Tweet
Lol didnt mean to post a generic link to google docs.. Ooops.
-
-
Day One Card Games
Game: Bullshit
Game Author
OG platform & Controls:
52 Deck Playing Cards
Controls Used:
Playing Cards
Describe gameplay and mechanics:
This game has a min of 2 players and goes to a max of 8. If anymore players are added, in some cases two 52-card decks are added to accommodate. The whole deck gets shuffled and passed out evenly to each player till the whole deck is gone. The main objective is to get rid of all of your cards in your hand. The way to achieve this is by the first person (chosen by the group to start either going clockwise or counter clockwise order) places a card down starting with the ace. The next steps are that each person in turn needs to place a down facing card, but the chosen card should be the next step up in card order. So from the ace the next card is a two, then a three, ex.. If someone in the group is suspicious about the card being played is not the one being stated, then they call “bullshit”. If the caller is right, then the person that played the wrong card takes the deck on cards that have been played in the middle. If the caller is wrong on their suspicion , then they need to take the deck. This continues till one player gets rid of all of their cards and wins the game.
Strengths and weaknesses of art and design and What made it fun?
Since this game is played with typical playing cards, the art is fine and traditional but it can very with special editions of different decks. The design of the game is relatively simple with its rules, yet its a game that can last quite a while because of its element of chance. Its “chance” is shown through the function of the deck shuffle and the fact that every player is guaranteed a fluctuating hand throughout the game. This develops tension, competition and strategy changes throughout the whole group. I bring up strategy changes because this game is also a behavior perception game. People will pick up on clues or tells when someone is lying about their card but this can be played to an advantage. A player can use a tell to trick the group and make them think they are lying to get called out on purpose and make them take the deck. As the game ramps up, the tension and paranoia rises causing players to call out constantly and be extra suspicious of every card. In this environment you have to make sure to not put too many cards down at a time, but when you happen to have all four (or in a case of having 104 cards in play) or more of the same card type, your chances of someone taking the deck become pretty high. These different scenarios and strats is what makes this game fun and keeps people playing.
Now that you’ve played it, why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
From what I could gather in information, different iterations of this game have been played for many years (furthest I could find was early 1800’s) and in many countries. It may not be the oldest card game out there but the fact that its rules are pretty simple does and has opened it up to enjoyed throughout all ages. Even though it can be pretty competitive, the element of chance does still attract the group of players that don't tend to go for competitive games. The fact that its played today and you can even ask pretty much anyone of any age if they have played it ever and they will most likely say yes shows that its design has stood the test of time. This game fits in the simpler but classic category when it comes to games in general. Its compact in not only the materials used but in the space it takes up when in play. Its an enjoyable pastime that even if interrupted, would be okay to just start over without much fuss from anyone. This game does have the standard clear spoon fed rules that come with any card game, but it also consists of the standard methods of how to properly strategize when playing with others. Most people would equate these types of strats or mind games to something like poker but there are some similarities between these two games. They both use an understanding that you need to use at least some behavioral psychology and be sure to use it to your own advantage. This would technically make this game pretty morally gray. This type of mindset out of the game and used in the real world isnt great, but its also a type of problem solving. Being able to notice someones tells can help with something like empathy or figuring out when someone may need some help. Games in general not only keep the mind busy but it can help further develop different sectors of our brains without us really realizing them.
-
Day 2
Game: Mancala
Game Author:
OG platform & Controls:
Meant to be played on a mancala board with gems, stones or marbles but a board can be made or drawn on the floor.
Controls Used:
Would the experience have been different using the original? How?
Computer used and vs a bot. The experience would be pretty different if played in person with another player. Playing with a bot did help a bit when trying to understand the basics of the game.
Describe game play and mechanics
It starts with a board with 12 small wells and 2 big wells (called mancalas) on each far side. Each small well is filled with 4 stones each. The objective is to get the highest amount of stones into your Mancala. This game is only a 2 player game, so each player will be positioned on either side of the board and have the 6 small wells in front of them. To start playing one player (whoever is agreed to go first) will pick up 4 stones from one of their well set and distribute 1 stone per well. Stones will be collected through the small wells, so be sure to pick up all the stones from the chosen well and distribute them one at a time per well. The player gains a point when during the distribution a stone gets placed into their own big well. If the person in turn happens to come across their rival's mancala, they will skip it and continue distributing till there are no more stones in hand. If the last stone you drop is in an empty well on your side you can steal that stone and any stone opposite from that well and place it into your mancala. The game is over when one row of small wells are empty. Both players will collect all the stones from their side of the board and mancalas, and whoever has the most stones wins the game.
Strengths and weaknesses of art and design
Some strengths would be that once you get the rules down, this game is pretty easy. The board itself can be created by using any materials around you or even dig some small holes in the ground and collect some stones. When its an official game board, it doesn't take up much space at all. If you happen to lose any gems from years of playing, those can be easily replaced without any problem at all. It can be played as a background game with the players chatting, maybe having some wine (if they are of age of course. If not just replace it with a suitable drink of choice). Some possible drawbacks or weaknesses could be that when playing with a first time player, the stealing aspect may be confusing at first. The looks of the played board could be deceiving because it can look like you're winning in your mancala but you gotta make sure their wells are low on stones. But thats just paying attention to your game and not really a drawback.
What made it fun?
It was an alright game. I can see how it can be better when playing with another person but playing with the bot did help with understanding the game. It doesn't have a super competitive element to it and yea not all games have to, but it makes the game more of a time passer than a “playing the game to focus on it”. Kinda confusing but its a different feeling when you play a game like BS vs Mancala. In BS you're more immersed in the game play and so is everyone involved. I guess its just not a party type game? Its too long to have any thrilling 2 player tournaments when you happen to have a bigger party and its too relaxed. Mancala is a game you bring when its just you and one other friend and you plan on having a chill time together. Nothing is wrong with that but its not a game I would get super hyped for. Its not that its not fun, there are some things that do make it fun for sure. When you come up with a strategy and execute it well, thats always fun. The element of stealing from your opponent does bring an element of fun. Its a light competitive game that everyone can play and can be easily taught.
Now that you’ve played it, why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
This game has been around since about 6000 BC. So many people throughout the world have been playing this game throughout history and still played today. Each culture had its own different variations where some rules and moves were added. Its pretty amazing how this game has moved through human history. Probably because of its chill nature and easy rule set, many games have branched out from this one. It for sure follows the four defining traits, and because of its design every age can pretty much play it. This game has easy accessibility by being able to be made by anything around you. Even if someone hasn't ever played it in their life, its so common that its very recognizable. The board has a very unique design and re-playability is great. Every round is a different experience and its easy to try new methods not only as you go but even with a fresh new round. Its a game that keeps you thinking ahead.
