LA Noire - Why The Bodies Look Wrong

So Brendan McNamara has commented on what a lot of people have noticed about the dissonance between facial animation and body animation in LA Noire:
McNamara: why you thought LA Noire's characters were "dead from the neck down"

"That's because we had all this animation in the neck and all this animation in the face, but the clothes don't move. Once you get to the level that people can actually see that level of realism, then people expect to see clothes moving and the rest of the body moving in a way we can't replicate in video games."

I'm afraid I don't buy this at all. The problems stem from the way the performance is captured, and the fact two different techniques are being used to do this. Behind the Scenes of LA Noire

1. Body Capture
The body is captured in the traditional manner with actors working together in the studio. This is a proven technique, and is used by most AAA studios. There are different ways to get the facial information - Naughty Dog records only body performance, then hand animates the faces (using videos for reference). This creates a very stylized animation for the faces - not necessarily realistic. Compare this to Avatar, Heavenly Sword or TinTin, where facial performance and body performance are captured using the same technique - small dots that are tracked by the cameras. With the right density of information, a good solver and a decent facial rig, good results can be generated - but at this resolution there is the very real danger of the Uncanny Valley - the slightest error being magnified and ruining the whole effect (like the dead eyes of Polar Express).

2. Facial Capture
This is the unique and impressive tech part of LA Noire. The facial capture uses 3D scanning of the actual face, which is then mapped onto the character's face. In order to do this, the actor has to sit very still on a chair while a number of cameras are targeted at their face.

• This results in a very high resolution capture, but has several significant problems. 
• The actor must remain facing a certain direction, they cannot turn their head. 
• There is only one of these rigs at any one time, so actor's performances are captured in isolation. 
• They are required to act in a sitting position only. 

You can instantly see that this is going to have an impact on their performance. They cannot move around much, and they have no-one to reflect off.

3. Combining
This is where LA Noire falls down - every performance is effectively two performances. The body and face are combined, and this is why there is a dissonance.

It is very difficult to get ADR (Automated Dialog Replacement) to match when re-recording voice work (hence why it is often obvious, or is done when the character is not facing the camera). Effectively the entire performance is ADR'd across the whole game and this is why they don't match a lot of the time - humans are very good at picking up on human movements, so can instantly spot this difference.

No amount of clever work on the clothing will fix this issue - for this technology to really work, they need to be able to capture the whole performance at once.

Design Methodologies

What is game design? It's a question that gets asked a lot, and the answer is generally completely different depending on who you ask.

The reason for this lack of shared response is the different methodologies present at different studios, and even within different designers at the same studio. What is right and wrong? To be truthful, no one method is the "correct" method, but there are definitely elements of each style that can be tied together to make a more rounded design approach.

Schools of Thought
Firstly lets consider the main thought process of how a game should be structured - generally there are two schools of thought in this regard:

• Scripted Design - tightly controlled, generally linear experiences where set-pieces are constructed to the player to engage with. This can be seen best in games like Half-Life and Uncharted.
  
  
  + Produces unique scenarios
  + Tends to be very narrative driven
  - Costly to develop
  - Can lead to limited player freedom
• Systemic Design - a set of building blocks are designed and then layered together to form a large potential outcomes. This is demonstrated best in games like Grand Theft Auto and Deus Ex.
  
  
  + Creates emergent play
  + Offers a lot of player choice
  - Creates emergent problems!
  - Can lead to a sense of repetition

Each of these schools of thought has their champions and detractors. Some despise the linearity imposed by scripted methodology, others enjoy the thrill of the rollercoaster ride it provides. However, great games are able to combine elements of both - so it might be a fairly scripted experience, but it offers lots of choice within each scenario for example.

Design Techniques

The task of actually creating levels and mechanics for a game can be approached from a number of ways. Again, there is no "right" or "wrong" way to do this, but different methodologies have distinct advantages, and conversely their own disadvantages.

Paper Design - GDD
The act of documenting a game mechanic or level layout is a very traditional approach. It shares the vision for the game to the team in a presentable fashion. A good game design document can help cement this vision and encourage communication throughout the team - it can avoid confusion and act as a reference point.

However, paper design is very much the Grand Old method of game design, and can be seen as something of a dinosaur by many. Writing documentation isn't glamorous, and is fraught with potential issues. If the document isn't continually kept up to date with the latest changes, then people lose trust in it.

+ Specifically states the intent of a mechanic of level design

+ Tangible evidence of a particular idea
+ Great for communicating the vision to the publisher

- Time consuming to keep up to date

- Can lead to inflexibility: "that's not how it is in the GDD!"

- Doesn't prove that gameplay or level design is actually fun to play

Documents are definitely useful, but should be kept should concise and up to date. In 3rd party studios, good documentation is essential to keep the publisher up to speed. Beware - they should never become gospel.

