Welcome!

Welcome to our community forums, full of great people, ideas and excitement. Please register if you would like to take part.

This is extra text with a test link..

Register Now

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Kaitlyn Schepise Game Journal

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Kaitlyn Schepise Game Journal

    Name of Game: Bullshit
    Game author (If known): n/a
    Game Studio: n/a

    Original Platform: Cards
    Original control mechanism when game was released: Cards
    Control mechanism you used: Cards
    Would the experience have been different using the original? How?: N/a

    Describe game Play and mechanics:
    Players take turns placing cards down in numerical order. Each player says the card they are putting down, and how many of the card they are putting down. If they do not have the right number in the order, they have to lie about the cards they put down. If another player suspects they are lying, they call "bullshit". If the player that put down the cards was lying, they take the whole stack. If they were telling the truth, the player that called it takes it.

    Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design:
    The game is very repayable and is adaptable to any amount of players, as long as there's enough cards to supply. Decks can be mixed, and there can be real strategy to the game when you start trying to remember where all the cards went. As far as weaknesses go, I guess it could get old after a while. The gameplay is the same no matter how many times you play it.

    What made it fun?
    The game is fun when it gets far in and everyone's calling bullshit on each other. It gets competitive when everyone has 3+ of the same card in their hand. The game is really all about the social aspect, it's fun to try to call out your friends.

    Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
    It almost fits itself into the Mafia genre of games, which got really popular recently with Among Us. These kinds of games have always existed, but being online means that games like these where lying is a key component is all about catching small keys that you could see like when you are playing bullshit.

    How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good)):
    5

  • #2
    Name of Game: Mancala
    Game Author: n/a
    Game Studio: N/a

    Original platform: Stone, dirt, or basically any platform with circles carved into it
    Original control mechanism when game was released: Stones
    Control mechanism you used: Stones

    Describe gameplay and mechanics:
    Players take turns picking up stones and putting them in different cups. If a player lands in an empty cup, they get to go again. If the empty cup is on their side of the board, they capture all of the enemy's pieces across from the cup. If the player lands in their own mancala, they go again. A player's turn ends when they land in a cup that is not empty. If one side of the board is totally empty, the rest of the pieces that are on the other side of the board go to the corresponding player's mancala. The game is over when there are no more pieces on the board.

    Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design:
    The game is pretty easy to pick up, but gets more challenging as the players get better at the game. It's very strategy based, so the game doesn't ever really fall into the same patterns, and super comebacks are possible. The weakness of the game is it could get kind of boring while playing, and sometimes it felt like there were times when you couldn't ever get a turn. Its weakness mostly lies with gameplay and not the design.

    What made it fun?
    Once all the rules were actually understood, it was a good strategy game where it felt like most of the times my plays mattered. It's a good game to kill time, but I wouldn't say it's one to sit down and seriously play for a while. It's more fun towards the beginning of the game.

    Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
    This game would be considered influentual because it's the start of the strategy games. The kind of gameplay almost seems like it could evolve into something like Risk, where it's all about taking space and capturing pieces.

    How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good)):
    2

    Comment


    • #3
      Name of Game: Pong
      Game author (If known): Allan Alcorn
      Game Studio: Atari

      Original Platform: Magnavox Odyssey
      Original control mechanism when game was released: Joystick
      Control mechanism you used: Mouse

      Describe gameplay and mechanics:
      Move your paddle back and forth to hit a ball across the screen. If the ball touches the edge of the screen, the person who last hit it gets a point.

      Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design:
      The strengths of it are that it's simple, and easy to pick up. Anyone could understand how the game is played at a glance. There's not any tricks or complicated rules to figure out, just the paddle and a ball. A weakness is how simple it is. It leads to pretty much the same gameplay over and over with few changes. It was a little more fun with a friend but even then it wasn't anything exciting. The design is so plain that it's honestly boring just to look at.

      What made it fun?
      Frankly, I didn't think it was very much fun. I'm sure it was fun at the time because it was new, but there wasn't really anything that made me want to keep playing it. The convenience of a table tennis game at home is the only thing I can think of that would make it kind of fun, otherwise the gameplay is monotonous and boring.

      Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
      It's influential because it popularized video games, as well as showed the general public that games can be enjoyed together. By introducing a game to the TV, it began a new revolution with tons of companies trying to also make games. While there are tons of clones now, when it first came out it was one of a kind. Pong got lots of people to try their hand at making their own video game.

      How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good)):
      1

      Comment


      • #4
        Name of Game: Space Invaders
        Game author (If known): Tomohiro Nishikado
        Game Studio: Taito

        Original Platform: Arcade machine
        Original control mechanism when game was released: Joystick + buttons
        Control mechanism you used: Keyboard

        Describe gameplay and mechanics:
        Move the spaceship back and forth across the screen and try to eliminate all of the invaders before they destroy or reach the bunkers that keep you safe. Each invader is worth a different amount of points, and drops bombs. One bomb will kill you, and you have 3 lives.

        Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design:
        It's simple, but this time it doesn't make it boring. With all the invaders slowly moving towards you, it creates a time limit and challenge that you have to fight against. There's also the added component of the invaders fighting back, with the bombs being dropped randomly either to take away your protection, or to kill you. As far as weaknesses go, there's not a lot of variation in sound or appearance, which can make the game kind of boring to look at. But for gameplay, it can get repetitive, and it's pretty easy to just spam a button to clear out a lot of the invaders.

        What made it fun?
        I liked the challenge that the game gave. It was more entertaining than Pong. There's enough variety in the gameplay that it can keep you entertained, and also gets harder. There's actual difficulty to the game, and it was fun to try to shoot the invaders and also dodge the bombs at the same time. It usually didn't work out, but it was something that kept me trying to play.

        Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
        Space Invaders was one of those games that spawned a bunch of copies and everyone wanted to make. While it did spawn copies, it also influenced tons of new games that took the original mechanics and built on it. Any game with shooting mechanics (a little after Space Invaders was released) was probably inspired by the shooting mechanics of Space Invaders. At its core, it's really a space shooting range. Some of the core game mechanics we see today were introduced in Space Invaders.

        How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good)):
        3

        Comment


        • #5
          Name of Game: Donkey Kong
          Game author (If known): Shigeru Miyamoto
          Game Studio: Nintendo

          Original Platform: Arcade
          Original control mechanism when game was released: joystick + buttons
          Control mechanism you used: keyboard

          Describe gameplay and mechanics:
          Move left and right across the screen to walk across scaffolding. You can climb up completed ladders to go up a level, and make it to the very top to rescue the girl. Donkey Kong will throw barrels at you that will cause you to lose a life if you are hit, so you can jump over them. There is also a fireball enemy that will occasionally spawn and follow you from the bottom of the stage to the top, opposite of the barrels that go from the top to the bottom. As stages progress, there are additional mechanics introduced, such as "elevator" platforms that will run up and down the wire they're on.

          Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design:
          The game is a departure from what I've had to play so far, as it's the first platformer and one of the first games I've seen with actual recognizable people in it. The game's mechanics are simple enough, and you can understand it completely in maybe 1 or 2 lives. The hammer is an interesting item, since you can smash barrels but can't climb up ladders with it. It forces you to be stuck on the same platform (which I didn't realize when I first picked it up). There's not a lot of weakness, though I was unclear on if there was something making the little fireball spawn, or if it was a random thing. I think it's random.

          What made it fun?
          The variation in the gameplay. Making the stages get more challenging and difficult by introducing new content kept the game fresh and made it fun to play. I also liked seeing the little cutscenes and the story I got out of it. I hadn't played Donkey Kong in a while, and I forgot there even was a story. It's a complex game, and had lots of stuff to learn and to try to master. Even the first stage gave me a bit of a challenge as I was still getting used to it. I like that it was a game on a bigger scope and built on its core mechanics.

          Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
          I think it was one of (if not the) first platformer. The platformer genre isn't my favorite, but it has a bunch of games that spawned because of it and was clearly an influence on anything that came soon after it. Additionally, the story in the game, despite its simplicity, was a new thing that hadn't really been seen before Donkey Kong. It kickstarted a whole new genre that's still wildly used today, and additionally gave Nintendo their highly recognizable mascot.

          How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good)):
          3

          Comment


          • #6
            Name of Game: Blockade Runner
            Game author (If known): Interphase Technologies Inc.
            Game Studio: Interphase Technologies Inc.

            Original Platform: ColecoVision
            Original control mechanism when game was released: Gamepad?
            Control mechanism you used: Keyboard

            Describe gameplay and mechanics:
            Guide your spaceship through an asteroid field, using as little fuel as possible. Asteroids that hit your ship will reduce your shield, and using your jets to move side to side will use up the fuel. Try to get as far through the game as possible with your 4 ships before you run out of fuel. (Upon looking up the game, I think there's some shooting mechanics that I couldn't get to work with the emulator.)

            Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design:
            Strengths definitely are that it's a first person game. The UI is very clear and tells you exactly what you need to know. The art of the asteroids is both a strength and a weakness, since I couldn't really understand what was going on until a few tries in, but once I figured out that they were flying at me, the game became fun. I think it was doing the best it could on the software it had at the time, but since there was nothing to really indicate to me where I was in space, it was hard for me to figure out sometimes what was going to hit me and what wasn't. There's not really a boundary that tells you where you're safe, sometimes you get hit sometimes you don't.

            What made it fun?
            Honestly, I think some of the technical limitations made the game more fun here. The confusion and difficulty of telling where things were gonna hit me made me over compensate a lot, and so I ended up flying around a lot more than intended, and I had to reach different sides of the screen really fast. Again, I think there are shooting mechanics I missed out on, since there's a crosshair and everything here, but I think I got the idea of the game. I also don't know if there was a story or an end, so if there was either of those that would have made it a little more fun.

            Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
            I think it would only be considered influential in the same way other first person games would for this time period. It doesn't seem like it really innovated on anything new, and it's once again using the classic space theme that so many other games used. I guess my short answer is it actually isn't very influential, and is instead just a product of its time.

            How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good)):
            2

            Comment


            • #7
              Name of Game: Asteroids
              Game author (If known): Ed Logg, Lyle Rains
              Game Studio: Atari

              Original Platform: Atari 2600
              Original control mechanism when game was released: Joystick
              Control mechanism you used: Keyboard

              Describe gameplay and mechanics:
              Keep your spaceship alive as long as possible, while shooting asteroids and other objects, like UFOs. Asteroids have a chance of splitting into multiple pieces rather than getting destroyed instantly, and UFOs will fire at you. Guiding your ship off the screen will have you appear on the other side of the screen. The game is lost when you lose all of your lives.

              Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design:
              The art was easy enough to understand. You can tell what everything is. There's not a whole bunch to praise about it, it's not really anything amazing. The design of the game was simple enough, although the heavy drifting on the spaceship made it harder to play in a way that made it less fun for me. I also thought the controls were weird, in that the controls were either rotate or thrust, and not both at the same time.

              What made it fun?
              The challenge of the game getting harder and the asteroids breaking upon shooting rather than just disappearing instantly. It adds some randomness to the game. I wasn't very good at the game, since I kept getting too much speed and drifting different places I wanted to go, but this added to the game and made it more difficult. I did find, though, that it was pretty easy to exploit the game and just kind of stay in one spot and shoot. There wasn't a lot of motivation to actually move the ship, so that probably could be improved on.

              Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
              This release of the game was one of Atari's first attempts at a home console game, and they were very successful. The specific mechanics of the game aren't what was revolutionary at this time, but the technology behind it. Atari was the biggest game company when this game out, and them releasing this on home consoles prompted other gaming companies (that hadn't already tried to start making consoles) to try their hand at it. Atari's first console with multiple games kickstarted the consoles and home video game industry.

