2010/07/28

Origami Hydralisk Tutorial Video and StarCraft II Released!

Update:
I just posted two slow, narrated tutorial videos for origami beginners - one for the zergling, and another for the hydralisk. Check them out. ;)


In case you haven't heard, StarCraft II is finally out! :D

Conveniently, Blizzard has been kind enough to time their release to coincide with the even more exciting release of my own epic, three-part TUTORIAL VIDEO for my original origami hydralisk design! ;)

A long-awaited release, most assuredly.

Rather than try to describe it to you, I'll just embed the videos right here on this blog and you can experience their amazing splendor firsthand. Just try not to let your head explode.


FOR THE SWARM! :D







It's been three years since people first started bugging me with incessant demands for a tutorial video. But now I can rest in peace, because the tutorial video is complete! :D Or not, because now they're asking when I'll be posting the instructions for my origami zergling. Oops. :p

If you want to be the first to know when I post my zergling tutorial video, go ahead and subscribe to my YouTube channel. :)

instructions coming 'soon'...

2010/06/10

Game Idea Giveaway - City Basher

Last year, I wrote up this game idea giveaway for Emanuele Feronato to post on his popular Flash game development blog. But after waiting for many months without a reply from him, I decided to post it here so I can finally share it with all of you!

Be warned, this giveaway is epically long. My longest yet.

...continued from The Game Idea Giveaway Thread

Request by triqui:
  • what sort of game idea you're looking for
    intriguing but difficult-to-implement ideas will do
  • what your goals are in making this game
    I would like to make a post about gameplay ideas

The idea: City Basher


In short, City Basher is a physics-based multiplayer artillery game combined with a trading card game (like Magic: The Gathering). It's a competitive game where you try to knock over your opponent's buildings, and it is designed to work very well with microtransactions.

This game is founded on the wide appeal of vanquishing strangers over the Internet and the primal joy of toppling carefully built towers of blocks, without the bother of having to actually build them in the first place. For that reason, the game is primarily a quick deathmatch experience, like most online multiplayer games aimed at bloodthirsty teenage males. Though there is also the option for team play and casual matches between friends.

Like other multiplayer artillery games, most notably Worms, each play session is short, measured in minutes, and involves only a handful of players. But as a game supported by microtransactions, players maintain a persistent identity across play sessions, retaining their avatar, items, resources, and statistics. This is the approach taken by Gunbound, a multiplayer artillery game that was one of the earliest successful microtransaction-based games to establish itself with Western audiences. Gunbound made its money by selling avatar decorations. City Basher will do that, and more. Much more. [cue dramatic music]

Each play session takes place in a 2D arena, seen from the side. The arena is full of buildings, structures of physically-modeled blocks, some solidly stacked, some precarious. At first, the arena is a neutral territory, dominated by a huge monolith in the center. Players take their places in the arena, each one piloting a vehicle with a mounted cannon or two. The game begins, and players open fire on the buildings to convert them to their own color. When one player topples an enemy building, a new building rises up in its place, owned by the player who placed the final shot and color-coded accordingly. The session ends when the neutral monolith in the center is toppled, and players are awarded their final scores.

The play format is very flexible. The game is not zero-sum. Players play for points, not simply to defeat their opponents. If you destroy one of my buildings, you are rewarded and I am penalized, but your success does not depend on my failure. It merely happens to coincide with it. Players are never eliminated from the game, though they are free to leave at any time - their buildings are simply replaced by neutral ones. And most arenas would support a varying number of players depending on how many people are available. If there are slots open, new players can join an existing game. This is very important for a casual multiplayer game like City Basher.

Since this is a game supported by microtransactions, we want to make everything into an item that can be bought and used up. Not that players would necessarily have to pay real money for everything in the game, but it's nice to have that option. What this does is set up the expectation that things can be bought. If players get used to paying for items with virtual currency earned in the game, they'll be more open to paying real money for the really valuable items they might want later on. In City Basher, these items consist of vehicles, weapons, buildings, arenas, avatar decorations, and general enhancements.

Gameplay

An important part of most any game is the movement, how a player gets around in the world. In City Basher, vehicles encapsulate this piece of the gameplay. Every player starts with a basic vehicle that is like a slow-moving tank. But other vehicles could be bought. They might move faster, they might be smaller or larger or shaped differently, and some might even fly or hover or jump. However, movement isn't the focus of this game, so it should be kept fairly simple. As a result, each vehicle is controlled in more or less the same way - that is, with the arrow keys or with the mouse, following the mouse cursor. Also for simplicity and to minimize the effect of lag, vehicles would not be able to collide with other vehicles or knock over buildings. Instead, they would pass through other vehicles harmlessly and treat building blocks as immovable terrain.

The real fun of the game starts with the weapons. This is the part that puts the artillery in artillery games. As is typical in the genre, the basic weapon is a slow-firing cannon, which the player must aim by setting the angle and power of the shot with the mouse or keyboard. There are a lot of ways to set up the specific controls for this action, so I won't go into too much detail here. The easiest way I can imagine is just to click the mouse to set up an attack, move the cursor to set the angle and power, and click again to fire. This way, you could fire off a quick shot by double-clicking. Since attacking is a focus of the game, different weapons could even have different methods of control, as long as they support both the keyboard and the mouse.

For a game like this, there would be dozens, if not hundreds, of different weapons to buy. Some might be variations on the basic cannonball, maybe with extremely high mass for extra power on stable buildings, or a small but extremely bouncy ball that can ricochet off multiple blocks and quickly take out more delicate structures. Some weapons might shoot several balls at a time, or an explosive shell, or several balls chained together. Others might be a different kind of weapon altogether, like a rocket launcher or a block-melting death ray. There are a ton of possibilties here - just look at a game like Worms for example. Each weapon would have a certain reload rate, a waiting period of anything from a half a second to several minutes before they can fire again. This would help to give the game a more strategic, turn-based flavor, without the turns. For this reason, there could also be weapons that are weak but useful because of their rapid firing rate. Another part of the strategy would be in selecting your arsenal, since you can only bring a limited number of different weapons into each game.

The other focus of the game is on buildings. Weapons are what you use, and buildings are what you use them on. So naturally, you'd be paying a lot of attention to them. Just like there are different types of weapons, there are also different types of buildings, each one a particular configuration of blocks of various size, shapes, and masses. Some have special side effects too, that are active while the building is in play. For example, one building might increase the mass of all your other buildings while it is in play, making them harder to knock over. There could even be a building that increases the strength of gravity over the entire arena, or doubles your score from every hit. It's a lot like the way that different cards have rule-changing effects in games like Magic: The Gathering or Pokemon.

The similarities don't end there. City Basher handles buildings just like cards in a trading card game. You don't build buildings, you collect them. Each player has a bunch of building cards in their collection. Each of these cards represents a particular building type, though a player might own several copies of the same card. When you join a game, you choose a set of cards from your collection that will be available to you during the match, in the form of a deck of cards. Like any trading card game, there is a limit to the number of cards that you can include in a single deck, and a limit to the number of duplicates you can use of the same building card. This means that you have to put some thought into which ones you choose. Some players might even spend more time just designing their decks than they do in playing the actual game!

