Meg Villanueva - Journal Entries

[Meg Villanueva]

Journal Entry 1

Name of Game
“Bullshit”, also known as “Cheat” or “I Doubt It”.

Game author (If known)
There’s no clear source of origin for the game with most of the available information claiming it’s a game that spreads through word of mouth (oral) hence a lack of documentation. This also explains why there’s multiple names for the game in other countries (“Mogeln” in Germany, “Verish' Ne Verish'” in Russia which all convey some sort of words that say cheat or liar)

Game Studio

N/A

Original Platform & control mechanism

A standard deck of cards is the original platform / control mechanism.

Describe game play and mechanics

Bullshit is a card game relying on deception and how well you can convince your opponents you’re telling the truth. You begin by receiving an equal amount of cards among each other. Then, going clockwise, lay down your cards in a sequential order (ex: start with ace as 1, then 2, 3, 4, until you reach the highest number and work your way back to the ace / 1 card). If it’s a player’s turn and the count is on 4, the player is required to place a “4” card down and is forced to repeat the number (ex: “I’m placing a 4). Whoever is able to rid themselves of all their cards first wins! However, the main mechanic that’s included is that no one but you knows what card you played, always having the cards face down when placed. This means that you can lie if you don’t have the required 4 card and place something alternate to continue decreasing your deck. No one’s going to know, right? WRONG. Absolutely wrong. If you suspect an opponent of lying and not placing the card they claimed they had, you can call “bullshit”. Claiming bullshit means that you are certain the player lied, and the player is then required to flip over the card they played and reveal it to everyone. If the number doesn’t align with the corresponding sequence number, then the player who lied will take all of the cards played and add it to their deck making it much harder to win. However, if the number DOES align with the sequence, the person who called bullshit receives the cards instead. The game will penalize you for incorrectly identifying if someone was lying, making the stakes and need for precision much higher.

Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design

With Bullshit, a huge strength of the card design is that ALL of the back of the cards look the same. You could argue most cards do, keeping a consistent aesthetic throughout the brand of cards, but it’s especially helpful here. Relying on deception, having the only part of the card you’re able to see from your opponents all being the same makes it that much more exciting and stress inducing. If there were more details or subtleties in the backs of the cards, even small indicators that meant it was a different number, it would ruin the chance and mystery of the cards opponents place down and would remove all sense of uncertainty (thus ruining the point of the game). There aren’t many weaknesses, though I found myself getting lost in what cards I had due to the variety of card designs (ex: how a number can be red or black, can be a diamond/spade/heart, etc) and it affected how fast I’d play a card. This usually led to me being clocked for lying, gaining more cards and moving further from winning.

What made it fun?

Bullshit is fun because the premise of the game is already ridiculous, and to some, that’s setting you up to have a fun time. It isn’t necessarily chance based, but more based on skill and how well you can mask the card you play. However, the mask easily falls when pressured by a group of others and can make the game exciting trying to decipher what a player might be thinking. The name itself, “bullshit”, also creates an environment with an expectation of it to be an amusing game. College students LOVE swearing, and implementing a core mechanic where you’re expected to curse to rat out an opponent makes the energy that much more lively. Additionally, it itches my brain in a really good way when I’m on the opposing side and trying to predict who's lying. Statistically, most of the time people will be lying, but being able to indicate when people are is incredibly satisfying without being wrong and receiving cards. There’s so much thought that goes into it, taking into account the person that’s playing the card and making an assumption on whether or not they’re lying based on what you know about their personality. As a result, no Bullshit round will ever be the same, especially since you’re never playing with the same people and some people act differently around others (some are more shy around different people and could bluff in an alternate way than they usually would).

Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?

Bullshit is absolutely without a doubt influential. How can a game named after a swear word not be? It seems as though it’s influential by presenting yet another game option to play with cards, which are easily accessible thus making it a game that almost anyone can play. Not only that, but I feel as though it sets up the central idea of “party games” and how most today rely on being deceptive to win (think “Among Us”, Murder Mystery). Bullshit has greatly influenced how people think they should be playing games and encourages critical thinking, analyzing opponents, and taking information you know and applying it to make informed decisions (like a puzzle… except it’s humans). It fits into the evolution of games by providing a somewhat complex concept with a non-complex item, proving that humans will ALWAYS make games and find a means to play it regardless of what control mechanism is used. I always think of the game “Sticks” where people use their fingers and hit each other's fingers.. Bullshit provides an example that allows following games to become more creative, taking alternative routes and not allowing the simplicity of the mechanism to determine how clever or fun the game is.

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

Stars are reliant on the people that play with you. Playing with a group of people who aren’t afraid to yell at every single person creates the best bullshit experience. It’s less about the game and more about the environment that’s created. In my case, 4 / 5.

[Meg Villanueva]

Journal Entry 2

Name of Game
Mancala

Game author (If known)
Although the exact origin is unknown, it’s said to have been played in Ancient Sudan / Ghana. There’s also a neat theory that the original type was used for ritual or divination since they were typically found in temples. The more modernized version we know and play was created by Willie Julius Champion Jr. and created under a different name “Kalah”.

Game Studio

N/A

Original Platform & control mechanism

We’re utilizing the original platform. The control mechanism is a wooden board carved with holes, and marbles are used to tally points.

Describe game play and mechanics

Mancala is played by earning the most amount of marbles within your wooden pot. Each side of the mancala board has 6 mini pots, with two big pots on either side of the board. Within the mini pots, 4 marbles are placed in each to begin the match. Each player begins with the same amount of marbles (0), and the goal is to get as many marbles as you can into your pot. You achieve this by picking one of the 6 mini pots on your side, picking up the amount of marbles in the pot, and going around the board clockwise laying down a marble in each pot you pass. If you end up passing your own pot, you place a marble in it and continue. This is how you earn MOST of your points. An additional mechanic included is when the mini pots are empty. If your opponent has marbles in one of their pots, and your last marble from the amount of marbles you’re putting down lands into the adjacent pot, you’re able to steal their marbles and add it to your huge pot. If your last marble lands in your pot, you get to move again.

Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design

A strength of the design is that you can play it with almost anything because of its simplicity! Although the game requests you play with marbles and the wooden board provided, you can create a mancala board within nature (making the pots in the dirt and using pebbles or rocks as your “marbles”). Mechanically, a weakness is that the main player usually gets the advantage. If you begin, no matter what mode of mancala you’re playing, you’re able to get set up pretty easily. You can use your pot with 4 marbles 4 pots away to get a free turn, then go again and you’re already winning. I understand the advantage isn’t huge, but starting means that most of your turns won’t be interfered with by your opponent, allowing for setup moves to try to steal pieces and whatnot.

What made it fun?

Mancala is fun because it’s extremely strategic. You might just assume that you can’t carefully plan out marble attacks, but you absolutely can! If you free up space on your side of the board, getting your last marble into an empty pot ensures you get the marbles from your opponent's side. In turn, you have to make sure you don’t leave yourself open. A lot of it’s fun factor also comes from the different types of people you play against. During the time we played, I played against three different people with very different play styles. It’s the same game and mechanic, but everyone will strategize differently and that’s what gives it a ton of replay value. I’d also argue some of the mechanics are unpredictable (not knowing if your opponent's play will interfere with a play you’re planning to do your next turn).

Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?

I’d argue it was influential because of the cultural impact it’s had. A ton of Iphones have made sure to include mancala on their games using “GamePidgeon”, and I assume most people these days find out about it through technology and not necessarily by someone having the board at their school. Despite this, the game application company thought it was important enough to include mancala as one of the games, directly noting how impactful it’s been. I also say this because my absolutely favorite game as a kid, Club Penguin, had mancala! They had a coffee shop in the game with an upstairs room, and upstairs was a mancala you could play with others. This was the first time it was introduced to me as a kid, so imagine how many others learned about mancala and love it just as much because it was in their online penguin game. Mancala fits into the evolution of games because it pushes ideas of strategy and games that utilize capturing opponents pieces (like chess almost). Just another building block in the variety of games available today.

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

5 starts!! I love mancala so much and I clearly have so much bias for it. Play it all the time on imessaging. Makes me really happy.

[Meg Villanueva]

Journal 3

Name of Game
Pong

Game author (If known)
Nolan Bushnell, the man who founded Atari, had Allan Alcorn (one of his computer engineers) create Pong.

Game Studio
Atari

Original Platform & control mechanism
Arcade Machine, controller stick
Being placed in an arcade, not playing on the original platform and playing at home kind of takes away the social aspect of it. Also playing on computer most likely makes the controls a bit easier since it isnt a joystick and instead my keyboard.

Describe game play and mechanics

Pong mainly consists of passing a ball back and forth between you and your opponent. On the left and right side of the screen, separated by a line to indicate which side you’re on and which side the ball is on, are two bars. One is in your control, while the other play operates the opposite one. A ball appears on either side, and it’s your job to make sure the bar you’re controlling hits the ball. If you move your bar to hit the ball, it’ll bounce off it and go to the other side where it’s your opponent's turn to hit the ball (basically tennis). However, behind your bar is empty space that when the ball falls into, the opponent scores. This gives you incentive to be quick with your movements, and to block the ball and pass it back to your opponent without letting it get into your empty space / goal.

Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design

A weakness about the design is that it lacks much flavor. It doesn’t need to be an AAA game, but generally games will think about a specific theme or design to base their graphics off of. In this case, it feels less like a game and more like an unfinished concept as a result of the simplistic design. It plays like tennis, why not adjust and make the bars you control rackets? Despite this, it’s also one of its strengths. The simplicity allows for incredible readability, with nothing to distract from the game itself. It’s incredibly clear where the ball is without extra graphics to distract, and the scale on everything allows us not to feel too cramped and that we have enough room to move around. They have this game in the Wii Sports games, but it’s redesigned to be a neon hockey game with flashing graphics and loud noises. Part of the reason why that version is so hard is BECAUSE of the graphics, the loud buzzer and the glowing assets.

What made it fun?
Playing against the CPU, the fun began when I turned it up to hard mode. It wasn’t fun continuously losing, but it was fun when I was finally able to hit a shot back at it. A good portion of the fun comes from the stress the game puts onto you, especially having to rush to the place the ball is gonna hit after the opponent moves. It’s incredibly satisfying to hit the ball back after you don’t think you’ll be able to, and a lot of the enjoyment comes from that. Additionally, I’d argue it also serves as a puzzle game more than a vs game. A TON of the fun comes from actively trying to predict where the ball is gonna land since it can also hit the corners of the wall and ricochet. It’s really hard to figure out where it’s gonna land, but it’s the same thing where if you’re able to hit it you get a lot of fulfillment out of it.
The controls also end up being tons of fun! Although it’s just up and down, the controls don’t slide and feel incredibly polished for being an earlier game. Being able to operate my character / side in a way where I feel as though I have 100% control over it rather than sliding makes me want to continue playing knowing that I'll be in absolute control over whether or not I’m able to make a goal.

Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
Pong seems to be another example of a game like mancala and cards where a lot of the enjoyment comes from the voluntary competitiveness. Pong was created with single player in mind, but practically begs for you to play against someone else. However, I feel as though it’s one of the first examples of a “CPU” where the player isn’t playing against a person. I’d like to say this was incredibly influential, possibly inspiring games like Pac Mac where a huge amount of the gameplay revolves around interacting or going against CPUS. Up until now, it kind of goes against the idea of the games we’ve played so far which 100% require a human player to operate. But Pong doesn’t, and I assume at the time it was a unique and interesting mechanic, especially since a lot of games following included or revolved their game around CPUS. Although not related to gameplay, Pong was one of the first creations that proved that games could be commercially successful, which I assume led to the creation and evolution of similar games as previously stated.

