Prototype Critiques 2.0

The same critique template was used as for the previous prototype presentations

2.1 3rd Cloud

Balance: it looks like they learned alot about how to balance out the interactive part of their game from what their testers tried to do.
Model: rpg style game; the prototype is digital using rpgmaker engine.
Art: feel good art style with an angry main character! This is how they described it. The art style at the moment appeared to be what the engine provides; it looks very Zelda SNES.
Mechanics: go up to objects to find out what they are/pick them up (the club). Explore the game environment; fight enemies using objects you collect and equip.
Originality: It seems like a fairly standard genre/style of game; it seems like they will be developing a very original multi linear plot to differentiate it.
Translation to paper: they didn't have to deal with this because they were able to build a digital prototype so quickly. This would good because it helped them see how their players would respond within the actual game; went beyond mimicking the game to an actually scaled down version of the game.

Some other notes:

• questionnaire given to testers to get feedback
  
• 17 yrs. - 23 yrs. old: rpg players, familiar with genre: appropriate for user group; people with different personalities and what they wanted to do within the game
• were told brief synopsis of story
• user explores the room/house and finds objects
• discovered that taking the club was not intuitive
• found out that not enough interaction in the prototype
• had the users fill in what they would expect characters in the game to say
• found out what disappointed testers and fixed it (mostly, they wanted to be able to explore EVERYTHING
• lots of space to explore already in the game (house, outside, shamans hut)
• Good at getting results from the users and taking their feedback into account

2.2 Food Fight

Balance: appeared straight forward; they received a lot of feedback to incorporate on how to balance out their game further
Model: paper prototype very similar to battleship; most people familiar with how to play
Art: nice looking original artwork displaying the different characters
Mechanics: very similar to battle ship; analogous to a cafeteria food fight
Originality: fairly original idea for a game (food fight); not so original mechanic; they learned from testing that they will need to differentiate their game more.
Translation to paper: translated very well; the majority (all but one) of their testers were familiar with the mechanic from playing previous games

Some other notes:

• similar stats among the testers
• tested a lot of people
• most people familiar with their mechanic (battleship)
• mechanics similar to battleship: but analogy to a cafeteria food fight
• lots of results from testing in terms of balance, learning curve, complication level
• changed prototype based on this
• recognized that they need to differentiate their game a little more; make it more interesting

2.3 Drive Thu Tycoon

Balance: it looks like they will need to incorporate some more elements into the game to keep it fun for the player (ie varied prices, appliances)
Model: they made both a paper prototype and a flash prototype (tested with the paper). Same artwork for both, plus monopoly money for pp. The pp allowed for real time gameplay to be more realistic representation.
Art: original color artwork; nicely done.
Mechanics: the artwork was movable to allow for real time play. Players try to sell the most burgers and fries to make the most money.
Originality: original spin on the tycoon style game.
Translation to paper: good. They got a lot of positive feedback from their testers.

Some other notes:

• simulation game: direct staff, manage cost, efficiency
• Testers age 20 - 23 students
• Tester must go through three 3 scenarios, they tested for difficulty and learning curve
• Highly ranked by their testers
• Good and varied feedback on what they should improve (variety, intuitiveness, aesthetics)
• Suggestions to add more features
• Plan to incorporate collect revenue to add appliance and increase efficiency; micromanaging mini rushes

2.4 Circular Strife

Balance: issued demerits to compensate for time constraints; found they need to stress the importance of controls.
Model: demolition workout hired to destroy ruins that you fly and bomb; real time playtesting.
Art: no artsy work necessary; used toys and some paper objects to simulate players and pieces.
Mechanics: player used a remote control car (to simulate plane) to drive around and 'bomb' (encircle) objects. Attaching bombs and such was done manually.
Originality: original prototype; action type 3D game.
Translation to paper: fairly accurate, mcguivered simulation of their gameplay.

Some other notes:

• Torque 3D engine (woot!)
  
