[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: ::scr Re: Cognitive Friction
On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 01:09:28PM +0000, jo walsh said:
> as if i'd learnt a programming language and could now find it
> exponentially easier to learn another one. i have an expectation set.
> with no knowledge of the field i'd say the expectation set of most
> games is pretty small. :)
Sort of. As I mentioned earlier games of similar genres tend to use the
same sort of interface - fighting games often employ the same sequence
of buttons to pull off similar types of moves - if I was to say that to
do move 'X' that you roll the D buttons from bottom to towards then even
if you didn't look at me like I was speaking Gujarati then you probably
still have problems pulling it off - as Jo said it comes down to muscle
memory.
On a slightly higher level you then have games like Dune and
Civilisation that have more complicated interfaces have a much more
difficult task although later games of the same genre then have a
problem that players expect a similar interface so any attempts to add
or change things, even for the better, are resisted.
Stepping sideways, games have another problem in that the whole
experience is the interface -
Every games is designed round the player while the hardware and software
for games may change, the psychology underlying how players learn and
react to the game is a constant. The problem that game designers have
i that whilst psychology has come up with quite a bit of stuff that's
useful to them it's buried deep within scientific journals and hard
copy and the like. Whilst designers don't seem to have a problem
wading through physics manuals and obscure maths books looking for
equations to simulate water and snow and lighting effects this sort
of information is less accessible.
Most game psychology can broadly be described as behavioral psychology
which focuses on experiments and observable actions. An interesting
thing about behavioral research is that most of the major experimental
discoveries are species-independent and can be found in anything from
birds to fish to humans.
Behavioral psychologists look for general "rules" for learning and for
how minds respond to their environment. Because of the species- and
context-free nature of these rules, they can easily be applied to novel
domains such as computer game design. Unlike game theory, which stresses
how a player should react to a situation (and is another thing that I'm
deeply interested in), behavioural pyschology looks at how people
actually do react.
As an example of the difference, a Game Theory anecdote I read once goes
like this ...
Two game theorists turned up in Jerusalem for a conference and got in a
taxi to go to their hotel - when they got there the squabbled with the
driver about how much it was and refused to pay - so he drove them all
the way back to the airport and kicked them out. This surprised the game
theorists since it was a lose situation for him and therefore
illogical. Legend has it they they came up with a whole new field of
Game Theory based on that experience.
Anyway, back to BP, it's important in games in thta this is how you
design levels and set difficulty curves - these are heavily
demographically orientated - American, European and Japanese gamers have
different expectations on the number they'll die and have to play
through the game again and hwne they'll get power ups and other rewards.
In BP terms :
Reinforcer: An outcome or result, generally used to refer to a reward.
Examples: an experience point, winning a level, a bigger gun.
Contingency: A rule or set of rules governing when reinforcers are
given. Also referred to as a schedule of reinforcement. Examples: a
level every 1,000 experience points, a bonus level that is only
available if you kill a certain opponent.
Response: An action on the part of the player that can fulfill the
contingency. This could be killing a monster, visiting an area of the
game board, or using a special ability.
This all forms part of the interface.
Then you have the usual narrative and suspension of disbelief problems
that comes with film/tv/writing but with the added problem that you
don't have the same degree of control - this leads to problems unique in
games : for example players find it frustrating that their progress is
blocked by a lock door - "But I've got a fscking@&%^!!rocket launcher,
mere wooden planks nailed together cannot stop the might of the
ExplodoTron4000". Another interface problem.
Finally, and not exhaustively there's the actual interface which has
been discussed ...
http://www.thegestalt.org/scr/arch/2001-October/000133.html
... previously.
This post is (typically) rambling nowhere. I probably had a point when I
started writing it before christmas but I've lost it (Yes, I've checked
behind the sofa) so I've rushed the last few paragraphs - can you tell?
There are references below for those who haven't fallen asleep yet.
Simon
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Foundational Relationships Between Ethnomethodology and System Design
http://ftp.ics.uci.edu/pub/jpd/papers/1998/hci-technometh.pdf
Designing Games for Novice Gamers
http://www.gamasutra.com/features/19990514/nongamers_01.htm
Adapting the Tools of Drama to Interactive Storytelling
http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20010914/littlejohn_01.htm
VUW interface games development group
http://igdg.fusion.net.nz/
Artificial Intelligence & Computer Games Research
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/laird/gamesresearch.html
including an interesting paper on anticipation in non player characters
It Knows What You're Going to Do: Adding Anticipation to a Quakebot.
http://ai.eecs.umich.edu/people/laird/papers/Agents01.pdf
and a special, festve bonus link :)
Glory and Shame: Powerful Psychology in Multiplayer Online Games
http://www.gamasutra.com/features/19991110/Baron_01.htm