Introduction to Critical game studies assessment 2.
In this essay I will talk about the major design issues we had during the developing of our key stage 1 game, Mr. Cheesey’s Spelling Fun. Even key stage 1 games take a long time and a lot of hard work to make; unexpected problems can pop up at any time so it’s important to be thorough in the design process.
Mr. Cheesey’s Spelling Fun is a game designed to assist key stage 1 children through the process of learning how to spell. We wanted to make the game both educational and fun so the children playing it would keep coming back. You play as Mr. Cheesey, who you use to collect letters that are spread out over a platform level. It then takes you through to a spelling screen in which you have to rearrange the collected letters to spell out a word by dragging and dropping them into the right position. Hints will be given to assure that the game flows and so the people playing don’t get stuck.
As soon as the idea of controlling a little cheese in a platform game was put on the table we all immediately decided that that was the game we wanted to make. Before starting the designing process we looked at different platform games and games that were aimed at the same audience. We went on the BBC website (www.bbc.co.uk/schools/ks1bitesize) to research KS1 games and found that there were a lot of similarities in the artwork of the games, also how simple and easy to pick up they all were. We did this to get a clear idea of how we wanted our game to look and ideas on how the mechanics would work. In Doug Churches article for Gamasutra he says “As a designer, you still have to figure out what is fun, what your game is about, and what vision and goals you bring to it.”(Church: 1999: 2) Here, he discusses the importance of getting the features right in the design of a game to avoid less complications during the development.
We also took an extensive look at the national curriculum to ensure that the content within our game was appropriate for children aged between four and seven. On the national curriculum website we found a section in the English key stage 1 content that we looked over.
Spelling
4. Pupils should be taught to:
Spelling strategies
a. write each letter of the alphabet
b. use their knowledge of sound-symbol relationships and phonological patterns [for example, consonant clusters and vowel phonemes]
c. recognise and use simple spelling patterns
d. write common letter strings
e. spell common words
f. spell words with common prefixes and inflectional endings
Checking spelling
g. check the accuracy of their spelling, using word banks and dictionaries
h. use their knowledge of word families and other words
i. Identify reasons for misspellings.
If the spelling section could roughly stick to this content our game would be suitable for the target audience. We then went back to the national curriculum website and found a database of words that KS1 children would be learning. We decided to pick out all the words that related to the themes in our game and use them for the spelling task. After planning the educational part of the game, we had to figure what would make our game fun.
We started playing retro platform games to try and spark some creativity. As we were playing through various titles; Mario, Donkey Kong, Kirby etc, we started looking at them from a designers point of view, talking about what works and what could be improved. From playing these games, we made a list of all the features that we wanted to have in our game, it consisted of things like; characters, character actions, levels and level layouts etc.
After reading an article ‘a formal approach to game design and game research’, written by ‘Robin Hunicke, Marc LeBlanc, Robert Zubek’ they talk about aesthetics using a ‘more directed vocabulary’. We sat down together with the intention of discussing what our aesthetic goals would be; to make it easier for ourselves we looked to the article and used their vocabulary to sum up what we wanted from our game.
1. Sensation 5. Fellowship
Game as sense-pleasure Game as social framework.
2. Fantasy 6. Discovery
Game as make-believe Game as uncharted territory
3. Narrative 7. Expression
Game as drama Game as self discovery
4. Challenge 8. Submission
Game as obstacle course Game as past-time
(Hunicke, Leblanc, Zuberk: 2004: 2)
Above are the words taken directly from the article. “When working with games, it is helpful to consider both the designer and player perspectives. It helps us observe how even small changes in one layer can cascade into others. In addition, thinking about the player encourages experience-driven (as opposed to feature-driven) design” (Hunicke, Leblanc, Zuberk: 2004:2) also taking in to consideration though “while there is no grand unified theory of games or formula that details the combination and proportion of elements that will result in ‘fun’, this taxonomy helps us describe games, shedding light on how and why different games appeal to different players, or to the same players at different times.” (Hunicke, Leblanc, Zuberk: 2004:2) we wanted our game to be aesthetically appealing as possible so we chose to apply as many goals as we could without over complicating our.
