Secret Lucas Writings

Why do I program?

2007-01-10T13:46:00.000-08:00

Here's a quote from Revenge of the Nerds

Anthony Edwards' character is helping a girl at the computer, she's frustrated and calls the computer inhuman.

"It's not inhuman. Only humans can be inhuman. Here, let me show you. Working with a computer's great. I mean, it's godlike, in a way, cos you can have complete control... You know, some people, they can create with their hands. But when you're working with a computer, you gotta build something with your mind. If you're good, you can do somethin' no one's ever seen before. It's a definite high."

Been a long time since I rock and rolled

2006-08-30T00:47:00.000-07:00

Yes, it's been quite a few.

So a few updates, and a little rant.

First, PAX was great. I ran into Jane again, always a great thing. She was busy so I gave her my card, since last time I didn't have any. Yes, I AM a game developer, imagine that.

Actually, PAX was great for reasons other than what was actually going on at PAX. I didn't really participate in anything. The panels were hard to get into, the place was too packed to really move around, I have absolutely no skills required for even competing in tournaments, and the tabletop room smelled horrible.

But seeing 20,000 people all packed into this convention center and bursting out of the seams really helped validate what I do. Seeing the success of the Behemoth, the accessibility of Torque, the sheer coolness of EETS. It's just, well, great.

Plus, I did see one panel - the Indie game panel. A lot of it was common sense, but the panel in general really inspired me to work on my own ideas. Before I would get on myself about spending so much time outside of work doing the same thing I do at work.

But you know what? At work, my job will get done. If I am working on a project, it will eventually ship, it has too. It might mean putting in extra hours down the road, etc.

But my ideas? My creations? Those aren't going to get made, if I don't step up to the plate and make them. Unless someone steals them, which would suck because then I have no influence over the final product.

The average American watches at least 2 hours of TV a day. If I spent 2 hours a day, 5 days a week working on my personal game, that is the equivalent of a full work week after a months' time.

Plus, I spent plenty of time doing things other than games. Whether it's martial arts, which I do about 3 times a week, going to the gym, which I do about every other day, riding my motorcycle, reading, playing guitar or piano, or drawing - the point is that I make sure to stay well rounded.

Which leads me to my next point.

Got done having an awesome conversation with Robin over IM. Robin and Santiago pretty much have the uncanny ability to make me feel great about what I do. Anyways, we were talking about the team dynamics and dealing with coworkers.

Working on a team is something that a lot of people who come into this industry are very weak on. It makes sense, there are a large amount of us game developers who got into the industry by working on stuff by ourselves. And there's a large amount of us that are lacking a lot of social skills. But once this becomes your job, you really need to learn how to deal with people. It's not just about your skills in your job field, it's also about your personality.

Now, I'm not going to pick on anybody about their personality traits, Lord knows I have a crapload of flaws myself. But one thing I've noticed is that when you become so focused on something like game development, it takes a little too much priority on your life. When you place so much emotional weight in what you do, it's hard not to take any criticism of it as a personal affront.

So what do you do?

Live!

Yes, get some hobbies outside of working on games. If it's 5-6 pm, and you're on schedule - GO HOME! Lord knows you'll be putting in enough extra hours once crunch time starts, get the hell out of there. Pick up a hobby that's different from what you do. Do you spend all day in front of a computer? Well go camping on the weekends! Don't get any exercise other than clicking your mouse? Take martial arts! or dance lessons! Pick up some books - learn about history, philosophy, whatever. Like computers because you have problems being social - take that head on! Invite some people out to a bar. Don't like bars? Do it anyways! Find industry gatherings, mingle, talk shop, whatever.

But for the love of God, get away from the videogame. I'm not saying stop playing them. On the contrary, developers should at least casually play games.

But the trap to fall in is the fact that all the sudden, your hobby became your profession. And obviously you enjoy it because that's the exact reason why it became your profession. But if you don't branch out, if you don't see how small developing games really is compared to how massive the fucking world is, how much there is going on outside of your own small focus, how our time is soooo short compared to the entirety of human history, then it's hard to take things in stride.

If you spend too much time focusing on yourself and what you do for a job, then you're going to become too self-centered, and it runs the risk of actually affecting your job in a negative way because you'll be too attached to the things that probably should be cut and you'll be so alienated from your fellow human beings that you won't know how to deal with them.

I know, it's something I have to deal with myself. Luckily I've met some great people over the last few years that make it much easier.

Good luck.

Pictures

2006-05-19T17:25:00.000-07:00

So here's a bunch of pictures from last week at E3.

Bowling with Tiffany and Matt, iam8bit art show, and the madness that is E3

http://www.flickr.com/photos/lukeyes/sets/72057594137296199/

The "I missed my flight BBQ" that I was graciously invited to starring some really great people, including Lulu, Robin, CrankyUser, Jane, Doug, and, unfortunately I didn't realize it until afterwards, Kim.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/lukeyes/sets/72057594137315239/

I wish I took more pics of the BBQ, but I also took some videos (trying to find an easy way to get those online).

Oh my god, a post!

2006-05-16T12:00:00.000-07:00

It's been a while, I know. Personal life sort of distracted me from my neverending quest to understand the phenomenon known as gaming. But now that the trip has ended, and the dust has settled, I'm back in this saddle riding off into the hills.

Speaking of trips, what better occassion to return than coming back from E3?

It seems that I have achieved another milestone in the life of a professional game developer, that of attending E3. This was my first one, and probably won't be my last, but don't see that as a positive review of E3 itself. If there was only the conference, and I was attending surrounded by strangers, I would have been miserable. But fortunately I know some really great people, both in and outside of the industry, and these fine folks made the trip great.

As far as my current impressions with E3. It was nice to feel how big our industry is, sort of legitimizes the whole spiel. Once a year, people who don't normally think about videogames hear about it on the news, thanks to mainstream news media like CNN, Time, ABC, etc. This helps filter out over the rest of the year and just keeps rolling over time.

Most games, eh. Lots of stuff just the same as before. Lots of MMO's that look just like other stuff, LoTR, D&D, Guild Wars, new WoW, etc. I'm still not gonna play MMO's. Lots of shooter brand X, like there always has been since Doom, and always will be. I wasn't impressed with the PS3, but I only played one game - Resistance: Fall of Man. MSG4 had a cool trailer, but in the end, what's the big deal? I liked Metal Gear Solid as a whole, but the gameplay got very frustrating at times. It was a lot of dealing with stuff to get to the next cutscene. And some of it was just unfair, even if it was cool. Like Psycho Mantis. I haven't played the sequels, but I watched my roomate play the second one and realized I wasn't missing out. MSG4 - great story great characters, subpar gameplay.

My biggest thing was the Wii. I got to bypass the huge line outside, but it was still 30 minutes per game inside. I played Zelda and Mario, so I will talk about them.

Zelda, I didn't feel like it was anything special. A lot like Ocarina, but with better graphics. The Wii stuff felt tacked on, and I got very frustrated. I'm a very unforgiving player, so that's easy for me to do. Once a game becomes NOT fun, I just don't want to keep playing it. Sometimes I will because by that point it's too late, or something else keeps me engaged, but I get very resentful about it. However, I'm not going to bash the game too much, as I don't feel it would be proper. I've expressed my opinions to a person at Nintendo, so that is that.

Now, for Super Mario, I am AMAZED. This was the game of the show for me. Let me tell you something - I don't like Mario. I just don't. Heck, I just played the new Mario for the DS, and I still don't like it. It just doesn't FEEL right. But SMG, wow, this is the game I WANT to play. It's just so right.

Wow, I haven't posted this yet - to be continued.

Mobygames

2006-01-04T18:11:00.000-08:00

Hey everybody, check it out! I got an entry on Mobygames!

My Mobygames entry

cool beans!

Quiet

2005-10-25T15:01:00.000-07:00

If it sounds like I've been quiet lately, it's because both
A - holding my breath
B - letting others speak.

A - I'm holding my breath, because I'm waiting to see how exactly Manifesto Games turns out. It takes some real guts to put your money where your mouth is. Anybody can rant, but very few actually have the convictions to even try to change things. I think Costikyan gained a lot of respect from a lot of people for actually pulling up his sleeves, stepping forward, and backing up his words. I know he's gained a lot of respect from me, and I'm anxious to see what he does.

