GDC 2008’s Game Studies Download 3.0

Unfortunately, I am not at GDC. Luckily, many people post the information they were going to present at the event on their websites!

The third Game Studies Download is up at http://www.avantgame.com/top10.htm and some of the things within it are rather interesting!

#9 Discussed how breaking a games’ immersion can be good for the player, as sometimes clumsy controls can cause reactions to the game that don’t follow the desired aesthetic. In addition, a game commenting on itself or causing a positive distraction to what is at hand can create a more memorable experience for gamers.

I think a few designers have been aware of this for awhile; the one that stands out the quickest would be Kojima with Metal Gear Solid. Almost every one of these factors is contained in each of his games. The in-game radio is a positive distraction from what is going on in the game, allowing the player to take a tiny break from the action within the game to get some more of the story or some humorous rhetoric; often the characters in the chat will break the fourth wall by saying “Press the Square button to choke him!” or something of the like.

Half-Life also does some commenting on itself, especially in HL2. The player, always being in Gordon Freeman’s view (always 1st person, and no loss of control during “cinematic” events within the game, which i LOVE!) also does not say anything. I simple interaction with the E key always elicits some vocalization from characters. Often the game makes a note of Freeman being a, “Man of few words,” or the “strong, extra silent type.” I remember these things from the game because they took me out of the immersion (which the intentionally make almost as seamless as possible in every regard) to give me a mental break from being sucked in and let me have a chuckle before progressing; perhaps I enjoy these games more without even realizing it because they did that. It also helps that the writers at Valve are pretty sharp.

#6 Women/non-gamers acquire spatial awareness improvements within 10 hours of game play.

It has always made me wonder why more women do not play FPSs, and while there are actually a few more reasons than simply, “it’s just the violence!” On issue that game theorists often look at is how difficult is too difficult? Or why certain players are drawn to certain game types. From reading of Raph Koster’s Theory of Fun (fantastic book, also an amazing artist), he notes that people will often be drawn towards games that they are innately superior in. Men are, in general more spatially aware than women. It’s by no chance that more men play FPSs than women.

However, #6 is suggesting that if a woman is to sit down for about 10 hours and play a game that involves spatial awareness that determines the success of a player, they will acquire the ability to keep this heightened spatial awareness permanently. The study itself retested after 5 months and their scores were about the same. This coincides exactly with what Koster was relating in his book (Pg. 108 of Theory of Fun, if you are interested.) So the question now is; how do you keep players interested in a game for 10 hours while they work up their abilities enough to the point that if the game was somewhat frustrating because it didn’t sync up with their innate skill sets, how do you keep them hooked long enough? It’s an uphill battle until the player can gain the necessary skills to continue on with a more comfortable feel for it. Perhaps the industry needs to introduce some more “training up games” where it’s not so much a direct FPS, but games that are based around spatial awareness for player success. Then women may not be as put off to the idea of FPS. (As a note, these references are from studies on average female players and are not intended to be sexist stereotypes. I’d rather have a great discussion about how men and women are different and how to improve both sides of the fence rather than being placed into the ’sexist pig’ bracket without any discussion.)

#5 The Exit Screen!

Who would have thought about the exit screen as being an integral part of a games process. The only risk, as was noted in the presentation, is that you exit the game or not. Games build up a grand entrance; there are cinematic in almost every game now when a player begins their journey, and yes, when they complete the game, but what about when a player does not have time to complete the game in one sitting. They must exit the game in some fashion, and this year the focus of a game element that is not studied as much was on this topic.

I personally would have never thought of this by myself. Once I read this, I thought back at how many games I remember the exit screen of; one was DOOM, asking if I was wussying out or some other such thing. Other than that, not many games give me as nearly a grand an exit as an entrance. Perhaps with MMOs there can be some sort of “leaving the game world” sort of cinematic that can be played the first time a player logs off in that area; in FPSs perhaps the player has to move out of a command center between missions to a parking lot or some other resting area that would be “off the job”. There are many interesting possibilities, most of which I’m sure will come about when I’m not trying to think up some for this post!

Some of the other findings were not so surprising, such as Voice Chat making your relationships with guild members much more… extreme, whether positively or negatively, there is a stronger attachment to the emotions regarding them. Video games becoming the future of live sports, and games having a more enjoyable experience if you can take it outside of the screen with friends or family.

Overall a fantastic read; I wish I could be there to hear the actual presentation. Hopefully there might be a live-blog of it out there somewhere or a podcast or some such.