Sunday, April 15, 2012

That's all folks!

Hey everyone! I finally finished my last GDW project. Here it is!! 


I must say, it required a lot of hard work to complete, but my group members and I all worked hard together, hence why I think our game turned out very well. Although there were a few things that didn't pan out as we would have liked (like 4-player multiplayer, particle effects, new enemies, and a final boss battle) our game still turned out well, given the time we had. Throughout the year, we had to deal with many assignments that took up so much of our time; so dedicating the last couple of weeks to our GDW game was definitely painful and resulted in lots of sleep deprivation, but in the end we feel that all our hard work paid off. We presented this game at my school's Game Con, where all UOIT game dev students show off the finished version of their year-long GDW projects. At the end of Game Con, an awards show took place. There, to my surprise, my group and I won the Professor's award for best 3rd year game, and Student's award for best 3rd year game! Given my GDW track record (where in 2nd-year I delivered a game that was mediocre at best, and in 1st-year I barely had a game at all) this was a real shock to me. Two years ago, I never would have thought that I would end up winning not one, but two awards in the future! As for Game Con's Game of Show award, we lost to 2nd-year team Ram'deep who presented Werebear. But rather than be disappointed, I'm actually very happy to lose to such a talented team; they truly deserved to win that award. I have a few friends of mine on that team, and I know how hard they worked to make that game. Don't get me wrong all GDW groups had interesting games to present, and I wouldn't doubt that they all worked very hard, but Ram'deep created a UOIT Game Dev gem. Bravo Ram'deep, and bravo UOIT Game Dev students and professors!! As for my team again, I'm so happy that our game turned out to be so successful, and it shouldn't be a surprise given the dedicated effort we all put forth together! I feel very privileged and honored to work with such an amazing and talented team, and I wish the best of luck to my teammates' future endeavours. Thank you, team ProTesters!!! :)
This is the awesome team I worked with: ProTesters!!!
Now that I completed my group project, my focus has shifted to my future. Right now, the near future for me is not entirely unknown, as I'll either be doing an internship or a capstone project during the summer for a fast-track credit. For every UOIT student, capstone is a requirement to graduate, and many people do their capstone during their 4th-year. Capstone is basically a big 4-5 month-long project that a group of students have to complete for a given client. Many 4th-years at the beginning of this school year strongly recommended for me to pursue my capstone credit during the summer, so I took their advice and looked into it. As I educated myself on the topic, I learned about internship, and how it can take the place of the required capstone credit. Internship is basically a temporary job position open for students for a certain number of months. Eventually I discovered Global Edge, which is an internship program that allows students to travel abroad and pursue internship in foreign countries. One of the opportunities they presented was an internship with Wooga in Germany. Wooga is the third largest social game development studio, which makes games for Facebook. Out of all the choices I have this summer, this one definitely appeals to me the most! So I applied for an intern position there, and I now have an interview this week! I'm really excited about the opportunity, so I hope I make the position!! However, if I don't make the position, I do still have my capstone project to fall back on. Taking either the internship or capstone during the summer will alleviate one course for me, instead of having to take it during my 4th year. This will give me more time to focus on running my school's game development club, which I've recently been elected as president. I have many plans for that club next year, and one of them includes helping 1st-years build their programming skills to match that of the upper years.
Wouldn't it be awesome to work for these guys?
This year has definitely been my most successful year at UOIT, and I'm truly thankful for all the help, encouragement, and support of my friends and family, which brought me to where I am today. I couldn't have done it without you all! Also, best of luck to everyone graduating this year; I wish nothing but the best for your game dev profession! For all those not there yet, I hope for everyone has a relaxing and enjoyable summer, and see you all again in September!! Goodbye for now!!! :)

- Mario

Monday, March 19, 2012

My Adventure

Hey everyone, it's been a while... a month and a bit to be more specific. Sorry that I haven't updated my blog lately, I've been working on a lot of different things, including an application to work at a German game development studio for two months this summer (I hope I get accepted!), and my website. In fact, check it out!! http://mariogreco.ca

Anyway, for the past month, I haven't experienced or stumbled upon anything significant in regards the game design, excluding the material I've learned from my game design class. To be honest, I'd rather not regurgitate what I've learned in that class on this blog; I'd rather post about experiences I've gone through in life, of which I can apply what I've learned in game design class to. Thankfully, just a couple of days ago, I did experience something which I think I can apply to game design!

