I remember the days when game soundtracks used MIDI files. Even that was pretty advanced compared to the minimal tones used in earlier games. Personally it is the MIDI tunes I always associate with the genre of 'Game Music.'
Games like Zelda and Final Fantasy were only enhanced by these poly tonal soundtracks. Because the music was different than that of whatever was playing in the charts at the time I think it served to remind you that you were playing a game. It was great because in playing games you got to listen to different music. Even though those days are behind us, I love listening to some of the old MIDI tracks because although players might not be intently listening at the time, I defy anyone to listen to MIDI tunes from games they played as kids and not instantly be taken back in their head to that game. I can still hear FF7 tunes and instantly see the game in my head.
Sound these days is vastly more sophisticated and is used to enhance the gaming experience much like it is used in films. Composers can now work exclusively for games, and create pieces of music which serve to enhance the mood, or increase the tension. Some character driven games have different pieces of music associated with each character and might have certain tunes play whenever said character makes an appearance. Sephiroth's theme from FF7 was even extended into a revamped version for the Advent Children film. Other games have certain music associated with them to enhance their identity. Halo made good use of this with an impressive orchestral score. Personally the FFX theme tune is one of the most beautiful melodies I've heard in a game.
In all my time playing games I think I can probably say that the most effective use I've ever experienced of a games soundtrack really enhancing the game, would be the Resident Evil series. Resident evil 1, 2 and 3 had the perfect accompanying sounds. The subtle music gently in the background, the soft shuffle of a zombie's feet when you entered a room, the silence followed by the turning of a door handle. Considering they came out in the PS1 days I think the developer really utilised the game sounds and score perfectly to enhance the experience. It was so well thought out I don't think it could have been done any better. The slow click click of an unseen licker in Resident Evil 2 is one of those gaming memories that will always stay with me.
Monday, 8 February 2010
Monday, 1 February 2010
Game Engines
Game engines are the underlying code structure which make a game work. These can be split into different components, such as rendering, physics, scripting, animation and AI to name a few. It is not uncommon for these to be reused seeing as their primary use in being developed is to speed up the process of creating games. This can be of particular use when developing a sequel to a game, having said that, some sequels prompt new engines to be built, or example half-life 2 uses a completely different engine to half-life 1. The original half life was built with a modified version of the Quake engine, whereas Half-life 2 was built from the ground up using the 'Source' engine. Valve have now actually remade the original half-life with the 'Source'. This remake however was a straight port, even reusing the original textures and models from the first game. Many fans felt that it didn't utilise the Source engine to it's full potential and as such there is now a third party remake in the works. This remake is called Black Mesa and is built from scratch to take full advantage of Source.
When working with 3D engines and level editing, designers have two methods at their disposal depending on which the engine supports. It will either use an additive or subtractive method of level creation.
With additive, there is an empty void and the designer must first create a hollow cube to break the player off from the world (the world being everything the player can see in the game) Inside this cube, parts can then be added to the world.
In the subtractive method, there is only an infinite solid to begin with and the level designer must then subtract and empty space from it.
In general, the subtractive method is becoming slightly obsolete. However, if you are making a solely indoor environment then it might be more practical than additive which is better suited to outdoor environments.
As you can see game engines, and the decisions that go into creating them is no simple task. As such many games companies may choose to licence a pre-existing game engine from another company. Though this is costly, it is rather time consuming as much of the ground work is already done. Once licensed they are then free to start creating their game or perhaps modifying the engine to suit their specific needs. In terms of the company who owns the engine, it can be a helpful source of revenue and thus adds to the appeal of developing your own engine. If the resources and time are available then not only can you create an engine specifically tailored to the game you wish to make but it's also good business.
With next generation technology, game engines continue to get more and more complex and in actual fact are some of the most complicated software currently written. Game engines bring many different components together and are sometimes termed middleware simply because of the ability to mix and match many specific game engine components like renderers or physics engines such as Havok. It's in the continued interest of developers to use engines in this way as everyone can benefit from developments in the gaming world this way.
In future, i imagine they can only get more and more complex, perhaps even with new components as next generation hardware/software attempts to break new ground!
When working with 3D engines and level editing, designers have two methods at their disposal depending on which the engine supports. It will either use an additive or subtractive method of level creation.
With additive, there is an empty void and the designer must first create a hollow cube to break the player off from the world (the world being everything the player can see in the game) Inside this cube, parts can then be added to the world.
In the subtractive method, there is only an infinite solid to begin with and the level designer must then subtract and empty space from it.
In general, the subtractive method is becoming slightly obsolete. However, if you are making a solely indoor environment then it might be more practical than additive which is better suited to outdoor environments.