B - I'm letting others speak. Well, mainly, I'm letting my friend Santiago speak. Santiago and I are pretty much industry brothers, having met each other when we were struggling hobbyist student developers, and pretty much breaking into the industry around the same time. We have very similar ideas about the potential place of interactive entertainment. And well, I'm letting him do the talking for now, while I sit back and try to collect my thoughts.

So if you want to check out more on the "are games art?" question. Go to gamesareart.com. Yeah, that's right, he made a pretty bold move and actually makes the statement that games ARE art, rather than asking if they can be.

He brings up a lot of interesting points that are worth discussing.

Katamari 2

2005-10-02T16:17:00.000-07:00

Bought the second Katamari.

Bad decision, I'm thoroughly disheartened and jaded.

I'm probably going to give it to someone that doesn't have the original.

Excited

2005-09-26T16:07:00.000-07:00

Holy crap, I usually don't get excited over videogames, but Mortal Kombat:Shaolin Monks is my favorite game of the year.

Most people know that Mortal Kombat II was the game that pretty much made me decide what I was going to do with the rest of my life.

Also, for the past year I've been commenting on how I just want a really cool action/adventure 3D beat-em-up, without all the annoying "jumping puzzles" (the ones where screwing up means instant death), stealth modes (ugh, stealth modes in an action game suck ass), horrible placement of checkpoints, and just general annoyance and frustration in general. I know everyone is all hot-to-trot over God of War, but I watched it being played and flat out decided that it was not worth my money at all. Why should I pay to be frustrated? There were so many places that just seemed way unfair. Yeah, the cool parts were awesome, so why do you have to put in the crap? seriously.

Mortal Kombat:Shaolin Monks has so many awesome ideas it's great. The fighting style is just so intuitive. 3 attacks - quick, launch, and power. Hold R2, and these give you your 3 special attacks. For example, I played with Kung Lao, so he does his teleport, hat spin, and hat throw. Grappling is just pure bad-ass, especially when you level up your attacks. The blocking mechanic is good too, more so in a one-on-one battle. Every button on the controller is pretty much used.

But what really gets me is the different ways to dispatch your enemies. You got the straight-up beat them to death. This is the longer and harder approach, but you get health from it. Then you got the fatality approach, fill up your fatality gauge, hit them with L1 (fatality stunner), input the code, and a cutscene plays out your fatality. This takes longer to watch, but you get extra experience from it. And then, my personal favorite, are the environmental hazards. This is where grappling come in handy. You can use the environment to strategic advantage, knocking your opponents into spikes, flame, catapults, pools of acid, giant hammers, iron maidens, off of bridges, etc. It's cool, and quick, but you dont' get any health or xp from it. There's also weapons, which makes things much easier, and randomly you'll get a slowdown matrix effect when you chop off someone's head or slice them in half. Downside, can't block or do special attacks with a weapon.

There's jumping, but instead of instant death, you usually end up losing some health (by falling on spikes or in lava), and have to quickly get back up to where you came. So there's negative effects, but not impossible.

They put in some minigame stuff, ala God of War. But wait, it's "Test Your Might!", that's right, the oldschool minigame from the first Mortal Kombat. This is how you pull levers, open doors, and even fight some bosses.

The graphics and voice acting are lacking, but whatever, I'm a gameplay over graphics dude anyways.

The coolest part for me is that MK:SM is basically what's going on behind the scenes during MK2. All the characters from the first and second Mortal Kombat's show up, and there's even a special appearance by one of the cooler characters from MK3. It got frustrating at times, but not horribly so. And because they restart you back in the same room, instead of the last save point, and let you skip the cutscene you already watched, dying isn't that big of a deal.

Plus, seeing all the oldschool MK2 levels (the Pit, Soul Tombs, Portal, Dead Pool, Living Forest, etc), made me not mind playing the level again.+

I will be honest, a few times I was lost, because throughout the game you gain different acrobatic abilities ala Prince of Persia:SOT, such as Wall Jump, Wall Run, and Swing. With all these abilities, it's a bit hard sometimes to figure out if an area is actually off limits or not.

Basically, Midway took Mortal Kombat 2, Prince of Persia:Sands of Time, and God of War, and mashed them all together, strained out most of the annoying shit and put their own special spin on it, filled it chock full of secrets and collectibles ala MK:Deception and pushed it out there. It's too bad they weren't given another 2 months to really put on some polish. But then again, almost every game really needs another 2 months of polish.

It's a short game, but I'm more for quality over quantity any day. Plus, with Ko-op and Versus mode, and the ability to unlock MK2, there's still replayability. It would've been nice if they had a versus mode where you were put in a room with just a bunch of grunts that you could beat the shit out of.

This is the first time in a while that I've hoped for a sequel. I really hope they do another Mortal Kombat beat-em-up. I think they could do a really interesting one with Mortal Kombat 3's storyline.

I'm sorry that I'm raving, I don't normally do this. But after playing this game, I'm so fucking jazzed to be back at work working on an action/adventure game. Mortal Kombat:Shaolin Monks was the game I've always wanted to play for quite a long time. Thanks Midway.

forever and a day

2005-09-20T23:32:00.000-07:00

I know, I know, it's been forever since I last posted.

It's been a busy time. I jumped from final crunch mode on Shrek, to helping out the Sims: Strangetown, to helping Chronicles of Narnia go final, to starting the next project.

Luckily, some kind people suggested I take a break, and I've been on vacation for the past week and still have half a week to go.

Lots of stuff to talk about. I'm really psyched about this new Nintendo Revolution controller. I've been slogging through Rules of Play and decided that I'm going to have to buy it (the one I have I borrowed from my producer) and just take a bunch of notes. It is seriously, THE definitive guide on game design. I also believe that if I continue my book, it's just going to end up being a rehash of Rules of Play, as the more I read, the more of my ideas I find in there. Hopefully though I can help push the study farther, but I don't really know, all my best ideas are already out there.

Right now though, I'm just enjoying my vacation. Visiting a lot of the Seattle sites, both urban and nature.

the argument

2005-08-08T00:34:00.000-07:00

I'm getting sick of the narratology versus ludology argument.

what spawned this?

David Byrne, probably most famous for being the frontman for the Talking Heads, posted a great post in his journal about games.

http://www.davidbyrne.com/journal/current.php
(July 31st)

I read it, and in my best Sean William Scott impersonation, I'm like "Dude, right on."

Now yeah, it can be pretty much said that his thoughts lean more toward the narratology side of the argument. And yeah, I understand that his post is more questions, but he doesn't pretend to have the answers like some people. It's just another kick in the ass to us in the trenches going "hey man, why can't you guys figure out how to do this?"

You know what? we need that! And if more people say that with their pocketbooks, you might see some change.

But Kim points out Mr. Koster's book, which, you can probably go down to see my praise of. However if you read it, the book really does lean towards more of the ludology side.

He also goes to point out how the answer lies in both. Well, I propose that there is no real answer.

I propose that we're dealing with a medium that's as broad as reality itself here, that's full of so many infinite variations, that EVERYBODY's right.

I mean look at the market. How well do these "interactive stories" like Final Fantasy (although not a favorite of mine) sell? They become cultural icons for Pete's sakes! On the other side, look at games like Tetris, a pure ludology game. Again, cultural icon!

Everybody falls somewhere on that spectrum. Now you may be wondering then, why am I so hot to trot about games then if I think that the market is rightfully addressing people's desires?

Well, I'm hot because I don't think the market IS rightfully addressing people's desires. I think that the needs and wants of the potential majority are going unfulfilled. Sure, gaming isn't in the minority that it used to be, but that's due to a lot of factors. And I think that one of them is that people lowered their expectations. And well, that sucks.

None of these guys actually argued about narratology versus ludology, but the opinions just make me remember those who do. Or rather, those who argue more than act. And well, that just bothers me. Because well, I don't have any answers, and it really pisses me off. You can only bang your head against a brick wall so many times before you get sore about it. And part of me hopes that there are more people banging their head against that wall and eventually we'll find a soft spot. But looking at people shouting at the wall, expecting it to crumble, well it's like "what the hell are you doing man? get down here and help me chisel at this thing."

Who knows, maybe it's just me.

But thanks for kicking me in the ass Mr. Byrne. If we can satisfy people like you, I'm sure that there's a lot of money to be made.

Everybody is talking about it, why shouldn't I?

2005-07-27T23:44:00.000-07:00

This whole GTA thing reminds me a LOT of the whole Mortal Kombat thing.

I remember Mortal Kombat throwing everybody up in arms. People thought that Mortal Kombat would hurt kids, make them violent. Oh my god, so much blood!