How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
3 out of 5 Comment
-
Game: Pong
Game Author: Allan Alcorn
OG platform & Controls:
Arcade machine where the controls are two dials
Controls Used/ Would the experience have been different using the original? How:
IPhone. For sure the experience would be a hell of a lot different if I used the og dials. Using an iPhone does give you an advantage by being touchscreen, so you end up having a lot more control over your bar/ paddle.
Describe game play and mechanics:
The screen is divided in half by a dotted line and the score tracker is located on the top on each side of said dotted line. Each player has control of a bar and the “ball” is a square that bounces from side across the screen. If one player hits the ball and the other player misses by letting the ball go off screen on their own side, the player that hit the ball gets a point. The main objective is to be the first to reach eleven points on the scoreboard. Part of the fun of this game is that the ball gets faster the more times it is hit. Originally only two people could play but eventually as time went on and the game progressed, the “computer player” was added, so people who wanted to play alone could. This also enabled the game to have difficulty settings. These settings would determine the speed of the ball/ how quick the computer would be.
Strengths and weaknesses of art and design:
Its a pretty basic design but I would for sure count that as a strength. The reason for that is not only because it gives it so much clarity and understanding of the game but it also makes it iconic and instantly recognizable. If for some reason, someone comes across this game and have never played it, they will almost instantly know what to do even if they miss a point. Its instantly recognizable in the way that if you draw two vertical lines equally apart with a dot between them (maybe skewed to one side), about 95% of people will think of pong. Sure there is replay-ability for a few rounds but the game does hold attention for hours on end. Not all games have to have that addictive factor but this game seems to be in the middle of being able to drop it for a while and playing it at least once a day.
What made it fun?
Some elements that made this game fun is the gradual raised speed as the round goes on. This brings a nice thrill and adds more to the already existing competition. Now I know that this game is a classic and thats fine but its not a very capturing game to me. I can see how when it first came out, it was a game that brought something new to the gaming scene, so a huge crowd of people were drawn to it. With that in mind, I think that there were a lot more board games available with much more of a replay-ability factor and could hold players for longer. Not saying that pong is in any way a bad game, but its basic design and play did help cater to a pretty big audience to help it along. Many people love this game with all its simplicity. I think the way it came out was what made Pong so huge and generational nostalgia has kept this game going. Its referenced all the time in media when there is either a new show or movie about games.
Now that you’ve played it, why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
Pong was made during a time where arcade games were in its infancy and this game was the first to majorly succeed. Its controls were pretty easy and I think that gave this game a big advantage for its time. People of all ages could pick it up easily and play it with a buddy and or a special person. This was something incredibly new and accessible to the general public, it stayed in arcades for an incredibly long time but also made its way into peoples homes through the Atari console. This expanded the crowd even more and it just gained rapid popularity as time went on. This solidified Pongs position in gaming history. This game can be practiced so the player can just get better and better with time and any additional challenges are depending on your opponent. Since not many people during the 70’s had a home computer, a game like “Spacewar!” wouldn't even be possible for the average person to play; Pong would pretty much be the only video game available for the average person to play. Even then, people who did happen to have a home computer, it was even less that would have Spacewar installed. These different variables are what made pong as huge and memorable as it is today. Its interesting because if feel like if Snake came out the same year as Pong did, Pong would still probably win in popularity. I believe this would be so because of Pong's 2 player factor. Less people in the 70’s were as introverted as people are today. It also seems like people were a bit more trusting of others, so making friends by asking someone to play was a bit more common practice.
How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good)) 3.5 out of 5Comment
-
Game: Space Invaders
Game Author: Nishikado Tomohiro
Studio: Taito Corp
OG platform & Controls:
Arcade Game buttons ←two for left and right movement and one for shoot
Controls Used:
Keyboard was used. I dont think the experience would change much because the only buttons used were the spacebar to shoot and left/right arrows to move.
Describe game play and mechanics:
The game is set up with five rows of aliens at the top of the screen. On the bottom of the screen you will see four dome shaped structures and under that is the ship that you control. The objective is to shoot all the aliens before they get to your domes. The objective of the aliens is to shoot the player and or destroy the domes. Both the player and the aliens are able to cause damage to the structures in shot. There are three conditions in which you can lose the game: If the aliens destroy all of your domes, if your three lives are spent by getting destroyed and if the aliens reach your domes. When the game starts the rows of aliens uniformly move from left to right across the screen. As they reach the other side of the screen, the whole sets of rows move down by one thus moving them down closer and closer to your domes. With each movement down, the speed of the mob of aliens gets faster and faster, creating tension. When the player succeeds in shooting down each row of enemies, the next level starts. Five more rows of aliens appear but the damage to your structures are still there but the mob starts one row down from before. This happens in every level and the game just ends when one of the loss conditions is met. Points are gained when an alien is destroyed and when you shoot a red ship that appears at random times during the game.
Strengths and weaknesses of art and design
This one is rather interesting when it comes to its strengths. The music creeping up and getting faster as you play creates a lot of fun anxiety that keeps you immersed and focused on the game. The fact that the player can actually cause damage to their own structures makes the player think before they shoot as well as figure out where to focus their attention when it comes to defense. These two factors also prevents players from just button mashing their way and actually penalizes them if they do. Having the extra fast red ship run by for extra points gives diversity in game and breaks up attention. This ship also makes the player strategize and quickly figure out priorities during play. When it comes to weaknesses, I think there should be a bit more diversity when it comes to the levels. For example, with each level “start over”, the enemies could be color coded differently and maybe they need to get hit twice instead of once. If the speed could slow down by a fraction but the enemies get more difficult to hit, this still adds just as much tension to keep the player immersed.
What made it fun?
So a few things make this game fun and keep you wanting to play till the aliens are so low that they hit your base by the start of the game. The bonus point red ship has a very interesting function to it. At the game's start menu, the screen shows how many points each enemy is worth. The red ship however is shown with three question marks, and in game when you happen to hit, the score changes. After some research, I found out that the red saucer goes through a point worth list depending on how many shots the player has shot. So for serious players, this adds additional complexity of being sure of counting their shots to get the max amount of points out of the saucer. I found that out to be so pretty extra but also a very cool little function. I always thought it was a random score. I guess with the way the list of points it goes through plus the amount of shots, it may have been intended as such? Not many people sit there and count their shots when playing this game, I don't think. Like I mentioned in the last question, this game is meant for the player to lose. This essentially helps the player understand that this game is not meant to be taken so seriously and its just to see how far you can get before you lose. Of course you can make it competitive by using the point system as a reference in a group or on the scoreboard in an arcade. I'm not huge on competition when it comes to games, but I can see how having these factors would be good for the machines business (always having people coming back). For some reason, space invaders doesn't seem to push for crazy points in the way that the game is designed.