It was early Saturday morning. I had a good night's sleep since I went to sleep early the night before, and woke up just before the sun rose. I washed up, had breakfast and all, and then I was ready to do some work. But I didn't feel like I was in the working mood; I knew I was going to procrastinate. So I decided not to do any work; I put on my running shoes, got my iPhone and headphones, threw on my sweat top, and headed outside around 8:30AM. For some reason, the weather was very warm for the month of March in Vaughan (the city above Toronto, Canada), so taking a jog in a sweat top was perfectly comfortable. So there's a golf course behind my house, and since it's March, the season hasn't started yet, and therefore no one was using it. But since the weather was awesome, I decided to make use of it; I hopped over the fence, and started jogging through the fields while listening the the soundtrack from The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time. I honestly felt like I was in the game! No joke! But without the green tunic, sword, and shield of course! The birds chirping in the real life environment augmented the musical ambiance, and they along with the squirrels - and of course the trees - added to the life of the visual scene. Additionally, the air was very moist and foggy, which was very soothing, and yet eerie at the same time - especially put together with an open field at dawn.

I felt like this guy.

Throughout my jog, I started to worry about larger animals in the area, like foxes and wolves. But I figured that many people use the golf course, and there's technically little forest for them to live in. Of course there's always a chance they may be around, but I figured hey, what good is life being cooped up in a room? Sure, there's risks involved with going outside, but sometimes taking risks is necessary to find inspiration in the life we have, and then be able to tell the tale - like what I'm doing now. Besides, it's unlikely that they'll appear; if it were likely for them to appear, then I'd call myself stupid for attempting something that could be considered suicidal. Furthermore, how do you think Link feels when he traverses the dangerous land of Hyrule? Sure, he has a sword, shield, other items to protect him, and he is a fictional character - but I feel that I should put myself in the character's shoes to understand his struggle, and then use my own similar adventure as inspiration to make my own works realistic enough for people to relate to.

Much like The Legend of Zelda, I decided to jog along the unpaved paths, and cut through the small forests. I also jogged beside a small river separating the cliffs and ledges above me, while often pausing to enjoy the scene. Eventually I made it through the golf course, and walked across a broken fence upon another subdivision. This subdivision was not too far from my house in terms of driving distance, but quite far in walking distance. I continued my open-ended and undefined jog through the subdivision, and walked to areas which I've seen so often as a child, yet never been to physically. Imagine a game where you can see something in the distance, but could never get to. For example, The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time. In Princess Zelda's courtyard, there are two windows, one on the left, and one of the right. One of them displayed a hallway of Mario paintings as some sort of an easter-egg. When I was a kid, I tried figuring out how to access the hallways and explore Zelda's castle, but couldn't. Then, when I got older, I hacked into the game using a ROM and emulator, allowing me to jump into that inaccessible hallway. To my disappointment, nothing but a void surrounded that hallway; what I saw as a child was the only thing there. In fact, there wasn't even any collision physics, so Link couldn't even walk on it; he'd fall straight through the floor. It's also similar to my experience in Disney World when I was around six years old; there was little cartoon village with doors for each building. I was curious to see what was behind those doors, so I tried opening them. To my disappointment, they were sealed shut. I even had a dream about what could have been behind that door; when I opened it in my dream, there was an open void full of stars one would see in the night sky. I couldn't fathom what was behind the door, but I always had the feeling that it was full of something wonderful. Today, now that I'm older, I know that those doors were sealed shut because there wasn't anything behind them; they were fake. Talk about a disappointing truth. So going back to my adventure, I went to the areas I could never walk to as a child, because I knew that unlike a video game where "what you see is what there is", there does exist content in the "unexplored areas". I just wanted to complete my knowledge of their existence left incomplete from when I was a child.