How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
I’d say.. 3 stars? It was alright, much better compared to the other two games. These types of games are made to be played with others, and seeing as I played by myself, I don’t think I got the same experience and so my rating is probably biased.

[Meg Villanueva]

Journal 4

Name of Game
Space Invaders

Game author (If known)
Tomohiro Nishikado

Game Studio
Taito Corporation

Original Platform & control mechanism

The original platform was an arcade machine, with a joystick on the left, button in the middle to shoot, and buttons on the right for one or two players. Similar to the last game, the controls are a bit harder on the computer and would probably feel a lot smoother with their intended controllers. I would also take the game MUCH more seriously seeing as the machine would maintain my high score (which I would 100% aim for and play longer trying to achieve).

Describe game play and mechanics

Space Invaders relies on your ability to eliminate your enemies, which are seemingly aliens raining down on you. You control a ship that operates by moving left and right with the ability to shoot at the aliens and kill them. The aliens slowly move to one side of the screen, and once reaching it, move one level closer to you and continue approaching this way. Your goal is to try to defend yourself by killing off the aliens before they get too close, because once they reach your area and touch you, you lose immediately. You’re also given a few barriers to protect yourself from the enemy projectiles, but over time they can break depending on how many aliens have shot them. The game has a live system, allowing you to get shot three times before game over (opposed to when they reach you and then its instant game over). There’s also a point system where different points are given based on what type of aliens you successfully kill.

Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design

A ton of the strengths in the design lay in its readability, or how the game was created with it in mind. Although the graphics are low and are mostly pixels, the aliens in comparison to our ship are conveyed in a way where we KNOW they’re the enemies. Some have tentacles, others have antennae, but it goes to show just how identifiable their designs are despite being simplistic. The color is also a great indicator, allowing the player character to be green (usually good or hero) and the aliens to be white (void of color, unnatural). Even if we don’t read the rules, we can almost immediately infer who the enemies are and progress / start playing immediately. It doesn’t seem like there’s many flaws in the design, though I guess it would be nicer if there was up and down mobility as well. Having another dimension to move would be beneficial in dodging the alien attacks, but it’s a trivial thing and still extremely playable without the suggested fix.

What made it fun?
Having more than one objective at a time made it fun! Instead of one primary objective like Pong where you’re just trying to hit the enemy projectile back, you’re now tasked with killing all the enemies before they reach you AND scoring points. Not to mention that you’re also trying to dodge their attacks at the same time and decide which aliens are the most threatening at the time. Since you can only kill one at a time and they’re constantly getting closer, you have to be critically thinking where to strike next in order to ensure your safety. While playing I’d constantly wipe out the left side, but then be left with the right side which I had to eliminate immediately since they had gotten so close and I disregarded them. On top of that, my barriers constantly got broken, and so while trying to manage the side I left unchecked I was dodging the alien attacks as best I could. All of this combined makes for a VERY engaging experience, because if you’re not focusing on eliminating your enemies strategically, maybe you’re just playing to get points and are more focused on shooting the UFO than shooting the aliens.

Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
This game is a great example of a game with a high score and I’d argue that aspect of the game was influential. Compared to the games we’ve played until now, most DO have scores, but don’t frame it as a “high score” which has a more competitive connotation than just a regular scoring system. As a result, I feel as though it fits into the evolution of games because it’s also an example of competitive games to come. Especially knowing how people are now with ranked online games and wanting a certain prestige, I don’t doubt it was any different when the game first came out with people wanting to achieve the high score. I know some arcade machines would keep track of all the high scores, allowing you to brand your name next to it, and to some that was a huge accomplishment. This seems to influence competitive games as a whole, proving that games aren’t just a fun hobby and paved the way for games to become much more important and serious.
Additionally, I feel as though it influences more of an 8-bit style in games. Although that’s pretty much all they had to work with at the time, it kind of establishes the idea that you can clearly convey enemies or objects with something as simplistic as pixels. As a result, lots of games follow after this format, and are just as readable as Space Invaders.

How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
It’s ok! 3 stars. Staple in gaming, would probably play it if I didn’t have my phone with me and I was bored. But if I did then I most likely wouldn’t look at it.

[Meg Villanueva]

Journal 5

Name of Game
Donkey Kong

Game author (If known)
Shigeru Miyamoto

Game Studio

Nintendo

Original Platform & control mechanism

Arcade Machine, The primary control mechanism is a joystick that allows you to move up, down, left, and right. On the right side, there’s a player 1, player 2, and jump button. Playing on computer has been a challenge, having to use the arrow keys, and I assume the original game would play a lot better on joystick.

Describe game play and mechanics

The game begins at the bottom of the screen with the level progression being upwards. You play as “Jumpman”, now known as Mario, aiming to rescue the princess at the top of the level. However, the princess is being guarded by Donkey Kong, the antagonist who throws barrels down the level to try to stop you. You’re able to move left and right with your goal being to reach the top of the tower. Throughout the level, there are ladders that you’re able to optionally climb to progress in the stage. You also have a jump and a climb mechanic that you can use to dodge barrels, or climb ladders to evade the obstacles. Behind you, there’s fire that will occasionally come out and start chasing you as well. This adds pressure to you continuously moving up the level and forces you to constantly be thinking and planning your route.

Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design

A ton of the strengths lay in the colors. It’s nice to see that all of the colors are much more saturated, making the overall color scheme and aesthetic much more vibrant and engaging. The black background in contrast to the saturated colors is an appreciated touch, helping the neon hues to stand out much more (and adds to the readability of the level, allowing the player to understand the layout and design). What’s also neat is that the saturation applies to most of the level, and to the protagonist and who the protagonist is trying to save, but Donkey Kong is MUCH more desaturated in comparison despite it being his game. This was intentional, making the antagonist more muted so that we could understand who’s on our side / who we’re trying to save. Additionally, Donkey Kong has an animation right before he throws a barrel at you, allowing you to anticipate when one is coming once you get much closer. Unlike Space Invaders where the aliens just shoot at you, Donkey Kong provides extra animation to help further convey readability in the game.