              How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good)):
              2

              Comment


              • #8
                Name of Game: Oregon Trail
                Game author (If known): Don Rawitsch, Bill Heinemann, Paul Dillenberger
                Game Studio: Minnesota Educational Computing Consortium (Kind of? It seems like they just let the code for it spread)

                Original Platform: Apple II
                Original control mechanism when game was released: Keyboard
                Control mechanism you used: Keyboard

                Describe gameplay and mechanics:
                Start the game by budgeting your money between, oxen, food, supplies, clothes, and ammo. After you start, begin playing through the Oregon trail. There are random events, such as hostile natives, hunting events, and stops at forts on your way through. The object is to make it all the way to the end using your resources as smartly as possible and to care for your family so they don't die of dysentery.

                Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design:
                I'm a little biased, because I played the Oregon trail all the time when I was younger. This game, as simple as the design is, it such a huge strategy game. The design of the gameplay makes you stop and think and really consider what your next move will be, or how much of your supplies/money you should allot. There's also some luck involved, making it a pretty good game to replay, since no two runs are exactly the same. The only complaint I really had was that the hunting minigame was TERRIBLE. Mixed with the slow framerate and insanely slow moving ammo, it felt unresponsive and just really bad.

                What made it fun?
                I like the randomness of the game. It's one of those games that can really get you going in a horrible pit of bad luck, but that's kind of the fun of it? I played a newer version of the game too where I could name my family members, and that made it fun because I named them after my friends and it was like survival simulator. I drowned Kylee. It was fun to try to figure out how to actually get people not to die, and the random events constantly made me lose so much stuff that I was broke all the time. It was kind of suffering, but like, the fun kind of suffering.

                Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
                I think this game is the real start of a bunch of the simulation games we see today, and its kind of like a choose your own adventure book in a game. It's just a good game to kill time, and it's fun to try to run it over and over again. It definitely has that life sim influence that makes games like the Sims fun, as well as the customization in later iterations of the games. Simulation games probably didn't have the chance to be good until the software that this ran on, and I think even the first iteration of the game was iffy, but when you see what came out of it, it's clear it's just a good game.

                How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good)):
                3

                Comment


                • #9

                  Name of Game: Microsoft Decathlon
                  Game author (If known): Timothy W. Smith
                  Game Studio: Microsoft

                  Original Platform: TRS-80
                  Original control mechanism when game was released: Keyboard
                  Control mechanism you used: Keyboard

                  Describe gameplay and mechanics:
                  Participate in all the events from the Decathlon. Each event has its own set of controls, ranging from anything from button mashing to careful placement of a javelin. Some games, you had to individually press a button for every single action you wanted your athlete to take.

                  Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design:
                  The game's biggest downfall is its controls. If the controls weren't so bad, this game would be fine. The controls are just too complicated and unresponsive for a game of this type-- had there been a bit more automation and less guesswork, it would have been infinitely better. As the game stands now, its controls render it nearly unplayable. The track events for running were fine and fun, since it was just key mashing, but the controls for the hurdles were not explained well, and even if they were, they were so unresponsive and the momentum was so wrong that it still would have been bad. Throw a different control scheme on most of the games, and mess with the momentum of the athletes, and this game would have been super fun.

                  What made it fun?
                  While I just complained about the controls, that's not to say it wasn't fun. It was fun in the same way watching a bad movie with your friends is though, and that's probably not the intended goal. Playing this game multiplayer made it stupid fun. Any sense of competition added to the game was great. It was funny to watch Tony spin out of control for the discus throw, and both of us making stupid mistakes like putting power at 100% and then watching as we just absolutely helicoptered with the throw was amazing. There were a few events where we just failed immediately, and then made fun of the game. Again, it was mostly just fun because it was so amazingly bad.

                  Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
                  While this game is bad, I can definitely see where inspiration from this game could be put into other games. The best example I can think of is Wii Sports. A multiplayer sport-based game where you take turns competing? This the same thing minus the good and responsive motion controls. It would almost make a good party game, due to the high number of players that can compete.