Formal Structured Approach

Several designers (such as Doug Church) are pushing for a more rule based approach to game design - approaching it as a scientific method. The belief is that a good set of rules can be defined rules to create a game experience. There is some mileage in the pursuit of this ideal, as it does create a lot of desire to analyze approaches to design and look at what works and what doesn't. On the counter side, design is part science, but also part art. Art often relies on breaking the rules to find something more interesting. It's a fine line to tread, and there is a danger that the formal approach might "suck out the soul" of game design.

+ Highly analytical approach to games

+ Creates a set of rules that can be clearly states

- Can be very rigid

- Ignores the artistic process that relies on breaking the rules
- Might create identikit games without anything really original

I'm not sure how much mileage there is in following a strict set of rules, however, I do believe the pursuit of analysis is a great goal to have. If this method produces a set of guidelines for what tends to work well, then I believe it will have a useful place. It shouldn't be used to quash creativity however.


Iterative Design
Iterative design is the process of quickly prototyping an idea, then refining it again and again to produce a final product. This process forgoes any formality to concentrate solely on one element at a time and work to make that element fun. There is a danger that this process the elements won't fit together as a whole, so someone should always be considering the big picture. There is also the danger of overrunning time.

+ Pursues elements that are fun

+ Refines and polishes elements

- Can become endless

- Can result in chaos if not kept in check

- Can limit the amount that is done

- Must be careful to consider each parts place in the whole

The iterative process needs to be carefully managed. It needs to have enough room to breathe, but it needs someone disciplined enough to say when enough is enough.

Rational Game Design

Rational design breaks design down into a series of building blocks. These building blocks are then combined to create more interesting scenarios / combinations of mechanics - a bit like a giant Lego set.

The first step of rational design is to break the game into its core mechanics. Then you can start to work out how they interact with each other. Rational design fits very well into the Systemic Design school of thought.

+ Creates emergent scenarios

+ Becomes quick and easy to build new scenarios

- Can be difficult to test

- Can lead to repetition or lack of anything spectacular

Rational design is useful for creating stock scenarios for a game, but in order to make something unique, you may have to use elements that are unique to a particular scenario.

Empirical Method

The empirical method is the use of observation to inform design decisions. It can actually start before the game has even begun through the use of focus groups.

Once there is a game to actually play, then the process of usability and playtesting can begin. This is the act of bringing in external people to play the game, observe them, record their actions and interview them on their reactions to the game. Data can also be gathered using instrumentation to output exactly what players are doing where.

+ Invaluable information about where players are getting stuck
+ Information that can be used to improve the game significantly

- "Evidence" can be manipulated and used politically

- Focus testing can result in bland experiences if over-relied upon

Whilst I have my reservations about the use of focus testing, the art of usability and playtesting is absolutely invaluable - in fact I firmly believe that high quality games cannot be made without it these days. The only thing to be wary of is the misuse or bad interpretation of data. It is important to approach the data processing without any kind of agenda, otherwise it is easy to cherry pick information that backs said agenda and obscure you from the actual truth.

The Ultimate Method?
The ultimate method is to combine as many of these methodologies such that you get the advantages with each and hopefully avoid the disadvantages.

Document what you can, but do it in a concise way that allows quick iteration. Perform iteration, but make sure that you have an end goal and timescale in mind. Come up with a set of rules for your game, but don't let them blind you to something awesome. Create building blocks, but remember that unique elements will make your game stand out from the crowd. Playtest and expose your ideas to focus groups, but don't be swayed by popular opinion if it isn't right for the game.

Ultimately each studio has a house style, and each individual designer will have their own approach that may (or sometimes may not) fit with that. Just be aware that other methodologies may have some use to you that you might not at first be able to see. Don't be close minded - always be prepared to learn something from others.

Combine elements of all design approaches to gain all of the advantages

The Mod Community Needs to Wake Up

Interesting survey:
http://www.hourences.com/book/surveyresults.htm

It's very skewed by the nature of the places where the survey originated, from the mod community. The interesting aspect for me is the disparity between what the mod community considers level design to be and what the actual job entails.

There is still the firm belief within the mod community that the level designer does the visuals as well as the gameplay. This is just not true anymore. Artists in the vast majorty of cases are responsible for environment art. The designers concentrate on gameplay only.

This belief led me to a rather dismal experience when trying to hire from the mod community not long ago. I'm from the mod community myself - the 1997 - 2000 era of mapping when BSP was king and the level designer was responsible for visuals. The attitude I came up against in the mod community was disbelief and even anger that we would not consider that part of the role.