When you choose which deck you want to use for a play session, this determines the type of buildings you can get in the game. Whenever you are due to have one of your own buildings pop up in the arena - say, when you topple an opponent's building - a random card is taken from your deck, and placed in the arena as a new building. When that building is toppled, the corresponding card is returned to your deck. That means that if you have three copies of the Citadel of Awesomeness card in your deck, you can have up to three Citadel of Awesomeness buildings in play at any time. And if you have no more cards in your deck when you destroy an enemy building, that building is replaced by a neutral one instead. The most powerful buildings are designated as Legendary buildings, and can only sprout up in special Legendary building slots, of which there might only be one or two in any given arena. Legendary building cards are ignored when drawing for normal building slots. This helps keep the game balanced.

Finally, there are the arenas, where the games take place. These are not items owned by individual players, but the effect is similar, since players may have to spend points or money to access certain arenas. At its core, an arena is a 2D map of indestructible terrain with a bunch of building slots scattered around - areas on the ground where a building may sit. One of these areas is reserved for the monolith, the giant neutral building that ends that game when it is toppled. The arena defines what this monolith looks like, as well as the deck of possible neutral buildings that may pop up. Each arena also specifies how many players are allowed at a time and where they appear at the start of the game. Lastly, each arena defines its own physical properties like gravity, air resistance, and wind, as well as the background graphics and sounds that make up the feel of the place.

Monetization

In a typical microtransaction-based game, there are two types of virtual currency involved in the in-game economy. One is earned through playing the game, like experience points. The other is bought for real money, which is how the developers make a profit. City Basher is no exception. Players can exchange their real money for a virtual currency we'll call Coins, and they can also earn another virtual currency, Points, through gameplay. The names used here are just for convenience, by the way - in the actual game you'd probably want something a bit more glamorous.

Players can earn Points in a number of ways. The most common way to earn Points is to knock down an opponent's building. You don't have to knock it down completely to get points - you only have to reduce its height with your shot. Each type of building is worth a certain number of Points to topple, and you get a fraction of that for every fraction of the building's original height that you knock over. However, you only get to replace it with a building of your own if you deliver the final blow, one that topples the building completely. The advantage to having lots of your own buildings in the arena is that at the end of the game, when the monolith falls, you receive Points for each of your buildings according to their remaining height and Point value.

This results in a system where new players can join in the middle of an existing game without having any unfair advantages or disadvantages relative to the other players. It also encourages players to stick around for the whole session in order to earn bonus points at the end for their remaining buildings. At the same time, no one is bothered if they leave, since their buildings are replaced by neutral ones which yield Points just as readily as player buildings. And it works just as well for team games, since players on the same team simply share a single color, and don't earn any Points from toppling their teammates' buildings. On the whole, it is a scoring system designed to reward good players, without punishing the players who aren't as skilled. This keeps the game accessible to casual audiences. And that means more money for you.

So, let's talk a little more about money. Specifically, let's talk about what players spend it on, and why. First of all, let me emphasize that the game itself is free to play. Players are not spending money just to play the game, they are spending it to buy virtual items inside the game. This is what it means to have a game based on microtransactions. Second, it is important to understand why players would want to buy these imaginary items at all. Players will spend money not so much as an exchange but as an investment. It's not about exchanging value. Why would a player give you real money for nothing? It's about investment. A player gets some significant value through playing the game for free, and then they think that they could enjoy even greater value in the long run if they invest a little bit of their own money right now. They should feel like they're getting a great deal every time they spend money in your game. If you can keep this one principle in mind, all the rest of your monetization decisions should follow naturally.

Here's how it works in City Basher. All items are bought with either Points, Coins, or some combination of both. Some items are permanent, some get used up, and some last for a limited amount of time. Building cards and avatar decorations are permanent, as in a typical microtransaction-based game. But weapons and vehicles get used up - weapons are sold in the form of ammo, and vehicles can be used for a limited number of play sessions before they must be refueled. Only the starting weapon and vehicle last forever. This is like the rental approach to monetization. Lastly, membership cards to access special arenas and unlock special game enhancements are effective for a limited number of days before they expire, much like a subscription. Each of these items represents a different approach to microtransactions, in the hopes of appealing to as many different buying habits as possible and maximizing the revenue of the game.

Outside of the artillery game itself, there would be a sort of store interface where players could browse and shop for items. Building cards would be bought in random packs, from different editions, much like in an actual trading card game. Some editions could be bought only with Points, but the sets containing the more powerful cards must be bought with Coins. The idea is that players who really get into collecting cards are going to be the type to spend real money on the game. Avatar decorations are bought individually, mostly for Coins, though there might be some basic clothes and such that could be bought with Points instead.

Weapons are bought in bulk - that is, packs of ammunition - and for the most part can be bought with Points. For reasons of fairness, you want to be careful about charging real money for items that provide significant in-game advantages - like weapons - though it could be appropriate to charge Coins for some particularly strange or specialized types of weapons. Vehicles are similar, but since they have less of an effect on the fairness of the game, it is more appropriate to charge Coins for some of the vehicles, especially if their advantage is purely cosmetic or a matter of personal preference in the movement controls. Vehicles themselves do not get damaged or expire, but they do have a limited amount of fuel. Every time you enter a play session, you use up one unit of fuel in your chosen vehicle. The more powerful or expensive a vehicle, the more it costs to refuel it, though fuel should cost only Points since it is a recurring expense.

Arena access must be bought with Coins. Players buy membership cards, each of which provides access to several exclusive arenas for a certain amount of time. It might also be possible to include an arena editor that can be accessed in a similar way. This could be a nice place to incorporate player-created content, if you are so inclined. Other game enhancements can be bought individually with Coins, also for a limited amount of time. These may include advantages such as a larger maximum deck size, or extra weapon slots in each game. Most importantly, these enhancements would be the type of features that very dedicated players would appreciate and pay for, but that the average player would not find useful. This makes it acceptable to charge real money for such enhancements.

Permanent items - that is, building cards and avatar decorations as well as Coins and Points - can be traded freely between players. Temporary items like weapons and vehicles, however, may not. This is partly for simplicity, and partly because you want to use weapons and vehicles as a currency sink, a place where Coins and Points are removed from the game economy. And this role is undermined if players can just buy weapons from each other. In a real-world economy, this is not as important, but in a game where you can bring currency into circulation just by knocking over a few buildings, it's essential to drain that currency out of the system just as fast as it comes in, to avoid inflation. Since weapons and vehicles get used up over time, players must continually buy new ones, removing currency from circulation at a more or less constant rate. To keep the system running smoothly, you must continually balance item prices with the amount of Points that players can earn from each building type. Keep those Points flowing in and out at the same rate. No one said this would be easy!

Implementation

To actually make City Basher, you'd need a good rigid-body physics engine, like motor2 or Glaze, or even Box2D. This could also be a great project for use with the PushButton Engine, since it has built-in Box2D support and an optional networking component for making multiplayer games.

However, making any multiplayer game on this scale is always going to be a massive undertaking. Make sure that you know what you are doing before you start. If you've never made a physics-based game before, start by making a single-player prototype of the basic building-destroying gameplay. Then, if you're new to network programming, make a simple match-based multiplayer version of the game, without the special items or persistent avatars.

If you can do that, and make it fun, then you can think about taking the next step and making it massive. When you do succeed in making a massively multiplayer game, don't add in all the special items all at once. Start with the basic free game, and add items gradually, careful not to upset the balance of the game. Incremental development is the way to go.

Good luck.

References

Required reading for anyone who wants to make a game like this:

Since Emanuele Feronato never showed up to receive his idea, City Basher is open to anyone to use for free! Even you. ;)

Let me know if you decide to try making it. I'd be glad to help however I can. Post a comment!

Want an idea? Make a request on The Game Idea Giveaway Thread!