What made it fun?

The player options and player controller! It’s still the standard left and right move mechanic, but you also have the option to climb up and jump which gives you tons of control over your character. It also allows for different options to obstacles, which is always nice for problem solving / replayability. There’s a barrel coming, but OH, you can go up the ladder to avoid it, or alternatively jump over and keep heading up. Ultimately, the choice is yours depending on the scenario. If there’s more barrels coming, it might be safer to use the ladder, but if it’s a singular barrel, jumping wouldn’t hurt and provides points.
What also adds to the fun factor is the extra enemies that follow you from the start (the stupid fire things)! As if the barrels weren’t enough, the fire will follow you and kill you more consistently than the barrels. Personally, I value problem solving a lot in games since it has me actively thinking and being careful with my inputs. The fire is annoying, but an extra mechanic that provides more opportunity to problem solve. Between the options to evade, plus the fire being an extra enemy, it adds up to be stressful but extremely engaging.

Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?

I believe this game helps to enforce that although games are more technical, they’re another medium to tell stories and serve as a secondary artform (and thus influences the idea that games can convey themes and ideas). I know that’s crazy to say, but you have a clear objective where Mario is trying to save the princess from some sort of evil. Previously, most games have had the objective of just killing enemies or advancing in some sort of way, and while they had a theme, they didn’t necessarily tell a story. However, in this case, the story and assets are clear and your objective is to progress through the story (save the princess) rather than just “completing” it if that makes sense. It feels as though it was influential because it made way for Mario as a series, with most Mario games maintaining the same objective of saving the princess. Despite the simplicity, some Mario games have much more complex narratives (saving the princess as the main objective, but getting lost in space with Mario Galaxy and having the secondary objective of helping Rosalina fix her ship) and it feels as though Donkey Kong was an excellent gateway to storytelling in games as a whole.


How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
The game is fun! But it’s hard and I’m terrible at these types of games. If I was smarter.. I could dodge the stupid flames. The flames are definitely harder than the barrels. 4/5

[Meg Villanueva]

Journal 6

Name of Game
AquaAttack


Game author (If known)
N/A / Couldn’t Find


Game Studio

Interphase



Original Platform & control mechanism

Colecovision / Controller like joystick; I feel as though it would’ve controlled a LOT easier since it was hard to understand on computer


Describe game play and mechanics

The game is a left progressing side scroller that consists of you controlling a boat while aiming to travel as far as possible without dying. The boat allows you to move up and down in a diagonal direction, while also allowing the player to decide when to speed up or slow down. However, the boat has limited supplies, and can only speed up for a certain amount of time before running out of fuel. Once your fuel is out, you lose and the game ends. You’re also able to use bullets against your enemies, but those are limited too. If you get hit too many times, you also die and the game ends. As you travel, there are sea mines and different obstacles laid out in the level. Helicopters and tanks will follow you and shoot at you, trying to deplete your health. Not only are you avoiding enemies, but you’re also avoiding obstacles in your path.


Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design

A strength is that all the colors are very uniform and similar! A ton of games will use a variety of hues and values, but the game seems to maintain a lighter more saturated color palette. Some games will tend to include black to help clarify some forms, but with how dark it is it can make the palette a bit awkward and just feel out of place. The game excels in ensuring all colors are similar values, so nothing feels too out of place or distracting.
A weakness is that a lot of the art / enemies don’t have a ton of clarity! I was able to understand what everything was supposed to be, but with them being lineless and some of the shapes being awkward, I didn’t understand for a good while (like the fuel that would appear, I thought it was an arrow so I didn’t touch it). It doesn’t help that the enemies / objects are lineless, so it lacks further clarity that it needs to be readable.


What made it fun?

The difficulty! Although it was a bit irritating at first, I became comfortable with how hard it was and learned to enjoy it. The overall mechanics add to the difficulty, only allowing diagonal movement, but it’s interesting trying to figure out how to properly maneuver. You’re able to speed up and slow yourself down, and with a combination of the two, it becomes really interesting to decide how to avoid obstacles. If you constantly sped up, you’d be able to outrun the helicopters, but then you’d have to be more conservative with your fuel after they were gone. The bullets being limited also make you decide when you really feel as though you need to use them, or if you should just opt to dodge. I also like how the second level includes similar mechanics, but adds onto the base game! In the second level, you’re able to go up and down vertically and side to side (you’re flying, so think of up and down like higher and lower in the sky). This adds a whole new dimension to dodging obstacles, forcing you to think in multiple dimensions rather than the one you were previously confined to. All adds up to be a challenging, exciting game.


Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
I feel as though its influential because of the change in mechanics throughout the game! Most games will maintain their core mechanics with new levels being artistically designed differently, or with the levels having different mechanics. AquaAttack takes a less expected route, and with the second level, introduces new mechanics that change the core mechanic of the game. Despite this, it proves that players can understand concepts and games can build upon them. Even though the mechanic is different, having similar controls to the first level helps understand how the second will operate, and allows for a LOT more variety in levels within the same game.
It fits within the evolution of games because, along with the other games, it has some sort of central theme along with gameplay that’s similar throughout. That sounds simple enough, but it’s another great example that artistic themes within games work a LOT to sell the narrative / objective and make it much easier for players to get into.



How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
I’d say… 3 stars? It was alright. Not much to comment this time.

[Meg Villanueva]

Meg Villanueva

Journal 7

Name of Game
Pitfall

Game author (If known)
David Crane

Game Studio

Activision

Original Platform & control mechanism

The original platform is the Atari 2600 with controllers on both sides. Although the computer version never works too well in comparison to the original, this one was REALLY nice. Since the website included some of the controllers for the original mechanism, I understood it a bit better and it overall worked really well.

