Blog Summary

This blog is used to document the iterative design process I used when creating the game. Throughout this blog I have documented the following:

The conceptualization of the idea: my initial step, this is where I began spouting ideas and using through analyzing the assignment specs decided on an initial theme and design. At this stage everything was very primitive.

Preparing for the game pitch: I began putting ideas together to get a more concrete foundation for my game. I decided to use many topics and models I had learned throughout the course, such as subversion ( contesting the norm ) to influence my design. I put together a slide show and a rough script where I talked about the fundamentals and relevant models used as inspiration.

Feed Back from game pitch: It was here I began making changes to the game, many of these changes are documented throughout. Again this step in the process allowed me to change/ alter or include many new features such as: making the goal clearer and choosing a target demographic for the game.

Analyzing Feedback: I decided to use the EGA/AGE model to analyse my game/feedback and document not just what I changed and why I changed it but how it would affect the game/game-play and the users experience as a whole. It also allowed me to suggest improvements to the game and how these improvements would further more impact new data for the player.

Playtesting: This was my next crucial step in the iterative process, I allowed a small demo section of my game to be played by others. Their would respectively give me feedback on certain aspects, their experience and any advice on improvements would become invaluable for further exploring my design. This would result in the addition of the mini game.

Playtesting Log: I documented many changes I made to my game, this was a rough log in which I would document any alterations of variables, changes or removal/addition of content. The mini game is further analysed here also.

PlayTesting Analysis: Again I decided to use another model/Framework to help explore what impact the changes/current content of the game would mean for the users experience...

Subversion: It is here that I communicate my reasoning behind the decisions i made with regards to a few aspects of the game: subversion( the decision to choose a more mature/dark take on the theme with contrasts the lighthearted source material ) and the juxtaposition of the sweet/more light hearted mini games.

Game Summary: As the game evolved so much throughout the iteration I wanted to document a solid summary for the final version of the game.

Game Summary

How the game fits the specification:

• It is a web based casual game that is intended to promote the commercialization of the IP/Brand of Dog Ear's children's book series - Miss Rosie Red.
• The design is experimental - it is meant to subvert expectations of a product based upon a children's book series. As a result is should promote the IP to a larger (yet older demographic).
• I wanted to create a fun yet professional experience for the player. I wished to achieve this through the use of iterative design; this allowed me to get feedback on game elements which in turn aided me in altering/removing elements that resulted in a "better" game. I wanted to prove this through both my game pitch and play-testing sessions (aided by numerous theorists and models to help with good design).
• I tried to make sure I put effort into all elements of my game, from sound design, level design, mechanics, aesthetics and atmosphere. The result was to hopefully create a bespoke product that I would be proud of one day publishing.
• I also made sure to include a tutorial (Level01) and a Help menu/screen which is accessed through the level select page. This would further reassure the player or clarify some aspects of the game if the player is unsure how to proceed.
• Replayability was a major concern throughout, I chose to tackle this problem by having a degree of randomness to where Enemies spawn and which type of enemy actually spawns in the first place. I also wanted to create multiple paths for each level and an unlockable mini-game on each level. The mini-games themselves are intended to create a sense of replayability as you try to beat your previous score.
• The idea behind the dark theme and juxtaposing (more upbeat/light hearted) mini-games was to create a unique game that through subversion would create something original.
• Finally the Blog itself is my documentation of this iterative process. I made sure to update this daily as my design progressed.

Summary of the Final Design:

The Game stars a sketched Rosie Red as she flees from or conquers her fears as she tries to reach the exit door. Along the way she uses her torch to reveal secrets and defeat dangers to find new costumes which offer new abilities. Her story continues across three levels as she gradually becomes more confident in herself (becoming invincible when she chooses to become herself). She must not allow dangers to cause her anxiety and may use her friends (bonuses) to help her achieve her goal. Three unlockable mini-games are also present which allows the players to put away Rosie's old building blocks into the clothing chest from her childhood.

Subversion

One major concern that I kept in mind throughout development was the nature of the game. The task was to create a game based upon a children's book and promote the IP/Brand. Throughout the semester I learned many new theories and models but one thing that really stuck in my head, and a word that I use constantly throughout this blog is subversion. The idea being that to create something that defies expectations and what is deemed normal. This is what I wanted to pursue. But I wanted to make clear throughout the process that no matter how much I wanted to subvert the experience I most importantly had to promote the IP of Miss Rosie Red.