Well, I'm going to chime in here. And granted, I might be one of a very small percentage of people, but that's probably a larger percentage than the amount of people who were inspired by video games to be violent.

Mortal Kombat turned me into who I am today. A good taxpayer who gives back to society.

I had a really rough childhood. My father was an ex-convict who spent most of his life in a maximum security prison with murders and rapists (over stealing guns and escaping county jail). My mother was a single mother who had me when she was 20 and couldn't make ends meet. Actually, my father refers to my stepfather, as my biological father abandoned us when I was three, and eventually went to jail for a very bad thing.

Growing up was no picnic. We lived everywhere from the slums of Harrisburg, to trailer parks, to the most remote countryside of Conneautville, PA. We were always on and off of welfare, my dad would work under the table and constantly get screwed by his employers. He was an ex-con with a 7th grade education, not much of a job market there. My mom would bust her ass to make ends meet and still take care of all the house maintenance stuff, cooking, cleaning, washing clothes etc. We would always have trouble with the law, because of my dad's reputation. Sometimes the frustration of life was taken out on me, because I wasn't his real kid. Almost constantly, members of our extended family were commiting crimes, going to jail, dropping out of school, the works.

Now, if I stuck with the sort of life that I had, I am almost 100% sure that I would currently be working at McDonald's, selling drugs on the side, and probably beat my wife and kids. I probably would have a criminal record, doing petty crimes like breaking and entering, etc. That's the type of life I came from.

But one day, counselors at school found out I was "gifted". They put me in all the "smart" classes, I even did this thing called Enrichment, where one day out of the week I would go to a special room and do projects like Odyssey of the Mind. There were 5 of us out of the whole grade.

You'd think this would be a good thing, but not in my neck of the woods. All the sudden I was further alienated from my family and the kids in the neighborhood. I was the "smart kid" full of "book learning." I was ridiculed, called a nerd, called stupid, told I was selfish and lacked any common sense, and that my life would be a disappointment. I was told I could never go to college because we were too poor, and if I didn't go to college, I would never amount to anything but poor white trash.

I was put in the gifted program when I was 10. Can you imagine how hard it was to be told these things? You just want to fit in. Here are the people that you are heavily influenced by, friends and family, and they're filling your head full of lies. Part of it is jealousy, part of it is because they don't want you to be hurt when you're let down the way they were let down.

My grades started dropping, i started getting into fights at school, started stealing, all that stuff. Until when I got to 7th grade, they put me in this program called Project Enhance. Every other Tuesday we would go to a nearby college and take classes like art and acting and stuff.

First day, I stopped by the campus arcade, and there it was.

Mortal Kombat 2.

and in that moment, my life changed forever.

from that moment, I knew, KNEW that I wanted to make video games. Everything about me, my proficiency with machines, my love of drawing, my passion for writing stories, my dream of making movies, EVERYTHING came together in one instant in a moment of clarity. Hell, I barely played the game, I would just stand there, part of the circle formed around it, and gawk at what I saw on the screen. I saw video games before, played Atari, had friends who had Nintendo, but THIS, THIS was where games were at. They HIT the big time now baby!

And in that moment, I developed a burning desire. A passion for creating games. It infused itself into the very core of my being. I saw it as a way out. Here was something that if I just focused, if I just thought hard enough, I could create. WITH MY MIND. It became my refuge, along with my comics, from all the bullshit in my childhood.

So if someone asks, do violent games affect children? Well, maybe they do. But maybe, just maybe, they help turn these kids into what they turned me into. They brought me out of poverty, gave me the strength to earn two degrees and be the first in my family to graduate college, made my family proud, and brought inspiration to my brother to not drop out of school and even look into going to college. It's made me a good taxpaying citizen, and I'm giving back to my community through volunteer work.

torque and cornflakes

2005-07-21T02:12:00.000-07:00

Anyone ever use the Torque engine?
Right now it looks like a really good idea. Being a programmer, I would really like to be able to make my personal games with as little programming as possible. Not that I hate extracurricular programming, but I think you all can understand my aversion. But I'm more than willing to hike up my sleeves and dig my hands into some code if need be.

First things first, need to get a new computer. Little Einstein here just hasn't been the same since I put Windows XP on it. A great internet machine, and was great for working on Lego Mindstorms, but now he doesn't even have a CD drive.

So, gonna build myself a computer to do four things. 1 - Edit movies. 2 - Make 3D games (which is where Torque comes in) 3 - compose music (Fruityloops just CHUGS on this machine) 4 - get back into Lego Mindstorms. Gonna hold off until after Shrek goes final though.

I just realized though. NEXT WEEK IS THE LAST WEEK OF JULY! In the words of a great man "HOLY SHIT"

Anyways.

I've had SERIOUS writers block on my comic. Basically, I can't figure out an ending. And without an ending, you can't have a story. Because the story is all about coming to an ending. I've always thought that you should work from the ending backwards. I have an ending, but it's so overly cliche. But given my characters, it's the only logical conclusion.

When I have a block on one thing, usually I get inspirations on other things. Such is the case with Captain Cornflake. I just had this huge epithany where everything came together, the characters, their relationships, everything. so I'm thinking of that now, while the Psycho goes on the backburner.

You may be wondering about Cubicles? Well, the original designer decided that he wanted to design something else. And I'm just too exhausted to spend a lot of time learning how to build a 3D tile editor when the person I'd be building it for isn't even into it.

Sometimes I worry though, do I want to do so many things that I end up doing nothing? I don't think that's going to be the case though. But when you're doing things for your enjoyment, you just can't force it. If you're doing it because it makes you happy, well the minute it drags on you and feels like work, you shouldn't do it. Especially when you do a good job at your actual job.

But given that I've wanted to write the Psycho since I was 12, and now have more of the time and knowledge to do it, and the fact that I have the time and knowledge to make Captain Cornflake, which I've wanted to make since I was 20, I think eventually, they'll both get made. And that, is good enough for me.

Cornelius T. Flake - To the Rescue!

related note

2005-07-06T19:30:00.000-07:00

On a related note.

I decided that I would eventually like to be a game designer someday. As much as I like having my hands in the implementation, I'm really starting to see the huge task that is game design, and how important it really is.

Also, I'm currently not on the "the industry is creatively bankrupt" bandwagon. I mean, yeah, sure, sometimes you look at the titles and are like "what? why?". But really, I think this whole "cry for innovation" thing has swung way too far on the pendulum.

It's mainly because everyone is focusing on the "big premise", when really, the big premise is a very small part of what makes a game enjoyable. The devil is in the details my friends. Hundreds of minor little details, like the responsiveness of a button, how big a collision box is, how fast an animation. All of these add up to make or break a game.

I frequent the Gamedev.net boards a lot, and everyone and their mother has this "great idea" for a game. But when it comes down to it, the great idea may not be that great. And bad design can drag down even the best premise. Everybody wants to cook up a pitch, and leave it there. We need more people to pull up their sleeves and make it happen, and not be afraid to worry about the details.

The more I think about it, the more I'd like to do that.

Rules of Play

2005-07-06T12:41:00.000-07:00

Rules of Play is one very tough book to read.

sometimes it gets annoyingly erudite and pedantic. Like it's spending more time trying to sound smart than getting across any ideas.

Once you get past that, there's a lot of good information.

I think I'm going to make a version called "Rules of Play for Dummies".

flying time

2005-06-17T02:37:00.000-07:00

wow does the time fly.

gonna be a long weekend. Alpha is coming up soon, and ship is August 1st.

At first I was getting tired of the long hours that I've putting in (more voluntary than required), but now I'm just excited.

I've put aside game programming side projects for a little while. After reading more into Rules of Play and Theory of Fun, I'm not quite sure what place narrative really has for games. It seems that games and stories act upon different areas of the brain, and that games really aren't equipped to touch the heart.

I haven't given up, but I've decided to focus on narrative in its more natural medium. I've been writing. Actually, I've only really been writing for the past week. Robin's dream post was the missing puzzle peice of a story that I've been assembling ever since I was twelve years old. Touched upon the manifestation of my very drive for creativity.

Only thing I'm worried about, is that I'm scared of failing. I keep telling myself I'm a programmer, not a writer. I'm afraid of creating something ridiculous. Not doing something so deeply personal to me enough justice.

I just find it strange, because I've never been afraid to try anything. I've never given up on anything. Pushed it aside for a bit, sure. But never gave up.