DOOR
Y U NO REAL?

As I continued my adventure, I came across a house with a strange design on its door. It looked somewhat like a face. I recall many games that have strange designs, some of them that look like faces; but such designs are are often reused throughout their respectful games. For example, The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time. There are towers where Link can shoot his Hookshot item at, in order to propel him across voids. The symbols on these towers look somewhat like faces, and I often found them throughout the game. I then related this to the concept of "echoes" from Alexander's Fifteen Properties of Living Structures, which makes use of "pleasing and unifying repetition". If this adventure of mine was a video game, and the house with the strange door was a place of significance, then the strange symbol would infer that. But that wouldn't be enough; there should be echoes of that symbol in the game, so that the player can be familiar with it before discovering the house with that design on its door. For example, the symbol should be displayed in different areas of the game as the player moves toward the strange house (for example, posters, tiles on the floor, etc.) except houses and their doors. Only one house will have the symbol on its door, and when the player makes the connection, s/he will realize that there is something mysterious about the house, and that will give them an incentive to explore it; no one will need to directly tell them that there exists a "strange house" in the area, because the environment itself already suggests that.

I saw those little faces even before I reached Dodongo's Cavern - the second dungeon.
You get the hookshot right before you reach the fourth dungeon.

Back to real life. There were some areas I wanted to get to though an unpaved path that I'd create on the spot, but sometimes those paths would go though one's backyard. I avoided this so as to avoid disturbing and/or scaring residents, so I decided to make paths that didn't run though someone's backyard. Although I could have taken the risk, the other options I had to get there were more appealing (for example, the longer path that goes around the house, which involves significantly less risk, but takes up a little but more time). Then there came another time where I found an area that contained a "The Void" (From Alexander's Fifteen Properties of Living Structures). I wanted to go to it, but the only way involved going through someone's patio  beside their house. So I hoped for the best, took a dash through, and made it to the void. I later realized that there was another way to get to "the void", but it was a much longer distance from the riskier path I took. This scenario strongly relates to game balancing:

The time it takes to cross the path + the possible risk of the path =  the non-appeal of the path

The closer the outcome is to zero, the more appealing the path will be. Now when you have multiple paths which equal the same value, then things start to get interesting for the player. As for my game in particular, if the player does take the risk, and then bumps into the owner of the house who s/he's trespassing, what would happen? Would the owner call the police, get angry, or become friends with the player? This would make the game even more interesting for the player. What if the risk could be rewarding? What if the risk could be punishing? These are the things I thought of as I adventured; what if this adventure was a game? What makes this adventure interesting? In a way, I attempted reverse-engineering the mechanics of real life as if it were a game. Imagine if real life were a video game. How would you play it? How would you "complete your game"?


For some people, this is their video game. And there's no extra lives.

As I continued my adventure through the subdivision, I discovered a hole in a meadow. I was a little worried of what it may contain, but I continued anyway. I shortly found my way out, and found a paved path before me. It curved to the left, and curved to the right; I had to pick whether to go left or right. The right side was an upward path with lit-up lights, and the left side was a downward path that looked nothing spectacular. Upon this first glance, the right side looked more interesting, and it gave me the impression that that was the path to take. However I wanted to see where both paths led to, so I decided to take a peek at the left side first. But after my first couple of steps toward the left, I realized that walking along the left path would probably take up a lot of time, especially since I had no idea how long that path would be. If the path is long, it would be tedious to walk all the way back to where I first made a decision of whether to move left or right, and then move along the original path I wanted to take. I then wished that I had a warp function in real life, so that I could see everything I wanted to see without sacrificing time. That's when I realized something; perhaps a warp function in this scenario would break my game. Because time is such an important factor, the player will be forced to make a conscious decision; either take the lit upward path, or the misty downward path. Depending on the player's choice, s/he will find whatever mysteries lie on the chosen path, while the other path will remain a mystery. Maybe the path not taken will be uncovered in the future as the player continues his/her adventure. I remember attending MIGS 2009, and a gentleman named Scott Rogers from THQ spoke about how he learned game design from Disneyland. One of the things he mentioned was multiple paths, and how even though they point to the same destination, the person would have a sense of choice. To me, that sounded like an illusion of choice, and although it may immerse the player into the environment more, I don't think it does nowhere near as good of a job as actual player choice. In my scenario, there was no illusion of choice; I had no idea where those paths were pointing to. They could have been pointing to the same destination, or perhaps not. Now consider the constraint of the player's time (which naturally resides in the player outside the game), and you've got yourself true player choice even in the most unconstrained and non-pressuring of scenarios. This is where I found myself.