Worse still however was the expectation of being able to work from home in their native country on a console project. It's just not a feasible proposition - for a start there is the sensitivity of the material being produced, procuring dev kits - but most of all modern development teams are just that - teams. The design role especially really relies on them being together in one place and having quick and easy lines of commincation. Notably most mod projects fall to pieces within months when they find it difficult to comminicate at the right times, or fall out because they misunderstand each other.

When this was pointed out to them the reaction was indignant anger. Why should they have to move? How dare I ask that they come over to the UK and be paid for a job they love to do?!

The mod community needs to wake up and smell the coffee a little bit. If you want to turn your hobby into a professional vocation then you have to understand that there are certain ways that things are done in the professional world.

Maybe the truth (as the survey suggests) is that the mod community is mostly made up of teenagers. They need to do a little growing up if this is something they want to pursue as a career.

Google Map based games

Having seen The Last Guy - a rather nice zombie game that appears to be based around google maps (well satellite photos at least), I got started thinking about other ideas you could play around with using google maps as a basis. I came up with the following ideas:

1. Fire Fighter

Fires may outbreak in cities or forest based areas. Make use of water resources, fire stations and various equipment to fight fires across the globe. May have a competitive aspect, where competing players fight to defeat as many fires as possible. Could be played at a local level within a city, or on a much larger scale to fight forest fires, etc.

2. Sim City

Recreate a similar feel to Sim City using real world locations and terrain.

3. Nuclear War

Already been done with Defcon, but might have a more pronounced effect with satellite imagery.

4. Racing

Drive cars across various cities or other routes in some form of race (create set course or find the fastest way from A -> B).

5. Treasure Hunt

Bury treasure at various point and leave a trail of clues and puzzles for players to solve.

6. "Real Life" RPG

Quest across the length and breadth of the world using the real world maps as the basis for a fictional story.

7. Recon

Mirror use of satellite immagery to recreate a recon scenario - bombing targets from a detached view, track targets to find locations, etc.

8. World Based Civilization

Similar style of game to civ - build and improve cities and take over other countries, form treaties, trade, etc.

9. Cops / Criminals

Act as a police commisoner deploying resources to track organised crime - or run a criminal organisation and avoid cops!

10. Pacman

Pacman using real city streets (thanks to Peter Field for that one!).

Mine Carts - the holy grail of design(?)

Every game I've worked on I have designed a section with Mine Carts. Every game I have worked on has been released without a section with Mine Carts. Why?

Ever since I saw Temple of Doom as a kid, I've always been fascinated with the idea of getting an homage to them into a project. The whole sequence when you first see it is mind blowing - the whole rollercoaster ride feel, the danger from other carts, collapsing sections, selecting the right route.

The simple fact is Mine Carts don't actually have that much gameplay - they are quite simply a visual spectacle, but there is little interaction. You are a essentially a fixed point moving along a rail. Any kind of shooting is essentially a form of "Virtua Cop". Switching tracks or collapsing sections are extremely hard to telegraph at speed, and likely result in instant death - never fun.

Sure, a fairly good Mine Cart section could be done, but will it ever beat the thrill of seeing that sequence in Indiana Jones for the first time as a child? Simple answer: no...

Still, it won't stop me trying. It's gotta happen at least once - damn it, I need to satiate my inner child!

How to get a job in Game Design

Design is by far the hardest discipline to get into as it's difficult to show aptitude and requires a lot of knowledge in different areas. I see lots and lots of really poor applications, but very few good ones.

What I would look for in a candidate's application is:

* A level built in a world editor such as Source's Hammer (Half-Life 2) or Unreal (you get the world editors free with the game).
* A well written and presented design document for an interesting game.
* A well written design specification for a particular game mechanic.
* A well written level design overview (perhaps using Sketchup - which is now free http://sketchup.google.com/download/ ).
* A game demo written in something like XNA ( http://creators.xna.com/ ).

What I definitely don't care about:
* Reviews of existing games.
* Screenshots of 3D models.
* Screenshots of levels (I'd want to see the level itself or at least a video - preferably with commentary to explain design decisions).
* Articles about games and sociology. This seems to be a huge topic in academic circles. In commercial terms, unless it is knowing your market better, I couldn't give a shit.

All in all I want to see applications where it is obvious that some effort has been put into them. Also people often seem to mistake what the design role is. Certainly the days of level designers building all the geometry are fading. These are generally art centric roles now. Design is now much more concerned where it should be - focused on gameplay.

It is essential that an designer has a decent portfolio of work to show a potential employer. We need to know how well rounded you are, where your strengths lie and your aptitude for particular things. We also want to see real passion for games and games development.

Piracy & Used Games

The great piracy debate has been around for years. I was forwarded an interesting link to a blog where a developer had questioned a bunch of pirates as to what makes them do it:

http://www.positech.co.uk/talkingtopirates.html

Personally I used to pirate the odd game on the Amiga when I was a wee lad. I wouldn't ever pirate a game now - the biggest reason being that it's pissing in my own pond. Being a game developer you have to set a good example to your audience.