The main thing we focused on was making our game a challenge. Every game has to have some sort of challenge, if there’s nothing trying to stop you from accomplishing your goal then you don’t really have game. This is discussed in ‘MDA: a formal approach to game design and game research’. “if the player doesn’t see a clear winning condition, or feels like they can’t possibly win, the game is suddenly a lot less interesting” (Hunicke, Leblanc, Zuberk: 2004:3) For our game we set many challenges for the player to overcome; difficulties with different life limits, a variety of enemies each with their own form of an attack, interactive platform levels that you jump around on. We feel that we set an appropriate amount of challenges for KS1 children. There’s not so many that a child would feel that it’s not going to be possible to complete, there’s enough to make him/her feel that it is going to be difficult to complete. These challenges were put into the game to make the ‘sensation’ of completing it higher. We wanted the player to enjoy it so much that they would want to come back and play it again. To achieve this, we decided that the game needed more than just a challenge. In Newman’s book, he discusses the importance of struggling to earn an award, “It is essential to note that players want to work for their rewards” (Newman: 2004:16). We discussed this topic and decided that the game needed to reward the player for achieving their goals, so we came up with a reward system. The player would be gifted a key after completing each level, they would then use that key to insert into a ‘magical chest’. After collecting and inserting all the keys into the chest, it would open up and reveal a well done certificate for completing the game. They can choose to print off the certificate, it shows that you’ve completed it and the difficulty and time in which you done it in. ‘Fantasy’ was already a concept, as our main character was going to be a piece of cheese that teaches children how to spell. Mr. Cheesey was the basis for the entire game. After he had been invented the rest of the characters were quickly developed; blueberry canary, hot-dog Dog, bake well Bob, dino Dan the ham and Spud. All the characters were based on different foods; we thought that children would find this amusing. While designing the characters we only had the thought of making it enjoyable for the target audience to look at, we never thought of it as adding a fantasy element to our game. We also wanted to make it expressive. When the player has completed the platform part of the level, they advance to the spelling part. Here they are asked to use the knowledge that they would be expected to learn in school to advance to the next level. The spelling section is the only part of the game that can be considered tedious. If the player is stuck and hasn’t found the answer, they can look to their hints, but if the hints have been used up the player has to rely on him/herself. I feel, as game players myself that when the challenge is higher, completing it would make me feel much more accomplished. For a child it is very important to highlight their achievements and praise them whenever they succeed at something. It was always important for us, and for the player, that after playing it they would discover that they can actually have fun while learning. We felt that this was the main reward for the player. With all these combined elements included in our game, I feel as though it borders on submission. Hunicke, Leblanc, Zuberk explain submission as “Game as past time” (Hunicke, Leblanc, Zuberk: 2004:2) and it was always our aim to make our game, one that players would remember.
Overall our game had quite a few major design issues, and in turn slowed us down when we started developing the game, but when times were tough we pulled together as a team and carried on working. In ‘Greg Costikyan’s’ article ‘I have no words and I must design: Toward a critical vocabulary for games’ he notes “It is important, however, to understand how and why game structures do shape player behavior; indeed, understanding this is fundamental to mastering the craft of game design. You cannot simply throw together a bunch of different game elements, and expect them to cohere; you must consciously set out to decide what kind of experiences you want to impart to your players, and create systems that enable those experiences.”(Costikyan: 2002: 20) We took this on board whilst designing the game but we felt as though we had a good combination of elements in our game, and felt that, although it was a difficult game, designing and developing. It was a game worth trying to make. This project has taught me a lot, and from this I will take with me, for future projects, the knowledge that the designing process of making a game is arguably the most important. You must remember at all times that you are making a game for the target audience as appose to making a game for your own enjoyment.
QCA Curriculum Division, 83 P., 2008. National Curriculum for England 2008. Available at: http://curriculum.qcda.gov.uk/key-stages-1-and-2/subjects/english/keystage1
Church, D., Gamasutra - Features - Formal Abstract Design Tools. Available at: http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/3357/formal%20abstract%20design%20tools.php
LeBlanc, M., Zubek, R. & Hunicke, R., MDA: A formal approach to game design and game research. Discovery, 83(3), p.01–04.
Newman, J., 2004. Videogames, London: Routledge.
Costikyan, Greg (2002) ‘I Have No Words & I Must Design: Toward a Critical Vocabulary for Games’, CGDC Conference Proceedings. Studies in Information Sciences. Tampere: Tampere University Press, pp. 9–33.