• remote control car to simulate the plane, paper objects laid out on the ground to simulate the rest; bombs are lined rubber balls that the car drags
• looks like it fairly accurately simulated their game play
• Issued demerits to compensate for testing time constraints (less is better)
• Alot of things done manually during play-testing (attaching bombs)
• 3 testers, all siat students
• They tested standard game play as well as a time trial to compare
• Got good feedback from their testers
• Found their game intuitive, easy to play understand

FoF weekly update #3

• I've done a boatload of research on the Torque engine
• I've been doing research to understand the engine in general
• I've been researching and finding solid links and articles and giving them to the team so that each member has information that is helpful and relevant to what they are working on
• I had a meeting with Angie on Friday Oct 26. We further discussed the sound design of the game.
• We went through a series of environmental and action sounds that will work for our game
• We looked around for theme music for our game. We've decided to go for a jazz fusion sort of style; we think it will be refreshingly different for this genre of game, and won't be irritating to the player (no words, not too repetitive, and something that they likely have not heard)
  
• St Germain seems to be in the running for this; jazz fusion with ALOT of variety in terms of calm, uptempo, and intense music sans lyrics - lots to choose from for general gameplay and fighting
• We want to have different music for each of the four life stages (which I should probably just start calling levels - so I will) to keep the game consistent with the idea of growing up/evolving
  
• In terms of what he will say, we are leaving that until a bit later when we see how the game looks/feels so we can keep consistent
  
• I had a meeting with Diana and Kick on Tuesday Oct 23 (I think this got put into the last update so I wont discuss it again)
• Magy helped us find a document on exporting models and animation from maya to torque, so that really helped us out alot; the modeling and animation is well under way.
• Peter and I worked during lab time to get familiar with the engine; we are modding the fps
  
• Had a meeting/work session with Peter on Thursday Oct 25 in the open lab. We worked on the fps; its baby steps right now because we are just figuring out how the engine ticks, but I am confident that we will learn very quickly; Peter has already figured out how to work with gravity under water, so thats wicked
• I am working on creating the terrain and texturing it for the game. Odds are this will evolve greatly after testing.
  
• I think we should implement gourad shading to make the graphics suit our game better. There doesn't seem to be a ton of info on this, so I'll keep looking.

The wiki is still down; borrowing server space from a friend was a bad idea. I'll post more up on the blog for now to compensate, but I will have to get something else up and running for us to more easily store info. In the following week we hope to

• have basic terrain completed
• imported a model into torque/ possibly animation if we find ourselves at that stage
• begin working on a basic prototype so we can user test the week after

Prototype Critiques 1.0

The framework I used for the critiques was to look at: balance, model, art, mechanics, originality, and translation to paper. I also added some notes that didn't quite fit into those categories.

1.1 ANTLION prototyping

Balance: it seems they set it up with 2 different perspectives in mind: the player can either be the ant or the ant lion (good guy vs bad guy analogy?); seems like a fun idea to let the player choose which they are.
Model: good minimal design of the prototype: only included what is necessary (simple board and instructions).
Art: clean and simple artwork to display the necessary aspects of the game.
Mechanics: turn based and rolling of the dice to play.
Originality: an educational game featuring a little known 'bad guy' seems like a good idea. I like the idea of combining a strategy game with educational content.
Translation to paper: It seems like their testers got a good grasp of the game from the testing sessions.

Some other notes:

• good at recognizing what is feasible for the course
• strategy game: ant vs ant-lion (ant-lion is trying to knock it into a pit to devour it)
• simple prototype layout (board and dice and piece)
• sat next to subjects to observe and record; direct feedback
• good feedback and recommendations on what the testers liked/disliked
• good: used feedback to find that player would prefer to be ant (over ant-lion)
• well thought out goals (ant-lion for education purposes over anteater for fun)
• a little brief with what they are going to change in their game ... but good overall

1.2 us!!!!!!!!!!! no critique necessary because we rule!!!!

