Interaction design is an interesting concept and the
questions I've been provided with have given me some food for thought. See, I
want to talk about the Kinect, the Oculus and the Wii and how we are now using
ourselves more as the controllers. HOWEVER, another question was asked in the
brief for this task.
" Games are inevitably complex entities demanding constantly changing inputs and responses from the player. Given that Call of Duty is more demanding than Word, how do the designers enable such complex interactions relatively ‘intuitively’? Are these interactions in fact intuitive at all?"
" Games are inevitably complex entities demanding constantly changing inputs and responses from the player. Given that Call of Duty is more demanding than Word, how do the designers enable such complex interactions relatively ‘intuitively’? Are these interactions in fact intuitive at all?"
For some reason I suddenly want to talk about UI design
because this article on Gamasutra that was written by Anthony Stonehouse is
absolutely fantastic in explaining the different concepts of UID. UID is such a cool topic because it's about psychology
based as well as artistic ability. Menus and HUDs and such are always designed
thinking about player interaction, especially with mobile games. We previously had an talk at university from Richard Tawn, from Exient, who went into detail about the UI design behind the game Angry
Birds Go on mobile devices and it was fantastic and really informative. Use of
colour and the size of buttons are all carefully decided and tested. It's
weirdly interesting.
Angry Birds Go [x]
Angry Birds Go [x]
The other question that was asked however was this:
"Game engines can handle complex physics simulations,
but have traditionally been hindered by the limitations of
screen/keyboard/mouse interaction. What effect could the rise of the Wii and
the new generation of motion controllers have on game design? What about the
impact of 3D technology?"
This leads me on to all the various types of controllers
that the games industry has bought to us. Basic two-handed controllers,
joystick, steering wheels, pedals and keyboard control schemes are all big
examples. Even light guns and other arcade game controllers are interesting to
talk about. Obviously, motion sensors are now a big thing with the improvement
of the technology see with the Wii, then Kinect and now the Kinect 2.0 with the Xbox One. One that is often overlooked in terms of
interaction design is touch screens however.
Touch screen gaming has really come into its own recently.
Originally introduced with the Game Gear (though it flopped), the Nintendo DS
really bought it forwards into the forefront of gaming. This allows for a
different kind of interaction that you get with a controller; it's far more of
a visual experience. This has paved the way for the booming mobile gaming
market that relies solely on a touch screen experience. It could be argued that
it's a more interactive and intuitive experience than gaming with a controller
ever has been.
For example, The Room,
from Fireproof games, has been a huge success with multiple awards, selling
over 1.4 million copies as of March 2013 [x]. Clearly, the touch screen mobile
experience is inviting in a whole new group of gamers and proving them with a
unique experience to that of consoles and PC. The way in which you interact
with the objects within the room has a realistic feel, with the objects
reacting to your touch. UI Design has a big part to play in this as well as
your interface is something that players have to interact with via touch. The
constraints of the technology are what make is so interesting in the case of
games like The Room, and clears the way for some interesting and innovative
design choices within games.
Again, Gamasutra has a fantastic article about the designing
for touch screen devices and I'd highly recommend giving it a read through if
you're interested at all in this topic. They also have a good article about The Room as well.
You may have noticed I've been skirting around the topic of
motion control and the Oculus Rift's VR technology. It's been talked about so
much, but it's most definitely worth a mention because that is where gaming is
heading.
I've got experience with the Wii and both of the Kinects.
Motion control is something that still needs A LOT of work put into it.
However, the potential it has is incredible. A lot of people actually hate the
idea of motion controls. Difficult to make it work without the controls being
completely useless or without having you looking like an absolutely idiot. "Games
shouldn't just look more real but they should feel real, too, yeah? Out with
buttons. In with realistic movements. No, no, no. Terrible idea." says
Stephen Totilo from Kotaku and, in some cases I agree. However, you cannot deny
the pull that motion control has had in increasing the popularity of the games
industry. The Wii bought in so many people who had never previously been
interested in games because of that interactivity and because of the promise of
something unique. Is the same with the Kinect. The Just Dance franchise is
incredibly successful but there are few "hardcore gamers" who are
interested in it. Clearly, however, motion controls are onto something.