2010/03/10

Flydrill and Logistical Gameplay

Want to know why I haven't written a blog post in two months?

I've been making a game.

It's called Flydrill.

Explore an infinite dream world. Survive an endless nightmare. How far can you fly?

On the 23rd of October, in 2008, I had a dream where I was this little abstract flying thing like the flier from Flywrench. I was in a maze of square tiles, and I could drill to the right. Little swarming dots chased after me. When I woke up, I decided to turn it into a real game.

And so, more than a year later, I did - with a bit of help from some helpful people, an exceedingly helpful game engine, and some "inspiration" from Canabalt, Left 4 Dead, and Pac-Man Championship Edition. Though I've only ever played one of those games. I'll let you guess which one.

But I'm not here to go on and on about how I made this game. I've already done that, in this thread on the Flixel forums. And I'll probably be posting another blog post, soon, about how to get Flixel and Mochi Live Updates and the Newgrounds API all working nicely together. But this isn't it.

Every time I release a game, I discover new blind spots in my understanding of game design. This latest game is no exception. The feedback I've gotten on Newgrounds and Kongregate has led me to some interesting new hypotheses about the basic principles of Flash game design.

Here they are.

...but first, a screen shot!

I've become convinced that Logistical gameplay is the single most important factor in predicting a Flash game's eventual success or failure. Of secondary importance is the Tactical gameplay. Flydrill is the first game I've made where the Tactical gameplay is really solid - in fact, I think it's better than most Flash games in this regard - but it has no Logistical gameplay to speak of. And the player response shows it - great reviews, but a mediocre overall rating.

If my hypothesis is correct, then adding Logistical gameplay to Flydrill should make it a very successful game in terms of portal ratings and popularity.

So, what is "Logistical gameplay" anyway?

I first came across this term in the book 21st Century Game Design by Chris Bateman. Corresponding to the four personality types in the Keirsey Temperament Sorter, he identifies four categories of gameplay skills: Strategic, Diplomatic, Logistical, and Tactical. My own analysis is based on the research in the book. Read it if you want to learn more.

According to Wikipedia, "Logistics is the management of the flow of goods, information and other resources, including energy and people, between the point of origin and the point of consumption in order to meet the requirements of consumers."

What does this mean for games? When it comes to Flash games, at least, Logistical gameplay often means lots of upgrades and items and achievements to serve as the requirements for in-game resources, and various ways to convert player time and skill into these in-game resources, whether experience points or virtual cash.

But logistics isn't just about grinding for an achievement. All gameplay revolves around choices.

Logistical gameplay (read more) revolves around choosing how to allocate your resources - which upgrades to invest in, how much to spend, how much to save, and how to manage your time and effort effectively for the greatest payoff. The pleasure of Logistical gameplay is not in simply doing something, but in doing it well - optimizing it to perfection. This is why achievements are so important. They give the player a reason to excel, which creates Logistical gameplay.

There are many Flash games that focus on Logistical gameplay. But the best example that I've found is a little game called Toss the Turtle. Actually, it's not little at all, it's big - packed with items and upgrades to buy, achievements to earn, and tons of variables to tweak and improve on the way to the perfect turtle toss. You can see this formula repeated in many top-rated games, from Learn to Fly to Infectonator : World Dominator. Why? Logistics. Each of these games is heavily Logistical, with a bit of Tactics thrown in.

But what is Tactics?

Tactical gameplay (read more) is about the choices you make from moment to moment in the midst of action. This can be anything from dodging bullets to matching gems - in general, reading the situation of the moment and responding in the most appropriate way.

In Toss the Turtle, the Tactical gameplay consists of choosing when to shoot your turtle for extra height, and using the arrow keys to slightly adjust the turtle's trajectory. It's not much, but it gives players some non-Logistical skills to work on between trips to the upgrade shop.

But the purest example of Tactical gameplay that I've seen so far is the ingeniously simple Particles. All you do is avoid the bouncing balls for as long as you can - no upgrades, no story, no fancy graphics. But the gameplay it creates is very effective, and very Tactical - reading and responding to constantly shifting patterns of safety and danger.

There are other types of gameplay that tend to be less critical for success in the Flash game market - namely, Strategy and Diplomacy. But these can be very important for long-term success, because these are the deeper skills valued by hardcore players.

Strategic gameplay (read more) is about imagining solutions to complex problems, and this skill is most often catered to in Flash by puzzle games. Fantastic Contraption is the perfect example of this. Its commercial success may have something to do with the fact that it is based on Strategic rather than Logistical or Tactical gameplay - as I mentioned earlier, Strategic gameplay tends to be favored by more dedicated players, who are perhaps more willing to pay for the experience.

But also important to mention is that Fantastic Contraption also supports Logistical gameplay, because each puzzle is predefined, and the solution can be discovered by trial and error - in other words, Logistical optimization - if no ingenious Strategic insights come to mind. This means that all the players who prefer Logistical gameplay will still get some enjoyment of the game, rating it highly and sharing it with their friends, even if they don't like it enough to pay for it.

Diplomatic gameplay (read more) is about understanding and reconciling differences while preserving individuality, a skill that is rarely catered to by Flash games. We just don't know how to make Diplomatic games - not yet, at least. But there is one genre that begins to approach Diplomatic gameplay - in a very rough and rudimentary way, but still, it's Diplomatic more than anything else. Can you guess what it is?

No? I'm talking about spot-the-difference games. The gameplay in these games is not Strategic, Logistical, or Tactical. It's about finding the discrepancies between two different points of view, and resolving these differences. Diplomacy, abstracted. Difference games often support interesting artwork or involved storylines - see Dream or 4 Differences for example - which can provide players with a sort of imagined Diplomacy of conflicts to resolve and different characters to empathize with, even if it has nothing to do with the actual gameplay.

So that's some interesting background information. But why would I say that Logistical gameplay is the single most important factor in predicting a Flash game's eventual success or failure?

On page 91 of 21st Century Game Design, I came across a table citing this study on the distribution of the Myers-Briggs personality types across the general US population.

Here's what I found:
  • 50% of the US population prefers Logistical skills (SJ)
  • 25% of the US population prefers Tactical skills (SP)
  • 15% of the US population prefers Diplomatic skills (NF)
  • 10% of the US population prefers Strategic skills (NT)
No wonder Logistics is so essential!

If you make a game that focuses exclusively on Logistical and Tactical gameplay, you will automatically capture 75% of your potential market. If you focus exclusively on Tactical gameplay, as I did with Flydrill, you will capture only 25% of players. Oops.

Hmm, that explains a lot.

Tower defense games effectively combine Logistics and Tactics into a single package, which helps explain their popularity and continued success. Puzzle games combine Logistics and Strategy. And the only reason we don't see more Diplomatic games is that no one knows how to make them. Difference games are the closest we've come.

So there you have it. If you want to make a Flash game that appeals to the majority of players, you must be sure to include some excellent Logistical gameplay. How to do that, of course, is the subject for another blog post. ;)

Until next time...

awesome score yay! :D

2009/12/31

Increasing Clarity

Recently I wrote about motivation. Now I'm thinking about clarity. Clarity is the ability to see your goals and see what you need to do to accomplish them. Like Neo at the end of The Matrix. Motivation is the energy to actually accomplish your goals. But without clarity, it's hard to be motivated.

I've noticed that some things decrease my clarity, while others increase it. One of my resolutions for the new year is to do the things that increase my clarity and avoid the things that decrease it. Sounds simple, right? But it's easier said than done.

