tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17282500.post4106829480197361958..comments2023-09-11T08:08:47.909-07:00Comments on Evolution Live!: Flydrill and Logistical Gameplayaxchohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00476494070603611505noreply@blogger.comBlogger15125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17282500.post-70205156990461048322011-09-14T21:15:44.484-07:002011-09-14T21:15:44.484-07:00I don't think even the author of the book real...I don't think even the author of the book really understands Diplomatic gameplay, actually. :p<br /><br />Most social games I've seen are heavily Logistical. These days I make a distinction between "Dexterity" and "Tactics" in games, especially in the iPhone space. With this definition, twitch games like Doodle Jump or Fruit Ninja involve Dexterity, while games like Bejeweled or Flight Control involve Tactical gameplay.axchohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00476494070603611505noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17282500.post-8715742206168476092011-09-12T00:44:15.635-07:002011-09-12T00:44:15.635-07:00Interesting post! I have never heard of Logical, ...Interesting post! I have never heard of Logical, Tactical, etc. gameplay before. I'll have to read the book that you mentioned, especially I don't feel that I understand quite what Diplomatic gameplay is.<br /><br />"Tactical gameplay" reminds me of Zoran constantly discouraging people from developing "twitch" games in our Capstone because it would alienate too much of the audience, for whom the fact thinking and reaction required by twitch games will just appeal to them the same way Angry Birds and Zynga's asynchronous games might. Then again, we were attempting the feat of creating social games that quarter.nathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06156918311256504698noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17282500.post-19655231081092449962010-06-15T11:36:57.051-07:002010-06-15T11:36:57.051-07:00Hey Justin, glad you liked the post. Send me an em...Hey Justin, glad you liked the post. Send me an email and we can schedule something. :)axchohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00476494070603611505noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17282500.post-24712685718695954392010-06-14T23:51:16.086-07:002010-06-14T23:51:16.086-07:00Hey Alex, I love this post it goes into the why ga...Hey Alex, I love this post it goes into the why game mechanics are setup the way they are, namely psychology behind games.<br /><br />I got your name from Elpizo, one of your capoeira mates. I'm interested into getting into developing games and loved your posts.<br /><br />Any chance you'd be interested in grabbing coffee?<br /><br />JustinUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16068578014326458015noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17282500.post-50335397285611974442010-05-26T15:03:07.140-07:002010-05-26T15:03:07.140-07:00Thanks. I'd probably use the word "dexter...Thanks. I'd probably use the word "dexterity" to describe the type of skill that you're referring to. You could consider it a variation on tactics, though depending on the game it could make sense to put it in an entirely separate category.<br /><br />I agree about engaging the brain on all four (or five) levels in the same game being the key to a wholesome, nutritiously balanced experience. I guess even casual games could do that...axchohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00476494070603611505noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17282500.post-49475537870304999672010-05-25T17:51:52.492-07:002010-05-25T17:51:52.492-07:00I keep meaning to say: This is some really good st...I keep meaning to say: This is some really good stuff. I've had a similar analysis of my own (No idea if you're aware of it, or whether I've even mentioned it on notgames), but it was limited to Tactics and Strategy as two ends of a spectrum, with the latter being a catch-all for long-term gameplay. Your concepts for Strategic and Logistical gameplay are much more interesting and effective ways of thinking about the systems involved.<br /><br />I do think there's one major type of gameplay you're omitting, typically referred to as "action" or "Skill-based" gameplay- getting headshots in a rail shooter, landing where you want to in a platformer, and taking advantage of the full set of moves available to a character in a fighting game. Games that continue to provide engaging and substantive challenges even after you've decided on your course of action, by staking the ultimate outcome partly or wholly on the execution. <br /><br />Perhaps more important, though, is the lesson I learned from Resident Evil 4. Consider the ridiculously engaging core gameplay of this title, which simultaneously offers substantive challenges on multiple interrelated levels- Skill (making quick, accurate shots against your enemy's vitals), Logistics (do I use one of my healing green herbs, or try to tough it out until I find the ingredient that combines with it to