                  How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good)):
                  2. The game is objectively bad, but I still had fun.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Name of Game: Tetris
                    Game author (If known): Gunpei Yokoi
                    Game Studio: Nintendo

                    Original Platform: NES
                    Original control mechanism when game was released: NES Controller
                    Control mechanism you used: Keyboard

                    Describe gameplay and mechanics:
                    Place pieces down to try to create solid lines across the screen. The pieces will slowly fall from the top of the screen, so you have a time limit on how long you have to place the piece. The pieces start falling faster the longer the game has gone on. The more rows you clear at the same time, the more score you get.

                    Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design:
                    The strengths of this game are definitely in its design. It's a game that's been released tons of times, yet the controls are always the same. Even if new things are added on top of it, the base gameplay remains the same. If a game has been alive this long and hasn't had to have control changes, then it definitely got something right on first release. Even the art is the same, save for some color changes here and there. Tetris is just a good game that doesn't need any changes besides the occasional graphics update to stay relevant.

                    What made it fun?
                    The game is usually pretty slow running at first, but it starts getting fun when the pieces start falling really fast and you have no time to think about where things are going. At a certain point, it's like a runaway train, the pieces start falling so fast that they place themselves before you have a chance to figure out where you wanted it to go. There's not really a whole lot to the game. It's simple and streamlined, and I usually play it as a time killer. I don't really sit down like "Boy, I sure want to play Tetris right now!", it's more of a "I don't have time to start another game, but I could probably fit in a Tetris game", and there's something to be appreciated in that kind of design.

                    Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
                    Tetris I think could probably be linked to the giant mobile puzzle game boom we've kind of got. It's just a simple puzzle game that the basic mechanics (match a row to clear it) can be taken from to create tons of easy to play games. Tetris led to match 3 games, which is pretty much every single popular puzzle game on phones.

                    How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good)):
                    4

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Name of Game: Super Mario Kart
                      Game author (If known): Shigeru Miyamoto
                      Game Studio: Nintendo

                      Original Platform: SNES
                      Original control mechanism when game was released: Controller
                      Control mechanism you used: Keyboard
                      Would the experience have been different using the original? How?: I think it would have been easier, since the keyboard seemed laggy.

                      Describe game Play and mechanics:
                      Control your chosen character and kart around several different laps. Like actual racing, first place wins. There are different items you can pick up along the way, that will either power you up or put other players at a disadvantage. A makes you go, B makes you stop or reverse. In this edition, karts auto drift around the tracks. Picking up coins makes your top speed go up, and being hit with items will make you drop your coins.

                      Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design:
                      It's strengths are in gameplay and art design. It's a pretty game, with clear graphics. The controls are straightforward, and easy to pick up and learn. The only weakness I really found was I didn't know what the items on the ground were at first. Instead of being in front of me, I had to run them over which caught me off guard, although I might just be biased as this is adjusted in later editions of the game.

                      What made it fun?
                      The competitiveness of the game makes it fun. Mario Kart is one of those games that gets better with the more people you're playing it with. It becomes a competition with your friends, throwing items and hating each other. Only temporarily, of course (sometimes). The karts feel fast, and it's got good controls, so it never felt like the game was unfair. It's just a really good game, all around very polished and with great game mechanics that it uses to this day.

                      Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
                      Mario Kart is obviously a very influential franchise, seeing as they're still making Mario Kart today. It's a great game for little kids to pick up, since it's easy and they can understand it and still have fun, even if they're just running into a wall over and over. Super Mario Kart influenced the creation of more racing games, though a lot of racing games are more serious. It can also be linked to the creation of more sports related mario games.

                      How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good)):
                      4

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Name of Game: The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time
                        Game author (If known): Shigeru Miyamoto
                        Game Studio: Nintendo

                        Original Platform: N64
                        Original control mechanism when game was released: N64 Controller
                        Control mechanism you used: Xbox Controller
                        Would the experience have been different using the original? How?: The experience would have been slightly different but I don't think it would have affected gameplay.