If I'm very low on clarity, it's hard for me to choose to do things that will increase my clarity again. It's like being drunk - it impairs your judgment so you think you're fine when you're actually not. So I'm coming up with a list of things I can do that will reliably increase my clarity. If I look at these things and get anxious, it probably means I'm low on clarity.

Here are a few activities that can help me increase my clarity:
  • yawning a lot (seriously!)
  • taking a nap
  • meditating
  • doing yoga
  • walking outside
  • running outside
  • practicing Aikido
  • practicing Persian ney flute
  • freewriting with my eyes closed
  • listening to music with my eyes closed
These are all things that help empty and clear my mind so I can see what is truly important. They relax me when I am tense or obsessive or when my mind is buzzing.

Things that fill my mind decrease my clarity. This includes browsing the web, checking email, or eating lots of carbohydrates. Sadly, I don't yet see a way to get rid of these entirely. Instead, I will do my best to balance them with clarity-enhancing activities.

Happy New Year! :)

2009/12/29

Game Idea Giveaway - Freetrace

...continued from The Game Idea Giveaway Thread

Request by Geekman:
  • what sort of game idea you're looking for
    Puzzle, Adventure
  • what your goals are in making this game
    To make it simple yet unique and fun
  • what games you've made already
    No Popular games (yet)
  • your favorite Flash games
    Fancy Pants, Dino Run, Wone, Sling, Roller Coaster Rush
  • your abilities in game design, programming, art, and sound
    Game design-Ok, Programming-Intermediate, Art - Ok, Sound - Bad
  • your preferences in game design, programming, art, and sound
    Programming

The weird idea: Databomb

The normal idea: Freetrace


In short, the idea is a puzzle game where you erase a drawing. It is inspired by the practice of walking a labyrinth - that is, following a winding, circular path for prayer or meditation. In this game, you trace the lines of an existing drawing with a virtual eraser by clicking and dragging, trying to do so as smoothly and efficiently as possible.

Each line is actually made up of many pixels, and like a typical drawing application, you can erase these pixels in an area around the mouse cursor. But to keep things a little more interesting, your eraser strength is inversely proportional to the speed at which you move it. That is, moving the eraser quickly will hardly affect the pixels underneath, while moving very slowly will erase them completely. This makes wild scribbling ineffective.

What's the challenge? I've recently discovered the joys of swarming enemies, and I think they'd work out great in this game. These swarmers would fly around the screen, chasing after your eraser - your mouse cursor. If one of them hits you, your health or perhaps a score multiplier would be reduced. But the swarmers wouldn't be able to pass through the lines of the drawing.

As you erase, you end up dismantling your own protection bit by bit. If you want to succeed, you must be careful to maximize your protection throughout instead of erasing haphazardly.

Some lines may create living eraser crumbs when you erase them. These crumbs destroy the swarming enemies on contact. So you can use them for defense. Some protective crumbs might stay where they are, while other types might move in defensive swarms themselves or chase after the enemy swarmers.

For an extra challenge, the eraser could be a limited resource that runs out the more you erase. This would encourage you to keep your eraser strokes efficient. Or the scoring system could reward efficient erasing by giving out more points for each pixel you erase, and less if you are trying to erase pixels that are already blank.

The game would be divided into levels, each one a unique drawing made up of curved or angular lines. When you erase the whole thing, you get your score and the next level is unlocked. There might also be an opportunity for randomly generated levels or an endurance mode with drawings that continually regenerate in interesting patterns.

You'll want to collaborate with an artist on this one, though this may be difficult since each drawing must take both gameplay and aesthetic considerations into account. For this reason, I would suggest starting with abstract patterns that make for fun gameplay and interesting puzzles to solve, and then enlist the help of an artist after that.

Implementation would be fairly straightforward - no fancy physics involved. All you'd need are basic bitmap manipulations and collisions, and some simple swarming behavior. Let me know if you want any help! Good luck. :)

Want an idea? Make a request on The Game Idea Giveaway Thread!

Active Sketch 04 - Pillars

Update:
Critiqued and analyzed on the Critical-Gaming Network blog! :D


Finally, an actually fun prototype!

It's a test of some movement controls for a one-button flying game. Tap to flap your wings, hold to dive.

I've been working with the artist brontosaurus off and on for several months now to create a game, and this latest attempt seems like our most promising project yet. It started with a bit of concept art, a simple landscape of pillars - Pixel Skylines 01. Then I tried to imagine what sort of game, what sort of characters and actions might be fun in such a landscape. Obviously, the typical platformer approach would not make sense. But maybe if you could fly...

So I made this prototype, and yes, flying is fun. See for yourself.


It helps that there's a flock of tiny fliers to keep you company. They give you something to do - something to attack or run away from.

In response to some prompting from brontosaurus, I've also released some experimental versions that allow you to turn in midair, either automatically or by double-tapping. And I've gotten some useful feedback about each of these.

But I think I'll stick with the simple original. This is the one that has gotten the most unanimously positive response, and I have found it to be much more accessible to non-gamers in my own informal playtests.

And I like the feel. It's like a soaring eagle.

So the next question is, how do we elaborate this into a full game? Maybe even something for the upcoming GAMMA IV one-button game competition?

This is where our organic process should be able to take off. In the past, brontosaurus and I made the mistake of trying to start creating cool things before we had a solid foundation of fun actions to build on. But now we have our fun actions.

I can see even this simple prototype turning into a game just by adding a score multiplier system and a time limit. But I would hate to waste its potential on something as trivial as that. I want to create a bigger game, with vast landscapes to explore and creatures to interact with - some dangerous, some friendly, some food.

I think the way to go, then, is to continue building a playground for this one-button flying creature, this eagle. I remember reading that this is how Super Mario 64 was built - first with a playground that made full use of Mario's abilities and acrobatics, and only then expanded into a world of castles and mountains and bosses and missions and such.

Well, we shall see where this takes us.

a cloud dragon...

2009/12/10

Game Idea Giveaway - Prejudice

...continued from The Game Idea Giveaway Thread

Request by kokosan:
  • what sort of game idea you're looking for
    a game involving physics
  • what your goals are in making this game
    Have fun developing it, and to get players to have fun playing it

The normal idea: Metastability

The weird idea: Prejudice


In short, the idea is Geometry Wars combined with Crayon Physics, with rules based on the dynamics of racial or cultural discrimination.

Like Geometry Wars, the game takes place in a field with a bunch of shapes in it. Everything in the game is a polygon, of varying shape, size, color, texture, and mass. Random shapes appear on different sides of the screen, proceeding past each other and disappearing off the opposite side, somewhat like Mondrian Provoked, or a large volume of pedestrian traffic. Unlike Geometry Wars, however, you cannot shoot. Instead, with deft strokes of the mouse, you ram into enemies with your sharp corners to do damage, while avoiding theirs.

Not every shape is an enemy, however. This is where the "prejudice" part comes in. At the top of the screen is a row of icons, each one depicting a particular shape. When the game begins, there is only one icon in this row - that is, the evil shape who has somehow wronged you in the past. Perhaps it killed your father. Anyway.

This evil shape, like all shapes, has several defined characteristics, such as area, number of edges, perimeter length, shortest distance across, longest distance across, color, and texture. Any shape that you encounter in the field is an enemy if it shares at least one of these traits with the evil shape. That's the prejudice part. The more traits it shares, there more points you get when you damage it and kill it. But if you attack a shape that does not share any of these traits, you lose points. Pretty simple.