Have you ever been so afraid of failure that you didn't even try?
And what did you do to overcome it?

Can a person be more than what they do for money? Is it really worth trying?

A Theory of Fun

2005-05-28T02:39:00.000-07:00

If you are even THINKING about designing games, you MUST pick up "A Theory of Fun" by Raph Koster.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU Mr Koster!

Reading this book, I couldn't help but agree. EVERYTHING I've been talking about, that I've been working on for these past 3 years was talked about in this book. Even more surprising, there were parts that I DIDN'T think about, and immediately disagreed with. The book CHALLENGED me.

But God, sometimes I feel like nobody gets the point, and this leads me to ask myself if there actually is a point. And it's just great to talk to people (since books are really a one-sided dialog between the author and reader) who SEE the point. Hell, even better than I see it. A lot of my efforts stem from hope more than knowledge. But I know that I will never find that knowledge unless I search for it.

Man, it's been a great week with books.

The last 3 days, I read "Rebel Without a Crew" by Robert Rodriguez. Another EXCELLENT book. As you all know, I came to this medium heavily inspired from comics and movies. I used to draw incessantly as a child, and in highschool I immediately started making movies when my parents bought a video camera. I felt a real connection with Rodriguez. There are some parallels in our stories, growing up unprofessionally making stuff that we wanted to do (although I had simple video games on top of the movies and comic books), fighting against the administrations of formal education, working multiple part time jobs at once, going to school, and working on our passions. While reading all this, I was like "this guy's been there, he understands". His advice about solving problems creatively versus using "the money hose" should be heeded more. And his first peice of advice in his "Ten Minute Film School" - don't say you WANT to be a filmmaker, make movies and say you ARE a filmmaker. GENIUS. I've been telling people all along - you want to make games? well then quit saying you WANT to and MAKE GAMES!

Reading books like these make me feel like I'm on the right track, that my pursuits aren't in vain. That this is a noble pursuit, worthy of my energy. And which is great, because really, at this point in my life while I'm still full of fire, I can't concieve pursuing anything else.

haha

2005-05-26T14:37:00.000-07:00

Fantasy versus Reality

books books books

2005-05-25T10:42:00.000-07:00

Too many books to read!

Still 100 pages to go in "The Illusion of Life".

Started "Rules of Play", but not totally focused on it.

Picked up "A Theory of Fun", as well as "Rebel Without a Crew"

And, to brush up on the classics, bought a pocket "Moby Dick".

This is only the tip of the iceberg, I want to get Chris Crawford's book, brush up on Richard Rouse, go back over "The Study of Games" and "Life of Poetry", as well as few other game design books here and there. I also want to read "Raising Kane".

On top of that, I want to really pursue the classics. I know I should play more games, but usually I just don't get nearly as much enjoyment out of them as I do books or movies. I have 202 movies enqueued on my Blockbuster Online account. Put on top of that time I try to spend on drawing, piano and music composition, and my programming side projects, and I'm one busy dude.

Oh well, my college years trained me for that. Rolling stone and such.

2005-05-24T11:37:00.000-07:00

Gamer's Manifesto

Hey dude, I'm with ya. Hopefully I can do something about these conventions, a lot of them that came from a mixture of inadequate technology and just plain lazy game design. Unfortunately, it's a big mountain to climb. And a lot of it isn't the audience, it's the reviewers.

I'm not going to say too much here, for fear that it will bite me in the ass later. Let's just say that to a lot of publishers, reviews are just as important as sales. With the hardest of hardcore gamers ending up being reviewers, I'm not sure how much push a casual market (I should say "non-gamer" market), is really going to have.

To be honest, I don't really like that. Usually, the best forms of art weren't critically acclaimed until well after their sale date. Especially popular culture ones. Remember, Dickens, one of my favorite authors of all time, was pretty pop-culture. So was Shakespeare.

Yeah, it was quite an eye-opener on how much a heavy hand a few people have in works made for the many. And I'm not too happy about it. And unfortunately, those of you who felt left out, are the ones who are going to suffer over it. Uggh.

retraction

2005-05-18T11:19:00.000-07:00

Alright, I do remember before that I compared Katamari to Citizen Kane.

I retract that statement.

Katamari is a bit like ice cream. Really, really good ice cream. Ice cream is great. It's easy to eat, very enjoyable to taste, and you can eat it about anytime.

But, like ice cream, sitting down to a session of Katamari can only last for so long, before the experience just gets kinda blah. Akin to ice cream melting in your bowl, and just not being that appealing any more - Katamari gets kinda repetitive pretty fast. The pacing is very good, that's not an issue I have with it, but after a while, it's the same thing over and over and over. Yes, I know, this is not any different from most games. Especially my all-time favorite - PacMan. But Pacman is ice cream too.

Another thing with Katamari. Man does it taste sweet. But there's no substance. You roll around, you're happy, you laugh. But other than that, it doesn't really affect you. Katamari is a GREAT dessert. It's the Tiramisu of games.

And that's saying something. Because, in reality, are games really much more than desserts? I'm not too sure, honestly. My hope is yes. My fear is no.

What brings this up, is that I finally watched Citizen Kane this week (thank you Blockbuster Online). I watched it about 3 times.

The first time, I just didn't understand why the movie was such a classic. It was good, it was entertaining, but I didn't really see WHY everybody made such a fuss about it - except for a few clever cinematography and editing tricks. I used to be impressed by editing tricks, but my friend John Paul, who works as an editor in movies, told me once that the minute the audience realizes something is clever, the editing failed. You're not supposed to notice it, it's supposed to add to the scene, not detract.

But then, I watched it with the commentary, and I started to realize something. The movie never got old. It's one giant mystery, you don't REALLY know what's going on in Charlie Kane's mind. And you never solve it, so every time you watch it, you are constantly engaged in it. And another thing, it didn't seem to set out to be a "classic". Orson Welles just wanted to tell the story he wanted in the most effective way possible, not the way it was done before. But when asked why he did things a certain way, like shoot the scene between Leiland drunkenly admonishing Kane with an extremely low angle, he just replied "I don't know, it looked better that way". And it did.

I think that was the real kick in that movie. It wasn't trying to be as much as people make it. The movie is too entertaining for that. It touches on just about every emotion known, from joy to fury, from humor to despair. Welles was a genius, but mainly because he just wanted to use the medium to the best of his ability, to get the emotion across.

I see another parallel in the life of Walt Disney. Currently I'm reading "The Illusion of Life" by Frank Thomas and Ollie Johnston. They talk a lot about Walt and the early days, how they really didn't know what they were doing, but they knew that Walt wanted animation to be different from what was currently done.

How appropriate, after looking at E3 stuff, I just got into a debate with a coworker about these very things. Unfortunately, now I'm just mentally tapped, and don't want to talk about it anymore. I'll probably continue later.

Before I go, I post a challenge for you. Come up with a design for a game version of Citizen Kane. Don't worry, I'm doing it to. Let's see what we can come up with.

YAY

2005-05-17T11:35:00.000-07:00

Finally! the E3 build is done and sent.

wow man, first E3 period as a game developer. I had NO IDEA how much stress was involved. Seriously, we were working like 14 hours Sunday trying to get the E3 build out the door. Didn't go home until 2 AM. Granted, my stuff was done hella early (did some little changes to the character select that MAJORLY improved the look). But I wasn't gonna leave the team, and besides, I had nothing better to do. Plus, I'm kinda excited. This is the first time other people are going to see it.

But no, I'm not going to E3, and what's interesting, most of the people I work with aren't either. In the large scheme of things, E3 just isn't that big of a deal. On the other hand, I'm really excited and nervous to see what people think.

The game? Well it's finally been announced. Shrek SuperSlam for the Nintendo DS. Developed by Amaze Entertainment and published by Activision in collaboration with Dreamworks.

Perfect game for me too, for two reasons. A - not hardcore gamer, so making a "pick up and play" game for a handheld is, as I believe, the perfect game for a non-gamer. It's about evoking the emotional reaction quickly and effectively. I think we're pulling this off pretty well with the zany slapstick action mixed with fighting that we are constantly working on to be balanced and fun. B - There are 3 types of games I really love. 1 - Diablo Hack'n slash. 2 - Turn-based strategy (I love Front Mission 4) and 3 - fighting games. I LOVE fighting games.