                        Describe game Play and mechanics:
                        Play as Link, and travel through the world of Hyrule. You can block, and attack with a sword. Holding the Z button will lock onto a target, letting you walk and block at the same time. Additionally, there are multiple weapons to choose from. There's a slingshot to use for long range enemies, a seed that can be used as a bomb, and a stick that can be used as a torch to light things on fire. There are several different types of enemies that you have to decide between which weapon to use against them.

                        Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design:
                        For strengths of art and design, the gameplay is pretty sleek and easy to navigate through. I did find myself occasionally having to rotate my hand to try to reach 3 buttons at a time, which I feel like isn't great, but also was probably more on me than the game. However, there's one thing that I really hate in games, and that is when I'm told to find something without being given any clues as to where it is. No NPC text or anything. I actually spent at least 15 minutes looking for the sword to leave the starting area. I had to have walked past that tiny hole in the wall 4 times. I also didn't think the game was very pretty. I had seen a lot of 2D games before this that look better than this game. The textures in homes were so flat that I didn't know at times that I could walk up multiple levels, and most of the time there weren't really any indicators that I could. Also, auto-jump was driving me up the wall. I think I jumped off of things on accident more times than I jumped where I wanted to go.

                        What made it fun?
                        I had trouble getting this game to be fun for me. I really wanted to like it, but the camera in the game was consistently making me motion sick, so I had to take so many breaks that it just really took me out of it. I think once I finally got out of the starting area, I started to find it a little more fun where I could actually try to fight something instead of having to wander around aimlessly looking for a sword. I liked the dungeon puzzles that I had gotten to. I just couldn't get very far in the game since it was making me sick, so I can't say I had a whole lot of fun playing it. I would love to revisit it again if there's a version of the game where I can move the camera instead of it following the direction I'm facing.

                        Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
                        I can see influence of this game through tons of modern games. It seems like the start of the open-world idea that we see commonly today. Additionally, reading up on the game, it introduces a lot of features in games that are still used, like the target lock system. A lot of modern games would suffer without having that option. The influence from this game rings true in several games I've played, and its roots are still seen in later games in the series, like Breath of the Wild (which I do like because it doesn't make me motion sick in 3 seconds, please don't shoot me).

                        How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good)):
                        My initial rating was a -5/5, with a point being taken off every time the game mildly inconvenienced me. the inconveniences were as follows:
                        1- almost failed to exit the tutorial area
                        2- got motion sick
                        3- tried to take advil for my headache, gagged on it due to aforementioned motion sickness
                        4- auto jump made me jump off of something i didnt want to again
                        5- got motion sick (again)

                        An actual fair rating? Maybe a 3, if I'm being nice.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Name of Game: Guitar Hero
                          Game author (If known): Greg LoPiccolo
                          Game Studio: Harmonix

                          Original Platform: PS2
                          Original control mechanism when game was released: Guitar Controller
                          Control mechanism you used: Knockoff Guitar Controller (I wore out the buttons on the originals)
                          Would the experience have been different using the original? How?: No

                          Describe gameplay and mechanics:
                          Guitar Hero is a fairly simple game at its core: press the buttons and strum on the guitar when they line up with the line at the bottom of the screen. The colors correspond to notes, with green being the lowest and orange being the highest. Small notes are tap notes, and do not need to be strummed. Blue notes charge up your star power by 25% if you flawlessly complete the blue section. You can use your star power once you have 50% of the bar full by either tilting the guitar controller upright, or pressing the button under the strum bar. Additionally, there is a whammy bar on the controller that allows you to bend the notes. If you miss too many notes, you will fail the song. Story mode takes you through different cities, often playing songs by bands that originated in the city.

                          Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design:
                          Guitar Hero is an easy game to pick up. With a simple explanation on how to hit notes, you get to play along with your favorite songs, go head to head with a friend, or work together with a friend to complete a song. The stages and characters are fun to watch in the background, and the sound design with the crowd cheering or booing at each tick of how well you're doing add to the atmosphere. Similar colors are purposefully not placed next to each other so it's harder to mix them up with each other, and the tracks are dark backgrounds to make the notes pop. When going into star power, all the notes turn blue, adding a slight challenge to gain all the score boost that you're trying to earn. I can't find any weaknesses to its design, although I'm biased. If you have problems with hand eye coordination, the inherit design of the game is not friendly.