There's more. You can add shapes to your "evil" list. How? If another shape happens to damage you, bumping into you with one of its sharp corners, then, naturally, it's evil. And it gets added to the row of icons at the top of your screen as a new evil shape. When your "evil" list is full - when it has more than, say, four icons in it - then the oldest shape is bumped off the list.

So any shape that shares a trait with any of the "evil" shapes in your list is an enemy that you can attack. These shapes are given a suspicious dark tint, for your discriminatory convenience. But in general, most shapes are content to mind their own business on their journey across the screen. Few shapes will attack you outright unless they are provoked, and some might even run away. This personality trait has nothing to do with a shape's "enemy" status - it's simply a way to modulate the difficulty of the game as you progress.

As if that's not complicated enough already, there's another twist to the idea. Not only can you have enemies, but you can have allies, too. This is where the Crayon Physics drawing engine comes into play.

When you have earned enough points from lynching enemy shapes, you can choose to spend some of those points to create allies. When you create an ally, you simply draw a shape in the mouse with the handy ally editor, and assign it a color and texture. Then, the ally gets added to a second row of icons at the bottom of the screen - your "good" list. There is always at least one shape in the "good" list - your own shape. The twist is that any shape in the field that shares a trait with any good shape - any ally - is not considered an enemy, even if it shares traits with an evil shape. So having allies reduces the number of shapes that you can legally attack.

But allies can be useful. Marked with a white tint, they swarm around you to shield you from aggressive shapes, and can also help you attack. When you hold down the mouse button, they swarm in tighter and flock with your velocity, so you can direct them in coordinated attacks. And if your very own shape is killed, then you can continue playing as the next ally in the list.

Like your "evil" list, your "good" list has a limited number of slots. If an ally is killed, its icon stays in the list. You wouldn't want to forget an ally killed in battle, would you? But if your list is full and you buy a new ally, the oldest icon is pushed off the list, though its corresponding ally remains in the field.

I want to explain the movement controls in a little more detail, as well. You move your shape with the mouse. One vertex of this polygon is the forward vertex, the point of a spike most easily used for attacking, and this vertex is made to follow the mouse cursor. This allows you to control both rotation and velocity with simple mouse movement. Allies swarm around you loosely, using a simple swarming algorithm. Just like your shape, they move from their forward vertices, which you would assign when you first draw them. When you hold down the mouse button, they try to swarm closer, and they also try to match your velocity and direction with a flocking algorithm, making their forward vertices point in the same direction as yours. This should allow you to direct their attacks.

That is all. Let me know what you think of the idea!

Want an idea? Make a request on The Game Idea Giveaway Thread!

Game Idea Giveaway - Metastability

...continued from The Game Idea Giveaway Thread

Request by kokosan:
  • what sort of game idea you're looking for
    a game involving physics
  • what your goals are in making this game
    Have fun developing it, and to get players to have fun playing it
  • what games you've made already
    Colorfill, a fill the screen type of game (Qix-like), SnakeBox, a snake game in 3D
  • your favorite Flash games
    Bloons, Bejeweled, this kind of games easy to grasp and where you have fun instantly.
  • your abilities in game design, programming, art, and sound
    mostly programming, game design OK, no artistic skills
  • your preferences in game design, programming, art, and sound
    Programming, definitely.

The weird idea: Prejudice

The normal idea: Metastability


In short, the idea is Tower of Goo combined with Crayon Physics, with a little bit of Tetris on the side. I know I've expressed annoyance at the countless Crayon Physics clones out there that waste a powerful physics engine with narrow gameplay goals. This is my attempt to design an alternative, a game that makes use of Crayon Physics' full potential.

Like in Tower of Goo, your goal is to build a tower as tall as you can. The world consists of a large horizontal platform, an island in a sea of bottomless nothingness. Random polygonal shapes form a layer of rubble on this island, which you can drag around with the mouse to form structures or just to toss off the island, never to be seen again. You can also draw your own shapes as in Crayon Physics, and drag these shapes around as well. New shapes drop down from the sky every so often, providing you with new material as well as threatening the stability of your tower.

You use these shapes to build a tower, but crucially, they must alternate between drawn and found shapes. And the tower is only valid if no drawn shapes touch the ground, the island platform. Otherwise, you could just draw a really tall shape and use that as your tower. Alternating means that a drawn shape must not touch any other drawn shape, only found shapes, and vice versa. If two shapes of the same type touch, the tower is invalid, and the offending shapes are highlighted in a conspicuous manner. To make this easy to see, drawn shapes should be colored differently than found shapes, and perhaps a beam of light shines down from the heavens if the tower is valid.

The height of the tower, measured from the ground, translates into your score. While it may seem that you could just draw really tall shapes and cheat, this does not provide an advantage. Bigger shapes are less stable, and since mass would be proportional to area, they would be so heavy that they might simply crush the shapes beneath them.

The game could provide a special timed mode, though this is not necessary since the shapes raining down provide their own form of time pressure, and the width of the island limits the maximum height of the tower. There could also be modes for different island widths, and different amounts of rain. You could even include a mode where the player can build several towers on the same island, with their combined heights added up for the final score.

I think this game could be awesome. If I didn't have a ton of other projects already, I'd make it myself. So you'd better do a good job of it! ;) Please keep me involved if you go through with this, as I can help you playtest and polish the design to its full potential and connect you with some good artists who know how to awesome-ify a game like this. If it succeeds, who knows - I could see Metastability making the same transition as Tower of Goo, toward the full-blown, award-winning World of Goo. There's a lot you could do with it.

Want an idea? Make a request on The Game Idea Giveaway Thread!

2009/12/08

Game Idea Giveaway - Tumblestack

...continued from The Game Idea Giveaway Thread

Request by FullerGames:
  • what sort of game idea you're looking for
    I am looking for the flash game gold: Simple, addicting. Perhaps a chain reaction game, a puzzle game, or similar. A "free-time" game that wouldn't be as complex or time consuming to make.
  • what your goals are in making this game
    The feeling of lots of effect for little action is what had me in chain reaction. Players seem to enjoy those

The first idea: Collink

The second idea: Tumblestack


In short, the idea is a physics-based chain-reaction game, based on the combo chains of match-three games.

Each game starts out with a bunch of colored bricks filling the screen, stacked up and packed together randomly but in a tidy manner. Perhaps they slide around in rows and columns or fall from the sky or change colors randomly too. But they all freeze when the player clicks on the screen. Then an explosion is created at the mouse cursor, sending bricks flying with the resulting shockwave. This starts the chain reaction.

Whenever a moving brick touches another brick, their colors are compared. If the colors match, then just like a match-three (or a match-two in this case) all adjacent bricks of the same color explode, destroying said bricks and sending a shockwave through the surrounding bricks. And hopefully, more and more bricks explode, continuing the chain reaction. The player's goal is to destroy as many bricks as possible in a single click.

That's it. I don't know if it would work, but it might. You'd need a good rigid-body physics engine though, like motor2 or Glaze. Fortunately, they're free. :)

Want an idea? Make a request on The Game Idea Giveaway Thread!

Game Idea Giveaway - Collink

...continued from The Game Idea Giveaway Thread

Request by FullerGames:
  • what sort of game idea you're looking for
    I am looking for the flash game gold: Simple, addicting. Perhaps a chain reaction game, a puzzle game, or similar. A "free-time" game that wouldn't be as complex or time consuming to make.
  • what your goals are in making this game
    The feeling of lots of effect for little action is what had me in chain reaction. Players seem to enjoy those

The second idea: Tumblestack

The first idea: Collink


In short, the idea is a physics-based chain-reaction game, based on the lattice structures of World of Goo.