I still have no idea as to how to respond to this picture... =S

So I ended up taking the path to the right, and discovered a tower with a few cannon replicas, which I've never seen before - even in despite of living in the area! It was created for the people of my town who lost their lives fighting in the first world war. I noticed a beer bottle on the window ledge of the tower, so I decided to climb up its base, and pick it up, while carefully jumping back down to the ground. I expected it to be a beer bottle from ten years ago (because seriously, who climbs things nowadays?), but in fact it was a soda from probably a few months ago. Meh, item attained I guess. But beyond the tower were steps trailing downward, with the Canadian flag and a few houses following in the distance. Perhaps those of the houses of members of the municipal government? I walked downward, figuring that this is where the left path in the previous scenario would lead to.

Eventually I found myself at an old community center where I used to play hockey as a child. I could have been a great hockey player if I actually participated in the game rather than divert my attention to getting a fly out of the ice. I digress...

Across the community center, there is a road that runs over the river. My path on the other hand dipped below the road that bridges over the river, but just above the water of course. As I walked under the bridge, I felt like if I've been there before, perhaps when I was a small child. The memory is very vague, but I do feel like if I've been there before. It was definitely a strange feeling.

I... think I've been here before....
(This is not the actual picture, but it looks similar.)

Eventually, I made it to the community center, and then decided to go back home. I tried taking all the short cuts I could, and walked across the golf course again. I eventually had to jump over a fence, and all of the sudden, the Zelda music I was listening to suddenly stopped. Oh well, I guess a branch took out the headphones. Keep moving. Not too long after, I jumped over a fence into someone's backyard, I quickly rushed out, and made it onto the road of a new subdivision. That's when I realized that my phone was not in my pocket anymore. I started to worry. I went back to the fence I jumped over, and looked around for a while until I remembered when the music I was listening to cut off. Perhaps that was when the phone fell out of my pocket. I went to that area, and there it was in the leaves. I picked it back up, hopped over the fence, quickly dashed out of the stranger's backyard again. I had to teach karate that day, and realized that I was going to be late, so I called my mother to pick me up and drive me home. I wanted to finish my adventure on foot, but oh well. I was still late for karate anyway. Thankfully I'm not the only instructor at the dojo on Saturdays.

So to wrap up, I learned that the concept of "echoes" can be used to subtlety point out an object or area of importance, and how a player's real-life time outside the game s/he is playing can be used as a path choice constraint provided that the player does not have a warp function. I also learned that player's time added to a potential choice's perceived risk give rise to conscious player choice and ultimately interest. Furthermore, allowing the said 'risk' to possibly be good, bad, or anything in between, throws even more spice into the equation. Most importantly, I learned that pretending to traverse the lands of Hyrule while listening to Zelda music is an exhilarating trip, and is something I would do again. Rather than sit in-front of your computer and/or live within the confines of society, jump out and do something you've always wanted to do - even if it is completely ridiculousness. I assure you that it will bring you much joy, and offer tons of inspiration which you can use for your own creations and/or life philosophies.