The reason why I pirated was simply price and it was so easy to do - like making a copy of a tape. When I were a lad I didn't have much money, so copying off your friend was an easy thing to do - all it required was a (pirated) copy of XCopy (how ironic). These days it's a little trickier (for consoles at least). It requires dedicated hardware to create discs, chip modifications or weird work arounds to get things running. The business of piracy makes some serious money for those involved. It certainly doesn't have the same "romantic" vision of the bedroom copying days.

As a member of the industry I do find it hard to justify the price of modern console games. Even I struggle to be able to afford them. If they were cheaper then I would most certainly buy more of them - it's as simple as that. When a game costs £50 a pop, you have to be damn sure that you are going to get your money's worth out of it (and I don't just mean in terms of number of hours - I mean quality of experience).

The excuse for these high prices is often the level of piracy that occurs forces them to hike costs, but this is a vicious circle. This ends up pushing more people to pirate games.

This has also caused the rapid growth of the second hand market, to the point where you can only make a £5 saving on a used game. This is ridiculous - and extremely bad for the whole industry. Developers and publishers are quick to blame retailers for this problem, but does it actually lie with publishers pushing for such high retail prices? It certainly fosters a market. If you only made a saving of £1 or £2 on a second hand game, then why would I buy the used copy over the new one?

Perhaps the industry needs to look hard at pricing and think about ways to get the costs of the products down (without increasing shovelware). I truly believe if we managed to get a game to the cost of a DVD - maybe a blueray (about £20), we'd get a lot more customers that pirate or buy second hand to "opt in" and buy the brand new copy, in the end giving us the developers and the publishers more profit.

Who jumps first?

Top Ten Games

Top Ten Lists - everyone's favorite pastime. Well, I thought I may as well do it myself (well if it's good enough for Warren Spector on his blog (http://junctionpoint.wordpress.com/2008/02/) then I think its probably good enough for me).

So - the list:


1. Half-Life Series
Bit of a cheat to begin with. I can't decide between Half-Life 1 or 2. The first was the game that really got me into game design by giving me the chance to edit my own levels in a real fashion - it eventually led to me getting a job in the games industry. The sequel however took everything in the first game and turned it up to 11. A beautiful and consistent world - a compelling story and believable, likeable characters. I particularly like the dystopian, Orwellian themes going on throughout City17, the wonderful character and audio design of the striders, and the incredibly well made set pieces that encourage emergent play within constained areas.


If it is purely on the game alone, it would have to be Half-Life 2, but I owe so much to the first game that it will always have a special place in my heart. If I'm really cheating I'd have to add deathmatch and Counter-Strike in with these as well. The joy of first entering the games industry really hits home on your first lunchtime, where you realise you have a large LAN and a room full of avid gamers. The number of deathmatch and CS sessions in the early days boggles belief!


And for a final cheat I'd also throw in Portal. In-fact - I should probably rename this Valve. Without a doubt in my mind they are the finest developers in our industry.


2. Civilization
If the award were to go to the game which has sucked up the most hours of my life, then Civilization would be the hands down winner. I have literally played civ for 20 hours straight some days (ah the joys of being a student). This game has really reached its peak with Civ IV, a really well crafted and balanced revision of the original.


This is a game to appeal to the power freak in us, it isn't for everyone. It's not high action, it's not frantically paced. Instead it sucks up hours as you micro-manage cities and carefully build your empire. I'm so power mad I have to play it on the easiest setting with the largest world. For me this game is not about the challenge, it is about constructing my perfect empire. I like to play the waiting game, building a massive powerful empire, then when my tech is so far advanced from my neighbours (i.e. tanks vs catapults) then it's time to crush them.


3. Syndicate
Playing this for the first time on the Amiga blew me away. A superb dystopian future world, realtime strategy gameplay and cyborgs with guns - does it get much better than this?


For me the persuadatron was the real gem of the game. I liked nothing more than attempting to persuade every single person on the map - thus resulting in an army of devotees following you around and a wall of machinegun fire everytime you pressed a button.


4. Dune 2
Another RTS, but probably the godfather of the genre. Again this is a megolmaniac's dream. The perfectionist in me relished the opportunity to build the most awesome defensive spectacle of a base I could - no matter that the way to win the game was to amass units.


Sure, there have been better RTS's since, but nothing has quite captured the same element of magic as the original in my eyes.


5. Legend
This is a bit of an obscure one - an RPG for the Amiga. Basically it had four characters: assassin, mage, troubadour and berserker, each with their own skills. The dungeons were designed to use interplay between each of the four character's skills. Some of the puzzles were particularly devious.