Not that I'm into violence that much. But I think fighting games are a microcosm of strategy. The good thing is that since I'm so passionate about fighting games (and not just Streetfighter like a lot of people on the team, I'm much more into 3D games like Tekken, DOA, and SoulCalibur, but as you all know MK2 has a special place in my heart), anyways, since I'm so passionate, I'm very vocal about the moves of the players, the AI, constantly trying to make it fun to play. And I'm very picky, and unforgiving.

But I'm also very passionate. I've always heard the phrase "well if you don't like it, YOU try to do better." Well, that's what I'm trying to do.

Anyways, we'll see how it goes. The nice thing is they loved the build, and I was able to go home early yesterday and take today off. A nice couple days of rest. I hope we get some press, but I doubt it, the game journalists don't really seem to care about handheld games.

Understanding

2005-04-23T00:27:00.000-07:00

Holy crap is Scott McCloud's Understanding Comics an awesome book

I can totally see the influence of Hayakawa and McLuhan, but with even more stuff. And a lot of it is stuff that I've been forming on my own.

Given my roots in comic books and films, I must have this book in my library.

I really recommend more people to give it a read. Especially game developers. We're developing our own form of media here, our own language of representation. It's good to truly understand better other forms to help us.

E3

2005-04-21T00:56:00.000-07:00

No I'm not going to E3 this year.

It's funny, there's been this interesting progression of my viewpoint towards E3.

First, it was the coolest thing in the world. I mean, holy cow, this is where all the games come together and they are shown off. How awesome is that?! And you can't get in unless you are a game developer or game press, or something to do with the industry? Wow! I can't wait to be in the industry and go to E3.

Then, I went to GDC. And it was like - hrmm, well, I guess E3 isn't that big of a deal. I mean, I guess I like games. Really I like movies much more. If anything I like the process of making games, rather than the end result. I guess GDC is more of my thing. But I'll go to E3 if I can afford it.

Then I got a job in the industry and went to GDC again. F**k E3! It's the example of everythingg that's wrong with the industry! it's all about marketing, a big freaking circus, pumping up all the crap about games. Ooooh look! More polygons! Better sound! So fucking what? E3 is stupid, and there's no way I'm going to go to it.

Then, our pre-E3 milestone occurred, and I found myself working late nights in the office, knowing that they are going to want something to show off. Goddamn E3, making me work like a dog. Jeez oh man, I hate it with my very soul.

Then, I started getting my second wind, getting really involved with the success of the project. Well, at least people can get to see what we're working on. Hopefully people get excited. Man, I really hope the marketing people do a good job. And I hope that people like my work. E3 is not for me, but it's not a BAD thing.

We'll see what my next stage is going to be concerning our lovely Electronics Entertainment Expo.

social commentary

2005-04-19T18:17:00.000-07:00

taken from here

posting

2005-04-13T15:57:00.000-07:00

I had a big long post made up yesterday, and Blogger ate it.

crap.

I should've known, I used to write my posts up in wordpad before posting them, I should go back to doing that.

it all comes back to Katamari

2005-03-21T21:12:00.000-08:00

So it seems like this has everybody at work all in a buzz

http://www.jeux-france.com/Webmasters/Images/52720050320_095048_0_big.jpg

Usually I don't listen to rumors, but look at the source - Nintendo Power.

Being a DS programmer, I must say that I'm excited as well. I may a bit biased or partial, and no way do I mean to emphatically endorse any particular product, but I believe in the DS.

I believe that the DS, with its touchscreen (which allows for multiple types of more expressive interfaces), and its wireless, has much potential to bring people together.

I believe the internet is a good thing, but I'm afraid that it's had a side effect of driving a lot of people inside (and away from people) to interact with others.

Now that doesn't make any damn sense to me.

But with wireless mobile! And I'm not talking cell-phones, which are fragmented and not built for anything very useful (my phone is cool but gives me carpal tunnel).

With wireless mobile, I believe that there is the potential for Anonymous Social Experiences - the ability to interact with complete strangers, to break that ice that keeps us so separated from each other. To make each other laugh, and better each others lives.

Granted I'm not saying it's going to solve world hunger, but maybe, just maybe, it will make us better humans.

I've felt lately that humans have become so separated from each other, we are so connected, but these connections are so shallow, so meaningless in general, that they can't sustain our psyches. We need depth. More and more, we've been getting cotton candy, when we've wanted sustenance.

We all yearn for that sustenance that only others can provide.

But, now I get excited! Because I see a whole new path.

Let me give you a hint on why I'm so excited.

There is a story here:

http://www.links.net/vita/speak/vonnegut/

It revolves around two people that I admire greatly - Justin Hall and Kurt Vonnegut.

I know that Justin is a pioneer when it comes to researching this phenomena we call the Internet. You may not know his name, he's not very famous. But there have been many people like him, those who actually searched for something, who were ahead of their time, so much that nobody remembers them.

Justin has been studying the net, and I believe, has been trying to figure out this damn thing and its real effects on people and its possibilities. And like a doomed sailor, swam so far in it that he almost drowned. He's now on dry land right now, and I hope he jumps back in because I'm anticipating the treasures he'll uncover.

Kurt Vonnegut, is one of my favorite writers. I don't understand the man, his thought processes, why or how he writes. He just leaves me baffled.

So here we have these two schools - oldskewl and newskewl. And of course it's like Clash of the Titans.

read the story, it's comical. Especially when Vonnegut grabs Justin and says

"Can you get this from a computer?"

NOW!!!! I'm excited because I can see a future where the answer will be YES! YES I CAN! Not a world where machines replace people, but AUGMENT! Where machines don't replace pure physical social interaction, but facilitate it happening!

I know, cellphones can facilitate this, but what I foresee is a whole nother ballgame folks.

Hopefully, a non-threatening game like Katamari can help this movement. I can see it, and it gets me excited.

I must say though, I went a bit overboard today calling Katamari the "Citizen Kane" for game developers. But I still stand by my feeling that even though the game itself is not revolutionary, it came at a time that made it revolutionary. Our industry is hitting this weird state, quickly approaching the studio method that movies found themselves in the early part of their history. And we're tired. We're tired of the licenses, the first-person shooters, we're just damn tired. Gamers are tired, developers are tired.

but Katamari gives us that one glimmer of hope. That one game that makes those of us who are tired remember why we started this path in the first place. We just want to affect people, make their days better, express ourselves, have what we do affect others in a hopefully positive way. It's that indie album that comes out that makes you want to pick up the guitar again, it's that one movie that makes you feel that things will be ok, and not give up the fight.

The game gives us spirit where that spirit is lacking sometimes. It may not be our Citizen Kane, but it will definitely influence the next Orson Welles.

Wow, it's been a while hasn't it

2005-03-15T23:03:00.000-08:00

I just got back from GDC, and I'm chock full of ideas.

I promise I'll write more often.

anyways, I just wanted to put something up.

I've decided that in my personal projects, I'm not going to make games. The concept of a game is too limiting. Instead, I'm going for Interactive Entertainment. Shortened, it is IntEnt, which complies more with what I'm going for - purpose, meaning, in interactive form.

I've got something brewing, and I'll talk about it soon.

Letter to A Friend

2005-01-20T14:56:00.000-08:00

So yesterday I read up on Robin's site, and she wrote a bit about game design stuff (always a good read). Here's the link.

http://www.cs.northwestern.edu/~hunicke/blog/index.php?m=20050118

The game stuff is down towards the end of the post.

Anyways, earlier this week, I played Katamari Damacy for the first time and then borrowed the Game Developer mag issue from a coworker. So a lot of this stuff is definitely floating in my head right now (that and crazy programming stuff), so wrote Robin an email. I'll just post it so you guys can read it too.

//----------------------------------------------------------------------------//

It's funny how everything all comes together.

So I finally caved into the hype surrounding Katamari Damacy and gave
it a go. And it's just interesting how it ties into the advice you
gave me back in April.

Basically the game reminds me of why exactly I'm not a gamer. I'm not
a gamer because very few games come to the level of quality that I
demand. And the unfortunate thing is, that this sound odd when I
say that game like Katamari Damacy comes to that level of quality,
while more complex, graphically intense, intricately designed games
just don't get to me.

But that exterior contradiction only comes through when one doesn't
truly understand games. When they just don't "get it". Games are not
made of polygons, powerups, realistic lighting effects, or simulation
style controls. Games have one purpose - entertain the player. This
is the pure purpose of a game, and what sets a great game apart is
when the designer envisions a solid design, and strives to build
everything else around it. That is when a game becomes more than the
sum of the parts.