Now that you’ve played it, why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
This game seems like the natural progression of the games before it. Its still simple but this game has added so many factors to juggle during game play that it just makes it so much better than what was around before. The controls (maybe a tad bit different but I don't think it was that different from the original controls) feel nice, the progressing difficulty along with the addition of “friendly fire” to your own structures really sets this game apart. The point system is pretty standard for its time and it sorta plays like an infinite game. Yea you can get better to get through the faster levels but eventually the player just won't be able to. The three ending conditions do bring a bit of fun flavor to the game which gives the player a competitive drive to see how far they can truly get, or how much better they can be. Out of all of the video games we have played so far, this game has shown that a simple showing game can have quite a bit of strategy to it. I think space invaders truly captures the essence of what makes board games and games in general fun. The video games before space invaders were on a mission to push what technology could do and this game had a very true fun structure to it. Not to bring the other games down, they are good for what they are and for sure amazing for their own time. Space invaders just seems a bit more timeless to me. I could be a bit biased because I do remember playing versions of this game growing up but it just seems to be an all around fun, timeless and well structured game. I wasn't good at playing it and I still am not but its still enjoyable. It could be because technically everyone loses this game, so the competitive aspect just feels like you don't need to take it so seriously.
How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good)) 4.5 out of 5 Comment
-
Game:
Pac-Man
Game Author:
Toru Iwantani at Namco
OG platform & Controls:
Pac-man arcade cabinet and controls were a joystick
Controls Used:
Keyboard arrow buttons but the game would handle a little bit differently if a joystick was used
Describe game play and mechanics:
This is a maze game where the objective is to collect all of the dots on the screen to clear the maze. This may sound too simple but there are a few factors that take this game to the next level of difficulty. While you are collecting your dots with your iconic yellow character there are four ghosts that are on a mission to get you. Once they get to you, you lose a life and if you're out of lives, it's game over. Even though Pac-man can't shoot anything for defense, you still have a way to fight back. There are four huge blinking dots on each corner, when you consume those they'll give you a power up. This power up makes the ghosts blink blue and white and they will start to run away from you; During this temporary boost, you can either go after them for some points or keep clearing the dots. When a lot of dots are eaten during the power up time, you'll see a fruit pop up. Fruits are worth additional points if you happen to eat it before it disappears.
Strengths and weaknesses of art and design:
There is a big time strength when it comes to the art design. It's all so incredibly simple that it strays away from the generic. Its like that one pumpkin carving competition at an animation studio a few years back that went viral, where the one that won first place was just a small cute smiley face. I'm pretty sure the second place winner's design was probably super intricate. There's something that just tickles the human brain when it comes to super simple design that just makes you think “duh, I could have done that”, or “its so simple and cute!”. Pac-man is literally just a yellow circle with a pie slice taken out for a mouth and its super iconic. The enemies design is nothing super special either but also super cute with their big eyes. The design of the screen follows the same type of path by just being a maze and sorta not using it for that during game play. Mazes are typically used to just find the end but the designer decided to twist the concept and make it an obstacle instead.
What made it fun?
I think a big factor in what makes this game so fun is its cute simple design of characters, using a maze a bit differently and its use of time to create panic. Part of its great game design is its use of the power up as a defense. Most games during this time were either shooting the enemy/ thing or beating an enemy in a competition. So because Pac-mans power is to just eat the dots on the board but not being able to eat the ghosts in their normal stage, gives the player sort of a feeling of being a bit helpless. The difference the temporary power up makes, gives the player the boost they need and also a sense of needing to get a bit of revenge on those pesky ghosts they have been running from. This also adds strategy and makes the player think through what needs to be prioritized at the time. The use of the fruit as a reward (extra points) for focusing on the main objective does add a pleasantry to the system. Of course you have to be fast enough to be sure to get the fruit but that also adds to the experience in a positive way. I think the thrill of the enemies getting faster as the game go on as well as each level does keep the player on their toes but keeps them focused on what needs to be done during play. The focus does keep the players coming back just to see if they can get better and see how far they can get. Of course this game is nostalgic but I really don't think its fun because of its nostalgia. This game has a strong design structure thats simple but still has a complexity that captures the player for hours.
Now that you’ve played it, why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
So Pac-man brought in some pretty cool concepts to the gaming world. Bringing story or personality to the enemies. When I found out about this bit of information, I thought it was so cool but it also made the game a bit more fun through some understanding. Each color ghost has their own name and behavior. This is something that isn't seen too often during its release time but its something that can have a butterfly effect to it. With enemies having their own behavior, yes they can be seen as a bit more predictable but with behavior comes personality. With the evolution of games, giving personality to the enemies can expand a story tremendously and bring so much complexity to it. You start off with ghost behaviors, then you end up with villains like the opera boss from nier automata and suddenly you have a character thats a villain but they aren't just black and white in their behavior. Of course you don't agree with what they are doing but shining some sympathy can do so much for a game. This could have been the seed that eventually added story to games instead of just focusing on the objective. One thing that I enjoy when it comes to the design is using a maze as an obstacle course. I know it sounds sorta silly but it gives new meaning to something other than its intended purpose. Its about being creative with an idea and changing things up a bit from the norm.
How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good)) 5 out of 5Comment
-
Game: Bump n’ Jump
Data East
Game Author
OG platform & Controls:
ColecoVision with ColecoVision controller
Controls Used:
Keyboard. I'm sure the experience would be different if the original controller was used but I don't think it would be wildly different.
Describe game play and mechanics
In this game you are a car going through a racing course with other cars on the road. Your objective as a player is to bump the other cars either off the course or cause them to hit other cars. This is how you earn points. You can also jump over cars because some of them are just too big to bump. Now the player needs to be extra careful around the big trucks because they can drop a hazard that causes the player to lose a life if they happen to hit it. The track levels are very different and they have obstacles of their own such as: no railing or wall, rivers that need to be jumped over, and very narrow roads. For major hazards such as the river crossings, the game will alert the player by flashing a sign with an exclamation point on it.
Strengths and weaknesses of art and design
This game had quite a few fun strengths to it but it did feel like something about the game was lacking a bit. The main point system of bumping the cars off the course does bring competition with the ai bots. The bots going after the player and being annoying does bring a lot of thrill to the scene. Needing to juggle multiple things at once in the game such as: other cars, trucks to jump over, truck obstacles to avoid and track hazards, do all keep the player immersed in the game for a while. I feel like if the player also had to win the race, that may bring some additional difficulty to the game as a whole. Its not a total “weakness’ but it could be what felt like the element that was missing from this experience.