produce something more potent?), and Tactics (Okay, I think I can get another two shots off and still have time to dive out the JESUS CHRIST CHAINSAW). <br /><br />So what's the lesson I see in this? Well-executed gameplay of a single type is like a delicious snack food- tasty and addictive in limited servings, but not something that'll hold you for hours upon hours. But give the human brain gameplay that simultaneously engages it in multiple ways/areas, and it's like a four-course meal; nutritious and delicious.Dagda (Brooks Harrel)https://www.blogger.com/profile/12719198062375441018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17282500.post-50754104519054680922010-05-18T20:17:26.356-07:002010-05-18T20:17:26.356-07:00Uhh, thanks? :p You're not a spambot, are you?...Uhh, thanks? :p You're not a spambot, are you?axchohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00476494070603611505noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17282500.post-68366435208011468012010-05-18T11:29:46.236-07:002010-05-18T11:29:46.236-07:00You intelligence is sexy. We should finally get to...You intelligence is sexy. We should finally get together.<br /><br />Love,<br /><br />ElsaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17282500.post-78161203905580239942010-05-17T00:35:04.704-07:002010-05-17T00:35:04.704-07:00Late response, but yes Krystian, I think you'r...Late response, but yes Krystian, I think you're right about the clarity of role (goal and actions) being at least as important as Logistical gameplay in this case.<br /><br />There are, of course, many ways to look at game design - which Chris Bateman would be the first to admit. The Myers-Briggs approach is just one of many that I've investigated and described in this blog post. I collect these models of game design like some people collect Pokemon. ;)<br /><br />Flydrill throws everything at the player in an undifferentiated, continuous mass of rules, tokens, and goals. It's too much to absorb at once, except for players with a lot of prior game experience. Looking back, I'm sure it would have been much more accessible with a structure of levels, which would each introduce one new element until the player understood the entire system.<br /><br />Even more fundamental is the number of skills that the game involves. Because there are so many different actions to the game, despite the simple controls, it cannot be treated like a casual game. Unlike Canabalt. The simple structure of Canabalt is not really appropriate for a game as complex as Flydrill.<br /><br />The lack of Logistical gameplay is just one of many problems with Flydrill. Still, I think it's worth discussing here, since I haven't seen it discussed anywhere else.axchohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00476494070603611505noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17282500.post-71277241974857339722010-04-20T11:47:29.477-07:002010-04-20T11:47:29.477-07:00Good observations!
But watch out, following struc...Good observations!<br /><br />But watch out, following structures like Myers-Brigg can be a dangerous thing. They are actually not quite as scientific as they appear. Check out the Criticism section of <br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-Briggs_Type_Indicator for starters<br /><br /><i>"However, neither the Myers-Briggs nor the Jungian models offer any scientific, experimental proof to support the existence, the sequence, the orientation, or the manifestation of these functions."</i><br /><br />That doesn't mean that your conclusions are false. But it can mean that they are not the only way to improve the design.<br /><br />The thing I was missing was a more clearer definition of the role you play. In Canabalt you are a guy fleeing from danger in a catastrophic Sci-Fi scenario. There is immediate and obvious motivation. In Flywrench I know what to do (go right) but it is not clear why? When will it end? Who am I? How do I know if I went far enough? So I find that I run out of motivation to continue playing quickly, especially as the game offers little resistance at first. Creating a clearer sense of the player's role could also simplify communicating the game to your audience.<br /><br />Remember that even Flywrench has scraps of embedded narrative. Even if they are cryptic. Actually, the cryptic ones often turn out to be the most motivating ones - see the TV Series LOST.Krystian Majewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11575248324136515649noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17282500.post-82612695796944320412010-04-05T10:23:21.980-07:002010-04-05T10:23:21.980-07:00Excellent post. It gave me things to think about.Excellent post. It gave me things to think about.KirbyKidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13866037458298228815noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17282500.post-4386046608654541092010-04-04T18:45:01.446-07:002010-04-04T18:45:01.446-07:00Barnes, axcho, regarding your disagreement, I thin...Barnes, axcho, regarding your disagreement, I think it might be important to should