A Look into Game Feel

I was invited to speak for a design class at the Florida Interactive Entertainment Academy on Game Feel. For this presentation, I wanted to really create something tangible for the students to interact with so I built a prototype using Unreal Engine 4's Roller Ball as my base. With this Blog post, I want to share some of my slides distilled down and provide some examples of games on the market as well as how I established several points of Game Feel in the prototype. The prototype video is also at the end of this post.

Game Feel is a cerebral concept. It is difficult to describe but easier to experience. There is no equation for success or perfection when it comes to Game Feel. It is more of an “invisible art”, where like real art, the painter needs to continue to practice. Why though is Game Feel so important? It establishes a connection between player and avatar or player and the virtual space.

The connection is key and in Steve Swink's book Game Feel he says the definition of Game Feel is "Real-time control of virtual objects in a simulated space, with interactions emphasized by polish." This definition applies across the board to all games of every genre. The control merely changes perspective and the same rules can apply though they may have a different context. To be honest you can apply this sort of "Feel" to other areas of interactive design. Let me humor you for a moment, The Car Door Window Example:

• If I try to roll the window in an older car with a “handle” it feels rough and a bit tough to control. The expected result is hard for me to feel out. How hard do I have to turn to reach the amount I wanted? By today's standards it no longer feels good.

• If I try to roll down a window using a power window “switch” it feels more consistent. I get the same result as the handle, but a smoother experience and one that I have more control over. However, in some car designs, when I press the button to roll down the window it will automatically begin rolling down all the way. This may not have been what I expected or my intent and I then have to finesse with the switch to regain control.

A car window with the ability to react more naturally to what my intended input is can be an application of "Feel".

Now in a game, we have all played games that "feel" good and games that "feel" bad. These are holistic systems that come together to feel good and not singular instances. As the definition above outlines it is about the system as a whole and these systems can be broken down into parts. The player avatar will feel different than when driving the car. However, the interaction between the two is part of the larger system while each retains its own, smaller system. In his book, Steve Swink mentions key aspects of Game Feel that can be used as a measurement.

pg 62, Game Feel by Steve Swink

These are Input, Response, Metaphor, Context, Polish, and Rules. These six terms represent measurements within the game space that we can establish as game designers. Not every aspect requires every measurement either. Context and Rules are more commonly seen within UI, numbers, and data. Think the coins and lives within the screen of Mario. Metaphor can be applied to most physical interactions or object properties. Think if a feather is falling it will lightly fall to the ground but if a bowling ball is dropped it will slam to the ground. Input and Response follow each other as my input to move will be followed by some kind of response, but there may be orthogonal responses outside of my avatar. Think if I jump and land in a pile of leaves there may be a slight brush of air at the impact point sending some leaves flying.

In that last example you can already see that the systems are interacting and we can establish input (jump), response (land), animation air effect, and leaves blowing away (polish and metaphor). You can akin this to the argument of fun vs simulation. Games are generally more fun because they aim to be fun. Simulating a sword attack is probably very dull but the sword attacks in Dark Souls are not dull at all.

For this next part, I will disclaim that I work for EA so I criticize between these two games knowing that both are great and I enjoy them both. Here are two quick snippets of me playing Battlefield V and Apex Legends. In this example, we are going to observe the movement, animation, and UI between both games. I specifically crouched in each and continued moving forward to illustrate a point of polish that we can measure.

The first thing I want to mention in these examples is the action of crouching and moving. In both gif animations the avatar transitions from standing run to crouching. The battlefield example has a slight downturn to the gun and the camera shifts but movement speed remains the same. In Apex the gun downturns significantly and the camera drops. Both of these are similar but why does the Apex version feel better? Via this example, visually, it looks better but I suggest you go play both games and compare them for yourself. The Apex version uses polish to provide a greater impact on the response to the players' input. In the Apex version the Camera bobble changes, the gun changes angle, movement slows slightly. In the Battlefield example camera, bobble remains the same, the animations speed is reduced, and gun ever-so-slightly turns. Independently both of these meet their purpose. If you remove the visuals and animations they are functional, but between the two one does Feel better than the other.

If we look at our previous established rules, we can see the UI displays various pieces of information. Specifically, in this case, the compass. No, what I'm about to point out is a UX issue but to be honest UX designers are Game Feel specialists when it comes to the rules and context of a space, menu structure, or user interface. The compass at the top of the screen in Apex helps to establish direction and quickly conveys this information. The Compass in Battlefield is almost hidden on top of the mini-map in the bottom left side of the screen. Even though I was playing the Conquest Mode in Battlefield in large open virtual spaces where a player needs directional information the example in Apex is the better feel. There is less of a struggle for a player to locate, read, and announce the information in Apex over Battlefield.