What made it fun?
I tried so many games in this emulator and I didn't have much fun with any of them. The controls were very awkward to begin with. I had to look up what the console looked like and it doesn't surprise me that the keyboard controls were bound the way they were. It's also very telling that the console itself didn't really make it to the popularity status that the atari home console did. Why would a controller need a number pad? Maybe it was trying to do something different to stand out but it seems to be such an odd choice. Especially when arcade games were just buttons and joysticks. The actual game play was fine, but the controls sort of just drag down the experience all together. I could see what it was going for and it does bring something different to the table since it wasn't another racing game. The implementation of the jump action was pretty cool and the actual jumping animation looks very clear and fun. Bumping the card off of the map is also a new fun action that this game brought. I feel like if I played this with atari controls the games fun factor would be a lot easier to see and describe. I just really cant get over the fact that the Colecovision console had a number pad on their controller. It just really seems like a dumb decision to make as a company. Because I have never seen this before, I had to look up why the number pad was chosen. Turns out that a few other consoles, including a version of the atari had number pad controllers too. The use of this was to have the option to make complex games, put in cheat codes, and quickly go through the menu. I am so glad this didn't catch on, cause I absolutely hate this idea.
Now that you’ve played it, why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
This game did think out of the box with their design by going down more of a carnival bumper car path. This does make it stand apart from other car games and with this design change it could seem much more attractive to a broader audience. From what I could see when looking up the history of this game, Bump n Jump did seem to be pretty popular in the first couple years. A lot of games where being pumped out due to video game popularity so its easy or understandable for a game like this to still get at least a little bit lost in gaming history. It did bring in some new ideas under a popular genre (cars) but not enough to be considered an iconic game like pac-man. This game does hit a nostalgic nerve because the game play reminds me of mario kart. It just didn't really have an emphasis on the racing part like mario kart does. I can very much see how Bump n Jump could be the inspiration for mario kart. This game was almost there and could have been as big but not all of the elements were right for this game. Still a pretty fine game and it sort of sucks that the first experience i had playing this game were controls based off of the ColecoVision controller.
How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
2 out of 5
Comment
-
Game Author
David Crane
OG platform & Controls:
Atari 2600 joystick and button
Controls Used:
Keyboard. Not sure if using the original joystick with the button would make the experience that different. Using a space bar and arrow keys I feel like are a pretty close transfer.
Describe gameplay and mechanics
Pitfall is an adventure game where the main character is on a mission to find treasure. The controls are pretty simple. The character can only jump, move left and right, swing, and go up ladders. There is no fighting, the player just focuses on avoiding any hazards. The way the player gains points is through collecting treasure found throughout the levels and lose points if they get damaged by any of the hazards. You start off every game with only three lives and you lose lives if you hit any of the creatures, fall into endless pits, fire, or quicksand. The main objective is to collect as much treasure, get through the levels and just survive in general. Pretty easy concept/ easy design. The UI only shows the time and the amount of points you have in the upper left corner of your screen.
Strengths and weaknesses of art and design
Even though I am not a huge fan of this game, it does still have some fun factors that play into the game's strengths. The use of the alligators and swinging ropes does keep the player on their toes when it comes to timing their jumps. The game is timed and that does bring some tension to the player to keep moving. There should have been a way to gain lives back or an extra life. Keeping it as only three sort of limits the gameplay. I guess it would keep players driven to keep getting better in order to preserve their lives but I can't imagine that tactic would work for everyone. Pitfall, although it has quite a few hazards it feels like the game is missing something big to it. I'm not sure what but it feels like its just lacking in general.
What made it fun?
I guess the obstacles made this game fun? But to be honest I did not find this game to be super fun. It edges on being a boring game but its not quite there yet. I did like the addition of the swinging rope and the alligators. I also found out that you can go backwards in levels but I am not sure what would happen if you go all the way back. Would the game still count the win or would you have to go through all of the levels again and you would have just wasted time? Not sure but still interesting to just leave that in the game. I was confused by the underground scorpion. It was just there and sometimes it would seem like it was following you. The environments were colorful (sort of) but a direction from the black screen background. The UI was lacking because it wasn’t clear on how many lives you had left. I had to look up some information about the game to really understand what its about. It was known that you start out the game with three lives but either way it would be nice to have an actual tracker visible on the screen. I'm sure it is due to the fact that I am not good at this game (this game does beat asteroids by a lot) but there were a lot more things in this game that I did not get to before I just gave up. Its a game thats going back to the simple basics in controls which is fine but the gameplay was too simple. There was a lot more going on in the game Bump n Jump and they came out in the same year. I was also bad at Bump n Jump but that game held my attention for a lot longer than Pitfall.
Now that you’ve played it, why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
I'm not sure if this game would be considered influential really. It could be because I just don't see it being that way and the fact that it was played on an atari in people's homes was just enough for the game to be big. Pitfall isn't a super simple game and it has its difficulties but it still feels rather empty as a game. I don't see how its design was any better than any other game that had come out that same year. Pitfall is a game that just feels fine and even just vanilla. Was this even a type of game that people would spend so many hours into the night just playing, trying to get through it? Does it create much competition through its own point system? I personally cant really see that happening with this game. I'm probably wrong and a bunch of player did just that with this game but I guess it just doesn't really work with my game preference. It was just another game that helped inspire and build other games that became bigger in popularity. It just takes one creative and driven player to get inspiration from a game like this and make it twenty times better. That's pretty much what has happened and continues to happen in the games industry.
How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
1.5 out of 5
Comment
-
Game: Oregon Trail
Game Author: Don Rawitsch, Bill Heinemann, and Paul Dilenberger
OG platform & Controls:
HP 2100 minicomputer
Controls Used:
Keyboard. The experience would be the same
Describe gameplay and mechanics
This is a text based educational game to teach the player about the oregon trail and how difficult the trip was in history. The games starts with choosing an occupation and naming your family members. The. you have to buy supplies such as food, ox, clothes, and extra wagon repair supplies just in case, on a budget of course. Then you start your journey off to get to the state of Oregon and hopefully live. There are different checkpoints on the map the player can stop in to either rest, buy more supplies, trade, or talk to people. In between each checkpoint are landmarks that give the player a chance to check on their supplies, rations, adjust speed, and adjust family food intake. When actively traveling, the player will see how each day the status of health, food amount, and weather. This is also the time you will see statuses like one of your family members broke their arm or got sick or maybe how your ox are doing. This keeps going and the player makes choices until they either die getting to Oregon or they make it.