Until my next blog post, thank you for reading, and arrivederci! =)

P.S. I found a fortune under the cap of the bottle I picked up. It said something along the lines of "contact those who are interested in your project". Interesting...

Monday, February 6, 2012

Magic the Gathering - My Made-up Cards

Hello everyone, this week I was given the task to create three new cards for the popular card game, Magic: The Gathering. Within that task, I was to balance the cards so that they can be playable in the actual game; costs = benefits. The rules for both costs and benefits are as follows:

Costs:
 Baseline = +1
 Each colourless mana = +1
 Each coloured mana = +2
 Total mana cost of 5 or more = +1 (+2 for Green)
Benefits:
 Each 1 Power or 1 Toughness = +1
 Being Red or Blue creature = +1


First up is the Isolated Boy.

His costs include:
1. The card baseline. (1)
2. Three colourless mana. (3*1=3)
3. One coloured mana. (1*2=2)
4. The cost so far is >= 5, but the card is not green, so there's only an added cost of one. (1)
5. Together, that equals 7.

His benefits include:
1. Power of 3.
2. Toughness of 4.
3. Not a Red or Blue creature. (0)
4. Together, that equals 7.

Isolated Boy's cost (7) equals its benefits (7), and is therefore balanced.


Next up is the Toddler's Drawing.

His costs include:
1. The card baseline. (1)
2. One colourless mana. (1*1=1)
3. One coloured mana. (1*2=2)
4. The cost so far is not >= 5, so there's no added cost. (0)
5. Together, that equals 4.

His benefits include:
1. Power of 2.
2. Toughness of 2.
3. Not a Red or Blue creature. (0)
4. Together, that equals 4.

Toddler's Drawing's cost (4) equals its benefits (4), and is therefore balanced.


Finally, we have Linkolian. No he is not Link from Nintendo's "The Legend of Zelda", he just looks strikingly similar to him. Sheer coincidence, honest! =P

His costs include:
1. The card baseline. (1)
2. Fifteen colourless mana. (15*1=15)
3. One coloured mana. (1*2=2)
4. The cost so far is >= 5, and the card is green, so there's an added cost of two. (2)
5. Together, that equals 20.

His benefits include:
1. Power of 10.
2. Toughness of 10.
3. It is not a Red or Blue creature. (0)
4. Together, that equals 20.

Linkolian's cost (20) equals its benefits (20), and is therefore balanced.

So that's that. Whadda ya guys think? Fancy? =]

Thursday, February 2, 2012

Pokemon Resources Short Critique


                Pokémon is a well-balanced game that uses many variables in a very intricately laid out fashion.  They work together to give a realistic feel for the Pokémon world; allowing each Pokémon to be unique, even if they’re of the same species. Looking back to a previous iteration of the series, Pokémon Fire Red version, there was a frustrating spike near the end of the game. After attaining the final badge which allows the player to challenge the Elite Four, their Pokémon are significantly stronger than the final gym leader. This usually causes the player to farm their Pokémon’s experience points in order to level them up. Since the amount of experience points required to level up increases relatively to a cubic exponential degree, it will (for example) take a while for the player to level up his Level 50 Charizard to Level 60. That’s the most important part I would change. Thankfully, I feel that Game Freak addressed that issue in future games, like in the recent Black and White versions.

                There is one other aspect I would like to change, albeit a small issue, and it hasn’t been addressed even to this day: Poké Ball prices. I feel that the decreasing triangle relationship works for the regular Poké Balls, however all of the special Poké Balls are priced the same at 1000 currency. For the regular Poké Balls, they cost 200, 600, and 1200 for Poké, Great, and Ultra respectively. (There is only one Master Ball per game which the player receives as a gift near the end of the game.) The special Poké Balls benefit the player only under certain circumstances. So why bother purchasing a special ball, when one can buy an Ultra Ball for just 200 extra? Ultra balls have a x2 catch rate for all scenarios, while special Poké balls have a x1 or x3 catch rate depending on if the player used it in the particular scenario that it’s supposed to be used for. As a long-time Pokémon gamer, I feel that such specific scenarios occur very infrequently. There are also many different special Poké Balls, and it would be costly to purchase one of each ball for scenarios that the player may not even encounter. To boot, other than the Master Ball, there’s never a guaranteed catch; so if the player uses her only ‘Fast Ball’ and doesn’t catch the Pokémon, the player will have to resort to her larger supply of trusty Ultra Balls. I believe prices of such special Poké Balls should be cheaper, maybe around the price of a Great Ball – then would I invest in them. I also believe that among the many different special Poké Balls, the prices should vary depending on the possible frequency of the special Poké Ball’s use. Other than that, I think Pokémon is awesome!


