the meantime I'd love to hear your thoughts!