Thanks Jameson!

http://jamesondurall.blogspot.com/2010/06/what-does-game-designer-actually-do.html

With the arrival of Alan Wake this week, a game that claims to be deep in the horror genre,  ’Horror Games’ are once again on the tips of every gamers tongue. And while this game has yet to reach my hands, and I’ve yet to make a judgement, I’ve been thinking about, and investigating, the types of Horror Games that have been released over the last 2 decades. And while taking an in depth look at each of these games is beyond the scope of this article, a cursory glance and criticism of some of the more popular horror games begs to be written.

Take Dead Space. On paper it should be the type of game made for me: mutated creatures, space, death by dismemberment. Silent Hill too. But these games fall to the same problems that so many horror films fall victim to: because they don’t know what horror should be, they try to recreate the elements of what current pop-culture tells us what a horror movie (and game) should be. They don’t understand or know how to shock the psyche of the gamer, and because they are trapped by the very definitions of what a modern game is, they contrast their frightening jumps with a lack of anything happening at all.

In Dead Space you are alone, trapped on a space-ship infested by aliens that were once human. The ship is quiet, but occasionally monsters jump out at you. That’s the premise, but here’s the problem: what is horrific about humans turning into monsters, if you’ve never met these humans before. What’s terrifying about a quiet spaceship if you’ve never seen it bustling with activity? What is at the core of good horror is context: the Dog Monster at the beginning of The Thing is terrifying not only because it is grotesque, bloody and just strange to the crew of Outpost #31, it is because it used to be the dog that we were introduced to at the beginning of the film. The Norris monster is absolutely terrifying because shit man, that was Norris not 3 minutes ago! In Dead Space there is nobody in the ship that I can connect with: every human I connect with is done through glass, or through communications and video recordings. Nobody is left in the ship and I have no context as to what this strange place was like before. Ridley Scott’s Alien introduces us to the Nostramus as a ship that is fully functional and we see it running in its day to day. So when an alien infiltrates the crew what was safe is now unsafe: it is the predatory grounds for something to which we the audience have never seen before: and it’s in the area that the characters deemed safe.

But it’s not just about giving context. Alien, Jaws and The Thing and any H.P. Lovecraft story all have a deep-rooted theme that the situation is exploiting. Alien is the fear of the unknown; The Thing asks what would you do if you couldn’t trust the  people you were trapped with; Jaws looks at our fear of sharks. What theme is Dead Space or Condemned trying to explore? Most of these games seem to be trying to mimic what was succesful about successful horror movies.

Dead Space and games like it also fall prey to what they think will heighten the fear of a game. In a movie you always fear for the survival of the main character – in Alien it’s Ripley. In a game the point is to survive, so the player knows that there is never a danger of the main character permanently dying. Instead Volatile Games and developers like them relying on ammo and save point mechanics to heighten the fear: you will always be afraid of not having ammo and you’ll have the fear of having to redo an entire section of a game because you cannot save your game except where the developer tells you to. Unfortunately this goes against the root of all sound game design: never frustrate the player. And really it doesn’t make any logical sense: if the player is conserving ammo, doesn’t that defeat the purpose of having the player kill all creatures with the weapons you provided? And why on earth would you punish a player by having them repeat, sometimes over and over, a long section of gameplay that really, you only intended them to play once?

While a poor game in implementation, I think Alone in the Dark had the idea right when it comes to weapons: if you have the player create the weapons themselves then you elevate the fear not by running out of ammo with which to kill your enemies, you limit the player in what they can build by what parts are available to the player. Sorry, looks like you can only attack this creature with a can of spray and a lighter. Pretty brilliant when you think of it. And Dead Rising had the same idea: the entire mall is full of weapons you can utilize, so the fear doesn’t come from will you have enough ammo to get rid of these monsters that you must kill, it’s will this item I just picked up be enough to take out the zombies that are attacking me. Unfortunately Dead Rising’s mechanic and enjoyment was completely exorcised by it’s horrible savepoint system; a system in which you must run to the bathroom to save over your only save point. For many it drove players away because the mechanic was taxing and drove you out of the gameplay.

We’ve seen many attempts at getting horror right. And some fans of Silent Hill or Resident Evil might argue that I just don’t get Survival horror. My counter-argument is that Survival horror, based on Japanese minimalist and psychological horror, doesn’t have a place in games, especially in the current market where action reigns the dollar. The point of a game is to entertain, and you can’t entertain if you don’t have anything happen. And by no means do I think that the solution is to go with the current fad of slasher horror: Rockstar’s Manhunt showed that the gaming community had no interest in that. Instead we need to look where a player feels the safest and jump them there; we need to look at building up relationships with other digital actors, and literally rip them apart. We need to take those situations and make important thematic messages about environmental degradation, a collapsing economy, war, universal health care and poverty because the best horror movies — Night of the Living Dead, 28 Days Later, Jaws, Nightmare of Elm Street —  do just that. Right now our industry is trying to find it’s footing and discover what is a money maker and what is not, and until they do there won’t be many publishers and developers willing to risk the money the way that George Romero, FW Murnau and John Carpenter did.

But I hate careless game design. And while Dante’s Inferno doesn’t have a lot of that and I’ve been enjoying the fuck out of it for a while now, at one specific moment  they got careless and pulled you out of the game; made you realize that you’re just playing a God of War knock-off, with almost no story or character progression. And you ask yourself as you sit there in your sweats, stuck in your house in a cold northern winter that won’t end: Why are you playing this again?
Take last night. I’m playing the Greed layer of Hell. I’ve just managed to skip over a jumping puzzle and fend off waves of enemies. I have no save at this point.
The idea is to pull a lever to pull a lever to pull that first lever so that you can run, jump twice, go on the lowering platform and get back up to the top doors before the doors close on you and you have to do it again. If you touch any of the blades that are lowering while you’re doing this, you die. Simple as that. I tried this 15 times with different variations, but always missed one part of the timing mechanic. After the 15th time I punched the controller and turned everything off.