Strengths and weaknesses of art and design
The ability to give the player options on what to do really pushes on the strengths of this game. Another big strength is the consequence and “punishment” system. A good example would be like crossing the first river when its too high and losing some items when you restart that section of the story. The player makes a choice and it lives with them for the rest of that run. This gives a feeling of mystery (sometimes) as well as a feeling of being responsible for your actions taken in the game. The option to hunt was a great implementation of traditional video game actions of that time. So this game expanded on “what can be a video game” as well as integrating some traditional game play. The games choice, and consequence system does seem pretty real as well as the bad things that would just happen as a result of traveling. Maybe a bit too real in comparison to real life. I know its an educational game but its still sorta wild.
What made it fun?
So I have always seen this game lurking around, not physically but it was a meme for a few years and it was mentioned a lot. I always thought I would never play it because it looked like the absolute most boring game in the world to me. Since this game made it to the journal list, I decided to give it a chance. It’s not the funnest game I’ve ever played but I’m genuinely shocked that I actually had fun playing this game. The game play isn’t groundbreaking since it’s just making decisions in text, but it obligates the player to think ahead. The decisions do have consequences and they can be good or bad but it echos life (like when you try to go the cheaper way and don’t take the ferry wagon but you just should have in the first place. Then you could have maintained all your supplies). This game did remind me of the movie The Revenant, because just by traveling in general, bad things would continuously happen. One of my characters kept breaking their arms and my ox kept getting sick (although the ox problem may have been my fault because I didn’t stop and rest very often). This game has a lot of replay ability in it because the outcomes of the players' decisions just drastically change the journey. This game does fall into being pretty amusing and I can see how players can spend quite a bit of time playing it this game. It’s also not competitive at all which is a rather nice change but I wouldn't call this a chill game. You still had to make sure you and your group of people didn't just die and that does create some anxiety (and not in the funnest way).
Now that you’ve played it, why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
Text based games aren’t a new concept because it’s based off of the ‘choose your own adventure books’. The main advantage to bringing a ‘choose your own adventure book’ into the digital world is you can include a lot more images, and options. This brings a bit more immersion into the experience. Of course it wouldn’t make the options or outcomes unlimited but it for sure expands them by quite a bit. The fact that there was a crowd for this game shows that players did in fact feel more than fine about story driven games. This factor is actually pretty big when it comes to the evolution of games. Games today are mostly story driven and that’s what helps you relate to the characters you’re playing, interacting with or even fighting against. Story creates complexity in games and gives the characters you play more purpose. It gives players excitement to play through what happens next or excited to continue the story in the next release. A good story in a game can for sure surpass graphics any day. A lot of games today may not be a true choose your own adventure game but it’s close and it’s cool to see how it developed throughout gaming history. Games like these (as boring as they may first seem) are incredibly important when it comes to the evolution of games. Imagine if there wasn't much of an audience for story games and the video game path just continued down the “get the objective” road? I think humanity would still resort to story based but it would take longer to get there and the games industry would probably look pretty different today. The stories may not be as complex and the industry itself may not be as big today.
How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
4 out of 5
Comment
-
Game: Wizball
Game Author
Chris yates
Ocean software
OG platform & Controls:
Commodore 64 keyboard
Controls Used:
I used a keyboard.
Describe gameplay and mechanics
The color of the wizard world has been drained and its up to you (the wizard) and your cat to collect all the color back and restore the vibrancy of your wizard world. You manifest as a ball and shoot down all the enemies, turning them into bubbles. Once your enemy turns into a bubble, you have to hit them to gain points. Each level has color bubbles that you have to burst into droplets in order to start adding color to your world again. Paint droplets have certain abilities depending on the color. As the wizard, you can only shoot enemies and the little ball that is around you is your cat. Only your cat can collect the paint drops, so you need to move the little cat ball in order to collect. The main objective is to destroy all the enemies and recolor your world.
Strengths and weaknesses of art and design
The art is actually pretty cool and I love the idea of the game but maybe it was too ambitious. It could also be that if this game was remade today, it could have a better chance if they improved their ability system. The setting of the story is so fun and weird but it could also be a situation where the technology just was not there to fully execute this game well enough. Unless a player really takes the time to figure out the game (and I'm sure many did at the time), the mechanics just seemed deceivingly lacking. Its truly unfortunate because it had so many fun ideas to it and the environment is so different but it just could have been done better.
What made it fun?
Well this game was interesting sort of. I did not have much fun trying to figure out the controls for this and from what I saw, a lot of people had trouble with that too. I would imagine that at the time of release these sets of controls may have been standard but since then we have sort of strayed from that. When I was actually able to get the game going, the actual game play was fine but also a little less than fine but just not horrible. The setting of the game was quite cool and the design of the actual ball that you play as was interesting. It did stray quite a bit from the game “cover” art. The ball looked like its supposed to be angry looking but in game it just looks like a silly fish face. I had to do further research on this game and see how it was supposed to be played. Turns out the controls have always been an issue from the start because they just happen to be complex in general. The system of unlocking abilities sort of clashed with the actual controls and a lot of players wouldn't take the time to learn. The concept and story of the game is actually cool and it reminds me of the game Epic Mickey, where you also had to recolor the world. I just really wish the developers would have taken some extra time to have their abilities work in harmony with their controls. There shouldn't have been a divide when it comes to a games controls; That sort of stands out as a flaw for a game that could have gained a lot more popularity. This could have been on purpose to attract a different kind of audience but that's also an issue when you’ve developed a game and are trying to have it just take off.
Now that you’ve played it, why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
I think the idea of this game is influential but I don't think it's that crazy influential. I’m sure a lot of people have a lot of fond memories about playing this game. It seems to be a game that if played now, is fun for the nostalgia factor. The story and use of different paint droplets doing different things is cool, it just feels like the execution of them could have been thought out a bit better. A game shouldn't be this hard in controls and if it does, then its explained at the start of the game and built up. That could be where its biggest flaw actually is. This game really needed some explanation and couldn't rely on the traditional function of “leaning while you play”. If it had a breakdown text on how to unlock or use different abilities like how most games function today, Wizball could have broken into the iconic realm. That could also count as being influential on its own though. When a game lacks something, other developers and creators catch those flaws. It gives them an opportunity to create a better game using the basics of the game plus learning from the mistakes, thus making a better game. It really sucks that Wizball had a lot of potential but it just tripped on something basic like not over complicating things.
How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
1 out of 5
Comment
-
Game:
The Legend of Zelda
Nintendo
Game Author: Shigeru Miyamoto
OG platform & Controls:
NES with NES controller
Controls Used:
Keyboard. I tried to use a controller with this but it wouldnt let me. I do think my experience would be different. The controllers are meant to be spread out to fit the hand more comfortably in a controller.