Describe game play and mechanics

The game is a side scroller that moves to the next stage after you’ve passed the current stage (not to be confused by it continuously scrolling). The player you control can jump, and move left and right to avoid obstacles. The main goal seems to be to go as far as you can, with each level providing a new challenge / new enemies. Most levels, however, include some sort of pitfall or hole that’ll instantly kill the character if fallen into. Once you waste your 3 lives, the game abruptly stops and you have to reset the machine. While going as far as you can, there are collectables such as gold that raise your score by a lot. Other than progressing, the other main goal is to die with as many points as possible (just aim for the highest score).

Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design

The overall theme of the game is cohesive and adds onto the gameplay! A lot of the new platforming mechanics, such as the rope that swings, fits perfectly within the jungle theme. Most of the enemies have unique mechanics, such as the crocodiles snapping their teeth and having to time your moves. I only mention this because not only did the game succeed at maintaining the concept of the game being in swamp forest type area, but it took that and made enemies with distinct abilities that most likely wouldn’t have been able to be the way they are if they were different. It just feels very thought out and all assets are intentional, which is really nice.

What made it fun?

The main mechanics are slowly introduced, and it feels kind of encouraging in a way where its like “woah, I could get past that obstacle, let me keep going!” kind of thing. The beginning starts with a static barrel that kind of introduces the main idea that hitting it won’t kill you, but youll lose points. Then, the game introduces the crocodiles and the cobra thing and whatever else. It’s done in such a fun way though, dedicating each level to a singular mechanic. The barrels are in all levels, but things such as the crocodiles, or the pits, are generally all contained within one level. By doing so, it can slowly introduce each mechanic one by one so that the player understands and then it can up the difficulty. For example, a huge one was the level with the pit and the rope to swing across. The following levels include a pit that disappears and reappears, giving you more options to complete the level, but mixing it up a bit to add some replayability and diversity.
Additionally, because of all these obstacles, the game is a bit more difficult but in a rewarding way. For completing levels, and for collecting gold at the end of some levels, you can earn extra points. The game rewards you for continuously going forward and progressing, so it feels satisfying.


Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?

I feel as though it provides a good example of how games could feel more like exploring rather than having one linear level with everything predetermined? At least to me, it seemed as though each new room was entirely different and randomized, which greatly added to the engagement because of how diverse the experience felt at times. It feels more generated than linear, and I feel as though it’d be a great starting point for more games that want to try to make their experiences more diverse.
This game fits into the evolution of games because it kind of shows the route that games go down in terms of platformers. We have lots of great examples of obstacles, and how to lay out levels in a way where it requires precise platforming (and so as a result, I feel as though it influenced / strengthened the genre as a whole)


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

I’d say 4 out of 5 stars! A lot more engaging than some of the other games.

[Meg Villanueva]

Journal 8

Name of Game
The Oregon Trail


Game author (If known)
Don Rawitsch, Bill Heinemann, and Paul Dillenberger


Game Studio

MECC



Original Platform & control mechanism

Apple II; Despite not being the original platform, I feel as though it operates VERY well since it’s already been intended for computer beforehand. As a result, I had no issues operating it and feel it worked really smoothly.



Describe game play and mechanics

The gameplay is primarily text based, giving multiple text options and allowing you to select different options based on the dialogue. The game follows the story of a settler moving west towards Oregon, following the Oregon Trail and stopping at various historical lakes and forts to regroup. Initially, the game allows you to choose how much money you spend on different supplies, including food, ox, clothing, and ammo. Once you set off, you’re unable to go back and have to manage your resources day by day as you travel the trail. At each checkpoint, you’re able to purchase more supplies, but until then you have to be careful with how many resources you use up. Every action must be thought out carefully, as there’s a chance element where every day something can go wrong (such as your cart catching on fire, or getting stuck in mud and losing a day to move). With all of these in mind, you have to be extremely strategic.

Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design

A lot of the strength lies in that in some places of the game, there’s a LOT more detailed renders of things. Whenever you reach a major milestone, the game will show a close up of the area and provide a beautifully drawn screenshot of each area. However, other than that, the game lacks a lot in visuals and solely relies on text. It’s a weakness in a way, where you’re kind of forced to think of visuals while stopping for the day or doing anything in your menu, but I feel as though it helps the player focus a lot more on gameplay mechanics and careful reading rather than viewing pretty pictures.


What made it fun?
I really liked the strategy of it! What helped a lot was that the game almost guided you on how to win, and that’s how I was able to win my first try. You aren’t quite sure what to do, but the game provides lots of areas where you can check your map, talk to the locals to get insight, and even when you’re in the shop it informs you the minimum you should be taking. It feels as though it rewards players for being curious, carefully considering all options and resource management. Other than that, you’re mostly on your own trying to manage your resources. The game will give you different options on how much to feed everyone, and how that’ll affect their health, so it's a balance of trying to carefully feed your characters enough to survive while also maintaining their health.




Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
The game proves that gameplay can be a VARIETY of things and doesn’t necessarily have to include a controllable player. A lot of the other examples have been platformer heavy, relying on the players ability to maneuver around the level and avoid obstacles. However, in this case, the player is solely relying on dialogue options to perform tasks (apart from the hunting section of course). It’s absolutely still a game, but it kind of redefines the idea of games where it doesn’t have to be something you’re actively moving within and can just be an interactive experience.
It fits within the evolution of games because it also serves as an educational game, paving the way for more games to evolve into more informative pieces rather than being mindless. As you travel, it provides a detailed map of actual historic landmarks and tries to replicate how it’d be at the time / troubles of traveling back in the day.


How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
5 Stars!! I got on the top 10 list on the internet archive version. Beat it first try, super proud of that. Love these sorts of games.