What was really fascinating was the magic system, which allowed you to construct your own spells out of runes. Through a simple system of basic mechanics you could create some complex behaviour - fantastically done.

6. Final Fantasy VII
The one everyone quotes and with good reason. The thing about FFVII for me though is the Materia system. I couldn't give a shite about the story, the characters or really the world itself for that matter (though I did well up a bit at the famous death). It's the purity of the battle system and the way the Materia system works that really sells the game for me. They haven't achieved as good a system since - at least not one that I have played.

It was the first and so far, last JRPG that I've gotten into and played to completion. I've played a few others since, but the mechanics haven't really gripped me in the same fashion.

7. Resident Evil
I was tempted to put Resident Evil 4 in place of the original, but I can't quite bring myself to do it. The original was truly great. It brought the element of horror and the first genuine jump moment for me into a game. Sure the acting was utterly terrible and the dialog worse, but it didn't mar the atmosphere of the game.

The fourth incarnation is by far a more polished and enjoyable experience, but the original has a special place in my heart - a fond memory of playing through the game with my flatmates at the time, lights down and eyes glued to the screen. Good times!

8. Call Of Duty 4

This is the most recent addition to the list, and I was initially tempted not to put it on. These "all time" lists tend to make it feel that you have to put older experiences in place of newer ones. However, COD4 is such an amazingly polished rollercoaster ride, so far beyond any "war" experience I've had before, it fully deserves to take its place in the top ten. In fact, I suspect it may climb higher in the years to come.

It succeeds so well at created scripted sequences that you believe in - particularly the fantastic "All Guillied Up" mission. There are so many lessons to learn from this game, that for the first time I'm inclined to play through the whole game again at home with my design anaylsis hat on. And I'm looking forwards to doing so!

9. Battlefield 1942 (Desert Combat Mod)
My earlier comment about the games industry and the realisation of a LAN and avid gamers most certainly applies to this entry. The Desert Combat Mod became a regular lunchtime and afterwork fixture.

This game has more frantic, laugh out loud moments than any other. It's particularly poingnaint for me as my wife started playing this game when we worked together as well. I could hear her laughter from the other side of the room during lunchtime sessions, and there was always a good post match discussion down in the smoking area on completion. Just a fantastic, fun game in the right scenario.

10. Wipeout 2097
This really crystalises the games becoming cool moment for me. Up until the orginal wipeout games still had a geeky vibe. All of a sudden Sony come out with this ultra cool looking game, with Designer's Republic designs and thumping tracks and slapped me in the face. I felt at this point the games industry had turned to a new direction and would soon become an industry to be reckoned with.

However, the original Wipeout had its issues. It was unforgivingly hard. A tiny tap of the edge of the circuit resulted in an immediate stop. It took the second revision - 2097 - to make it really playable and give it that real mass-market appeal. I can still look at 2097 and appreciate its asthetics now - and they still haven't managed to better the experience in the series since (though they did get a lot closer with Pure and Pulse).

Evolution, Innovation or Revolution?

I hear the word Innovation bandied around a lot in games of late. Innovation is held up as the ideal for every new game mechanic or feature. I'd suggest that most things are actually evolutionary not innovative.

Now I've always defined Innovation as the introduction of something completely new, but I've been told that this is revolution. Is it? Many have said the Wii remote is a revolution. I would say it is an innovation.

Revolution is the complete change of a paradigm to something new. So something I would consider that the Wii remote has completely changed the interface for one console, but the other consoles haven't yet thrown out the traditional pad, and I presume aren't necessarily likely to immediately. Therefore the Wii has had a large impact as an innovation but it is not a revolution. 3D would be classed a revolution, but motion sensing isn't quite there yet.

Personally I believe innovation has its place in games, but evolution is the main driving force of development. People take other ideas and improve upon them. The best ideas survive and carry through into other games - survival of the fittest just as Charles Darwin described.

Innovation shouldn't be held with such ridiculous esteem. Many innovative ideas aren't actually going to survive. Those great ideas that do (the Wii-mote) will enter the next cycle of evolution and again the fittest will survive.

Superb Blog

For anyone interested in Game AI you can't beat a look at the Game/AI blog:

http://www.ai-blog.net/

The Importance of Playtesting

Playtesting is an emerging discipline in games design that should hopefully become a required part of the production pipeline. Its value is often underplayed by many companies, even sometimes derided by designers, but it is quite simply the only way that you can properly guage how well you are building your game, and will result in you producing a better game if you approach it in the right way.

By far the leaders in this field are Microsoft. Their Games User Research department is just astounding.

http://mgsuserresearch.com/default.htm?MSID=8934bfd6814e40afb5835315db01c453&c00=1

Their site has a lot of links to talks that various members of the group have given at different games conferences. Having seen Ramon's talk at GDC this year, I was astounded to the level of depth they are now able to analyse games. However, not all of us have these facilities at our disposal.