Describe gameplay and mechanics
This game plays very similarly to a lot of other damsel in distress games. The main playable character is the hero with a sword on a mission to save the princess, collect the power source and save the world. On the journey you find a lot of enemies you need to fight, collect weapons/ new abilities, and gain health (expand your health meter to get stronger). As the player ventures on to new terrain, they meet unique characters that expand on the story. With each new biome is a set of new caves where the player needs to fight the bosses and collect all of the triforce parts. Within these caves are sets of puzzles the player needs to figure out in order to reach those bosses. The use of puzzles to set this game apart from the traditional hero savior games.Once the triforce parts are all collected, you will need to fight the main boss Gannon and save the world.
Strengths and weaknesses of art and design
The design is so strong when it comes to Zelda. The eight bit designs are so clear that its easy to tell who is who from the box art. The environment is also so clear and simple yet so much fun. When it comes to the natural environments, a lot of the same elements are sprinkled around that give harmony in its design. Its obvious when the player steps into a new environment and the spacing between obstacles are always nicely placed. The caves are always decorated nicely within its pixel limits, but you can always picture them in your mind. The Legend of Zelda works very well within its limits and is always pushing the edge with creativity. I do think some places in its environment design could bear to stand out a bit more in order to pop out to the player. Like super important entrances just need to be a bit more flashy. Like why is the old wizard guy in some normal looking cave? He just sort of stands behind the sword and two torches and thats about it for him. There could have been a bit more story in the interior of the cave environment.
What made it fun?
This game felt very nostalgic to me. One of the first games I played when I was a kid was Legend of Zelda: Oracle of Ages and Legend of Zelda: Oracle of Seasons. I was horrible at games (still am) and I could never beat them, but I still loved playing. Since this game is the first of the series, oracle of ages and seasons dont stray too far from the original game play. The story at the start still deeply peaks the interest of the player and gives a pretty good idea of how the game is going to play out. Although not entirely clear at first when getting your sword. You can literally just keep walking throughout the map. At first, I thought: “hmm maybe ill run into the cave at some point here to progress the story and get the sword”. Turns out no, I am just an idiot thats also a bit blind because I did not see it at the start. I guess I was just really excited to play the game. I feel like the cave that you need to go into should be a bit more flashy to stand out a bit more? But on the other hand, that could be why future Zelda developers implemented the guide fairy Navi. Its because of players like me, ahaha. To be fair a lot of games today do delay weapons in order to progress the story. Sort of sucks that the controls were kind of wonky when it came to fighting in the emulator. I am sure, the game would have played better if the speed of Link plus his sword hit was in sync. I probably would not have died as many times. I love the variety of enemies in this game and how diverse the environments are.
Now that you’ve played it, why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
I really think that the reasons for this games success and influence is due to the great story writing, game play mechanics and diversity in enemies. Yes the story starts off with the damsel in distress trope but it digs deeper. The initial story implies that Zelda herself has powers even though she still got captured. So that gives her character some depth and shows that shes got wit (by knowing that Gannon would be going after the triforce, she divided and hid all the parts). By not really mentioning much about Link at the start, it adds mystery to his character. This plays in the favor for both the player and for marketing. People tend to like when they can place themselves in the place of the main character. Like when a house is up for sale. Statistically a house will sell faster when it is shown with either minimal basic furniture or no furniture at all. The people looking at the house can picture themselves better in it and are more likely to seal the deal. The game play starts off basic and works its way up to more semi complicated tactics as your ability arsenal expands. This is something that has really stood the test of time when it comes to games. Its not just a function of “oh here, test this out”, its a method that makes sure that the player really gets to understand the new ability or weapon. I always appreciate when new weapons or abilities are tied to the story. It changes things up and gives a new feeling to the game play. The range in enemies are both fun to look at but also very fun to play with. The player has to change their tactics a bit with each new enemy that pops up. Its even better when some minor enemies are more difficult to kill by needing to take more hits.
How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
5 of 5
Comment
-
Game: Comix Zone
Sega
Game Author: Peter Morawiec, Adrian Stephens
OG platform & Controls:Genesis, Genesis Controller
Controls Used: I used a keyboard for this. Obviously this game was very much designed with the genesis controller in mind. Using a keyboard did inhibit the experience a little bit.
Describe gameplay and mechanics
This is a side-scrolling beat ‘em up style game, where the main character is an artist that gets sucked into his own comic book. The mission of the main Character named Sketch is to get to the end of the comic to break free and go back home but he can only do that by defeating the main bad guy of his own story. You have three main abilities to fight your way through each panel: Punch, kick and upper cut. These are determined by the direction you hold down plus the hit button (at least on the keyboard it was). There is an additional ability where if you hold down your punch, Sketch starts to “tear off” a piece of the background, makes a paper airplane and throws it at the enemy. This ability will take away some health and if you're already low, Sketch will state that he doesn't have enough strength.
Strengths and weaknesses of art and design
I would say that the art style is a 10 out of 10. Not because its my personal aesthetic but its a very nostalgic style. Each panel backdrop is pretty fun and detailed. They are clear and tell a lot of story while keeping the right amount of mystery of whats going on in that world. The colors use the right amount of that colored comic saturation and a great balance of using bright poppy colors. The pages keep a nice harmony due to each panel having consistent elements between each other. I would say the design and layout of the game is pretty solid. The camera sliding from panel to panel as the character hops around makes so much sense for the comic book theme. It mimics how readers move from panel to panel in real life. The enemies do stand out pretty well against the backgrounds. The characters in general have basic enough designs to them with an added flair.
What made it fun?
This game is very much from the 90’s but in the best way possible. I loved the presentation of the story and how the character just jumps from panel to panel after each enemy fight. I found everything about this game very charming and it for sure surpassed my expectations. Going into this journal I was just going to write about sonic, but after playing this game I had to change my plan. I really wish I had this game in my collection when I was younger because I can see myself playing this for hours and hours. The environment design has so much story and is so detailed. The animations were pretty good and the fighting style was super fun. Even though I used a keyboard I still found myself immersed in the game play, so I really wish I could have used the intended original genesis controller. The camera movement from panel to panel worked so well. The story is so interesting or maybe it just resonates as an artist. When creating art, you tend to put yourself in either the mind of the character or in the world that you are drawing; To create a game where the artist gets sucked into their own created universe is such a fun concept. The ability to tear off paper from the background and it taking away health made so much sense. Destroying any part of artwork tends to hurt any artist to a degree, so it was a nice touch. Bonus points for the play style being a beat ‘em up because that's one of my favorite types of game play genres. I had a great time playing this game, I’m just a little sad that I didn't get to play it earlier in my life.