As you can see game engines, and the decisions that go into creating them is no simple task. As such many games companies may choose to licence a pre-existing game engine from another company. Though this is costly, it is rather time consuming as much of the ground work is already done. Once licensed they are then free to start creating their game or perhaps modifying the engine to suit their specific needs. In terms of the company who owns the engine, it can be a helpful source of revenue and thus adds to the appeal of developing your own engine. If the resources and time are available then not only can you create an engine specifically tailored to the game you wish to make but it's also good business.
With next generation technology, game engines continue to get more and more complex and in actual fact are some of the most complicated software currently written. Game engines bring many different components together and are sometimes termed middleware simply because of the ability to mix and match many specific game engine components like renderers or physics engines such as Havok. It's in the continued interest of developers to use engines in this way as everyone can benefit from developments in the gaming world this way.
In future, i imagine they can only get more and more complex, perhaps even with new components as next generation hardware/software attempts to break new ground!
Monday, 25 January 2010
Gaming Culture
I suppose primarily, the gaming culture that i am a part of is the art side of things. Growing up my work was heavily influenced by concept art for games - both style and content. I wouldn't say that gaming is really a part of my life anymore these days. I still play the odd game, but I'm nowhere near as 'in to it' as i used to be. Back when i was at school my friends and I used to spend quite a bit of time on xbox live. It was immensely entertaining at the time, to be able to play some of the best games around in the comfort of your own home but be able to chat and socialise (virtually) with your friends too.
In that sense it was very addictive, i remember wasting many hours just sat on burnout paradise chatting to friends over the headset. Looking back, i don't think i would go back on xbox live again, mainly due to the fact that as I've grown up i find i have less and less time for games, as other responsibilities crop up.
Some games, almost have cult status and an incredible following. Take final fantasy 7 for example, or even just that series on the whole. Gamers have parties where they dress up as characters, films are made about games, and vice versa.
I think games have become a rather sophisticated form of entertainment and like anything which people are interested in and passionate about, the way in which it is reflected in our culture will reflect peoples passion for it.
I think for some younger children however it's quite a detrimental past time. I know some young kids that just sit on their games consoles all day everyday, chatting to people online, some of which they don't even know. I personally think this is a sad case, seeing as they should make the most of their time as kids, and be out enjoying the world, not cooped up. But then again i guess they have that option and can always take it if they want to.
Games have seemingly cemented themselves in our culture, how it will develop in the future still remains to be seen.
In that sense it was very addictive, i remember wasting many hours just sat on burnout paradise chatting to friends over the headset. Looking back, i don't think i would go back on xbox live again, mainly due to the fact that as I've grown up i find i have less and less time for games, as other responsibilities crop up.
Some games, almost have cult status and an incredible following. Take final fantasy 7 for example, or even just that series on the whole. Gamers have parties where they dress up as characters, films are made about games, and vice versa.
I think games have become a rather sophisticated form of entertainment and like anything which people are interested in and passionate about, the way in which it is reflected in our culture will reflect peoples passion for it.
I think for some younger children however it's quite a detrimental past time. I know some young kids that just sit on their games consoles all day everyday, chatting to people online, some of which they don't even know. I personally think this is a sad case, seeing as they should make the most of their time as kids, and be out enjoying the world, not cooped up. But then again i guess they have that option and can always take it if they want to.
Games have seemingly cemented themselves in our culture, how it will develop in the future still remains to be seen.
Tuesday, 19 January 2010
Boom
I think it's fair to say that the video game industry is in it's prime. No doubt it'll fly higher in the future but in the present the industry is a serious force to be reckoned with. Despite a large percentage of the population thinking games are just for kids etc, now, more so than ever the games industry is a successful, established and profitable industry.
The industry itself is constantly continuing to develop and new technology is the hallmark of an evolving industry. In order for the industry to continue, new developments consistently need to be realised so it doesn't stagnant. Consumers, fickle though it may be, will soon grow bored if nothing new is on offer or is likely to be offered in the foreseeable future. Happily though, at the moment the industry is going well.
Having said that it too is suffering the effects of the recent 'recession' and last year many games companies had to fire many employees as cutbacks were made. People working in this industry should try not to feel too secure at any given time. Although the industry is not in danger, due to it's very nature cut backs are made all the time. For example after a game project is finished the team working on it may be trimmed. For that reason many employees have had to deal with periods of no work and competing for new jobs and opportunities.
The main problem with this industry is that when it booms, it bloats and generally does itself more damage than good. There are a vast amount of established companies now which theoretically can stand the test of time, but the number if third party developers coming and going is still very high.
I think at the end of the day there will always be a demand for talent. However the industry is now extremely saturated with talented individuals, experienced and novice alike. This means that the level of talent demanded is even higher. So yes there will always be a demand for talent, but the bar is ever rising.