However, we can attempt to replicate certain elements of their work on a tighter budget:

1. Provide Instrumentation
Having your game dump data as a player uses the game will allow you to collate much more information than user feedback or observation alone. Crunching the data can be tricky, so carefully plan out what data you want to watch beforehand - don't dump absolutely every scrap of information - only what you really need. For example, you might want to know what combos people are using in a fighting game, positions where people are dying often, or the times people are achieving in time trials.

2. Question your Subject
Asking for feedback from your test subject is vital. They should be encouraged to talk as much as possible about how they are feeling and what they are thinking as they are playing. This will provide vital information - sometimes people see things in a completely unexpected way. Also use questionaires to seek out answers to certain questions you may have - explore how they feel about certain aspects - and importantly whether they are enjoying the game experience.

3. Observe
There is nothing quite like watching someone play your game to understand the problems that people may encounter. It is vital however not to be tempted to give advice or show them solutions to problems (unless they are completely stuck for a protracted period of time and you want to press on with the testing).

Why I should have paid attention in school

I was thinking the other day of how many subjects are useful for the field of game design and I came to the realisation that pretty much every single subject has some sort of use for a game designer.

There's the obvious subjects such as Maths, English and Science, but even more obscure subjects hold some useful information.

• Maths -for programmers it's an essential, but a designer definately needs a knowledge of mathematics. It helps when devising rules for mechanics and plays a hand in analysing playtesting data. It allows the designer to calculate desired angles and distances when building geometry, calculating the speed of elements and plays all sorts of other roles.
• English - a designer is a communicator. Thus english plays a vital role in defining how well a designer can communicate with others, both in the written word and verbally. Also english literature is a vital skill. Knowing stories, tales and the structure of writing will help enormously when working on narrative driven games. I'm not saying the designer should be writing the story, but they should definately have the knowledge of what works and what doesn't.
• Science - all the sciences hold a great deal of knowledge that is rich pickings for a designer. Chemistry and its compounds and formulas, Physics with its modelling of the real world, and Biology with its analysis of life - all these give the designer a starting point for simulation and ideas for twisting known science to produce something new (science fiction).
• Geography - the knowledge of geology, population, migration, peoples & culture is also essential to a designer. They need to know how real world populations develop to make their own worlds believable, they need to know how various strutures are formed so they can be twisted into something even more impressive.
• History - the knowldege of the past, events that shaped our culture and people that affected human development - all of these are vital to creating more believable worlds. They also provide immense inspiration.
• Design and Technology - this has pretty obvious translation to game design - the crafting of a product and the design process itself.
• Art - again art has a pretty obvious application in design.
• Religious Education - the study of other cultures is extremely useful to a designer, being able to understand these differences and imbue their own worlds with such details again will increase believability. Tackling the subject of real world religions in games does however is still a bit of a hot potato.
• Physical Education - this one I struggled with for a bit, but there is still plenty that applies to game design. Firstly the rules of team sports can have a direct correlation. But further elements such as muscle structure, movement and other aspects of physicality can also be applied.

In short, I didn't realise how useful this stuff was at the time. If you're wanting to be a game designer and you're still at school - pay attention - it will all be useful some day.

Is this how you look playing games?

http://www.mrtoledano.com/frame_videogamers.php

If I look like these lot whilst playing games I may have to quit...

Games increasing on the High Street

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/hmv-videogames-are-the-new-rock-n-roll

It's interesting to see giants like HMV shifting their focus onto the games market. It really is proving that the erosion of traditional media has got them scared. This can only be a good thing for the games industry as a whole - more competition should free up the market and might hopefully stop Game's relentless pursuit of the secondhand market, which is undoubtable a very short-sighted way of making profit.

Personally, I always try to buy a game I like brand-new, I want to see money go to the developers. Game's cheeky profit margins on secondhand goods is getting ridiculous.

Exploration in Games

Pretty interesting article on exploration in games:

http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/?p=1856

I for one really enjoyed Oblivion, still keep meaning to go back to it, as I was about 100 hours in and only halfway through the main quest. But GTA IV came and interrupted my Oblivion session. With GTA IV story complete I'm thinking of returning, but to be honest I'm not sure I can be bothered.

The problem with these games is that they are such a time sap. It's all too easy to get lost in them, just wandering around the worlds taking it all in. Then you hit a certain point and you think, why am I actually bothering with this?

I tend to have better experiences with linear, narrative-driven games than with exploration games. I find them more focused, shorter and more succinct. I tend to remember parts of them in greater detail than I do with exploration games. Having said that, both Oblivion and GTA IV had stand out quests / missions that really do stick in my mind. Getting trapped in a painting in Oblivion was a fantasticly imaginative quest. The Heat style gun battle in GTA IV was easily my favorite section of the game.

