Minor Project 5 - Option 4 (Cut Scenes to Jargon)

Cut Scenes

A game that incorporates cut scenes is Final Fantasy XIII. It has many cut scenes that bring you through the very long and in depth storyline. Without cut scenes in this game the entire point of the game would be lost. You would never truly understand the storyline. The storyline is what makes this game as well as every other Final Fantasy game out there. It is so unique and the cut scenes really help guide you through the game in a visually dynamic way.

Minor Project 5 - Option 3 (Childhood Game Redesign Pitch Document)

Here is a pitch document I made for "Intense Go Fish" in Adobe In-Design:

Minor Project 5 - Option 2 (Childhood Game Redesign Logo Design)

Here is the logo that I created for "Intense Go Fish!" :

Minor Project 5 - Option 1 (Childhood Game Redesign Written Description)

Here is my redesign of the childhood game "Go Fish":

Intense “Go Fish”

Author: Samantha Moses
Date: 2/28/12

OVERVIEW

This game will create a more intense version of the game “Go Fish” that encourages more competition between players through use of a point system, time limit, and rounds. These components and competitive aspect of the game will target a broader audience, rather than just children. In fact the target audience will be older kids and even adults because there will be a need to some math.

The game will be played through use of a standard deck of 52 cards. However, there is the hope that this game can one day be turned into an online game or used as an App for platforms such as the iPod, iPad, iPhone, or Android. The player can play against a bot on these platforms with the ability to choose between a number of how many bots they would like to play against.

WHY ARE WE MAKING THIS GAME?

“Go Fish” is a game that is often associated with one’s childhood, and so we would like to have this game tap into the nostalgia of slightly older players who want to relive a fun childhood game in a way that it is more intense, advanced, and age appropriate to them. It would create a new and fun way to embrace a childhood game and make it more intense and competitive.

If the game can be expanded across the different platforms, it can improve the game, and bring it back into popularity through use of modern technologies. Not everyone has a deck of cards on them, but most people do, however, have their cell phones, laptops, and iPads with them when they are on the go. Having the player play against a bot, allows for immediate and continuous gameplay, rather than waiting for someone to respond to you like social network games such as “Words With Friends.”

WALK US THROUGH THE GAME!

The player first must choose a platform: either a standard deck of cards, or a technological platform such as cell phone, iPad, or an online game.

Players are first dealt their cards. Next, the first player progresses to ask a player for a card and if he does not get that card from the player, he will draw a card from the deck. If the player does receive the card he asked for then he puts down his cards that match. The game progresses the same for each player until each round is over. At the end of each of the rounds, the points get added up. The player with the highest score combined across all of the rounds will win the game. After game is over, game can be restarted and played again for some more fun!

SIMILAR GAMES

Go Fish, http://www.bicyclecards.ca/game-rules/go-fish/76.php?page_id=32

Minor Project 4 - Option 4 (The Art of Game Design)

The childhood game I selected is "Capture the Flag."

Question 1: Does my game have clear goals? If not, how can I fix that?

-The game does have very clear goals. The main goal of the game is to safely capture the flag from the opposing team's side and bring it back to your team's side.

Question 2: Do parts of the game distract players so they forget their goal? If so, can these distractions be reduced, or tied into the game goals?

-There are some parts of the game that distract players from their goal. Not only do you want to try and capture the opposing team's flag, but you also want to prevent the other team from capturing your flag. Therefore, this requires some attention to the defense and trying to stop the other players from getting your flag before you can go and complete the main goal of capturing the other team's flag. The only way distractions can be reduced is by keeping your main focus on offense and leaving your teammates to the focus of defense. Having each player with their own goal, allows you to focus solely on your goal and thus eliminating distractions.

Question 3: Does my game provide a steady stream of gradually increasing challenges?

-Yes, my game does provide a steady stream of gradually increasing challenges. This is because it becomes harder to capture the other team's flag when your players are captured in the other team's jail or when there are too many people guarding the flag that you are trying to capture. Many parts of the game create challenges for a player.

Minor Project 4 - Option 2 (Logo Design)

Here is my logo design for Rock, Paper, Scissors. I used Adobe Illustrator to create this.

Minor Project 4 - Option 3 (Realism & Abstraction?)

-A good example of a realism game is "Assassin's Creed" because the graphics are extremely realistic and accurate based on the time period in which the events are taking place.

-A good example of an abstract game would be "Tetris" because there is no realism in the graphics, it is a combination of shapes and colors.

-A good example of a 2D game is "Pacman" because it is a flash animation based game where graphics are all made in 2D.

-A good example of a 3D game is "Call of Duty" because the graphics are all made in 3D. There is a good sense of depth perception and other 3D concepts in this game.

-A good example of a 1st person game is "Halo" because you play the game seeing through the character's eyes. You can only see the gun and the hands implying that you are the character.

