Gaming Elements: Structure

Plot Structure Templates              CNN article on "earworms"

Fundamentals

At the core of any game is an idea.  The purpose of a game is to actualise the idea in an interactive format to be portrayed to the gamer.  A business way to look at it is creating a product to sell to a customer, and artistic way is to express the story and mood that goes with it.

Engagement

This is an important one – How engaged does the gamer have to be?  Are there lulls in the gameplay where they can rest their attention?  Is there a structure to the plot – maybe a climax to the end of a chapter/level?

Structure

There is a common formula tried and tested… I’m gonna use Star Trek episode structure for my example:

1^st Quarter:  Introduction

·         The scene is set – This is where you get introduced to the characters, see the challenge which will have to overcome.

2^nd Quarter: Development/Twist

·         Story development – You see the intended direction they need to go to resolve the challenge

·         Sub plot – A second story relating to the main plot is revealed – Maybe it will clash with the intended direction of main plot or is to give more background information or mood

·         The problem they didn’t want to happen – Something goes wrong, and is vital to story it is resolved

3^rd Quarter: Build-up of tension & release

·         Crescendo – This is where they will have to work hard and often do the unexpected, leading to an inevitable climax where the goal will have to be met.  Imminent threat and often a timescale creates pressure.

·         Sub plot progression – Something unexpected happens, maybe a twist where there is a personal decision.

·         Climax - Friction & suspense leading to action and resolution

4^th Quarter: Wrap-up

·         Conclusion – The characters reflect or rejoice on the actions they took that day.  They are richer for the experience.  They progress.

This formula would work well as a level or chapter.  The idea stays the same, what you have to consider is the engagement level. Star trek is obviously made for TV and tries to draw you in and is structured around the advert breaks to “leave you hanging” and hook you to watch the following section.  There is also a soap formula in star trek where the characters all grow and is a greater scale of story arc.  This often fits over whole series and even further. This can also apply to modern action games like Gears of War… I’m sorry to say I know someone who cried while playing the third one as he had grown so attached to a character through playing the whole series.   This is serious emotional impact evoked through story telling.

Games Are Not TV, Film, Books, or Music

This is pretty obvious but needs to be mentioned.  Games are interactive and require the gamer to interact with the game.  With music you can dance, with film you can discuss but you have no direct influence on how the film unfolds or what the lyrics in the song will be.  It’s this interaction which sets it apart from the other entertainment.

The interactive aspect gives the game developer a whole world of tools and challenges into creating a game.

Street Fighter IV vs Mortal Kombat 9

These are both fighting games – very similar in principle; Two people on either side of the screen need to beat each other up.  There are also many precepts which are applied to both – They both have energy bars to display how far from defeat they are, they both use similar controls to move about and attack, they both have a variety of characters with unique moves and styles of fighting.  The presentation is the same you go from options to arcade or versus mode, have a practice mode and can adjust the same options.

There are also many subtle and vastly different elements, such as gameplay, presentation, network code/online function and of course marketing.

Mortal Kombat: Mature; with gore, realistic models, dark/evil setting

Street Fighter: Arcade style; with vibrant colours and cartoon like graphics, more sophisticated fighting mechanics/balancing, more fluid gameplay from established systems.

Mortal Kombat I found disappointing.  It tries to complete with other modern fighters but doesn’t bring the needed flexibility in gameplay.  The gore appeals to teenagers more than me and I find it to be a gimmick getting in the way of the game.

Street Fighter IV I was amazed at, I hadn’t really played much since the old days in arcades and before that SNES/Megadrive.  It seemed to give me the same feeling I had when playing it then, it felt and looked so suited to how I want to play fighting games.  The simplicity and learning curve are amazing, There is a massive range of skilled players you can very easily play online.  You can easily check your own and friends replays/progression, study high end battles.  There is also great flexibility on the characters and the style you can play.

I don’t want a fighting game where the fighting is monotonous and unrewarding – Mortal Kombat gives you few options when playing online as the balancing is out the window, also every characters normal moves have identical properties, they move the same speed and have the same amount of energy – These are very easy ways to make characters feel unique and to balance the game accordingly… But no.

I can bitch a lot more about Mortal Kombat and bore you with fighting game mechanics… Let’s just say I like fighting games a lot and MK has nothing done right.  These are an example of how two games closely the same can be very different – Maybe made for a different market or just not took into full account current standards.  It did however win some awards…  Think Warner Brothers have something rigged.