The industry itself is constantly continuing to develop and new technology is the hallmark of an evolving industry. In order for the industry to continue, new developments consistently need to be realised so it doesn't stagnant. Consumers, fickle though it may be, will soon grow bored if nothing new is on offer or is likely to be offered in the foreseeable future. Happily though, at the moment the industry is going well.
Having said that it too is suffering the effects of the recent 'recession' and last year many games companies had to fire many employees as cutbacks were made. People working in this industry should try not to feel too secure at any given time. Although the industry is not in danger, due to it's very nature cut backs are made all the time. For example after a game project is finished the team working on it may be trimmed. For that reason many employees have had to deal with periods of no work and competing for new jobs and opportunities.
The main problem with this industry is that when it booms, it bloats and generally does itself more damage than good. There are a vast amount of established companies now which theoretically can stand the test of time, but the number if third party developers coming and going is still very high.
I think at the end of the day there will always be a demand for talent. However the industry is now extremely saturated with talented individuals, experienced and novice alike. This means that the level of talent demanded is even higher. So yes there will always be a demand for talent, but the bar is ever rising.
Sunday, 10 January 2010
Back to Basics
Right then, back at Uni at last. Time for a bad bed, no food and a freezing room. On the plus side, a decent desk and all the time in the world to draw! =)
Good stuff.
Bring on round 2. I've decided that i worked as hard as i could in term one, but i need to work smarter. This term i shall work smart, and hard! My aim is to not have to redo anything next hols! Only had to redo one thing this time round so thats not too bad!
Was great to be home, free to just sit down with the books and study what i wanted to study! Made some great progress! Been looking at light in terms of representation rather than scientifically, and made some progress on representing form with mark making. Good times all round!
Good stuff.
Bring on round 2. I've decided that i worked as hard as i could in term one, but i need to work smarter. This term i shall work smart, and hard! My aim is to not have to redo anything next hols! Only had to redo one thing this time round so thats not too bad!
Was great to be home, free to just sit down with the books and study what i wanted to study! Made some great progress! Been looking at light in terms of representation rather than scientifically, and made some progress on representing form with mark making. Good times all round!
Tuesday, 5 January 2010
Something From Nothing
I think our individual creativity is our personal response to the world around us in any given context. There are many instances in which one may be creative. Give someone a pen, and they might draw or write. Give someone bricks and they might build. Put on some music and they may dance. Give them drums and they will play. Give them a problem that they may solve. Give them the tools to lead a better life. Educate them to look differently at the world around themselves.
The human mind’s creativity knows no bounds in any area of life.
I think perhaps it is a great shame that we as a species have got into the habit of measuring creativity. We might say someone is very creative if they produce a work of art, but if someone else only creates scribbles on a page, then we may say they are not very creative. All too often creativity gets confused with innovation. Innovation, originality and novelty perhaps are measures in themselves and should thus be looked at separately.
The act of living in itself is a creative endeavour. Were we not so advanced as a race, we’d be creatively hunting and providing shelter for ourselves on a daily basis. In the modern world, social situations provide endless opportunities to be creative. Creative with words, for example, creating in jokes, nicknames or slang. If you are playing a game, how you respond and therefore play the game is a reflection on yourself creatively.
In these terms, creativity is very simplistic and basic, but it is creativity nonetheless. Once provided with tools, or certain situations creativity increases greatly in complexity. When working in a team, creativity gets even more complex. Now you have each individual’s response to a certain problem and then their individual response to everyone else’s response! This is why businesses have brainstorming sessions with large groups of people, because in doing so you can ensure that the creative ideas being put forward are also innovative.
Back to innovation again. Inevitably innovation is important because it is the holy grail of creativity. My earlier point was only that not all creativity should be judged on how innovative it is. For instance personal endeavours or hobbies. In business innovation is key to success, so we have people learning how to maximise their creativity and really nurture it.
Can creativity be nurtured? Yes because unfortunately there are those that simply shy away from life. People that are not truly living. Take someone who just sits on the couch all day, interacting with no one, watching TV. They are hardly living life to any extent at all.
I think creativity can be nurtured by opening our minds, and trying new experiences and constantly challenging how we think on a daily basis.
Whilst I may have said earlier that creativity is all around us and should not be measured, I do however think it should be encouraged. Someone might not be that innovative, try as they might, but they should still be encouraged to be creative as it will undoubtedly enrich their lives.
The human mind’s creativity knows no bounds in any area of life.
I think perhaps it is a great shame that we as a species have got into the habit of measuring creativity. We might say someone is very creative if they produce a work of art, but if someone else only creates scribbles on a page, then we may say they are not very creative. All too often creativity gets confused with innovation. Innovation, originality and novelty perhaps are measures in themselves and should thus be looked at separately.