-A good example of a 3rd person game is "Final Fantasy XII" because you are looking down at the scene that is going on. You do not get a sense that you are looking through the character's eyes.

-A good example of a game that was made for the real world and was reinvented in the "gameworld" is "Pinball." This is because pinball was originally created to be played on a physical machine and now they have versions that you can play through various gaming platforms such as Mac and PC.

-A good example of a game that involves storytelling and a storyline that is vivid and memorable is "Gears of War" because the storyline is quite in depth and you are playing through the journey of the characters in this fictional storyline. There are even sequel games to complete the storyline.

Minor Project 3 - Option 2 (Is Rock, Paper, Scissors Linear, Non-linear, or Sandbox?)

Rock, Paper, Scissors is a non-linear game. It is non-linear because it can be completed in a number of different sequences. There can be multiple different occurrences. Each game will have a different result or different occurrence because you never know what selection a player will make.

For example:

There can be rock vs. paper.

There can be scissors vs. rock.

There can be paper vs. paper.

And so on…

You never know what result the game will have therefore each game you will have a different experience making it set up as a non-linear game.

Minor Project 3 - Option 4 (Should RPS Be Restricted To A Two Player Game?)

I think that RPS should be restricted to a two player game state because the game is set up in a way where each selection you can make (rock, paper, or scissors) has equal power in the game. Each beats one selection, but loses to the other. The system works in pairs. Since it works in pairs there can only be two players so that two options are put out at once. If there were, let's say, three players, and each of them threw out a different selection, nobody could win because they each beat one player yet lose to another.

For example:

In a game with three players:

Player 1: Rock

Player 2: Scissors

Player 3: Paper

Player 1 beats player 2 but loses to player 3.

Player 2 beats player 3 but loses to player 1.

Player 3 beats player 1 but loses to player 2.

Therefore there is no clear winner.

Minor Project 3 - Option 1 (Rock, Paper, Scissors - Logo Examples and Logo Design)

Here are some good sample logos for RPS:

Here is my design for an RPS logo:

Minor Project 2 - Option 1 (RPS - Quick Start)

Here is my attempt at a quick start, condensed set of rules for the game "Rock, Paper, Scissors."

Minor Project 2 - Option 3 (Identifying Game Genres)

Identifying Game Genres

Here is my attempt at correctly identifying the genres of a few games:

Call of Duty: MW3 - First-person shooter because you play through the main character's eyes during the game.

Checkers - Non-digital because it is a board game but it involves strategy like that of certain digital games.

Beat Hazard - Shoot-'em-ups because the main goal is to destroy everything around you as fast as you can.

Minor Project 2 - Option 2 (Everything is Rock, Paper, Scissors - oh really?)

Final Fantasy X

http://www.cosplayful.com/media/catalog/category/file_3.jpg

In the article, "Everything is Rock, Paper, Scissors" by Andrew Vanden, he discusses how aspects of games such as "Doom" and "Final Fantasy" are very similar to the game of "Rock, Paper, Scissors." I disagree with this statement, however, I am going to go more in depth in explaining how "Final Fantasy X" is both similar and different to the game of "Rock, Paper, Scissors."

"Final Fantasy X" is similar because there are a series of actions, and each action can both beat and lose to another action. In "Rock, Paper, Scissors," there are three actions you can take: rock, paper, or scissors. Rock beats scissors, scissors beats paper, and paper beats rock. In "Final Fantasy X" the series of elemental attacks you can make on an elemental based enemy works in a similar way. There are four elements to choose from: fire, ice, water, or lightning. Each element has the capability to beat or lose to its elemental opposite. However, the fact that the elements capability to beat another element is based off of opposites, is where the two games differ. There are two pairs of opposing elements: fire/ice and water/lightning. Fire beats ice, however ice also beats fire (the same goes for water and lightning). For example, if your enemy is a Fire Flan, then an ice attack will be the ideal attack because it is fire's elemental opposite. However, if your enemy is an Ice Flan, then a fire attack will be the ideal attack because fire based enemies have a weakness to ice attacks. The same goes for the elements of water and lightning.

Therefore, the two games are similar because they both have a series of actions/attacks that have both a weakness against one action/attack but a strength against another action/attack. The difference occurs between the relationship of actions/attacks. In "Rock, Paper, Scissors" it is a cycle where each action can lose to one but cannot beat that same action (i.e. - rock can beat scissors, but scissors cannot beat rock), while in "Final Fantasy X" each attack has an opposite and each opposite can both beat and lose to its opposite (i.e. - ice can beat fire, but fire can also beat ice depending upon the situation and what kind of enemy you are facing).

Here is Vanden's article link that I referenced to:

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/29718/Analysis_Everything_is_Rock_Paper_Scissors.php