Truth is, I do love exploration games, but I'm getting a bit long in the tooth (and family orientated) to sit through 100 hours of game. I need short bursts these days, and they say it's the younger generation that have short attention spans?

Unbelievable Plagarism!

I've seen some shocking rip-offs in my time, but Limbo of the Lost really does take the biscuit and shoves it where the sun don't shine...

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=17885450

How on earth did they think they could get away with this? And they haven't, it got canned pretty damn quickly.

And someone dug up this article about the developers:

http://www.kentmessenger.co.uk/paper/default.asp?article_id=9644&slide_id=1&newspage=2&searchkeyword=&searchpage=1

What a bunch of goons.

101 Things I Learned in Architecture School

Been given a fantastic book to read called "101 Things I Learned in Architecture School" by Matthew Frederick. It's amazing how many parallels can be drawn between the worlds of building design and level design.

I'm in the early stages of writing an article on level design using architectural theory, so this book is very useful, but it also contains a number of more generic design guidelines that I thought I'd share here:

1. "The more specific a design idea is, the greater its appeal is likely to be."
Designing for everyone often results in a watered down, uninteresting design. Designing specfically for one person or group of people will make that group much more interested in it, and in turn may attract more attention.

2. "Any design decision should be justified in at least two ways."
Having a single reason for a design decision might not be enough. The more justifications you have for a mechanic or level design, the more solid it is likely to be.

3. "Draw Hierarchically."
Changing this to "Design Hierarchically" makes sense - start with broad brush strokes to define the design then burrow down into the details. If you start with the details, that particular section of the game might be amazing, but might not work well in the whole composition.

4. "An architect knows something about everything. An engineer knows everything about one thing."
This really does apply to game designers. Artists and coders are effectively like engineers - very specialised in their fields, where as designers need to have working knowledge of all areas.

5. "Good designers are fast on their feet".
Design changes over the course of the project. A designer that is open to change will be a better fit than one who steadfastly sticks to the original vision.

6. "A good designer isn't afraid to throw away a good idea."
Sometimes a great idea just isn't right for the current project., no matter how great it is. Save it for a later date if it's really that good, but don't try and shoehorn a mismatching idea into your game.

7. "Being process-orientated, not product-driven is the most important and difficult skill for a designer to develop."
Something we are really focusing on at Ninja Theory is process-driven design. And it really is reaping its rewards. Sometimes it is hard to trust in the process and see it through, but by doing so it really does make things easier in the long run.

8. "If you can't explain your ideas to your grandmother in terms she understands, you don't know your subject well enough."
All too often people use terminology that is overly complex and elaborate when it doesn't need to be. Sometimes this is masking a lack of understanding, or is used to purposely bamboozle or impress other people.

9. "An effective oral presentation of a studio project begins with the general and proceeds toward the specific."
Presenting the design to the team can be tricky. It's too easy to start with minute detail and bore your audience. This advice is really useful. Begin with the broad picture and narrow it down as you get further along.

10. "Design with models!"
We use Sketchup to create our level designs, and it really allows us to understand spatial relationships as we build and also forces to think more about how elements are interwoven.

11. "Limitations encourage creativity."
There are many limitations when designing computer games. Work with these limitations and see them as aids rather than obstacles. They give you a framework within which you can build rather than being free to do whatever you want, which is often overly daunting.

Jack Thompson

Every game developer's favorite lawyer is in a spot of bother. One doesn't like to gloat (not too much at least), but I think a lot of people in the business will be rather pleased with this news.

http://kotaku.com/5013148/jack-thompson-walks-out-on-hearing-court-recommends-enhanced-disbarment

It really is about time the anti-video games brigade found another band wagon to jump on.

My Top 10 Memorable Gaming Moments

We've all had moments in games where we finish them and feel utterly exhilerated, moments where we were "in the zone" or where events occured that had us mesmerised - things we won't forget. I thought I'd try and compile my top 10 most memorable moments:


10. F.E.A.R. - The fat programmer activates the turret

One of the hardest things to achieve in gaming is motivation for the player to feel emotion towards characters. In F.E.A.R. they achieved the need for retribution with aplomb. I have never before wanted to really kick the living shit out of a character as much as I wanted to when the fat programmer turns the security systems against you. Unfortunately I didn't have the same inclanation to actually finish the game. Running around a dull office block environment with a rather hackneyed story for a carrot just didn't do it for me. Shame, as the psychological scares were really well done.

9. Final Fantasy VII - Aeris Dies

It's a daring move by Square to kill of a party member which the player has spent hours nurturing and building up, but it sure does have an impact. I was quite honestly agape when she died - and really quite shocked. It sure does give you impetus to right the wrongs in the world. And having spent 100 hours in completing the game, it sure left an impression on me.