                          What made it fun?
                          I love rhythm and music games. I've been playing Guitar Hero since I was a little kid, so at this point I'm pretty decent at the game. Constantly trying to work my way up to harder songs is fun, and I one day hope to be able to clear Through the Fire and Flames. I like listening to music but often struggle to just sit there and listen to it, so adding in the game so I'm kept active while listening to music makes it more interactive for me and lets me enjoy songs without feeling like I'm getting bored. It's got a kind of addictive factor-- if I fail a song, my first instinct is not to bump the difficulty down, it's to instantly press that restart button and try to get through it again, despite there being a practice mode. The songs offer a real challenge, and even if the ones in game get too easy, there's an entire community that does nothing but make insanely hard guitar hero charts.

                          Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
                          I don't think I've seen another game series as frequent and as loved as Guitar Hero just fall off the face of the Earth like it did, but Guitar Hero is still one of those OG rhythm games. It's not a taptap rhythm game like is seen on phones and on some other consoles, but its influence is still prevalent in its offspring. It spawned several spin offs, and the original studio went on to make Rock Band, which I practically grew up playing. There's even an entire fan-recreation of the game so that it can be played on PC. Guitar Hero is an all around good game, and works great in multiple formats, like arcades. I think its decline was really rooted in just how many spin offs came from it, almost hammering to death a solid formula before it ever had time to really evolve past what it was.

                          How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good)):
                          5 STARS BABYYYYY BRING BACK GUITAR HERO!!!!!!!!!!!!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Name of Game: Halo: Reach
                            Game author (If known): Marcus Lehto, Christian Allen
                            Game Studio: Bungie

                            Original Platform: Xbox 360
                            Original control mechanism when game was released: Xbox Controller
                            Control mechanism you used: Xbox Controller
                            Would the experience have been different using the original? How?:

                            Describe gameplay and mechanics:
                            Halo: Reach is a continuation of the Halo series, which are all first person shooters. You can use several different types of weapons in the game, such as sniper rifles, rocket launchers, and gravity hammers, but usually start with a basic assault rifle. Additionally, you have grenades you can throw (without having to unequip your weapon). Your health consists of a health bar, and on top of that, shields. After your shields are destroyed, they recharge after a certain amount of time of not taking damage. In the campaign, you start off by making your way down to a base, where you begin to encounter the game's different kinds of enemies. These include grunts and elites, and other various kinds of covenant. The grunts are the weakest, and elites are the strongest of the common enemies. You also get to have one spartan ability, which can be sprinting, a jetpack, invisibility, and some others.

                            Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design:
                            The thing that separates Reach from other Halo games is its story. The spartan nobles all look different and unique, and as you travel with them through the campaign they all have distinct personalities. Characters tend to react like an actual humans, and as you watch them die it really feels like you are experiencing a loss instead of a character simply just dying and the game moving on. Also, the forge mode in this game is amazing. You can design an entire map yourself, starting with nothing but an environment to pick from. Basically anything in the campaign that you see can be taken and placed in the maps, all the way down to floor panels to build things. As far as its weaknesses, sprinting as a spartan ability rather than a base control feels odd. It was hard to get my mind out of the "I can sprint at any time" mindset that I'd adapted from most other FPS.

                            What made it fun?
                            Being able to fight my way through the enemies in the campaign in any way I want to made it very fun. I was never forced to use a new gun (unless I ran out of ammo) and got to make my own decisions on how to progress through the levels. You could solve simple problems in the dumbest ways if you wanted. A lot of the fun comes from how involved in the story you get to feel the further you progress. You're not playing as another person, you get to play as your own character. The multiplayer is also a lot of fun. Growing up, I would play a ton of Reach with my brother and dad, just running around in our own custom maps and shooting each other. The variance in allowed playstyles really showed to me there: I liked driving the vehicles, my brother was more about the shooting, and my dad was kind of a mix of both. To this day I always default to a loadout that only consists of a rocket launcher and a gravity hammer.