Conclusion

Game Feel is an interconnected web of systems, animations, SFX, VFX, and more. There are many different ways to accomplish the desired Game Feel and there is a layering effect that improves the feel with each layer. These layers are affected by budget, time, competency. There is a base layer though, and even without the additional layers, the game should feel great. If I removed all of the sounds and visual but left you with a black box that can move around and shoot other black boxes it should still feel good. For some examples view the video below!

Creating Quests Dynamically for Live Action Role-playing games

Awhile back while I was working with C.A.S.T.L.E. on their Live action role-playing (larp) game. One of the things we lacked within all of our "towns" or game sites was a structured method for tackling quest creation and implementation. Now it depends on the type of larp because there are many types but I will be covering the common "campaign" style that a vast majority of American larps follow. This will be a collection on how I approached some encounters, and the methods I used to successfully entertain the players. While this is for Larps I strongly believe that some of the same mentalities involved could translate to level and quest design in digital games. Finding ways to build content dynamically through what players want is the future of all games.

Flexibility

One important thing to remember about Larps is that, in most cases, the attendance ratios of a game will be heaver on the Player Character (paying customers) than the Non-Player Characters (non-paying). This means that you need to be flexible as a designer because there may not be resources available at a moments notice. Another aspect to flexibility is the quest itself. Designing quests to rigidly follow a path set by the plot team is a recipe for failure. However designing them for potential outcomes, "The players may kill everyone" or "The players may save everyone" is easier to manage when they end up doing something you never thought of.

For example, when I am given a group of players to take into a "dungeon" I learn what they have come for and if there is any important components (npcs, questlines, etc that are critical story elements). If those resources are not available to me I don't turn them away. Instead I lead them in believing they are doing what they came for. However, that doesn't mean they will find what they are looking for on the first try. Instead of finding the chambers of an important figure underground they discover a pool of tar that mutates orcs into two headed orcs. They still get a sense of "discovery" which is key to success. We as humans love to uncover things and when we discover something, even something we did not intend on discovering, it is just as great if not better.

Once more, the above example was executed because I had 4 npcs available for a group of 10 veteran players. To be flexible I had to create moment to moment encounters by dynamically scaling the npcs health, damage, and spawn rate as the dungeon went on. This is something I explained to my NPCs before the encounter, setting up structure for how they should act or react to the players based on what the players may do. In the end the players expressed that this was fun, they didn't find what they were looking for, BUT they had many opportunities for role-play and combat throughout the encounter. You know you have succeeded when a player expresses that they blew through a lot of resources but they could care less because it was well spent. I have several other examples of this but I would like to keep on topic.

Atmosphere

Moving into atmosphere we can find out that this is a tricky thing. The key here is to attempt to create a believable space. Sadly most larps do not have a budget or a large cavern underground. Instead we have to make due with tarps to build out "mod shacks" which act as our dungeons in most cases. One thing most larps do have are props, whether these be candles, chests, flowers, ribbons, etc. Instead of using these as "just clutter and set dressing" they can be used as components of the game. A ribbon can instantly become a collectible for the current quest, a chest could be hidden among the rubble for someone to find. Perhaps you have some fake bricks, a real fireplace (unlit), and a chest. Why not make that spot look like a cave in and within the rubble is a chest. Again, we come back to the sense of discovery that we as designers have control over. Even though we may not have the best equipment to get the job done it merely need to be believable. The players may question why there was a chest in the rubble, if they do then why not explore that avenue and start to hint at someone may have been in the cave in. Let the players help you write the story unfolding.

Lets look at another resourceful example. I once was approached at night by a group of 15. I had 2 npcs available, myself and one other. I decided to start up a quest line I had been pondering on for some time. I picked up a set of candles, a wireless speaker, and threw some dark robes on. I told the extra NPC to go out to a location in the woods that had an alter and benches. Set the speaker near a tree, set the candles at the alter and some near the seating, then lay on the alter. As the NPC set this up I began to walk with the players letting them speak to themselves in-game and picking up on what they were looking for. This group was just looking for mysterious things. When we approached the area I said "see those candles over there. You are standing here when you spot those candles. If you choose to investigate then how you approach this situation is up to you. If you choose to flee then run back to town." With that I walked down to the alter and said 3..2..1..game on!