Each game starts out with a bunch of variously sized circles bouncing around the screen, like in Particles. When the player clicks on the screen, everything stops moving, and each circle forms two links - two springs - between itself and the two circles closest to it. As a result, the whole playing field gels into a lattice structure, just like you might see in World of Goo. You could play around with the number of links that form - maybe three would be better, or four. You could also experiment with letting the circles continue their velocity instead of stopping.

So as soon as the circles have formed this lattice, an explosion is created where the player clicked, destroying all links within a certain radius of the mouse cursor. Maybe it could impart a bit of velocity to the circles nearby, as well, in a sort of shockwave. Once these first few links are destroyed, gravity kicks in, starting a chain reaction. Whenever a circle collides with a link, the link is destroyed, causing more circles to fall and further collapsing the structure. Circles are never destroyed - instead, they collide with each other, and move freely if all their links have been broken. The player's goal is to destroy as many links as possible in a single click.

That's it. You'll need a decent physics engine for this, but it should be very easy to set up. :)

Want an idea? Make a request on The Game Idea Giveaway Thread!

2009/12/07

Game Idea Giveaway - Salmon Song

...continued from The Game Idea Giveaway Thread

Request by IvyGames:
  • what sort of game idea you're looking for
    I guess, can any of your ideas incorporate a floating jellyfish?
    The jellyfish in itself isn't that important to me, what is important is the flowy feel one gets from sea-based games, and a jellyfish is for me the epitomy of that flow... very relaxing but intense at the same time, if you know what I mean.
  • what your goals are in making this game
    Making a game that really flows together and is simple but beautiful.

The normal idea: Randori

The weird idea: Salmon Song


In short, the idea is a 3D version of the one-button helicopter game, combined with an eat-and-grow game like Fishy.

The key feature of this idea is that the game is split into two contrasting halves. The first half is a lonely, perilous race for survival, with a blue and gray color scheme, and the second half is a warm, triumphant journey of growth and abundance, with a deep red color scheme. The contrast is what makes this work, accentuating and enhancing the emotional impact of each half. Not only gameplay, but sound and color design play a big role in establishing the mood. I even picked out two specific music loops for the game, which I would be glad to hand over to you if you decide to make this game.

The idea is that in the first half, you are a flowing, snake-like creature traveling through a tunnel toward your ancestral spawning grounds, to lay your eggs and then die. Like a salmon. Your goal is to get there as fast as possible without getting eaten. In the second half, you take control of a hatchling, traveling back out of the very same tunnel you had gone entered in the first half. But here, enemies that you once had to avoid are now delicious food for you to consume, and grow bigger, and as you grow bigger, more enemies switch from dangerous to edible. That's the core concept.

The specifics of the controls and graphics are less important. I had in mind something minimal and 3D, based on the helicopter game where you control your movement with a single button, pressing it to rise against gravity. In the first half, you are constantly sinking. To rise up, you hold down the mouse button. But you are also moving forward constantly, through a tunnel in 3D. The camera is fixed ahead, never rotating, looking straight through the tunnel directly behind your snake-like body. To speed up, you put the mouse cursor in the top half of the screen, or in the lower half to slow down. You cannot move backwards, however. To steer left and right, you put the mouse cursor on the left or right of the screen. Basically like a joystick.

The interesting thing is that in the second half, you are constantly rising. You press the mouse button to sink against your own buoyancy, effectively reversing the controls for your vertical movement. The idea is that the first half should feel more like a struggle to stay afloat, while in the second half you should feel more liberated. This effect could be enhanced by placing bigger, more dangerous enemies lower in the space, in deeper waters. This gives a consistent association of safety to the upper region, which would increase the emotional impact of the reversed controls.

The tunnel would be rectangular in cross-section, varying randomly in width and height at discrete intervals, for simplicity. It would basically be a bunch of randomly sized boxes connected end-to-end, which should be fairly easy to generate and render in 3D, perhaps with an engine like Papervision3D. At some points it would be long and narrow, while at others it would be very wide and deep, like a vast aquarium tank. You never know what strange creatures you might find lurking in the bottom of one of those. This is the purpose of using 3D - it's good for conveying scale and the feel of wide and narrow spaces.

The tunnel would be populated with objects, sparsely at times, or densely. Some would be inert obstacles that obstruct your movement, while others would be enemies of various sizes that might try to chase you if you get too close. Though once you pass an enemy, it will not be able to follow you down the tunnel. And there could be speed-boosting gates, as well as areas to heal you if you rest inside. All of these objects could be represented by spheres - perhaps a circular sprite for each type, scaled based on distance rather than an actual 3D polygon mesh. Your own avatar, the sea snake, could be a simple chain of spheres, similarly to the creature in flOw.

The scoring system would be fairly simple. There would be two numbers to keep track of - health and energy. Health goes down when you touch an enemy, with more dangerous enemies taking away more health. If your health goes to zero, your snake dies and you lose the game. Energy starts high and decreases constantly over time, encouraging you to go fast. Energy is basically your score. When you reach the spawning ground, the end of the tunnel, in the first half, any remaining energy is carried over to your hatchling, while your health is simply reset. In the second half, as a hatchling, you can increase your energy by consuming the enemies that are smaller than you, which also makes you grow bigger. Your goal is to get back out of the tunnel with the most energy - the highest score - by consuming enemies without dying or going so slowly that you use up all your energy in the process.

Want an idea? Make a request on The Game Idea Giveaway Thread!

Game Idea Giveaway - Randori

...continued from The Game Idea Giveaway Thread

Request by IvyGames:
  • what sort of game idea you're looking for
    I guess, can any of your ideas incorporate a floating jellyfish?
    The jellyfish in itself isn't that important to me, what is important is the flowy feel one gets from sea-based games, and a jellyfish is for me the epitomy of that flow... very relaxing but intense at the same time, if you know what I mean.
  • what your goals are in making this game
    Making a game that really flows together and is simple but beautiful.
  • what games you've made already
    Vertical scrolling shooter and a Three Word Story game.
  • your favorite Flash games
    Dolphin Olympics & N The way of the Ninja.
  • your abilities in game design, programming, art, and sound
    The first three for me are just a matter of taking it painstalkingly slow; I could program anything given enough time in the helpdocs and online guides... sound I expect to mix and edit from sources on the Internet.
  • your preferences in game design, programming, art, and sound
    ...

The weird idea: Salmon Song

The normal idea: Randori


In short, the idea is a mouse avoider like Particles, where instead of dying on contact, you only die if you get hit too hard.

You asked for a game with a flowing feel, that is intense but relaxed. What that means is there's a lot going on, but you continuously make small motions that blend with those around you, whether those are enemies, obstacles, the wave of the sea, or your own breath cycle. It's about being harmonious with yourself and your surroundings.

The small, flowing motions are important. If you're smashing things out of the way, the experience may be intense but it's not relaxed. Instead of opposing the movement around you, you blend with it. You match its velocity. That means you see how fast an object is going, and then you match that speed exactly so that when you touch it, there is no impact. You are not moving relative to each other. This is concept from Aikido, the nonviolent martial art. If someone punches at you, you can use your body to match the speed of their fist and then redirect the force.

So how do you make a game about that?