Now that you’ve played it, why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
I feel like this game concept opened up the door to how creative a medium like video games can get. It doesn't need to follow the typical format of how a story “should be '' and it can get as crazy as any movie or book. Video games do provide a whole different kind of experience since you get to explore more of the world, interact with the other characters/ enemies and they tend to last longer than movies. Diving into a story is not a new concept but the way it was done with this game does make it stand out in a way that only video games can do. Typically when a movie has this concept, the character goes through either a portal or a “panel” type portal and then manifests in the story universe. Comix Zone can keep the panel style and swing from panel to panel. This action/ design in itself sets the creativity apart and provides such a charming layout, no matter how much action is in the game. This game fits perfectly in the evolution of games because it pushed on story and how it can be told. Comix Zone expanded on how far design could go and encouraged other games to go farther. It used its different layout and made the animations super fun. They weren't mind blowing at all but it played well with its use of direction when swinging around the panels. This game proved that so much more can be done with video games and all you have to do is just grab a concept and push the boundaries of creativity. Games for the most part with a few exceptions during this time followed a formula and the games that stood out by not following said formula, rang in gaming history.
How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
5 out of 5
Comment
-
Game:
Super Metroid
Game Author:
Yoshio Sakamoto
OG platform & Controls:
Super NES and Super NES Controller
Controls Used:
I used a keyboard but I for sure didn't want to. The emulator I used wouldn't recognize my controller. My experience would for sure be different if I used the original controller.
Describe gameplay and mechanics
The game starts off by going through a facility until you get to a room with a metroid in it in a capsule. Suddenly a big dragon creature appears and takes the metroid. This is important to Samus so the player is able to shoot at the dragon. Eventually the dragon gets away with the metroid and then a warnking appears that the facility is about to self destruct.The player is put on a timer to run and get out before the place blows up. The mission of the game is to search the planet to find the stolen metroid and fight the dragon. The abilities that Samus gathers in order to be successful in this mission are: shoot, jump, morphball, laser grapple, rockets, timed bombs, and a high jump. These abilities are introduced and gathered one at a time as the player progresses through the levels, aside from the basic jump, run and shoot.
Strengths and weaknesses of art and design
This game has some pretty notable strengths in its design, mainly the character design and the environments stand out for sure. Each creature is iconic and very fitting in the hostel world. Samus’s design is super cool, her suit shows practicality in the way that shows power. She doesn't have any unnecessary add ons on her suit that scream “this suit belongs to a woman so it needs to have an obvious silhouette of a woman” and that's pretty refreshing. One thing that I had an issue with design wise is the user interface. It took a bit to get used to on the plus side the location worked best for what was presented. The map is a little bit off to the point that it probably wasn't needed to be added. I know the developers are limited in how the map looks but I think with that fix, the user interface would look better.
What made it fun?
Out of all the games we had on the list, this one was the most fun. I never really played Metroid growing up and the first time I saw Samus was through super smash bros. I liked her design a lot, because her suit embraces power and practicality. The platformer style does work very well for 16-bit games. Both Super Mario Kart and Starfox had too much going on and it gave a blinking effect that was super distracting during game play. I loved the design of the first monster and the little brain creatures, it really added to the world and how scary /hostile the environment is. Samus’s abilities are what bring the true fun to this game. Slowly gathering abilities is always the right system in my opinion, to make the sure the player grasps each function. The morph ball is a new concept that brings in a lot of interesting play when it comes to fighting bosses. Its a simple clear dodge-like jump that eventually causing damage by dropping a bomb in the process. The developers really put in some obvious care when it comes to interacting with Samus’s environment. You can see some echos of Mario ideas, even some ideas from sonic, like when she uses the morph ball ability to roll through smaller tunnels. I liked the use of the laser grapple ability; it is a fun way to be able to use the whole environment instead of just the floors and platforms. Samus’s ability range when gathered together seems like a lot to handle but it is presented in a very manageable way where its not overwhelming to the player. Overall its a fun game and I can see why some people can obsess over Metroid, but I felt that it was fun but also “okay” at the same time.
Now that you’ve played it, why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
This game has some pretty die hard fans and I can see why. The story goes in depth, the main character is so obscure at first in their suit that the player can relate. Samus’s reveal was such a twist that it made her even better as a character, showing that women can also be hella strong and powerful. The abilities make so much sense and yet are very creative and the use of them are very player friendly. Metroid is a platformer, which that on its own isn't anything new especially for its time but Nintendo did make this game stand out by creating such a unique and believable world. The characters stand out with their designs and you can easily point them out and know where they come from. This games knows how to keep a player in suspense as well as keep that thrill (like in the beginning sequence when the area was about to explode). This game shows the importance of a well developed story, environment, character design and ability system is what makes a game stand out from the usual (even over used?) platformer system. It draws in an audience that tends to stay for life and spread the word on how good that game is to them. The developers put in a lot of love in this game and characters and the dedication really shows. I do wish I could have played with a controller cause I may have liked this game a bit more than I do. I may have also gotten farther but the controls got a little too frustrating. I may give this game another chance if I can get that part figured out and have the time.
How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
3 of 5 Comment
-
Game:
Ape Escape
Game Author:
Susumu Takatsuka
Takafumi Fujisawa
OG platform & Controls:
Playstation with dual shock controller
Controls Used:
I used a PS5 controller but I don't think my experience would be different if I used the original intended controller. Yes the design has changed through the years but the key controls are in the same place.
Describe gameplay and mechanics
The main story of this game is a silly version of the Planet of the Apes. The main objective is to capture all the monkeys in each level and eventually get to the boss monkey. This is a third person perspective and the main character has a few interchangeable abilities. The idea behind this is to bind an ability to a button and being able to change them according to the environmental situation. There are also some environmental abilities or gadgets like a water fan thing for speed while swimming, a boat, a water net, a little flying ship to get over some map gaps, and a few more that I wasn't able to get to. The main focus of this game was to show off the analogue sticks and how they can work together or even independently so the abilities are heavily reliant on those stick functions.
Strengths and weaknesses of art and design
So character design wise this game is a bit wild (pun not intended). I feel like the designs of the characters are heavily influenced by Pokemon. Of course there's nothing wrong with that but in a way it got too cliche if that makes sense. Like for example, the main character being named Spike and having spiky red hair. I guess it was just too on the nose for me. The environments were pretty fun, like the use of pitcher plants to hide monkeys. The environment interaction was very fun. The environmental enemies (all non monkey enemies) were very fitting and worked in harmony design wise. Somehow the use of dinosaurs in some levels did still work. The world of this game seems to be very technologically advanced and having a Jurassic Park dino revival scenario still just works. I talk about it more in the next question but my personal gripe with the design is with the controls.