[Meg Villanueva]

Journal 9

Name of Game
Microsoft Decathlon


Game author (If known)
Timothy W. Smith


Game Studio

Microsoft



Original Platform & control mechanism

Apple II, Control mechanism was keyboard; I feel as though the controls were easy, especially cuz it was designed for some other type of computer, BUT some of the choices for the games were just awkward. Some keys dont pair well with each other, and yet the games asks you to utilize them for certain games and it just doesn’t feel right.



Describe game play and mechanics

The game consists of two different modes, text mode and then action mode. The game has you playing in the Olympics, reading about the event you’re about to perform, and then allowing the player to execute it with certain controls. For example, the game has a 100m dash minigame. It explains to you that’s what you’re about to do through text, then allows you to take control and asks you to use the 1 and 2 keys for running. These keys change for every game, but the general loop of the game is that you enter a text phase where it explains the game to you, and then you play it.

Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design

A huge strength is the use of black in the game. The primary screen color is black, so anything contrasted against it is easy to see and comprehend. Most of the colors used for the games are pink, blue, and white, all with TONS of saturation to stand out from the black background. This made comprehending the objects and what they were supposed to be MUCH easier.

Weaknesses. Oh my god. The sound design is awful. I try to be more objective while writing these but oh my god the sound sucks. You’re playing in the Olympics and its just… dead quiet. There’s no background music to help with the atmosphere, and most sounds are WAY too loud to actually be enjoyable. I just love when I boot up the game and it sounds like my computer is breaking. No thanks.



What made it fun?
Similar to Oregon trail, the different prompts and varied responses allowed for different playthroughs every time. Like Oregon Trail, there’s different prompts you can choose from (such as deciding when you’re gonna jump during the long jump), but then you’re given direct control of your character which is MUCH different. Oregon Trail, the other text game, had you mainly view the player character and make choices for your players. You had direct influence over them, but I would argue you weren’t really operating their movement. However, in this case, Microsoft Decathlon gives you a chance to maneuver the actual character and only includes the text segments to make your choices and provide context to the different sporting events.
Part of the fun is also just… raging at it. I LOVE difficult games, even if it’s to the point where it’s frustrating, and this is a great instance of that. The controls are fine, but some of the inputs on the keyboard feel weird (like using the [ and ] key for one of the events, it doesn’t really feel right). Not only are some of the controls for the games uncomfortable, but the margin to jump on some of these challenges is VERY tight and seems like it’s almost undoable unless you’re perfect about it. Something about the challenge is compelling, but similarly annoying.




Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
I’d say it’s influential because it introduces almost a hybrid game, where it’s primarily text based to provide context and introduce the different challenges you can play, and then it hands off the controller to you and actually allows you to play it. Most text games are text and remain that way, utilizing the players imagination to fuel the game. Oregon Trail takes it a step further by providing more visuals, but doesn’t directly allow you to control the characters movements except within the hunting game. Microsoft Decathlon mixes these elements together, handing off the player controller much more often and allows for context and choice to be built with text, then the execution of said choice gets to be done by the players.
It fits within the evolution of games because it’s another example of how narrative games can be accomplished / done. As games evolve, they begin to convey more through text rather than just showing you and allowing you to come to your own conclusion. This game has a great mix of both, explaining context, but then allowing you to kind of feel it out and play for yourself.



How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
3 Stars! Too hard, maybe a skill issue.

[Meg Villanueva]

Journal 10

Name of Game
Super Mario Bros


Game author (If known)
Shigeru Miyamoto and Takashi Tezuka


Game Studio

Nintendo



Original Platform & control mechanism

Nintendo Entertainment System (NES); Control mechanism includes a controller with up, down, left, right, a and b buttons. The computer version actually feels really good, working well with the already established up down left right, so I don’t think there’s much difference.



Describe game play and mechanics

The game consists of you platforming through levels from left to right. Each level is a bit different in design, but all of them function the same. To complete each level, you must reach the flagpole at the end and touch it to win the stage within the time limit. Each level has blocks within it that you can use as platforms, or that you can break to reach new parts of the stage. Sometimes, these blocks will contain powerups that make reaching the goal easier. These mostly include powers that help you plow through enemies.. Around each map are enemies that walk in a set path, providing another obstacle other than platforming to get through.


Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design

A huuuuge strength is the color palette / color variation in general. A lot of the foreground / background is saturated, having incredibly bright blues and greens that are utilized. In contrast, Mario is a lot more toned down, having a more muted red and grey / green color for his clothing. This helps to convey the idea that the world is fun and alive, making the environment bright, while also being able to see Mario without having him clash against the colorful background. The design choices are also VERY obvious and the player can begin the game without knowing what it’s about. The goombas, although somewhat aimless, are designed where they’re angry and have these giant eyebrows. You can already infer that they’re supposed to be some sort of enemy, and so you can tell you’re supposed to stomp on them / avoid them just from their design. The same goes for the powerup blocks, intentionally having a “?” branded onto them. Although you don’t know that they’re helpful when you begin playing, the mystery of what’s inside urges you to hit it and figure out the mystery.



What made it fun?
I love challenge, and part of what made it fun / difficult was the scrolling system! Once you choose to move screen right and the camera pans with you, there’s no going back. This is sosososo fun because it encourages you to think critically while playing! Yea whatever you’re already thinking critically but it adds another level to it. The question block you just passed and now it’s off screen and probably had the fire flower? Gah! Too late, can’t go back now. It makes you consider your movements more carefully and take more time to observe your surroundings, which is a nice touch once you remember that they’ve carefully crafted like 20+ levels for this one game. I also really enjoy the way that the game operates overall, giving you options on how to defeat enemies. Most enemies can be defeated even without powerups just by stomping on them. However, the game provides you with extra options (such as the fire flower or star powerup) to tackle the enemies and obstacles differently,




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’s one of the first games to establish an entire world / kingdom? Don’t get me wrong, some of the games we’ve looked at have established environments, like the one game with the pit and the snakes and whatever the name was. But in this case, including multiple WORLDS with various level designs is so interesting! Most games have different levels, but tend to stick to one theme and leave it at that. However, Super Mario Bros has a few different concepts that they manage to merge together (like how water levels exist in this world, or how Bowser just makes sense to exist) in a way that doesn’t feel so wrong? I assume it’s because some of the concepts are already wild, such as the goomba enemies, so the castle or the water levels don’t feel too wild in comparison. It fits within the evolution of games where we start to see games have more varying themes that fit within one world, like how games will have an established universe but can contain multiple areas with differing aesthetics that all still somehow make sense.