Here are the underlying problems with this shit.

1. No Save:  I just killed waves upon waves of enemies and while I do get a ‘restart point’ if I turn it off in frustration,  like I did, I’ll have to start at my previous save point.
   NOTE TO FELLOW DEVELOPERS: Stop being lazy and using save points to  make your game more “challenging”.
2. Redundant Redundant Redundant: I have to pull a lever to pull a lever to pull that first lever. And if I fail, WHICH I WILL, I do it again.
3. One shot kill: after pulling these levers I have to try and make it under the blade that is slowly falling down. If I don’t, I die immediately.
4. Time Mechanic: A time mechanic is fine, but a time mechanic that makes me have to do all of the above again is not. I managed to pull the lever to pull the lever to pull the lever, to double jump under the blade before it killed me, got on the platform, but by the time I got to the door, the door was closed and I had to do it all again!
5. Cone of Error, how small it is: I need to be exact, and with a response system that isn’t I can’t be as exact as they want me to be.

Listen. I’m not saying make games uber easy, I’m saying design for your PLAYER, not for you. Too many times in games I’ve made and played I’ve seen designers make game levels for what they find fun. But listen bub, you’re playing the level 20 times a day. Your average player is going to play this once.

Remember Cel Damage? I worked on that game. We balanced that game for us, new game developers on a new platform with one QA guy. And to quote American McGee when I met him at GDC after we released that game “You made that game too fucking hard!”

And we did. Because we made the game for us: developers who played the game 20 times a day. And for that we got ridden hard in reviews. For that, we sucked.

When you make a level you have to say to yourself: besides what would be cool, and visually interesting, what would make this fun. And 9.99 times out of 10 that will not be to punish your player. And that’s what this mechanic is doing in Dante’s Inferno. It is punishing the player for not playing EXACTLY the way the developer did. The cone of error is so narrow that the player MUST play it exactly how the developer played it, and this only leads to the 10th ring of hell: frustration. And my controller thrown against the wall.

With the game pressed and waiting for January 26th this week has been about reflection and planning. During this time it is customary to sit at an email and spew hate for the things you didn’t like while working on this project, ignoring everything that was great about what you did. Some would call this a ‘post mortem’ – a dissection of how the project faired in terms of production. I call this unproductive bullshit.

Listen, the point of a post-mortem is to have a retrospective look at how the project faired: We are a young industry and we’re still making all this shit up, so it’s important to aggressively criticize the methods taken to make the game. Writing down emails of ‘and then this person did this and I hated it’ accomplish nothing. Sitting in a room with 30 people and having a shouting match about what you hated accomplish nothing. You need to break it down to what worked and what didn’t. But also one more thing that many studios forget: you have to create action items for everything on the list; you need to ensure that every complaint, every kudo has task to fix it or continue it.

But it doesn’t stop there: you need a production or management staff that will use those action items as tasks for the next project. In 2005 for Full Auto, the art team filed me (as Art Lead) emails that were broken down into such categories and combined and filtered them into what ended up being a 55 page document with action items for everything. This was then sent to the managers of the studio, where it sat and wasn’t looked at. Which then created more emails of hate. The Art Team did everything right and all the work and effort that was put into it was put out with the heel of a boot.

BioWare, and more specifically the Mass Effect team’s preferred method, is to gather everyone in a room for half a day and with a Producer at the helm gather the feedback. (I should note here for others in the gaming industry that we have the best producers in the world here. Your preconceived ideas of what a producer is is completely shattered at BioWare). Usually doing this causes chaos and a Kill Cloud of negative energy gathers in the room. People start talking over each other, others become quiet and irritable, even worse is when some people’s comments are negated because someone has a louder voice. But kudos to our production team for finding a way to resolve this. Yesterday our Project Manager Corey Andruko split the giant whiteboard into 4 sections of development: tools, workflow, systems and communication (usually the whipping boy of these meetings) and like a conductor, a stinking and sometimes unworking marker his baton, brought in the the ‘What went rights’ with the ‘What went wrong’. Everyone had a chance to speak and every item was boiled down to the issue at hand, sometimes being combined with other issues into a larger task. Even though we were trapped in that dark meeting room for the entire morning, we all left feeling that someone had listened to our thoughts.
And here’s the thing…every item brought up were things that would make the next project better. There was nothing disastrous brought up and that really showed how well this project went. We were all sitting in that room wanting things to change, or stay the same, to make the next project better.

So now the poor production team has to collate not only our feedback but the feedback of every department and discipline on Mass Effect 2. And this is where we’ll see if our minimal effort and productions hard work goes further and is rolled out as tasks for the next project. Seeing as how this process and a post-mortem of Mass Effect 1 created Mass Effect 2, a game and process we’re all immensely pleased and proud of, I’m optimistic.

But for those of you entering the industry or working at a studio that doesn’t have any or a productive post-mortem process, here’s my advice. It is critical that we do this: we are a young industry with gangly arms trying to get the respect of the adults. If we don’t seriously criticize ourselves and work to fix those issues that arose; if we don’t research how other studios resolved those problems and envelop the successful studios processes we will not only not get that respect we’re asking for, we will never mature as an industry. So gather your people after a project, ask them what went right, ask them what went wrong and take those tasks to heart as to how your next project will work. Don’t make this a shouting match of hate because that will do nothing but piss people off.