8. Resident Evil - Dogs jump through the window

Games never really tried to be scary. Then along came Resident Evil, and with the exception of the hammiest acting ever, really set a new standard in just how to make a scary game. The epitome of this is the dogs jumping through the window in the corridor, very near the start of the game. I really haven't had a shock like it before or since!

7. Shadow of the Colossus - the Eagle colossus

The game is elegant and beautiful, yet odly desolate and bleak. Killing the colossus truly feels like a crime, particularly when they are as well realised as the eagle. When you first jump up onto it, and the music rises in tempo in a crescendo, it really does make your heart soar. Flying through the air clining to various parts of the beast is a truly magical moment.

6. Grand Theft Auto IV - The heat style gun battle

This is probably only in my top ten right now as it's so fresh, but the heat style gun battle after robbing a bank in GTA IV really hit a chord with me. The battle in Heat is one of my favourite moments of cinema, so to be able to actually play through it was truly satisfying. When I died playing through it the first time, I was actually pleased, as I got to have another pop.

5. Half-Life 2: Episode 2 - The Strider Attack

The final part of episode 2 is a real heart attack moment. I don't think I've ever felt such an adrenaline rush, or being quite as on the edge of my seat as this section of gameplay. I almost had to stop playing because I was finding it almost too stressful. I died a few times, and was beginning to feel a vein of frustration. But then I finally completed it just as the final strider was charging up a shot to destroy the rocket. Talk about nick of time - virtually perfect balancing to get that feeling of overwhelming danger, but still make it possible, but then Valve really are the masters of fine tuning.

4. Half-Life 2: Episode 2 - the ant lion attack in the tunnels

Yes - the Half-Life series is my favorite, so it is appearing several times. Episode two had one really defining moment for me that made me go "wow", and that was the fight in the tunnels where the ant lions begin to attack. The setup and characterisation is brilliantly executed, making the moment where the attack begins feel truly tense and nerve-wracking.

3. Call of Duty 4 - The Sniper Mission

COD 4 is a superb set piece extravaganza, but it really shines in the sniper mission, which is both fast paced and tense. The real heart pounding moment occurs when running through the field and a group of soldiers approaches. Ducking down in the grass you really start to sweat as you have to second guess where the enemy soldiers will walk and move out of the way.

2. Half-Life - the introduction

Considering what FPS meant before Half-Life, the introduction was truly daring - 20 minutes of nothing but scene setting. We are placed in the shoes of Gordon Freeman's everyday life, giving us a sense of normality before it is all turned on its head. For me this left a real impression of how games can be fascinating and interactive without relying on conflict. It was something that was mirrored in the beginning of Half-Life 2 to great success.

1. Half-Life 2 - the fight under the bridge

I find it hard not to put the entirety of Half-Life 2 as the most memorable moment, for me a perfectly crafted game. It is in reality a constant procession of memorable moments sewn together - a real rollercoaster ride. But the moment that sticks in my mind the most must be the fight against the helicopter underneath the bridge. The feeling of danger is overwhelming with little room to move and a dangerous drop directly beneath. The satisfaction of taking down the chopper is really unparalled. A truly great moment.

The Use of Metacritic

Metacritic is becoming more and more the barometer of determining game quality. Is it a great scale to use?

Yes and No.

Using an average does give you a statistically better score than relying on one particular source. However, the review process metacritic does have issues:

* It is suspected by many that review scores are subject to many factors including advertising dollars spent with the publication by the publisher, or even how many free lunches the journalist got. Of course many journos can also get caught up in the hype machine and be swayed simply by that.
* Some reviewers like to be purposely harsh to get noticed, throwing in a contradictary opinion.
* Small scores like out of 5 skew results so 3/5 which is a fairly decent score when considered in that sense become 60% as a score out of 100, which is considered to be bad.
* Reviews without a score are attributed a score by metacritic themselves based on the content of the review, which is extremely subjective.
* Review scores are weighted according to the publication by metacritic themselves. This process is not transparent, and has no feedback to the public lending the sense that this is somewhat arbitrary.

So - is it reliable? Again - I think it does actually produce fairly decent results. The main problem is not from metacritic themselves, but the whole reviewing process. However, for all the corruption and one-up manship it generally does reflect the quality of a game.

Some publishers are now tying developer bonuses to metacritic scores. In a way I like this. It is a way of preserving the chances of a developer being paid that bonus - old style dirty tricks in this case (like purposely reducing the metacritic score) would simply be shooting themselves in the foot.

It's interesting to see that people have been analysing metacritic scores by publisher to show their quality bar:

http://kotaku.com/393104/the-big-publishers-metacritic-averages