How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
4 Stars! Fun classic. Im just biased because I like the 3d mario games more….. 3d mario world is so fun

[Professor Watkins]

Graded to here.

[Meg Villanueva]

Journal 12

Name of Game
A Bug’s Life


Game author (If known)
Jon Burton (Director), though game was a movie created by John Lasseter


Game Studio

Traveller’s Tales



Original Platform & control mechanism

PS1 / PS1 Controller; The computer port of the PS1 game wasn’t so bad, but a huge draw in platforming games is having a controller since they’re generally mapped to feel better for movement.



Describe game play and mechanics

The game follows Flik the ant as he traverses through the world of bugs as seen in the movie it’s based off of. The goal of each level is to collect all the wheat in the level, defeat the bug enemies, and collect the letters of your name in order to progress to the next level. This is accomplished by utilizing the plants around you. Some plants you’re able to uproot, and after uprooting it are able to choose what platforming option replaces it. For example, there’s a flat grass platform that you’re able to step on. However, it’s too low to reach the platform you need to get to. You can uproot the grass platform and replace it with a mushroom one that allows you to bounce and reach the area you previously couldn’t. You’re also able to throw fruit which defeats the enemies around the world.


Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design

A lot of the strengths lay in the color choices. Because of the nature of the game, a ton of the game contains greens and browns for the earthy parts. Generally, ants are colored brown, but I appreciate that the ants and bugs contained in the game are specifically made so they can be seen through all the neutral colors. The game is extremely saturated, but it isn’t overwhelming and is just enough for the world to feel whimsical and fun. A lot of the weakness I’d say is the camera, because it’s trying to contain the character in the center of the screen, but it has a view delay where you often get out of the middle. At that point, it becomes a frustrating game of trying to adjust the camera.



What made it fun?
Some of the ways the developers used ordinary objects and created them to be integral to the level is really interesting! For example, the mushroom platformer and being able to bounce off it to reach higher areas / the grass platformers. It’s also really cool how you can determine which platformer is where by changing the color and then regrowing the plants. It serves for a nice puzzle that isn’t too hard, but still engaging to be fun.
The berry throw mechanic is also really fun since some of them auto aim onto the enemies in the sky. Although it isn’t the most engaging, something is really satisfying about hitting all the enemies.
I really appreciate how the level feels semi-open world? There’s a definite end to the level, but we aren’t told where anything is and are forced to navigate without instruction other than understanding how the mechanics operate. I know some people hate when games don’t tell you where to go, but part of the fun is figuring it out. Puzzles aren’t fun if someone shows you exactly where each piece goes. I think it was a great decision to do this, especially because players are entering a world we understand if we’ve watched the movie, but haven’t actively lived in.


Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?

This is a REALLY interesting game because I feel as though it marks the start of movies being turned into games. Until now, games have been their own separate ideas and concepts, but somehow they turned a movie that’s already fully fleshed out and meant for viewing into an interactive experience. It presents the idea that stories can be told multiple ways and can be modified to cater towards audiences, who in this case, may not want to watch the movie and play it instead. It also offers extra insight on the world and how it operates since it seems to somewhat alter the story presented in the movie to provide more cohesive gameplay.
It fits into the evolution of games in that currently, a tooooonn of games that exist are based off of already existing media. Ultimately, games are another way to make money, and as games gain better graphics as they improve, people move more towards it. As someone who isn’t a huge fan of watching movies, interacting with media that’s based on a movie but not a movie is really nice to experience. Sometimes, movies are a slog since there’s a predetermined ending or I have no say in the matter, but games and interactive experiences allow you to directly put yourself in the situations. These days, a majority of games have evolved to become cash grabs and I feel as though this fits right in with trying to reel in their movie audience into paying for the system and the game.



How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
3 stars. Not the worst, not the best. Just think its a funny choice of movie to make into a game.

[Meg Villanueva]

Journal 13

Name of Game
Super Mario 64


Game author (If known)
Shigeru Miyamoto


Game Studio

Nintendo



Original Platform & control mechanism

Nintendo 64; I played on the Nintendo Switch and honestly… the port is SO much better and much more polished. Platformers are really nice on controller, so I didn’t have much problem playing and it actually felt really nice overall. Compared to the 64 controller, id even argue it was a better experience on the switch.



Describe game play and mechanics

Mario 64 follows Mario as he goes to rescue Princess Peach. This journey takes him through various levels where his main objective is to collect stars within the level. Each world requires a certain amount of stars to be accessible, including the final boss level where the Princess resides. The main goal is to collect as many stars as possible, and eventually retrieve enough to fight Bowser at the end of the game and rescue Princess peach. You’re able to double jump, wall jump, crouch and utilize tons of other player controller mechanics to complete the levels. Mastery of this controller can determine if you’re able to get a star or not, encouraging you to conquer the difficulty of the game itself.


Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design

A lot of the strengths lay in the simplicity of the designs! It’s not really high graphics, but the designs are readable from far and distinct enough to be memorable and to remember the function of different enemies. This also allows for levels to be built in conventional ways, such as some levels being a combination of floating rectangular platformers that would typically be awkward if they were more detailed. Since it’s less detailed, the game can get away with weirder and more interesting level layouts without having to try to explain why things are built the way they are.
A weakness is that the camera is kind of weird. The camera tries to make it so Mario is almost always within the middle of the screen, but ends up in some awkward positions throughout the level and doesn’t feel natural.



