Listening to a GDC Radio podcast of "AI and Design: How AI Enables Designers" by Brian Reynolds from Big Huge Games. Talks about how designing AI influences game design concepts.
First notion: start somewhere, even if it's just x = rnd(3). Then you can at least get feedback for next iteration:
"AI was dumb because he did X when he should do Y"
Then it's easy to go from there.
Examples of AI influence design:
In Civ, player's able to make and break treaties at will with no influence to other factions. Soln is to make a reputation guage - this affects design.
In Colonization (?) he talks of being able to make a treaty, and walk your troops in without computer noticing. It had no way of knowing. Design element soln: you can't put your troops within 2 squares of opponents.
Only halfway done.
Showing posts with label podcast. Show all posts
Showing posts with label podcast. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 01, 2006
Monday, October 30, 2006
Clint Hocking about interactive media
(Lecture at Futureplay)
He suggests that games can be places along 3 axis... we're currently focused on two:
Technology axis (group responsible: programmers)
This goes from data to resources
Either you rely on precomputed info or runtime. Think Myst vs some tiny game that creates textures on the fly
Representational axis (group responsible: creative team/artists)
Abstract vs simulation
Pong is abstract, it could represent anything. A game, or even a conversation. Rockstar's Table Tennis can't be argued to be anything else. It's a simulation.
His new concept:
The game "Call of Duty" is used as an example. You can play it, and think it's "fun". Well, the game designer has said it was inspired by the movie "Saving Private Ryan". It was of course a good movie, but when you get out of the movie do you say "wow, that was a fun movie!" ...? No, you don't - so he claims fun is not the right word.
"The solution I proposed was to stop talking about fun and start talking about an 'axis of meaning' that has at one end 'distraction' and at the other end 'engagement'."
Think Saving Private Ryan vs Snakes on a Plane, Final Fantasy vs Final Fight. Goes on to say distraction isn't bad, it's still enjoyment.
Continues to say that we're stuck as niche programmers making games to a niche group (18-35 male). Similar to other articles I've seen that talks about how the console wars are too focused on the core demographic.
He suggests that games can be places along 3 axis... we're currently focused on two:
Technology axis (group responsible: programmers)
This goes from data to resources
Either you rely on precomputed info or runtime. Think Myst vs some tiny game that creates textures on the fly
Representational axis (group responsible: creative team/artists)
Abstract vs simulation
Pong is abstract, it could represent anything. A game, or even a conversation. Rockstar's Table Tennis can't be argued to be anything else. It's a simulation.
His new concept:
The game "Call of Duty" is used as an example. You can play it, and think it's "fun". Well, the game designer has said it was inspired by the movie "Saving Private Ryan". It was of course a good movie, but when you get out of the movie do you say "wow, that was a fun movie!" ...? No, you don't - so he claims fun is not the right word.
"The solution I proposed was to stop talking about fun and start talking about an 'axis of meaning' that has at one end 'distraction' and at the other end 'engagement'."
Think Saving Private Ryan vs Snakes on a Plane, Final Fantasy vs Final Fight. Goes on to say distraction isn't bad, it's still enjoyment.
Continues to say that we're stuck as niche programmers making games to a niche group (18-35 male). Similar to other articles I've seen that talks about how the console wars are too focused on the core demographic.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