What made it fun?
I didn't grow up with playstation or xbox so I was suggested to play Ape Escape. Oh boy, this game is very conflicting. I love the concept and the game play itself but I absolutely hate the controls for this game. Up until now with all the games we have played (except the Colecovision ones. My thoughts on those controls still stand!)I thought that the games would probably be better if the original controls were used; If I really hated the game, it was probably due to not using the original controller/ controls. This game for sure takes the cake on how horrible that controls are. It made the game play awkward, clunky and just clumsy in general. I kept playing a few levels cause I genuinely enjoyed the game play until I got to the boat section. I pushed through everything until I got to that stupid boat. Who thought it was a good idea to make the boat controls SO CLOSE TO REAL LIFE??? My thumbs aren’t coordinated enough to move like mini arms! I get that the dual shock controllers just came out and this game was the one to really show what the controller could do but that was such a stupid idea in action. Its great that it was a cute idea on paper but did no one test this action out?? I don't think I have ever been so conflicted with a game quite this way. I would absolutely love to keep playing because it really hits that Nintendo-esq nerve with the story being so silly. This game is like a cross between pokemon with a little bit of Mario 64. I love how creative some of the abilities were, like the saber and monkey tracker. The designs of the abilities seem kind of off but the game clearly doesn't take itself seriously (in the best way) so it still makes sense. If it wasn't for the control situation I would probably love this game.
Now that you’ve played it, why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
So even though I got so frustrated with this game, it still technically did its job of showing off what the new (at the time) dual shock controller could do for the Playstation. This was Sonys response to Nintendos rumble pack and it became so popular that the dual shock controller or capabilities became pretty standard. Through the reasons of Sony needing to showing off, ape escape became pretty popular. According to the reviews, a lot of people actually liked this game and the developers created a few more. They even ported this game to the playstation portable. This games success showed that when showing off a new piece of technology like a controller, its important to show off how impressive it can really be with a properly structured game. I remember when the PS5 came out, we got the one that was released with the new Ratchet & Clank. Yes that's a very popular IP and well within reason but more importantly, this game showed off not only the great features of the PS5 (like how fast and seamless it could load a whole new map) but it showed off the controllers new trigger functions. That was incredibly impressive. I think that's probably how players felt when they first experienced Ape Escape and the new controller. Even though I had trouble with this game, I can see why it fits so well within the history and evolution of games. I can for sure agree that this game falls in the category of being influential. Its pretty impressive that such a silly concept for a game can go so far. It feels like most AAA games that come out these days are so serious and the ones that aren't tend to come from Nintendo. I may be biased because I'm still a big Nintendo game fan.
How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
2 out of 5
Comment
-
Game: Super Mario 64
Game Author:
Shingeru Miyamoto
OG platform & Controls:
Nintendo 64
Controls Used:
Nintendo switch controls were used. The arrangement of the buttons aren't too far from the nintendo 64 controller. Sure the joystick is closer on the switch but I think that provides a more comfortable playing experience.
Describe gameplay and mechanics
Mario 64 follows the same type of story as the other mario games do. Princess Peach has been caught by Bowser and Mario needs to save her. The execution of how you find and save Peach is where it diverts from the norm. Mario's mission is to go through the paintings in Peaches castle and though beating bosses and solving puzzles you need to collect stars in order to keep opening doors. The player needs to collect enough stars to get to Bowser to collect keys to then open the locked doors and save Peach. Mario is armed with the basic, punch, kick, jump, run, swim and climb. Those abilities are all you really need because the game is going to be either fighting, puzzle solving or both. Like when fighting Bowser you need to get to his tail to be able to throw him and that counts as a hit. If the player just hits him and doesn't follow through, Bowser just gets stunned and you'll never beat him.
Strengths and weaknesses of art and design
This game has some pretty good strengths in design even within the technological limits. Enemies are creative and their silhouette stand out. Miyamoto really got creative with shapes when it came to designing some of these enemies but they still worked so well. Sometimes the enemy designs got pretty strange. Directing the player to where they needed to go throughout the whole game wasn't annoying at all. The direction hints were not too obvious but clear and the enemies or friendly characters would word things pretty clearly. Puzzles do end up being challenging enough where you gotta think about it and maybe even try things out a few times to get it solved. This keeps the player spending time in the game rather than things being too easy to the point that it gets boring. I am sure there are weaknesses in this game but I can't really point them out.
What made it fun?
This was the game that I played the most in my childhood. I find this game to be so incredibly fun and re-playable. The diversity in the design of all of the levels keep the game refreshing and its got a great amount of challenge to it. I remember playing this game and getting stuck throughout multiple levels but being able to get through them with enough practice and persistence. Replaying it now brings so much nostalgia and there are still some obstacles that I have to retry a time or two before getting it. Part of the fun of Mario 64 is that its game play is pretty balanced throughout all of the levels. It has just enough challenge to keep the player trying but not hard enough where the player gets too frustrated and needs to take a break from the game itself. The concept of each level being a painting and having its own theme is so fun. Replay mechanics are so clear yet so smart with the multi-star per level system. This gives the player options to either keep going with another world or to keep working on the new star opportunities. Its great that each star award per level is a different puzzle, so it continues to keep game play fresh. The bosses are designed pretty well with gradual difficulty as the player goes through higher star doors, so the player is able to acclimate skill wise with a good pace. Mario 64 is a game that can be played and replayed through the years and still have the same amount of fun. The controls are thought of and mapped out pretty well, where playing is comfortable and easy to remember. There aren't too many things in Mario 64 that are bad; Its not a perfect game but the pros do very much outweigh the cons.
Now that you’ve played it, why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
I think the creativity of this game is what makes it so influential but thats my personal take. Mario 64 caters to all age ranges quite comfortably as well as all types of players. If you want to be able to move on from world to world, you are able to do that. If you're the type of player to %100 a game, then you have so much to find and so many puzzles to do. If you are more of a mix or didn't get enough stars to open a door, there are so many options and difficulty ranges to get that star to then move on. According to some reading on how this game was first received, the main thing that people went crazy over was the dynamic camera. This was a pretty new thing in games. I do feel like if this game was released today, it would still be pretty popular and would draw in a pretty big audience. Maybe not as big but I am confident that the game play would stand out. The dynamic camera is what makes this game influential for sure but I think the design, concept and structure are what make this game fit into the evolution of game history. The range of abilities do relate pretty well to each other and make a lot of sense. Like pressing the same jump button over and over again triggers different types of jumps till the cycle starts again. The play style is pretty easy but putting that into the mix along with puzzles and fighting makes the play style still feel pretty complete.
How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
5of5
Comment
Comment