Monday, January 23, 2012

Rules vs. Mechanics

Hmm, I read something interesting: http://www.raphkoster.com/2011/12/13/rules-versus-mechanics/


One day,  Ian Schreiber  tweeted, "Game designers: in your everyday use of the terms, is there a difference between “rules” and “mechanics”? If so, what?" Raph Koster decided to answer that, but unfortunately his answer was too large enough for a tweet. He basically explained that every game is composed of smaller games, and each of those smaller games compliment each other in a fashion that supports the overall game. Each of those smaller games are basically mechanics. For example, one mechanic would be the jumping mechanic; it first considers all your previous progress (which consist of many small games), the act of jumping (which utilizes the rules of physics, especially the force against gravity), and the act of landing on an enemy to kill it (where the rule known as "player colliding with enemy and player's last position was above enemy" comes to fruition). These acts are dynamics carried out by the player through her choices, all thanks to the existence of the mechanics, and the rules that give the mechanics their existence. It's like a building; the rules allow mechanics to exist, and mechanics allow dynamics to exist.

At least that's how I understood it. To be honest, the article was quite confusing, but it gives you another designer's perspective on game design semantics. I feel knowing the difference between rules and mechanics is important, as it will help the designer break down and carefully construct her experience knowing the exact nature of her components. In this case scenario, the designer will choose rules that are not too loose and not too tight. With that, the rules will naturally generate mechanics that the player can use to partake in the game - mechanics are the part that are consciously on the player's mind, not the rules; the player knows that she can jump on an enemy to kill it, but does not think about "the rules of physics allowing force to drift the player upward", and, "collision with enemy provided that the player is above the enemy on the y-axis on the previous frame". Finally, how the player uses the mechanics become the the very essence of dynamics.

Wednesday, January 11, 2012

Alhambra board game critique

Good day, ladies and gentlemen.

A few days ago, I played a board game called Alhambra (created by Dirk Henn) with four other people during Game Design II class. We took about fifty minutes to play it, as we were running out of time in the end. If we had the time to finish playing comfortably, we'd probably take an hour to play. The class and I were then asked to write an individual critique on the game we played. Now before I get into it, I might as well explain what the game is about, no?


Alhambra is turn-based in a clockwise order. For each turn the player has, she may choose to do one of the following; pick up money, use money on hand to buy buildings, or rearrange structures on hand. The money comes in four colours, and four are placed on the play table every turn. If the player picks up money less than a value of six, she may pick up another money card also worth less than six. The money gained can then be used to purchase buildings of the same colour. For any transaction, the player does not receive change. Each building card may have a black border around its edges; sometimes on one edge, sometimes on more than one edge, sometimes on all edges, and sometimes on no edges. The black boarders represent walls, which the player must carefully place together with other buildings to ultimately create a fortress. Inner walls are allowed, provided that the inner wall of one card is paired up with the inner wall of the adjacent building card. Regardless, inner walls provide no benefit to the player besides some leeway from having to match up walls perfectly on the outside. Sometimes buildings cannot fit in the current state of a fortress, so the player can put up to four buildings in her reserves area. When the player decides to take a turn to restructure her fortress, she can put any buildings she has in the reserves into the fortress (and vice-versa), and can rearrange her fortress however she sees fit. After the completion of one clockwise turn cycle, all players count how many points they currently have. Points are given by the amount of buildings each player has in their fortress; each building has a colour, and each colour has an associated value. So each player must add all values for each building they own, and then that total will serve as her current score. Once the game is complete, the player with the most points wins.