With just myself, some spooky sounds, and an NPC I was able to entertain these players for over 30 minutes. I used the atmosphere to set the mood, this was creepy, this was in the woods, and it was isolated from the town. The players approached and took seats as my creature was performing some vile act on the NPC who was screaming in pain. The players, not knowing what to do sat and watched, something I did not expect. When the creature turned to them they all froze. I walked slowly between the benches,  sniffing, twitching. The players afraid to move continued to stay still. I began to feast upon one of them, as I whisper to her, "begin screaming as if I'm causing your worst nightmare to come to life." At last they spring to action and aid their friend; a fight ensues. Using the darkness and the forest I dashed around vanishing and appearing once more through the brush and I gave them a run for their money. The players thanked me for giving them one of the most interesting and entertaining encounter they have ever experienced. While other factors are at play this was mostly successful because of the atmosphere. If this had been day time, near the town where you could hear other players, or even with different monsters it may have been lackluster and less effective.

---

In-game Rewards

Last but not least we have the In-game reward side of quests. First, reward is important because reward does not need to come in the form of items and coins. Rewards can be so much more than that and recalling the previous two topics it depends on what the players are looking for. Do these players have a goal? If they seek information then why not reward them with information? Sometimes you know that players within the group have knowledge that others do not and even though they came to this cave to slay a manticore for its hide they discover more vital plans. Such as someone who has been breeding a horde of manticores and has recently left. At times resources may be low and it is ok to say "we don't have that," but always offer something else. Favors or even miscellaneous items such as chits/gems/trinkets can be enough to satisfy a player. Keep note of deals, offers, trades, and favors so the entire plot team can make use of these.

All too often the rewards are handed off as if the player is part of an online game. "Oh hey you completed the quest here is 20 gold," or "a chest appears before you." That is boring! That is detracting from the in-game mentality. Let me paint a picture as we move into the importance of in-game reward.

A player approaches the plot team asking for rewards. This could be anything but they are doing it with an out-of-game mentality. They know that you are a person that gives rewards, they know that if they come to you and ask for a quest or a "mod" they will get something. That does not add to the overall atmosphere of the game, and it can detract for everyone. As a quest designer we should always work our player's thoughts towards in-game. Here is an example:

Gregor walks up to a plot member directing some npcs.

Gregor: "I'm going adventuring for gold!"

Plot Member: "Oh, I would love gold too, good luck on your adventure."

Gregor: No, I mean I'm looking for trouble to get some gold coins.

Lumberyard Supervisor (Plot Member): "Looking for trouble? I think you came to the wrong place, I'm just directing these monkeys around to prep lumber for a house. If you are looking to fight someone I hear there is a fighting ring that opens up late at night, I think somewhere behind the tavern. (effectively established location, a character, and a future event of interest).

Gregor: Oh, I mean I would like to go look for something to fight right now and get some gold.

Lumberyard Supervisor: I think you should go ask the guards if they have seen any bandits, they may have a few bounties or event pay you directly for helping out. If you are looking to make some gold coins perhaps I can have you work for me? I'm in need of some muscle to move things around (these players would npc for some coins).

The above is an example of how the plot person can stay in-game and handle the situation of a player seeking rewards with an out-of-game mentality. The player will most likely convert into thinking about "what" they want to do in-game rather than seek "the rewards" from an outside perspective. It is important to note that there is a transition for both people involved. The plot member was just a plot member but quickly chose something that could act as a funnel for how to think. You should always be asking yourself, even in moments of rewarding players, how can I be in-character. What is the setting around me and how can I build out a better experience. You are in a world so use your brain power to define that world and establish tone and atmosphere.

Conclusion

Hopefully this has been helpful in some way! I believe that when designing quests in larp that one should attempt to have content developed before an event. However Larps are special in the fact that they are live and moment to moment no matter how you look at it. Sometimes an opportunity arises and as a designer you should take hold of it and deliver the biggest bang for the buck. It is important to be flexible, provide atmosphere, and keep rewards in-game.  By doing this you can provide meaningful experiences and develop not only player interest but content that is guided by player feedback and desire.

Avoiding Design Traps in Game Mechanics

This particular post is my thoughts & opinions on design traps in game Mechanic. 

Mechanic Trap: A mechanic purposefully or accidentally designed to look beneficial to the player but doesn’t provide appropriate benefit.

(this may not be the best description, but it is a starting point).