The easy way of doing this is through aesthetics, use assets from the wire-frames of the book. And to a certain extent I chose to do this to help with the creation of certain assets, they were edited in Photoshop of course to a more unique design. But I wanted to put more depth into the game than just aesthetic appreciation. How did I want to achieve this? By the inclusion of the three main levels, each of these has a darker atmosphere (screen darkens, less upbeat music etc.) than the mini games (more lighthearted). These main levels act as a tutorial and a story as such, starring an older (sketched) Rosie Red. They tell a simple narrative (something I toned down after feedback), of Rosie Red and how she is able to reach her goal through fleeing or conquering her fears through the help of different costumes, in the end she becomes invincible when she simply becomes herself.

The sketched aesthetics and mannequin models for both Rosie and the tracking enemy are also meant to have meaning (essentially the enemy is a mirror image of herself). I wanted to create a deeper world than what is simply on the surface, by creating these subtle pieces of the narrative and world scattered throughout the game in the chests and writing. But I wanted to avoid allowing it to seem like I am equivocating. This is backed up by the feedback I received, as bluntly telling the player this (meanings behind enemies, why I chose Rosie Reds design to be so dark etc.) would only be perceived as waffling without mentioning the reasoning behind why. The subtle nature in which I wanted to explore the world allowed me to include easter eggs/links to the source material throughout the game (the friend bonuses and costume portraits are very basic examples of this).

Final Analysis (Play-Testing)

I feel that my previous analysis has been quite long-winded and I will try to make this final analysis post more specific and focused.

Main-Game Analysis:

What is fun? I wanted to give the player enjoyment through both the aesthetic appreciation and physical stimuli of interacting with the level ( opening chests and fighting enemies etc. ). Depth was prioritised over superficiality, each level was designed to have multiple paths, enemies and moving platforms, giving the player a reason to replay the level. The game focuses on pitting one subject(Rosie Red) against the computer (reasonable enemy AI), with the task of reaching the goal with inefficient means(Player abilities & rules) within a closed system. This introduces new data and patterns to the player (new enemies), teaches them gradually how to master abilities(through repetition of enemy encounters) and rewards the player with new experiences(new costumes which allow the player to reach new places).

How is Fun achieved? I believe it is achieved by allowing the player to overcome conflict when it arises in "unique" ways. The goal(exit door) which is limited by rules(gravity etc.) creates competition(can I make this jump? etc) in play, this competition is fighting enemies, finding the exit door and learning how to manage resources (battery, anxiety etc.). This allowed me to focus on improvements highlighted by playtesters.

As this is my second play-testing session numerous new additions and alterations were made to the game.One of the most important being the addition of new layouts (level select, help screen, score screens etc.) to make navigation more professional and user friendly. A lot of consideration also went into the creation of assets and aesthetics as these elements remained positively reviewed by play testers. These improvements were added to tackle the criticisms that play-testing revealed (what is the goal/controls? This being solved by including a help/tips screen etc.).

Finally I wanted to consider Ian Bogost and his view towards destroyed time. I feel this is appropriate to my game as it possibly requires a player to play a level multiple times under certain circumstances( if they die, fall into a trap, want to find new paths/collectibles/minigames). This results in a lot of the players time being "wasted" as they spend time within this game world trying to collect everything as opposed to spending time in reality.

Mini-Game Analysis:

Personally I find these mini-games more fun than the main game. I therefore wanted to create a small analysis of WHY I found them more fun. Firstly I believe the simplicity helps, both with aesthetics, mechanics (you only need to click and drag to create a platform - Grokking may occur). The goal is also simple and easily accessible (direct blocks to the destination chest). The timer, obstacles and limitations to the maximum number of platforms creates conflict that the player must deal with. Including a score and randomising the destination chest creates replay-ability as the player wants ("bragging rights") to beat their previous score. Finally the unlocking of these in the first place creates reward for the player as they feel they have earned something.

I fell that some improvements could still be made to improve the experience. Such as adding new conflict gradually (allowing mastery of the the conflict) and power ups to dynamically change the level (such as adding time).