For the critique, the class and I were required to list five likable and five dislikable qualities of the game we played. I personally found it difficult to find ten distinct qualities I like/dislike, as points I fathomed seemed to overlap with other points. Nonetheless, I listed them the best I could:

Likable qualities:
1) The game is unique, especially thanks to its fortress mechanic.
2) There's strategy involved; for example, should I take the money or building this turn, or should I anticipate a better value next turn? Should I stock up on lower value buildings, or save up for high cost buildings that others might nab before me?
3) Inner walls allow leeway to constructing a fortress.
4) No change when buying something – contributes to strategy; if there’s money of value eight and money of value nine, pick up the money value of eight to buy building of value seven, then attempt to pick up the money of value nine the next turn.
5) Score card is like a board map, where the player’s pawn is on their score; allows player to know her score simply by glancing on the score card, rather than have someone to write it down.

Dislikable qualities:
1) The game felt repetitive and boring; it felt like busy work, a chore. I believe this is due to little challenge involved, while luck seems to mostly control the game.
2) I initially mistook the score card for the play field. I mostly found it to be useless other than taking up space.
3) Fortress doesn't seem to hold much purpose other than to include many buildings for points while requiring a wall to surround it. Player requires mostly luck to gain new parts. Not that challenging, just busy work. The game is more like a puzzle with extra tedious work if anything.
4) The same thing goes for money, luck is required to pick up the right money cards when they are displayed, and then luck is again needed to pick up the right building cards when they are displayed. It’s tedious.
5) The game is difficult to understand at first, which is a little frustrating. Once the game is understood, it's so easy to play and involves little challenge that is becomes boring.

If I could design a couple of elements differently, I'd say players should be able to bargain with other players in regards to buildings in reserves; if a player has a building in her reserves that another player needs, on his turn, he can either trade or buy her property – provided she accepts. This will increase accessibility of needed parts, which would shrink reliance on luck a little more, and thus allowing more room for strategy. Another design element I’d like to add is a more robust fortress system; each player has a pawn that can move around a game board every turn using dice, in addition to the original game. Each player’s fortress is constructed on the game board. Players can break into other players' fortresses. If a player gets to the fortress core of another player, she may decide to destroy it. She can also instead steal a building of another player’s fortress; if she does, she cannot steal anything else or destroy its core while she holds the building, so she might as well rush back to her own fortress without getting caught. Yes, in my version of the game, people can carry buildings, whadda ya know?

Anyhow, this is just what I think. How about you guys? DISCUSS FOO!!!!!!! C=<

Mr. T pities the fool who doesn't discuss in the comment section of this post.

Tuesday, January 10, 2012

ACT II

GOOD DAY LADIES AND GENTLEMEN

I HAS RETURNEDED!!!

IMPROPER USE OF GRAMMAR IS AWESOME!!!

Okay... I'm back.

Now I'm taking a course called Game Design II, which is the sequel to last year's Game Design I, where I murdered my ass off to make the world's crappiest game, Desert Racer!! Huzzah!!!! I won't be seeing you in my portfolio, sir!

No... no medal for you.
Thankfully this time, I'm continuing to develop PIVOTal with my group from last semester, and what a fine game it is so far!! This is way less stressful than last year, where I had to make a game from scratch unlike everyone else who had a game to build on from the semester before. Just thinking about that nightmare of a year makes me shudder... :(

Now THIS is what I'm talking about!! =D
Anyway, I just want to let you all know that anything that has to do with my GDW progress will now be found at http://protestersuoit.wordpress.com/. On this blog, however, I shall be posting material that is related to my Game Design II course.

Anyway, this is just a quick blog post to say that I am still alive, and see you all next post!! :)