The simplest way I can imagine doing that is to make a game based on the randori practice of Aikido. In this exercise, you are in the middle while a bunch of other people rush in and attack you, either with an actual strike or a simple push or a grab, depending on your skill level. You must remain calm and in control, redirecting their attacks and keeping on the edge of the crowd so you don't get trapped in the middle. The basic response to an attack in this situation is to turn your body to match the speed of the attacker and redirect it around you at the same time, then push them away once they are past you so you can move on to the next attacker.



As a computer game, this could be very minimal. Everyone is now a circle. You move your own circle with the mouse - it follows the cursor more or less instantaneously. The other circles, your attackers, all swarm in toward you. If you get hit too hard - if the relative velocity is too high in a collision - you lose a life. To avoid that, you match an attacking circle's speed to reduce the impact, then push them off to the side so you have time to move and engage the next attacker. It could be a simple survival game, like Particles, where you try to last as long as possible before running out of lives. More attackers might appear at regular time intervals, increasing the difficulty as time goes on. Some attackers might not even attack you - they could just bounce off the walls and each other like the balls in Particles. Some might just be inert obstacles that clutter up the field and force you to move more carefully. There's a lot of complexity you could add to this concept.

And of course there's no need to give this an Aikido theme. It could easily be abstract, just circles and shapes, or even underwater, with jellyfish, if that's what you want. Jellyfish could be cool, too, because you could make the objects more than circles - they could be webs and strings of circles connected together with ragdoll physics. And you could add waving currents or fluid physics too. Just don't put it in space! That's overdone. ;) I might end up making a game like this with an Aikido theme anyway, so that's another reason to theme it differently. :)

Want an idea? Make a request on The Game Idea Giveaway Thread!

2009/12/04

Game Idea Giveaway - Random Lulz

...continued from The Game Idea Giveaway Thread

Request by TobiHeidi:
  • what sort of game idea you're looking for
    strategy, action (often a problem in Multiplayer games cause of lag), open to anything
  • what your goals are in making this game
    Create a Multiplayergame that creates a community, keeps players coming back, forces players to interact (attack, but also help each other).
    I like to have the players to be able to upload s.th. (i.e. graphics) and autmatticaly intergrate them in the game as gfx / or maps

The normal idea: Gridslime

The weird idea: Random Lulz


In short, Random Lulz is a collaborative rhythm game based on the innovative Dark Room Sex Game, but with a more kid-friendly theme.

In Dark Room, each player has a button to press, which makes a particular sound. When you play, you are paired with one other player, slowly alternating button presses with each other. Your goal is to accelerate the rhythm of your button presses as quickly as possible to an exciting climax. This works best as a competitive team game, where two teams of two race to finish faster than the other team. The limitation is that you cannot press the button too soon after the other player - there is a minimum amount of time you must wait between presses. If you press too soon, you have to slow down again. This minimum time limit gets smaller as your rhythm accelerates.

With Random Lulz, the gameplay is similar but somewhat more complicated. You press a button to make a sound, a single laugh or chuckle. You are still trying to accelerate your rhythm as quickly as possible to reach full, hysterical laughter. But there are some extra limitations. There is a minimum time limit, but there is also a maximum time limit - you don't want to wait too long or the energy of the laughter will die away. And more interestingly, the time interval between your button press and the other player's last button press must be different than the previous time interval. In other words, the rhythm of the button presses must be random, because no one laughs like a metronome - that would just be awkward.

The requirements of this game are very minimal, assuming you have a basic multiplayer system set up. All you have to do is send a message with a timestamp every time a button is pressed, and lag isn't a big deal - it just makes things a bit more random. Graphics are completely optional, but if you want you could give players customizable avatars, or different arenas in which to laugh, or let them upload their own background images. Sounds can be recorded - just get a bunch of friends together late at night and loosen them up with some sugary or alcoholic beverages, and start having laugh contests. Record a range of sounds for each person - starting with low-energy grunts, chuckles, or giggles, and gradually moving up to knee-slapping guffaws or full tear-streaming, rolling-on-the-floor hysteria. Guffaw is a weird word. Anyway. The Dark Room team did something similar for their sounds.

The idea is pretty loose - there's a lot of ways you can take it. If it appeals to you, I'd encourage you to at least try it out, since it should be very easy to prototype. See if it's fun with simple beeps and no graphics, and then add in the recorded laughs and teams and scoring and all that. I'm looking forward to playing it. ;)

Want an idea? Make a request on The Game Idea Giveaway Thread!

2009/12/01

Game Idea Giveaway - Gridslime

...continued from The Game Idea Giveaway Thread

Request by TobiHeidi:
  • what sort of game idea you're looking for
    strategy, action (often a problem in Multiplayer games cause of lag), open to anything
  • what your goals are in making this game
    Create a Multiplayergame that creates a community, keeps players coming back, forces players to interact (attack, but also help each other).
    I like to have the players to be able to upload s.th. (i.e. graphics) and autmatticaly intergrate them in the game as gfx / or maps
  • what games you've made already
    All my games are Multiplayer, made a strategy and a soccer/pong game.
  • your favorite Flash games
    many, not some special ones
  • your abilities in game design, programming, art, and sound
    Game design = %60, Programming = %99, Art = , Sound = %30, in terms of how well I am with them
  • your preferences in game design, programming, art, and sound
    I only make Multiplayer games.I am very bad when it comes to art...
    I also would like to avoid strongly physics based games (doesnt work to synchronize in Multiplayer games), and games that have problems when there is more lag then about 200ms (ping).

The weird idea: Random Lulz

The normal idea: Gridslime


The idea is to take the minimal gameplay of Slime Volleyball, and expand it into a 3D multiplayer game of four square. It retains the fluctuating rules and interesting social dynamics of four square, while simplifying the physical aspect of the game into simple bouncing spheres.

You play as a sphere that can move and jump with the mouse. Your short-term goal is to hit the ball when it bounces into your square, your medium-term goal is to advance to the lead square in each game, and your long-term goal is to make your way up the global grid by challenging other players.

Four square is a popular playground game played on a grid of four squares with a bouncy rubber ball. It is simple to play, and features a compelling blend of physical action and political strategy. If you haven't played it before, there are a lot of websites and videos around that will introduce you. And plenty of player nostalgia to go along with it, too.

The idea is that each player has a square to defend. The squares are ranked, and your goal is to progress to the highest ranked square and stay there. If the ball bounces in your square, you have to hit it back to another player's square before it bounces again. If you don't hit the ball in time, or you hit it out of bounds instead of into another player's square, you're out of the game, and everyone in a lower ranked square moves up by one to take your place.

In the playground game, there's usually a line of people waiting to get in the game, since only four people can actually play at a time. In that case, you'd be sent to the end of the line. Otherwise, you're sent to the lowest ranking square to start over.

The interesting part about four square is that the leader, the player in the highest ranking square, gets to change the rules of the game. This is also the player who serves the ball at the start of each round, and before serving, this player can announce changes to the rules, such as allowing or disallowing certain moves or situations. There are tons of these weird rules and moves, often known by obscure names like "cherry bomb" or "bus stop", many of which can be found online. It's a phenomenon analogous to Pokemon or Magic: The Gathering. And as you may expect, it is ripe for adaptation into a game.

the rules of four square...

So how do we turn this into a computer game?

You may be familiar with Slime Volleyball and its many variants - these were Java games that were popular several years ago. Most of these games were simple 2D games analogous to Pong, where you move a "slime" that's like a circular paddle and try to bounce a ball to the your opponent's side of the court. Move left, move right and jump. There's a lot you can do with these simple controls. It's like playing table tennis with a basketball instead of a paddle.