Just Dance 2014
After reading, yet again, another couple of Gamasutra articles about
motion controls [x] [x] (seriously why are you reading my blog, just read their stuff,
it's awesome), I came across a man called Douglas Wilson, who has an
interesting view on motion controls. He is the man behind the game Johann Sebastian Joust, a multi-player game that utilises the motion controls in an
interesting way.
Just... watch the video:
Johann Sebastian Joust
This man has got some incredibly interesting theories. While
many designers swear off motion controls, he's all for them. In fact, he
believes that the only way they will improve is if everyone bands together and
talks about the problems they've encountered when designing for these games, so
they can find out what works and what doesn't.
My kind of man.
The problem with designing control schemes surrounding
motion is that we're still designing those controls with buttons in mind. "[It
revolves] around a binary kind of input – either you did the
"correct" gesture or you didn't. The system would miss the gesture
you swear you performed correctly; the system would register the gesture you
swear you didn't perform"(Kris Graft) This causes clunky controls that the
"hardcore" gaming community just make fun of, which puts companies
off designing for it. "The beauty of physical movement is that it's rich
and complex,""That is to say, physical movement is very 'analog.'
Many of the best physical games figure out how to let players move in
expressive ways, rather than prescribing exact gestures." says Wilson.
Therefore, the control schemes that we design needs to be more organic rather
than "analog" and we'll get somewhere.
God, this man knows how to use words.
Anyway, another thing attributed to the negativity surrounding such an innovative technology is public expectation. "The rhetoric goes that motion control is supposed to be like the Holodeck or virtual reality," says Wilson. While the Oculus Rift is starting to provide some VR control within the industry, he is right. People are expecting Star Trek Holodeck and we are NOWHERE near that yet and people are disillusioned as to what they are getting. They expect immersion but they just have clunky control schemes that need more research and more work because the industry is still stuck in the mindset of button-pushing.
God, this man knows how to use words.
Anyway, another thing attributed to the negativity surrounding such an innovative technology is public expectation. "The rhetoric goes that motion control is supposed to be like the Holodeck or virtual reality," says Wilson. While the Oculus Rift is starting to provide some VR control within the industry, he is right. People are expecting Star Trek Holodeck and we are NOWHERE near that yet and people are disillusioned as to what they are getting. They expect immersion but they just have clunky control schemes that need more research and more work because the industry is still stuck in the mindset of button-pushing.
I know Lt. Barklay... I want a holodeck too...
Now I've finishing crying over how awesome Douglas Wilson
is, I'll wrap it up.
" What effect could the rise of the Wii and the new generation of motion controllers have on game design?"
Well. Motion control still has SO much potential but we are so far away from where we need to be in terms of technology. As my main man, Doug, says " "It's about getting people to do stupid crap with weird plastic controllers. … I don't think the industry really put in the time, research or thinking to make radical new stuff."
" What effect could the rise of the Wii and the new generation of motion controllers have on game design?"
Well. Motion control still has SO much potential but we are so far away from where we need to be in terms of technology. As my main man, Doug, says " "It's about getting people to do stupid crap with weird plastic controllers. … I don't think the industry really put in the time, research or thinking to make radical new stuff."
We need more research into the control schemes with a
more organic, fluid approach before we get the most out of the technology we
have. In terms of interaction however, it's clearly doing something right with
games like Just Dance and Kinect Sports. People enjoy them an get involved,
immersing them in the games. A little more work needs to be done to bring that
to the "hardcore market" however.
I didn't get time to talk about the awesomeness that is the Oculus Rift... Guess that means another blog post soon.
Links used:
No comments:
Post a Comment