So I remember how you basically said that even though I might be a
gamer, there are probably games that give me hope, even if they are
once a year. Katamari is one of those few games. So thanks for being
so fanatic about it, because you and a couple other people broke me
down to say "alright, I'll give it a try".

But here's my quick list on why I enjoy it so much, and it falls in
line with everything I want to focus on when designing.

simplistic design - games are nothing but a system of goals/rewards.
Just like movies, games should be able to be broken down into a
sentence. The player should be able to figure out what they are
supposed to do. With Pacman, it's "eat stuff". With Katamari, it's
"get bigger". Too many games convolute this focus, and while hardcore
gamers are used to dealing with that, normal consumers just throw up
their hands and say "games are too complicated"

simplistic controls - simplistic and intuitive controls are a very key
element. Anything in a game that takes you out of the game and makes
you focus on your world just causes conflict and confusion. I know a
lot of people who say they don't play games because there are too many
buttons. Nobody should be forced to realize they are bad at a game
because they couldn't get their hands to press the right buttons.

no violence - games are about conflict. Basically, you have a goal, a
reward for achieving that goal, and something placed in front of you
that conflicts with you achieving that goal. In Pacman it was the
ghosts and your limited amount of lives. In Katamari, it's time and
the ability of things to make your ball smaller. Too many games think
that violence is the necessary force of conflict, and confuse the
issue of what they are really trying to do, instead taking the easy,
instead of the innovative, way out.

Again, I'm not saying games with violence are bad, just how some of
the most violent stories are the most deeply engaging (MacBeth,
Hamlet, Lord of the Rings). The trick is to realize that violence is
a means to an end, a way to bring about conflict, not the sole source
of conflict itself.

engaging music - we have 5 senses. I don't see any innovations coming
with taste and smell in entertainment media (although an Iron Chef
game where the food is made? interesting concept). Books utilize 1
(sight), Music utilizes 1 (sound), and the dramatic arts (theatre,
film) utilizes 2 (sight, sound). Games provide a third (touch), which
is one reason why controls should map as closely to the in-game action
as possible. However, it seems too much like only 1 sense (visuals)
are really focused on in game development, with sound thrown in as an
afterthough, and touch relying to typical conventions.

This is why I get very excited when a game focuses on sound. I
finally read the KD postmortem, and it made me very happy to see that
he designed a lot of things with sound in mind. Believe it or not,
the soundtrack is actually made me want to play the game! Someone had
it shared at work.

low poly - KD shows that you don't have to be high-poly to be
interesting, but that your visual must serve to present the "feel" and
"look" of the game. Too many games don't recognize the Uncanny Valley
theme, trying to go for realistic visuals that look flat, rather than
focusing rather on how their visuals enhance the environment and play.

story - too many games with a unique and innovative design, don't even
try to go with story. I'm not saying story is necessary, but I think
it's a bit of a cop out to say "we'll just let the mechanic carry it."
A good story (or rather story elements such as character,
environment, etc.) give the player a good grounding in the game, and a
sense of motivation and urgency. It's not just a "game", they care
what happens. And that's the power of art, getting people to care,
evoking their emotions.

yeah, I know, long email, but when I find something like this that
just gets it "right", it just gives me so much to talk about.

I was reading your post about the Urbz. I think you're right. It's
not the best game, but a good example of a type of direction that I
think more people should try to think about. There are some design
and balance issues (the showers, the first level is very hard and has
a difficult learning curve, lack of accessible clues for missions),
but I think overall, it's a direction that can be refined. It's a
good example of a mission "be popular" that turns as a goal, and the
conflicts that you have with others are more relational and social
conflicts than mindless violence. It shows that social interaction
CAN serve the purpose of a game.

I didn't really get very far with Riddick, because I think the sewer
level was overscaled and the level layout was confusing. But
otherwise, the use of likeness and voice acting is a big deal, it
creates a sense of connection with the player. Suspension of
disbelief is such a precious precious precious commodity in art. It
has to be protected as much as it can.

Ok, definitely long email, but I think I'm going to post it on my blog
because I definitely think I said a lot of good stuff. Thanks for
pointing in the right direction of things and listening to what I have
to say. It's nice to know that there's someone out there who actually
thinks that this stuff is valuable.

//-----------------------------------------------------------------------//

The short of it? Katamari Damacy uses everything I've been raving about for two years now, and is the direction, along with the Urbz and others, that I would like to go with if I ever have the opportunity to design someday.

Doug Church's interview

2005-01-05T18:29:00.000-08:00

http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20041123/hall_01.shtml

http://interactive.usc.edu/members/jhall/archives/2004/12/ctcs505final_an.html

Bibliography

2005-01-03T18:14:00.000-08:00

GameStudies

www.gamestudies.org

Gonzalo Frasca - Videogames of the Oppressed
http://www.ludology.org/articles/thesis/

Gamasutra

http://www.gamasutra.com

Grand Text Auto
http://grandtextauto.gatech.edu/

(look into the Facade program, very interesting stuff)

Experimental Gameplay Workshop

http://www.experimental-gameplay.org/

Indie Game Jam
http://www.indiegamejam.com/

Ludology.org
(Frasca's blog) - http://www.ludology.org

Terranova

http://terranova.blogs.com/

Of course, Jesper Juul's site
http://www.jesperjuul.dk/ludologist/

And there are books

Raph Kosters - http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1932111972/qid=1104805353/sr=8-1/ref=pd_ka_1/103-8418415-6859839?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

Eric Zimmermans -

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0262240459/qid=1104805383/sr=2-1/ref=pd_ka_b_2_1/103-8418415-6859839

Video Game Theory

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0415965799/qid=/sr=/ref=cm_lm_asin/103-8418415-6859839?v=glance

First Person

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0262232324/qid=/sr=/ref=cm_lm_asin/103-8418415-6859839?v=glance

Hamlet on the Holodeck - read, must buy
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0262631873/qid=/sr=/ref=cm_lm_asin/103-8418415-6859839?v=glance

Richard Rouse
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1556227353/qid=1104805609/sr=2-1/ref=pd_ka_b_2_1/103-8418415-6859839

James Paul Gee
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1403961697/qid=/sr=/ref=cm_lm_asin/103-8418415-6859839?v=glance

more to come.

the quiet

2004-12-27T15:15:00.000-08:00

I know I've been real quiet on this blog, but I've been spending the past several weeks dealing with holidays and trying to graduate college.

Good news is that I succeeded pretty well.

Also, I got a job! I'll be programming for Griptonite Games, a division of Amaze Entertainment, up in Kirkland (near Seattle).

So now the blog will be quiet due to relocating across the country and starting a new and challenging job.

But I do plan to post up more in the near future, in the mean time, all my ideas are going the old fashioned way (on paper)

Pets

2004-11-14T16:46:00.000-08:00

So my friend Stephanie and I were discussing about why Pacman doesn't cry. There's no rules for him to cry. It kinda reminds me a bit of that Tom Hanks line
"There's no crying in baseball"
Anyways, it's true. There's no rules set up by the game that allows you to cry. Try as you may, scream yell, jump up and down, kick the TV, Pacman will not shed a single tear. He'll just sit there, until the ghosts gobble him up.

This proves my point really, games are all about rules. Games are all about what you can and can't do, and the enjoyment really comes out of the exploration of the rules. Pacman works because the rules are finely tuned to allow an addictively fun experience.

I guess in this way, I'm a bit of a ludologist. However, I've been reading a bit of Hamlet on the Holodeck. Do not dismiss narativists.

Games aren't story, that's for sure. But stories can be very important. Why? Stories give MEANING to the game, the rules, the action that takes place. Stories create the environment, which gives the player a reason to affect this environment.

This came up a couple weeks ago when I went to Eat N'Park with my friend Bill. We were talking about the game I'm currently working on, Bandit's Adventure, and how the story and the gameplay doesn't fit.

This led to a discussion about how the story should always fit the game, not vice versa. Now I'm not sure ALWAYS is appropriate, but I believe there's some truth in the matter.

This led me to come up with the meaning of story in a game. I thought I was original, but looking back at some of my notes from the GDC, it seems that Nate Fox from Sly Cooper planted the seed in my head, because his ideas are almost verbatim what I just said.

Anyways, I think anyone who's interested in the Narrativists vs. Ludologist issue read some Hamlet on the Holodeck. I think it shows a great middle ground between the two.