1.3 MIZU: saving the world one droplet at a time ...

Balance: It looks like they put a lot of effort into balancing out their game
Model: Scrolling action during gameplay and turn based during fighting; artwork to show the different characters of the game.
Art: very good, pretty artwork; it looks like the put a lot of time into it.
Mechanics: splash attacks; dice rolls - different numbers result in different attacks that are also based on your droplet size. Fighting is based on proximity to a 'bad guy'.
Originality: Very original, I like the idea of using elements and being water.
Translation to paper: It seems like the paper prototype didn't completely mimic the game concept and what it will be digitally (but I think that just happens sometimes - some mechanics are really hard to translate)

Some other notes:

• find four elemental gems by exploring different elements of the world (air, earth, fire, vs water)
• i like the idea of charging your splash attacks
• got their level and art concept solidified
• a little vague on the feedback from the testers
• good feedback on how realistically their paper prototype mimicked the game

1.4 Testing 1...2...3... (untitled)

Balance: incorporate different characters and skills into the prototype.
Model: paper based on D and D map; allowed them to easily incorporate feedback during testing.
Art: basic bare bones artwork (my preferred style for prototyping) that is easy to scratch out and redo (little time would be wasted); some good plastic figurines to represent the characters of the game.
Mechanics: combat; turn based; extensive use of puzzles.
Originality: it seems like a reasonable common genre of game.
Translation to paper: Seems like it translated fairly well; the identified areas where the prototype was lacking (ie pickups).

Some other notes:

• real time schoolyard fight game gone medieval
• plat-forming, puzzle solving
• stripped out large open level design (realistic goals)
• good goals for testing
• good variety of testers
• good versatility for changing the paper prototype based on immediate feedback from testers (using dd map)
• nice... tested different characters to compare
• excellent feedback from testers
• good conclusions based on feedback
• hurray for changing characters/sheets while testing

wiki no!!!!!

It seems the server that hosts our wiki is down ... hopefully it will be back up soon!

FoF weekly update #2

This week, on FoF ...

• Our team has switched back to Torque 3D. Peter (lead programmer) and I felt that Half Life 2 was getting to complicated with the different modding tools necessary to make it work
• This took place during an msn conversation on Monday Oct 22.
  
• I am currently working on a level diagram for our game
• Our game will be a single level consisting of 4 life stage 'zones'
• Another way to look at it is 4 levels that are seamlessly connected (no flashy obvious start and finish points)
• Each 'zone' will gain in difficulty to stop the player from moving too far ahead without taking the time to find points and grow up
• I've updated the wiki to include some new scope, and timeline
  
• I had an msn conversation with Angie (sound designer) where we began to discuss character and element sound. She will be gathering sound over the next few days, we have a meeting planned for this Friday, October 26 to go through and start picking what is appropriate.
• I had a meeting today Tuesday October 23 with Diana and Kick (animators) where we discussed what modeling and animating will be done next. Details of this meeting can be found on the wiki under "Meeting Notes" category.
  
• we are trying to stick to the essentials so that the game is realistic for the time that we have
• I have a meeting planned with lead programmer tomororw Wednesday October 24 to begin programming our engine, deciding what comes first/has priority, diving work, etc
  

FoF weekly update #1

The past week has been mostly about paper prototyping:

• I set up a wiki at http://www.abstract-science.com/kate/ where project info and team progress are kept nice and organized
• I met with Angie on Friday Oct 5 and we came up with layout and rules for the prototype.
• I tossed those ideas together using fabulous dollar store supplies over the weekend, and put the prototype rules up on the wiki
• I met with the rest of the team on Wednesday Oct 10 and we had our game testing session on campus
• On Friday Oct 12 I tested one more friend b/c we only had time to test 2 people on campus
• Over the weekend I put together the testing document and presentation slides and sent them out to the team for their input and approval
• We had previously decided to use the Torque 3D game engine, but during an impromptu meeting on Oct 9 we decided to use the Half Life 2 engine instead
• I defiled my mac and installed windows parallel so that I can run the source engine

Note on prototype testing: I'm not going to post up the nitty gritty details and observations here because I've written them up way too many times! Full documentation of our testing sessions (observations and comments from each individual tester) can be found on our wiki under the 'paper prototype' section, as well as info can be found in the testing document and seen during our presentation next week. We got great feedback from our testers.

The team has been working hard on this game, and I'm really excited about our progress so far.
Modeling is well under way and things are looking good for our engine choice (so far ... dun dun dun)

Coming up we will continue to work on modeling, begin sound design, and dive face first into the source engine to start developing our beta.

we meet again ... jerk

To my complete and utter astonishment (seriously, what were you guys thinking ?!!??!), Tadpole Soup was chosen as one of the top ideas! It has since been reborn as ... Fins of Fury!! aka FoF aahaha