I have run into this many times in both digital and tabletop games. This commonly appears in RPG games, but is not limited to just that genre. A very brief example would be Dungeons & Dragons 3rd Edition where many feats available to the player actually provide little to no benefit. It can be argued that it is up to the player to make the choice of which feats they are going to take. However the deceptive nature of some of the feats leads us to question if the feat should be in the game at all.

While working on my tabletop RPG, Project Aymir D12, I ran into such an issue. I was designing the abilities for the rogue class and I gave them two reactive abilities. Reactive abilities are literally used as reactions to something and the player can only use so many “reactions” a turn. So, when I created these abilities I looked over both to make sure that the player would want to use them but have to make a skillful decision on which one to use due to their limitation.

Let’s look at the abilities: (these are just quick overviews of the skill and not the final description).

• (R1)Quick Acting - if the rogue fails to evade an attack he can spend a reaction to attempt a second evasion roll.
• (R1)Lucky Coin - When the rogue receives damage he may luckily escape the full force of the attack. Flip a coin, if the coin is heads reduce the damage based on your luck score. If tails take the full damage.

The issue here lays within the second ability Lucky Coin. The player gets a 50% chance to reduce damage or take the full damage. You may ask: What is wrong with this?

The skill provides a 50% chance to gain a bonus and costs an important resource. It doesn’t reduce damage to 0 unless the players luck score is really high. On the other hand the player could use Quick Acting and have a chance to negate the damage all together.

This causes “gamist” players or players with some common sense to only chooseQuick Acting as a skill because Lucky Coin is too risky and a trap/waste of experience. If players only choose Quick Acting and based on the games rules it is the most viable option then Lucky Coin doesn’t even need to be in the game.

In that case all we need to do is add some kind of “reason” for people to want to take Lucky Coin. With that in mind I added a second bonus to the player for getting tails on the coin flip.

• (R1)Lucky Coin - When the rogue receives damage he may luckily escape the full force of the attack or cause the attacker to get hurt as well. Flip a coin, if the coin is heads reduce the damage by your luck score. If tails take the full damage but deal your luck score back as damage.

Now when the player flips the coin he receives a benefit from either side but he takes damage no matter what. This makes it so that players with high evasion may want to retaliate or reduce their damage when actually being hit, so they may take Lucky Coin. Players who do not have a high chance to avoid may choose Quick Acting to give them a second boost in dodging the attacks.

Conclusion:

When designing mechanics for anything make sure that there is a reason to choose all mechanics. It is important that the players decisions are skillful choices of their gameplay style. Adding a skill for filler isn’t a valid excuse to put it into the game. It is your job as a designer to piece together the interesting choices players can make.

Color Blindness In Games

Did you know that majority of games, especially competitive games do not support color blindness? Only recently have game developers begun to incorporate or update their colors in games to help those who are colorblind. I have a few friends that are colorblind so I was made aware of this several years ago. A lot of artists or basically those who choose the colors in the game will commonly go for Red & Green. Both are associated with good/bad, go/stop, etc. An artist is also not color blind, or at least very unlikely so what they see seems fine.

Now, this doesn’t mean your entire game needs to feature colorblindness modes. There are ways of making characters or items pop out without changing your colors. Colorblindness settings come into play when information is vital and the player needs to be able to quickly differentiate two colors. Games such as Call of Duty require quick understanding of player names, if a point in domination is yours or an enemies. In Left4Dead a player needs to see the outline glow of their teammate. Sometimes the enviroment mixes too much red and green making it difficult for someone with Dichromacy or Anomalous Trichromacy to see anything properly.

so, what is the fix for this? Well Yellow/Orange & Blue. My personal preference is Orange and Blue (artistically I like it more) but either works.

Note, I am not covering complete colorblindness because at that point values are the only way to tell the difference between what’s what. I’m only covering Dichromacy and not Anamalous Trichromacy because the earlier is the complete lack of, while the latter is not. If you choose colors based on Dichromacy the Anamalous Trichromacy should be able to see the colors without issue.

Below are the colors in order of the rainbow from left to right. Each example is positioned the same. For those of you that may be color blind and trying to see this The second and fifth circles are Orange and Blue respectively. The third is Yellow.

Dichromacy: Red-Green

Dichromacy: Blue-Yellow 

Here is a comparison of the second and fifth circle from each. Notice that the normal colors translate to different colors.

So remember! Color blind people play your games. About 10% of American males are color blind. A large % of males play games!

Edit: I recently played the Titanfall beta and Respawn chose Orange and Blue as their team colors! Awesome job guys!