Play Testing Feedback Log

Feedback Log:

The game brightness has been increased to make it easier to see.
Enemies have been made sparser and weaker to make the tutorial less frustrating.
Costumes have been balanced:
Dinosaur costume jump height has been decreased.
Fairy costumes gravity has been increased.
Rosie Red costumes health has been increased.
A mini Game has been added to add greater variety and linkage to the IP.
The Level has been altered to allow for more paths to be taken.
A secret area has been added to allow for further discovery.
Tips and controls have been added to re-purposed tutorial level.
Narrative has been toned down in favour of exploratory game-play and secret levels (mini-game).

This log below shows any updates made since due to further feedback.

• Re design of level layouts
• More Levels and Mini-Games
• Altering the Music played to make it less ominous and more appropriate
• More theme music and Mini-Game versions.
• The Inclusion of a splash screen & Level Select Screen,
• Shortcuts to replay level or reach the level select screen
• The inclusion of a Help/Tips screen
• Altering difficulty levels
• New Assets created
• Altered Rosie's aesthetic design
• Balanced Enemy types
• Removed unnecessary Lore (made more subtle)
• Added sound effects on pressing menu buttons.
• Added Scores/High Scores and alerts if the mode is unlocked.
• Added dedicated score screens.
• Added new types of platforms

Play Testing & Analysis

Some common problems occurred during play-testing and as a result amendments were made:

Trouble using the User Interface: some users had trouble with the controls, this resulted in a degraded experience with the game. I included a tips section on the tutorial level to counteract this and reduce confusion in the player. This inclusion of help/tips also extends to the mini games were clarification is made as to what the players goal is.

Erratic choices: some users made unique decisions on where to go, when to face enemies etc. and ended up in unintended locations. As a result I chose to attempt to reward the player for these unique discoveries by hiding collectibles in unique places around the level and attempting to proved consistent responses/feedback to the player. This should hopefully increase the amount of fun the user has.

First Impressions: the aesthetics were a unique selling point, the linkage to the theme and the variety of enemy types and paths available. Enemies initially were a lot harder to defeat and injured Rosie a lot quicker, with the feedback given I chose to re distribute variables to make the journey less demanding for the player. This results in new data being able to be displayed to the player less frantically, so the player can process what's happening.

Depth: The most exciting element of the game for some was the choices available to the player: costumes, bonuses, secret coins, secret areas etc. As a result I chose to expand on this and to include a secret mini game one each level which will reward the player further for exploration and experimenting with costumes to reach secret areas. Other elements were also added to expand depth and to continue to communicate new data to the player.

AI & Outcomes: The play-testers found the AI to operate efficiently, each enemy type follows different rules (bouncing, following the player etc). Their difficulty level has been altered to make the game less demanding yet still rewards the player accordingly.

Analysis:

One appropriate model I feel that reflects how the play testing affected the "player pleasure experience" is set by Le Blanc. In this model Le Blanc explores how certain aspects of the game (fantasy, narrative etc.) will effect the experience the player has when playing the game. He defines numerous forms of pleasure within the game that I feel appropriately fits our game.

Narrative: Prior to this play testing narrative was a main focus of the game (following the EGA model), this resulted in a lot of unnecessary text on screen which distracted the player from other aspects of the game. This became problematic throughout testing as it became very difficult to differentiate whats important and what was simply lore or flavour text. As I moved to the EGA model narrative became more subtle, less text on screen and more meaning is implied through aesthetics (the enemies reflecting Rosie Red's appearance). I feel this change improved the game for the better as it allowed the player to focus more on the game play experience but still find narrative pleasure through finding the lore throughout the level.

Challenge: The game was initially pitched as being a challenging experience, enemies would track the player and do a lot of damage to Rosie upon contact. The enemies spawn with a degree of randomness and their behaviour also can be unpredictable (this was to increase the replay-ability of the game), this as well as the goal being unknown to the player initially was intended to reward the player through exploration/discovery. The problem with this was constantly restarting the level, this quickly became frustrating for the player. This meant that as the game was introducing new data(enemy types) the player was chunking the experience. As defined by Koster, this chaos furthermore meant that the player was not having as much fun as a result. I chose to fix this by changing enemy behaviour to being more consistent and reducing their quantity, damage, speed and spawn rate. This meant that the player was able to focus more on experiencing the new data, through interacting with the enemies through gameplay or by aesthetic appreciation of their design. This impacted the players experience positively as they were able to play the game more casually and enjoy the journey. After all it is a casual game.