What made it fun?
A ton of the fun comes from the variety in levels! Instead of being confined to one overarching theme within levels, each area has its own theme which adds more incentive to keep collecting stars. Obviously, it’s not the end game, but being able to choose which levels to go to next with an entirely new experience each time is refreshing. Each level is also created with multiple objectives in mind, so each part of each world feels unique with different parts being intended for separate stars.
Additionally, the mechanics that we’re able to use within the game make it a lot more fun too! Things like the double jumping, backflipping, diving, and wall jumping allow for a lot more leniency on how levels are completed, which is something I really like. A lot of the levels are designed in a way where they’re able to be completed with different objectives and in a variety of ways, and these movement options help a ton with it. Instead of going all the way up the mountain to the Bob-omb KIng the intended route, people have figured out a combination of these game mechanics to make their way up the mountain in a faster / more optimal way. Games like these are always fun because it rewards the player with an easier experience for having more mastery over the player controller.



Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?

This is another one of those games that set the standard of games where people REALLY like kind of open world designed games. Obviously, each level is contained, but within each level there’s a variety of ways to collect stars / complete the level and that’s what makes it feel so open worldy. One level you could be trying to defeat the boss, while the other you could be trying to reach a star in a really hard area. As a result, the levels are built to feel like an “open world” with various opportunities to complete the world in different ways.
A lot of games up until this point have been platformers, but I feel as though this is an updated and revolutionary version of the genre. Platformers have been relatively simple, with jumping and other mechanics that make it stand out. However, in this case, Mario 64 does this by creating a more complex player controller which I believe inspired the subsequent platforming games within the coming years. Instead of being limited to just jumping and crouching, there’s a lot more mobility options which make it much more immersive and feel a lot better.
Additionally, this game led to a HUGE speedrunning community? I don’t know if speedrunning was a thing before this game, but this game definitely influenced speedrunning and the culture as a whole. People used the player controller along with game breaking bugs to complete the game much faster and became a notable way to play the game. This most likely influenced the idea of speedruns as a whole.



How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
4 stars!! I love this game and would always play the DS port of it. Nostalgia blinds me, but I don’t care

[Meg Villanueva]

Journal 14

Name of Game
Ratchet and Clank: Going Commando


Game author (If known)
Brian Allgeier (Main creative director)


Game Studio
Insomniac Games



Original Platform & control mechanism

Playstation 2, Playstation controller; Playing using an emulator on the computer was.. Frustrating. In this case, the original control mechanism would’ve been appreciated, especially because I feel as though the movement would feel much more smooth.



Describe game play and mechanics

Ratchet and Clank follows two space heroes who are going on another mission to save an untitled project by the people they’re employed from (this answer is vague because it picks up in the mid / latter half). The gameplay is primarily a platformer, allowing the player to jump and utilize other movements such as his jetpack and his side jump abilities. However, most of the mechanics are utilized through the weapons provided throughout the game. Each weapon has a unique gimmick and can help more within different contexts, so its up to you to choose your favorite weapons and figure out how to utilize them when most effective.


Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design

A strength is that this game has a LOT of cutscenes. Generally, you’re aiming to play the game more than watching cutscenes, but they help to really establish a lot of the world and the relationships Ratchet has with others. Overall, they help to sell the main tone of the game, including a lot more lighter moments within the cutscenes and saving the more serious matters for actual gameplay.
For the most part, the HUD is clear and pretty nice, but at some points (especially during the area sections), it becomes to feel a bit too cluttered for me. Although the information is necessary, I feel as though it couldve been done a bit better. Because of how fast paced the game is, some of the HUD feels distracting and as if it’s another thing to crowd the screen.



What made it fun?
A ton of the fun comes from.. Being able to shoot at everything. Which makes me sounds weird, but the fighting mechanics within the game are incredibly satisfying. Whenever you break or shoot at anything, the reaction time it takes to occur is just the right amount of seconds to where it ends up feeling REALLY good. Paired with the fact that enemies drop the screws / coins upon death, the sounds of retrieving them after killing them is really effective and addictive. To add onto it, the fast paced gameplay makes it much more engaging. The game has a nice contrast of giving you time to chew on the premise and makes the beginning intro really slow, but then immediately throws you into the game afterwards where it’s fast paced and right into it. There’s always lots of space within the levels to maneuver and play how you’d like and feels really open. A lot of the options for movement such as the jump and the side jump smoothly chain into each other, so that’s really nice too.
What also makes it fun is just the overall story. It gets much more serious down the line, adding higher stakes to the story, but starts as this funny sort of thing where they’re trying to retrieve a pet experiment. And even then, within the game, the bad guys start laughing at each other during the cutscene? Which I feel is really unseen these days where games typically take themselves too seriously. As a result, the gameplay has a lot of charm when including moments of humor.



Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
The game is really neat mechanically, where you can jump and sidejump and do extra moves, but I believe a HUGE part of the influence is in the battle system / battle item system. Ratchet and Clank is unique in that there’s not just one weapon the main character uses, but a multitude of items you can mix and match and choose which work best for you. Additionally, each weapon has a unique gimmick that makes it that much more interesting. For example, one of the more notable ones is the “Sheepinator” which turns your opponents into sheep. Obviously, this doesn’t work for bosses, but it works for lower enemies throughout levels. This gives you the option to immediately eliminate smaller opponents while also doing it in a fun and enjoyable way. Like.. when have you seen a game where you can turn your enemies into sheep? There’s another one that throws out a decoy inflatable of Rachet, the main character, that can fool enemies. These are only two of the many that are available in the game. Ratchet and Clank does really well with creating weapons that are truly unique. Rather than making the same type of gun with different range and varying damage, they bump it up and try to implement what would be a more fun yet effective option to include.





How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
4 Stars!! I never had a ps2, but my brother did and I’d watch him play since I hated the playstation controller. Nostalgia blinds me once again, but I think it’s good even now looking back at it.