Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revisionBoth sides next revision
research_report_groworld_dave [2010-02-03 15:05] – 82.181.215.205research_report_groworld_dave [2010-02-03 15:23] – 82.181.215.205
Line 7: Line 7:
 Foam were working on this project with two other groups, [[http://www.tale-of-tales.com|Tale of Tales]] and [[http://www.sixtostart.com/|SixToStart]]. Both of whom have experience working on projects which use games technology to explore specific experiences and situations.  Foam were working on this project with two other groups, [[http://www.tale-of-tales.com|Tale of Tales]] and [[http://www.sixtostart.com/|SixToStart]]. Both of whom have experience working on projects which use games technology to explore specific experiences and situations. 
  
-And as a game project, we were sometimes explicitly, at other times implicitly tackling these issues:+And as a game project, we were sometimes explicitly, at other times implicitly tackling issues such as these:
  
   * What is the depiction of plants and growth within existing games?   * What is the depiction of plants and growth within existing games?
   * Should this be a scientific simulation, if not how do we avoid this?   * Should this be a scientific simulation, if not how do we avoid this?
-  * What is an art game? Are we making one?+  * What is an art game? Are we making one, or a 'normal' game?
      
 ==== Problem/Aim ==== ==== Problem/Aim ====
Line 167: Line 167:
  
 This was a really ambitious project. Even with a very clear design agreed from the start we would have been seriously pushed to complete a game project with the resources and time we had. Looking back I am pleased that we covered so many of the aims, even if we failed to bring them together into a single product.  This was a really ambitious project. Even with a very clear design agreed from the start we would have been seriously pushed to complete a game project with the resources and time we had. Looking back I am pleased that we covered so many of the aims, even if we failed to bring them together into a single product. 
 +
 +These are the things I would like to look at changing if we were to undertake a similar project:
 +
 +  * More use of computer-less prototyping, board games, lego, drawings
 +  * Less 'open debate' and more focused with post-its, drawings, etc - even taking notes, it was difficult to record all the decisions and remember them between meetings, leading to a certain amount of retreading old ground 
 +  * More restrictions, earlier on - I felt there was a constant re-widening of the possibilities, when we needed to be making decisions 
 +  * Doing the user stories at the start of the project - we didn't talk about our audience much at all until this point
  
 The plant eyes prototype I worked on formed an end result I was pleased with, but it never really felt like it could stand alone as a game. The main reason for this is that it remained a test of a game mechanic, a way of growing into space and a achieving a disorientating feeling of becoming another life form with different restrictions and abilities. To make into a game it would take surrounding this growth mechanic with a richer world, problems to solve and ideally, other human players to interact with.  The plant eyes prototype I worked on formed an end result I was pleased with, but it never really felt like it could stand alone as a game. The main reason for this is that it remained a test of a game mechanic, a way of growing into space and a achieving a disorientating feeling of becoming another life form with different restrictions and abilities. To make into a game it would take surrounding this growth mechanic with a richer world, problems to solve and ideally, other human players to interact with. 
  • research_report_groworld_dave.txt
  • Last modified: 2010-02-22 14:41
  • by davegriffiths