So back to the Pacman issue, it led me to think about how it would be cool if emotions were the primary verbs. So I thought up of an idea for a game, there are many games out there where you have to take care of a pet, but what about a game where you ARE the pet, and the computer has to take care of you? think about it.

Watch, in two years, there's going to be a game that comes out like that and sues me for my idea.

the museum

2004-11-05T13:54:00.000-08:00

I went to the art museum this week with my friend Huiming. Pittsburgh's Carnegie Museum is really nice, and one of the perks of being a student at the University of Pittsburgh, is that the admission is free.

I've been to the museum often in my time here in Pittsburgh, but given my increasing shift towards my inquisitiveness of new art forms, this time around it was more engaging. I think part of it was that there was a particular purpose for our visit. I'm not speaking about the romantic purpose behind me wanting to spend time with her, but rather the reason why she chose the museum.

She had an assignment for an art history class, that revolved around a sort of "treasure hunt" in the museum. She was given a set of descriptions for particular works of art, and she had to find them and write about them. I do very well when given a purpose, and surprised myself greatly when I began to explain a lot about each particular artwork. Given that I am American, and she is Chinese, I have a greater level of familiarity behind the culture and mythology of European art, but I also believe my open-mindedness concerning learning subjects other than computer-related really came in handy.

The provocation of this knowledge, however, deepened the effect that exposure to the art forms gave to me. I started feeling a connection with the artists, envisioning myself in their place, trying to understand what exactly the artist was trying to say, trying to give, with their particular representation of their world.

I will tie this in with the book I am currently reading. Janet Murray's "Hamlet on the Holodeck." It came highly recommended from a colleague of mine. I kept pushing off the reading of it, protesting about "not having enough time." But I find that it gives me an opportunity to step away from my obligations for a short time, and explore more of my interests without too much time involvement (as opposed to game programming).

The unfortunate thing about reading this book, is that it seems my ideas are not that original. I assure you, a lot of the ideas I have come up with, I developed without much outside influence. But I guess it's not a contest of who got there first, and it's encouraging to read that there are others who believe the same way I do.

I agree with the fact that games are still in their incubatory form. There is a constant fight between the limits that technology places on the form, and the developers utilizing new technology to create greater limits. I understand that there are some who would disagree with my viewpoint of games as in incubatory state. But this mainly stems from the easy comparison of games to film.

However, take a walk through your local art museum and look at the progression of painting. The technology relatively stayed the same, but the techniques and practices, evolved over thousands of years. In comparisons, yes, games are relatively new.

Costikan would disagree. And to a point, I contradict myself as well. Games are more immersed in our being than language. Animals don't write poems, but the do play games. He believes that games are the cultural elaboration of play. I agree.

Wait a minute, you just said that games are new?

Ok, let me put it in this light. Games have been around probably since the existence of man. I wrote in a paper before that play is a necessary part of development, it builds our temporal and spatial reasoning. Competition and cooperation are ingrained into our psyche, and sports become a smaller scale of wars and civilizations. The majority of games before the computer games, usually took the form of either sports, cards, or board games. But each has a core element of restricted play, and the restrictions and representations create the myriad of each of these games that exist today.

But when the inevitable idea of using the computer, which is the most fluid machine created by man, to allow the playing of games, this was nothing short of a revolution. The combinations of representation and restrictions now gained the power to reach outstanding proportions, giving the game's creators and players much more freedom and power. Seriously, I wish I could make an analogy of the jump, but nothing comes to mind.

After Huiming and I finished up the last artwork, we talked a bit. She's a PhD student in Computer Science, so I am a bit interested in why she chose the particular path. Then it came my turn to speak. Of course, I spoke a lot about my ideas, the power inherent in games to create the next art form. The potential power to effect people in positive ways, to enact social change and better understanding of our world. I tried to keep it a bit low key, because I know to the uninitiated, I can sound a bit mad. I talked about how I like the art museum because it lets me think more about representation. She commented on how games are much like art because of the increasingly amazing power of graphics. To this I replied my theory about games as a language, and how the graphics become the adjective and adverbs.

"The power of games lies in their ability to be a language. The graphics, sound, etc, are the adjectives and adverbs. They specify on how things happen and what they look like, they describe the action and the subject. But the power lies in the sentence. If I say the fox walks across a room, the fact that the fox is brown or black, and the room is big or small, adds to the sentence, but in reality, the sentence is about foxes and rooms.

Let me say it this way. In a game, I give you a noun. Let's say it is Pacman. It doesn't matter how well Pacman is described, it is still a noun that boils down to the representation of you, the participant, in some form. I give you a set of verbs, Up, Down, Left, Right. That is now my language. You can't laugh, you can't cry."

To this, she replied "Why not?"

This has stuck with me, for the entire week, replying over and over in my mind.

Why can't Pacman cry?

Costikan

2004-10-29T13:29:00.000-07:00

Greg Costikan has a wealth of good thoughts on his blog today. Also, his essay "I Have No Words &I Must Design", was one of the essays I read a few years ago when I was coming to terms with my ideas towards games.

I want to note, I have wanted to develop games ever since I was 11 years old. My first program that I created on my own (unassigned), was a simple "game" for the Apple IIE. I had a fascination with fighting games, I think because the first videogame I remember playing was Karate Champ" with my stepfather (dad) at an arcade machine at some camp. Him and I didn't get along very well when I was young, and it was the biggest memory in my life of us having a sort of "bond". But that really struck an emotional note, and looking back, I believe that may have been the single moment that set me on my path.

So when I first found out about computers, and I found the power I had to "create", I was immediately engaged. I have always been a builder. My parents eventually stopped giving me toys other than Legos, because they realized that they would hardly be used. Well, legos and army men, because I had a fascination with the plastic army men as well.

I'm getting off subject.

Anyways, for some reason I picked up computers extremely easily. I knew I wanted to do more than what we were learning in class, so I eventually I came up with the idea to emulate the game that my dad and I played. This motivation made me breeze right through our assignments, so that I could spend extra time in class working on my program. I would go home and write lines and lines of code (graphics programming in Apple Basic wasn't very easy), and come back and type it all in. Ahh, the good ol days *tear*.

Looking back, I probably did a lot more work than I had to. But the thing with me is, I may not be extremely intelligent, but I make up for it with sheer tenacity. If you get me dedicated on something, I will get it done.

So I made a little program that had two guys, one was a white guy in blue pants, the other was a black guy in red pants. the program gave you two choices - punch or kick. When you picked one, it played an animation of the black guy either punching or kicking the white guy, and it would display "Winner!" or "Trojan!", respectively. I forget why I picked "Trojan!" as a winning statement. But, that was my first "game" so to speak. And I was immediately hooked.

Ever since that first program, my life has consistently revolved around pursuing the development of games. I made a bunch of QBasic games throughout my years in junior and senior high. The problem was that my ambition was a little overboard. I constantly wanted to make a "Mortal Kombat" clone. Now, looking back, I realize that it's mighty tough for a young teenager with no home computer and accelerated courses to make a MK clone by himself. I did make a couple really rudimentary games, though. It's too bad that they are lost forever. Eventually, during highschool, the sheer weight of trying to balance my chores, working a part-time job, taking accelerated classes, fighting to participate in clubs, and managing a social life (I was big into punk and the music scene back then), mixed with the fact that PASCAL (the language I was learning in class) was not very graphical (this was before I found out about the power of Windows GDI), I eventually resigned myself to developing a text-based adventure (which I still have some source code for), until my late junior year.

Then I got a computer, it was given to us by a friend of the family, and I can see why. It was 1997, and the computer I got was a TI-994A. Looking back, man this thing was so outdated. It had a 32K expansion kit, that's the size of a two XBox's stacked on top of each other. You turned it on and it sounded like a vacuum cleaner. I didn't have the speech synthesizer, unfortunately, but I did have a floppy drive (360K), and a plethora of ol TI-994A magazines.

On a sidenote, one TI-994A magazine had an interview with Will Wright. It came at a perfect time, as I was fighting with my father very hard to attend college. He was expressly against me furthering my education. Wright's interview gave me motivation to continue fighting. He is one of my personal heroes, and I hold meeting him as one of the best moments of my life.

The good thing about the old magazines like that, as opposed to today, is that they gave you tons of games in terms of source code. So I would spend hours, typing in undocumented code, so I could get a homemade version of Frogger to work. But I learned a lot, because eventually I started breaking down and analyzing the code. I even developed a couple of my own games, although they were horrible.