It's easy enough to adapt this to four square. Just replace each human player with a sphere that can move around in its square and jump into the air. Aiming is accomplished by hitting the ball at the appropriate angle. On a computer, you might move with the mouse, and jump by pressing the mouse button. You can see a similar control scheme in Slime Volleyball 3D, except that the slime moves slowly toward the mouse cursor instead of moving instantly with it, which can be frustrating. I'd recommend making the movement instantaneous. And allow for a variable jump height, based on how long the mouse button is pressed.

But there's no reason to restrict the game to what is possible in Slime Volleyball or four square. You can take it further. In particular, you don't have to restrict the game to only four squares. You could have as many as you want, in any configuration. They don't even have to be square. Assuming that you keep the whole thing on a grid, you could make some squares neutral, some impassable, some into walls that bounce the ball, and change the size and shape of each player's area. You could even make them all shift around over time. This would be a great place for procedural and player-created content.

There are a lot of cool things you could do with the rule changes as well. Since this is a computer game, you can let players modify the physical properties of the ball or players, to change things like size, speed, bounciness, mass, or friction. Beyond that, you could even include ways for players to directly disrupt each other, with weapons or environmental hazards, kind of like the shells and banana peels of Mario Kart. Any of these might be special abilities bought by players with earned or purchased currency, or they might just randomly appear in the game to keep things interesting.

And of course, there are all the special rules of four square itself. These generally determine how you can hit the ball or who you can hit it to. Here are some common examples:
  • windmills - putting a lot of spin on the ball is allowed
  • cherry bombs - bouncing the ball really high is allowed
  • lemon drops - hitting the ball really low to a corner is allowed
  • chicken feet - hitting the ball at a player's feet is allowed
  • dictatorship - getting a player out with a serve is allowed
  • air ball - you can hit the ball before it bounces in your square
  • poaching - you can hit the ball no matter where it bounces
  • jump ball - you can only hit the ball while you are jumping
  • treetops - you can hit the ball up to two times in the air
  • bubbling - you can hit the ball any number of times in the air
  • holds - you can catch and hold the ball before passing it
  • tea party - two players may only pass to each other
  • friendship - two players may not get each other out
  • no passbacks - you may not pass the ball back to a player
  • around the world - you must pass the ball around (counter) clockwise until it has been passed to every player on the court
  • other variations - you may only pass the ball to players who are orthogonally adjacent, diagonally adjacent, wearing the same color, or whatever else you can think of
There are also rules that allow special situations to occur, often when a player catches the ball and shouts a certain word. The words and situations differ from game to game, but here are some examples:
  • pops - if you catch the ball before it lands in your square, then the player who last hit the ball is out
  • poison - if you catch the ball before it lands in your square and say "poison", the player who last hit the ball is out, but if that player says "poison" first, then you are out
  • mail man - if you catch the ball before it lands in your square and say "mail man", the last player to put their foot on the outermost corner of their square is out
  • bus stop - if you catch the ball before it lands in your square and say "bus stop", the last player to put their foot on the center intersection of the squares is out
As you can see, there's a lot to choose from. And they should be fairly easy to adapt to a computer game. What's most important is how they contribute to an interesting social dynamic without totally unbalancing the game. The powerful moves - like "cherry bombs" or "poison" - should also be risky moves that won't guarantee dominance.

In a game with four or more players, it's all right to let one player gain an advantage, since the other players will compensate by allying themselves against the offending player. Temporary alliances and betrayals are common in four square as players make deals to help each other get to the lead square, only to stab each other in the back when they are in power. But players who lie and betray others will find that their tricks stop working once players discover their true nature. It is a delicate balancing act, one which is at the core of most compelling multiplayer experiences. This is how you get a lot of gameplay for free in a multiplayer game.

In order to support this dynamic you must have abilities that benefit the lead player, as well as abilities that benefit all players. Obviously there must be benefits to being leader, so that players are motivated to reach the top spot. Perhaps they earn more points this way, which they can spend on special abilities, or maybe the ability to control the rules of the game is motivation enough. Either way, there must be advantages. But there must be ways for the leader to reward other players as well. That way, players can make campaign promises to each other to get their support: "Get me to the lead square and I'll use my Pay Day ability to increase your earnings for every round that I am in power!"

So far the game that I've described does not involve a long-term goal. Or even an end condition for each game. But don't worry, that's what I'm going to explain next.

grid slime?

There is a world map, a giant grid where each cell is a Gridslime court. At the bottom of the map are the newbie courts, where new players enter. At the top are the expert courts, where the stakes are higher - more points can be earned the higher you go. Players strive to reach the highest courts, both to prove their mastery and to enjoy the richer rewards.

As a new player, you start in the lowest courts. You can move freely left and right between courts, each of which might feature different terrain and configurations, but you must earn the right to go up to the next level. To move up, you must get to the lead square in your current court. Then you can choose to leave that game behind and join the court above - or wait in line to join it if the court is already full with players. Once you're up, you can move between courts left and right and below, but to go up again you must attain the lead square in one of the courts. If you come to an empty court, you can start a new game there, but you can't advance to a higher court unless you are the leader in a full game.

Alternatively, there might be a level requirement for each row, where players earn experience points through play that let them level up over time. The basic idea is to make sure players are matched with others of similar skill, to keep things fair and interesting. If it's not too unbalancing, you might also allow players to earn or buy free passes to get to the row above. You could also make some grid cells that are not courts - either completely impassable, or with free movement in any direction. You could even make movement cost a certain number of points, and make some grid cells cost more than others. This could help control the flow of players around the grid.

Enough of that. How about monetization and player-created content? First of all, you'll want to have some sort of virtual currency in the game. Actually, you'll want two - one that players can earn through playing, and one that players can buy with real money. And what will the players buy with this virtual currency? They will buy special abilities and avatar decorations.

The special abilities can be things like "cherry bombs" or "bus stops" that players can use when the leader allows them, or they can be rule-changes that players can use when they are in the lead square, like calling a "tea party" or allowing "poaching" for a round. They may also be physical changes like increased size or bounciness, or even weapons used to disrupt other players. For the most part, these will be bought in bulk with earned currency simply through playing the game, but rarer abilities may be purchased with real money. Because the leader has control over which abilities are allowed, there's less of an issue with players spending money for an unfair advantage.

Avatar decorations can be purely decorative, serving no in-game purpose. Or, if your engine supports it, players could customize their avatars beyond simple spheres, adding extra spheres or even other shapes in a ragdoll-ish way, or just adjusting and upgrading physical properties like stickiness and bounce. You can also incorporate player-created content here as well, allowing players to upload images as textures for their avatars, for a fee. They could even then go ahead and sell their images to other players, with you taking a transaction fee off the top. Since all players are spheres, you could just generate a circular cutout of the uploaded image and use that as the player sprite, maybe with a bit of shading tacked on for a more 3D feel.

The other place for player-created content would be in designing custom courts. One approach that might work is to let players form guilds or leagues (for a fee, of course) where members have access to special league-controlled courts as well as permanent abilities available in games within the league. And special hats, or something. This would be good if you want to keep player-created courts separate from those on the main grid. Or maybe you could find a way to combine the two. Could be cool.

I'm going to stop here. I've already gone on far too long. If you have questions, feel free to let me know. I'll leave you with this excellent article on design considerations for competitive multiplayer games, Testosterone and Competitive Play. Read it.

Want an idea? Make a request on The Game Idea Giveaway Thread!