The act of living in itself is a creative endeavour. Were we not so advanced as a race, we’d be creatively hunting and providing shelter for ourselves on a daily basis. In the modern world, social situations provide endless opportunities to be creative. Creative with words, for example, creating in jokes, nicknames or slang. If you are playing a game, how you respond and therefore play the game is a reflection on yourself creatively.
In these terms, creativity is very simplistic and basic, but it is creativity nonetheless. Once provided with tools, or certain situations creativity increases greatly in complexity. When working in a team, creativity gets even more complex. Now you have each individual’s response to a certain problem and then their individual response to everyone else’s response! This is why businesses have brainstorming sessions with large groups of people, because in doing so you can ensure that the creative ideas being put forward are also innovative.
Back to innovation again. Inevitably innovation is important because it is the holy grail of creativity. My earlier point was only that not all creativity should be judged on how innovative it is. For instance personal endeavours or hobbies. In business innovation is key to success, so we have people learning how to maximise their creativity and really nurture it.
Can creativity be nurtured? Yes because unfortunately there are those that simply shy away from life. People that are not truly living. Take someone who just sits on the couch all day, interacting with no one, watching TV. They are hardly living life to any extent at all.
I think creativity can be nurtured by opening our minds, and trying new experiences and constantly challenging how we think on a daily basis.
Whilst I may have said earlier that creativity is all around us and should not be measured, I do however think it should be encouraged. Someone might not be that innovative, try as they might, but they should still be encouraged to be creative as it will undoubtedly enrich their lives.
Saturday, 2 January 2010
Scales
My own personal description of ‘gameplay’ is the balance between challenge and fun in games. The game mechanics serve to create gameplay, for instance, the challenges themselves, the options available to the player, and the control systems in place allowing the player to make independent decisions.
No one likes a game that is too easy. Conversely no one likes a game that is so challenging that it is almost impossible to get through without some serious frustration. For someone to continue playing a game there must be some sort of payoff to the user. They must essentially be having fun and enjoying themselves. A lot of games try and address this with rewards, and level completion bonus along with unlockable extras. The best games get the payoff just right as the user is playing the game, providing just enough challenge that as the user makes progress through the game the satisfaction comes from the user being ‘good’ at the game, if that makes sense. There is no universal measure of whether a user is good at a game or not. But we all know from personal experience that some games we feel we are good at, and others we feel that we are not. When playing a game and you pull off a great headshot, or drift round a corner, or get an awesome combo, or do something generally perceived as skilful, you feel somewhat proud in that moment. This feeling is only enhanced if you feel that you have pulled this action off in spite of the challenge of the game.
So as I said, for me it is all about balance. If it’s too easy, you might pull off some ‘skilful’ things too often, lessening the impact of them. Games are a little like rollercoaster’s, you have to balance out the ups and downs, and then throw in the occasional loop.
So is it important? Yes! I think if someone so desired they could probably break down the individual gameplay for individual games, but there are no overarching themes/rules or categories that you can apply to all games. Even if someone can’t explain it, they understand gameplay on some level. They know when it is good of bad. With this in mind, it should most definitely be planned for and implemented in games carefully. It is possibly the most important factor in designing a game and also the hardest to get to grips with.
A little balance can go a long way.
No one likes a game that is too easy. Conversely no one likes a game that is so challenging that it is almost impossible to get through without some serious frustration. For someone to continue playing a game there must be some sort of payoff to the user. They must essentially be having fun and enjoying themselves. A lot of games try and address this with rewards, and level completion bonus along with unlockable extras. The best games get the payoff just right as the user is playing the game, providing just enough challenge that as the user makes progress through the game the satisfaction comes from the user being ‘good’ at the game, if that makes sense. There is no universal measure of whether a user is good at a game or not. But we all know from personal experience that some games we feel we are good at, and others we feel that we are not. When playing a game and you pull off a great headshot, or drift round a corner, or get an awesome combo, or do something generally perceived as skilful, you feel somewhat proud in that moment. This feeling is only enhanced if you feel that you have pulled this action off in spite of the challenge of the game.
So as I said, for me it is all about balance. If it’s too easy, you might pull off some ‘skilful’ things too often, lessening the impact of them. Games are a little like rollercoaster’s, you have to balance out the ups and downs, and then throw in the occasional loop.
So is it important? Yes! I think if someone so desired they could probably break down the individual gameplay for individual games, but there are no overarching themes/rules or categories that you can apply to all games. Even if someone can’t explain it, they understand gameplay on some level. They know when it is good of bad. With this in mind, it should most definitely be planned for and implemented in games carefully. It is possibly the most important factor in designing a game and also the hardest to get to grips with.
A little balance can go a long way.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)