                            Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
                            Reach's absence of Master Chief just shows that a game can make a departure from its core franchise and still become a loved game. It shares a universe with the rest of the Halo games, but you don't ever see Master Chief, despite him being the core backbone of the series. It could appeal to both fans and newcomers to the franchise without feeling like you were being thrown into another game's campaign. It raised a standard for storytelling in first person shooters, with realistic feeling characters that didn't just seem to be used as plot devices. Reach made a first person shooter become more than just another first person shooter, allowing the player to connect and become a part of another world that could have been another rehash of the Halo series. Later installments in the series haven't drawn from Reach, except in the Infinite multiplayer, which was very reminiscent of the Reach series.

                            How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good)):
                            5

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Name of Game: Stardew Valley
                              Game author (If known): Eric Barone
                              Game Studio: Eric Barone

                              Original Platform: PC
                              Original control mechanism when game was released: Mouse/Keyboard
                              Control mechanism you used: Mouse/Keyboard
                              Would the experience have been different using the original? How?:

                              Describe gameplay and mechanics:
                              After being given a farm by your grandfather, you are tasked to grow and take care of it while discovering the secrets of Stardew Valley and chasing Joja Corporation out of town. You are given a certain amount of months each season to grow and harvest crops, each season having its own crops to manage and take care of. The crops all sell for different prices, and can be combined to make other items, or be donated to the community center. Once the community center has been filled out, end-game content unlocks, such as a new island with more crops and a second farm. There are also seasonal holidays, and lots of NPCs to interact and grow bonds with. If your bonds are high enough with the NPCs, special things can happen during the holidays. Additionally on your farm you can raise animals, who will produce animal products, as well as act as pets that you need to pet and feed.

                              Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design:
                              Stardew Valley is a very cute and relaxing game. I played the game almost entirely in multiplayer, and it is an amazing way to still have fun while kind of just hanging out. There are lots of micro tasks and minigames to keep you busy throughout your in-game days while also having to juggle your farm. The game is easy enough to play, there aren't many controls to learn, and it feels varied enough that it doesn't get old. The NPCs in the games feel like real people with their own lives, meaning sometimes you have to really hunt them down in the towns if you need to talk to them. My only real gripe with the game is that it feels nearly unplayable without a wiki. There are some things in the game that I found myself thinking "if I couldn't look that up, I would have never figured it out," and they were never hidden or secrets. There were some core game mechanics that the game simply doesn't teach.

                              What made it fun?
                              What made it fun to me was the time I got to spend in the town and managing my own farm. Sometimes, I just don't feel like a game with high stress like the FPSes I usually play, and Stardew Valley was a great way to relax and play a game with my friends. It never felt like an urgent game, and I found myself most of the time sitting by rivers or the oceans and just fishing all day. It kind of fills the same void that Minecraft does-- relaxing games with no real end goal if you don't want there to be. While there is the community center to fill out, the game doesn't end there. You can just keep the farm going as long as you want to, and it will always be there to pick up again once you're ready. Low-stakes gameplay is something that can be hard to make fun, but Stardew Valley accomplishes this.

                              Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
                              Stardew Valley wasn't revolutionary at release. It was built based off of several games of the same genre. What makes it influential is its success as an indie game. I have seen plenty of games that were inspired by Stardew Valley, also made by indie studios who wanted to produce their own take on the game. As well as being open ended, Stardew Valley's easy support for mods makes it so that fans can make their own new looks for the game as well as add minor things. The support that the game has received after its release shows that with enough determination and love for the craft, creating full games is possible with just one person. The game has a certain freedom in it that just wasn't present in other games like it at its release. This open ended, low-stress way of gameplay has changed how indie games, especially farming games, look at their stories.

                              How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good)):
                              5

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X