After a couple years of college, and a fiasco where I decided I never wanted to be a programmer, I eventually came to the realization that my frustration stemmed from school not teaching me the skills that I needed to create the games I wanted, and that if I wanted to be a game programmer, I would have to just learn to program games.

Thank god for Andre LaMothe. His "Windows Game Programming for Dummies" is what gave me my start, and has led me to where I am now.

But back to the original point of the post.

I always wanted to be a Programmer in the field of games. Contrary to what some people believe, I don't think you need to be a "gamer" in order to be a good game programmer. Quite the opposite, a good game programmer is a good programmer. Good programmers are interested in their work, but playing a game, and making a game, are two different "games". A good programmer spends time finding out how to program better, not sitting on the couch playing Nintendo. A good programmer spends their time in front of the computer, programming, trying to figure out how to page flip the video buffer, not playing countless hours of Starcraft. Now, given, you can do both, but if you have limited time in your day, a good programmer will choose option A, while a "gamer" will choose option B.

That has always been my problem, because I'm always juggling at least 3 things at once (work, school, social life), I have limited time in my day. So I try to use that for option A (although lately, I've been kinda worn out, but that's just temporary). So I'm not a gamer. Not to say I don't play games. If you get me hooked on a game, I play the crap out of it (Halo, Prince of Persia, Pikmin, Diablo, Warcraft). But almost because of that, I stay away from them. Instead I take my time, reading about real-time collision detection. As an aside, I found myself staring at LaMothe's "Tips and Tricks of the Windows Game Programming Gurus" when I woke up this morning. Seems I slept with it like a teddy bear last night!

However, I get a lot of flack for my thoughts. "How can you make games if you don't play them?" I'm always asked that, usually by people who don't know how the division of games usually goes nowadays (design, programming, art - all their own areas of development). One night I got so fed up, I emailed Robin about it (another person on my list of heroes). I was later in for a surprise, seems like it's a valid argument, as not only did she respond, but she posted it in her blog as well.

But now, my thoughts toward the subject is changing. I mean, looking at where I started, I wanted to make games because I wanted to build something AWESOME. Like totally rad. But now, I've dived into the belly of the beast. A lot of time, I'm not just thinking about developing an awesome computer game. Rather, I'm reading all these websites, all this research by people like Juul, Frasca, Zimmerman, Costikan, etc., and coming up with my own questions. What are games? What can they be? How can they affect people? So on and so forth.

There's a difference in viewpoints. I find myself with this big black blob of silly putty, this "game" so to speak. It's like a lump of clay in my hands, right now, it means nothing, it does not exist. So I look at it, and I think, what is the significance of this damn thing? What the hell am I making exactly? These are bigger questions.

In the industry, I will probably be given a set of goals and tasks, and I implement them. The why will be to earn a paycheck. I will be a programmer, implementing the ideas of the designer, it won't be my place to ask.

Maybe this is a lot like graphic design, or shooting commercials. There is no "why"'s and "what"'s, you just do what you're told and maybe slip some of your influence in them. It's the way it needs to be nowadays as games grow abnormally large. There is no individual personality. Games are a product if you want to survive off of them.

But guess what.

We still have digital camcorders, we still have editing software. My point? The director of a commercial may spend his or her day, doing what they are told, not really able to think about the bigger questions pertaining to their product. But they can come home, get a few friends together, and actually work on something that addresses these questions. At work, make the product; at home, make art.

That's where I find myself now. I think that's why I'm searching for more. I know that I'm going to be making someone else's creations for a paycheck. But I'm an artist at heart, experimenting with a medium that's full of potential. At work, I'll make the product.

But at home, I want to make art.

experimental gameplay

2004-10-25T17:42:00.000-07:00

So after my thoughts last night, I'm looking into the Experimental Gameplay workshop.
here's the link to the main website. http://www.experimental-gameplay.org/

Gameplay is the key elements here. Gameplay are the verbs that the user enacts upon the nouns. Or rather, the set of sentences that can be created with these noun/verb interactions.

Gameplay is the core of our medium. "Our" signifying game developers.

I wrote a bit about this in an essay a couple years ago. I'll try to summarize.

Each dimension has a corresponding art form.
Except the 1st dimension, which I'm not so sure about.

The second dimension has conventional "art". Paintings, drawings, murals, photographs, etc. Each of these are a sort of manipulation of 2 dimensional space, usually by varing color at a specific x, y position.

When we add the z plane, we get the third dimension. The 3rd dimension translates to "real space", ie, the world we live in. Go to your local art museum and browse the sculpture section. Here we have both the "color" of the exact coordinate of 3D space, but also another variable - "existence".

Mathematically, time is considered the 4th dimension. so now we have 4 variables (x,y,z, and t). a collection of (x,y,z) points correspond to a specific t. when t is viewed in ascending order, we get another variable - "sequence". The sequence is core element of a 4th dimensional art form, it's what separates the art from from others. 4th dimensional art forms are theatrical performances.

Ahh, but what about films? good question.
Films are 2 dimensional art forms with a t variable. I still count them as 4 dimensional, along with comic books, because the t variable changes, but the z variable stays the same (0).

Now, mathematically, a collection of 4th dimensional objects create a 5th dimension. The 5th dimension, if you believe in modern physics, signifies "alternate realities" and "parallel universes", buzzwords which have captured the mind of science fiction writers.

the 5th dimension adds another variable, which I'm going to call p (for possibility).

so imagine that the viewer of this medium is at instance (x,y,z, 0,0)

for the next increase of t from 0 to 1, the rules of gameplay says that there are a multitude of (x,y,z,1,p)'s. The set of these values constitute what these "rules" are, as they limit what possibilities are available.

So, does adding the variable of p (possibility), preclude games from being an "art" form?

I guess, that entails a definition of what art really is, which takes a rather trancedental view.

thoughts?

A little weird

2004-10-25T04:17:00.000-07:00

I'm feeling a little strange tonight. I've been feeling strange for a while.
I'm sitting up, trying to think about where I fit in with everything.

I haven't worked on any games lately, and haven't thought much about my theories of them, because I've been so busy with school that I can barely think. But I still believe that there's something there, that can be used for a lot of good.

I really want to experiment with AI. I think that's the next step. Yes, I think graphics are fascinating, especially when you consider it's just "fooling" the viewer with bunch of math! But there's something about the essential element of "thinking" that just intrigues me. There hasn't been a definitive answer to the question "what is intelligence?" It seems any attempts to provide a quantitative answer ends up with the definition being thrown out the window.

So how can a machine think? And what does it mean for a machine to think?

This is where I must repeat that the definition of a machine thinking HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH RESEMBLING A HUMAN. That is way too ambitious, way too complex.

But think about it. Does a fish think? Does a bird think? Does a snail think?

So if we made a machine that emulated a snail, but not a human, can we capture intelligence?

And can we make intelligence useful? What are our constraints?

Games are the best field, because games revolve around a limited set of nouns (objects which constitute a world, described by a set of adjectives which describe the objects attributes). In this world, the verbs are cut down to a limited set. The set of the allowable verbs are "rules".
These rules are described by a set of adverbs. In reality, a fancy graphic animation is nothing more than an adverb. The better the graphics, the fancier the adverb. Same thing with the description of object, a nice texture is nothing more than a nice adjective.

But really, the nouns and verbs are what constitute the actual language. The boy pets the dog.
That is the main point. The fact that the boy is young, and the dog is brown, gives you a better description of what we are describing. But in reality, we are talking about boys and dogs.

Look around you, look at the world. Think about how many nouns and verbs there are to describe the world we live in. Way too many to simulate!

Compare it to a game. Now we can create a finite set.

So the question is, if we create a sort of intelligence revolving around a limited set of nouns and verbs, does this translate to intelligence when the our language is expanded?

That's the question. I do not know the answer. I may never know the answer, but my intent is to better educate my guess.

hi

2004-10-18T16:15:00.000-07:00

Hi, this is Lucas. This used to be Myriam's site, but she gave it up. I thought that rubbishcentral was way too cool of a name to go to waste. So I took it. I'm still going to post in my livejournal, but I'm looking at this blog as a bit of a departure. I want to write a book, and here's where I plan to keep my notes.

I don't really have a plan for my book right now. I don't know the structure, I don't know what it will be about. But I know that deep down I have something to say. The problem is I have a lot of things to say, none of them which are terribly important.

But maybe, if I have enough unimportant things,they may turn out to be important. who knows.

test

2004-10-18T16:13:00.000-07:00

this is a test