Discovery: This was a crucial element of my game. The player was to be rewarded for finding new paths to complete the level, for finding coins and costume chests. These rewards would give the player bonus and such, giving them a reason to come back. Playtesters enjoyed this feature as it meant that the player was given a fair chance to reach the goal with their inefficient means(they can only use the torch and move). I then decided to expand upon this by adding features that would improve the rewards received by the player through discovery. The main improvement being the mini game. This was a separate game style which juxtaposed the main game, it was a more casual (higher replayability) style of game and had a simple goal. The player could unlock these mini-games by finding the secret door on each level, giving them a reason to explore. Again I feel these improvements impacted the game positively.

Another model I feel which also correlates with the impact of the changes made at this stage is Caillois interpretation of the social structure of play. Ludus llinx (formalised vertigo) was my initial pitch on what I wanted the structure of the game to be. Play-testers found this disorientating as it meant they weren't focusing on the game-play, instead reading text etc. Again as I moved to the EGA model I wanted to focus on making the experience more fun for the player I did this by the addition of extra game-play elements (minigames - costumes etc.) and by adding extra player abilities (double jumps) to avoid stagnation.

Game Pitch Analysis

Through analysis of the Game Pitch feedback I came to a few conclusions, some highlight areas that stand-out and others that could be improved upon. In my feedback post I mostly covered the changes that occurred as a result of the feedback and how they impacted my design, in this post I want to focus mostly on areas that particularly stand out as being strong features or weak and frustrating.

Initially I chose to follow the EGA model, with the emotional experience of the event taking precedence over the game-play that happens as a result of manipulating the actions. I felt that a strong narrative and aesthetics would communicate the games theme to the player while making the game atmospheric and enjoyable. This subversion of expectations and communication of strong emotions such as (fear leading to survival, fight or flight etc.) was intended to be the USP (Unique Selling Point) of the game. After analysing the feedback given I came to the conclusion that while the aesthetics and atmosphere did communicate the theme (albeit aimed at an older audience to promote the IP) the gameplay and actions performed by the player are more impactful and engaging.

This convinced me to switch to the AGE model, where actions such as managing, jumping and chaining take priority over the experience of the journey. This allowed me to focus more on fine tuning my mechanics and player abilities (something I feel was a weak link) to allow for a more enjoyable experience. Movement was made easier by altering speed variables, a 'scroll to' was included to allow the player to move the view-port using the mouse(for a large view of the area leading to more discovery). Other additions include adding costume bonuses(some allow the user to double jump etc). This allows for further discovery as the player is able to reach new heights and areas, this also allowed me to integrate some discernible aspects and constantly reward the player for attempting new things with new data (also encourages re-playability).

A few areas of concern that became apparent at this point were: the difficulty, the brightness and the goal. The difficulty of the game was initially set to offer a challenge to the player, they should have (reasonable) difficulty in reaching the goal, essentially having inefficient means to reach the goal through facing conflict. The game should still offer fair chance throughout and ultimately reward the player for overcoming the conflict. Yet the enemy quantity, speed and damage resulted in a bullet storm, consistent enemies travelling towards the player with high speed. This made it difficult for the players to react and resulted in erratic decisions and eventually a quick game over. To improve this I balanced some variables and turned to the Risk/Reward system and the addition of new mechanics and player abilities. I wanted the player to have new options at their disposal (the torch regenerates health, defeats enemies, reveals collectibles etc.) and that if they choose to go a certain path with extra danger (more obstacles) they are rewarded at the end.

The brightness of the game was also a big concern, as the game started dark and only became darker. The improvements made were simple enough, I set the opacity levels lower(increasing the brightness) and altered the time it takes to darken the screen. This resulted in a less intimidating starting screen for the player.

This was my first focused analysis of a small section of my game, in later entries I will use other theories and models to frame the relevant elements with.