distinguish between a "hypothesis" and "philosophy". A hypothesis can be tested, scientifically, whereas a philosophy might be defended on fuzzier grounds, usually semantic in nature. Anyway, I think arguing that anything is "purely this" or "purely that" makes a more difficult case of it. Extremes are hard to defend. <br />Anyhow, axcho, I think you bring up an interesting point regarding the timescale of the decision required by a player in your game. While the decision to "drill" or "penetrate" may be of crucial importance, given the timescale of these even over the entire game the overall efficiency of your outcome is probably not effected as much by logistics or diplomacy (in some "reflexive" sense of the word) as it is by tactics. In short, I agree with ms./mr. axcho.<br /><br />~ Elsa<br /><br />P.S. - And my original comment before I saw this thread -- LOVE your imagination. I've never been so inspired by a dream. It's somewhat prophetic in a way :)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17282500.post-26453699367530824562010-04-03T23:45:16.179-07:002010-04-03T23:45:16.179-07:00Sorry about getting your name and sex wrong. You c...Sorry about getting your name and sex wrong. You can tell how bad I'd be at diplomatic games.David Barneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10437350044177392499noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17282500.post-4423640061565815122010-04-03T20:06:29.940-07:002010-04-03T20:06:29.940-07:00Hmm, you may be right. I still think the biggest p...Hmm, you may be right. I still think the biggest problem with Flydrill is the (relative) lack of Logistical gameplay, but I know it also has a very chaotic introduction, as opposed to games that present one simple idea at a time, in sequence, until the player gets it.<br /><br />Though there are some logistical decisions in Flydrill, I would argue that these are not the kinds of logistical decisions that are very satisfying to players looking for Logistical gameplay. They are pretty minor. Drilling through walls or going around things is still very tactical - more about "reading" the situation than planning investments, since your choice has little consequence after a few seconds.<br /><br />Pac-Man does a lot of things right. Another advantage it has over Flydrill is that it constantly rewards the player as they gobble up dots every second, while Flydrill saps the player's life force until they finally succumb. Not everyone is going to like that.<br /><br />I really appreciate you thinking about these ideas and taking the time to write such an in-depth reply. And thanks for the post on your blog! :)<br /><br />A few points I feel obliged to clarify, however. I am male, first of all. Though being female is cool too. Also, I generally prefer the name "axcho" to be completely lowercase, not capitalized. Like the 'i' in iPhone. Not a big deal though. Just thought I should let you know. ;)axchohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00476494070603611505noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17282500.post-82422196106332048442010-04-03T13:09:11.985-07:002010-04-03T13:09:11.985-07:00I've been giving this post a lot of thought. T...I've been giving this post a lot of thought. The 4 gameplay styles are very interesting.<br /><br />I don't agree that Flydrill is pure tactics. In fact, I wonder if one of the difficulties with it is that it exposes too many gameplay styles right from the start.<br /><br />You have the immediate tactical need to dodge moving things. Then you have logistic decisions about whether to drill through walls or go around things. There's also some "diplomacy" if we take that as the need to understand the game world -- there's some "mapping" involved.<br /><br />And so on... right from the start, it's sophisticated game play.<br /><br />The main lesson I'd take from the 4 kinds of gameplay you mention are:<br /><br />- At the start of the game, expose players to simple tactical or logistical play only -- most people will be naturally disposed to this style of play<br />- Then introduce some extra tactics or logistics<br />- Later introduce the need for strategy and diplomacy as the player becomes more sophisticated<br /><br />If you take a game like Plants vs Zombies, you start off needing only to worry about logistics (having enough sun to grow plants). Then you need to be more tactical, making sure you plant pea shooters in response to oncoming zombies, and keep building as pea shooters get overwhelmed.<br /><br />As you advance, the tactical and resource management play becomes more sophisticated. In the later stages you need to think strategically too -- figuring out the best way to organize your plants so as to combine defence and attack.<br /><br />It also occurs to me that Pacman is a brilliant combination of tactics (running away from ghosts) and logistics (finding an efficient path to cover the whole maze), which might be why it has an enduring appeal with casual players.David Barneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10437350044177392499noreply@blogger.com