Evely Torres - Journal Entries

[EvelyT]

Journal #1



Name of Game
Bullshit (Originally titled “Cheat” according to the Oxford Dictionary of Card games; Additionally called “I Doubt It”)

Game author (If known)
Upon research, I was unable to find a conclusive creator, however many variants of the game exist within different countries, some sporting unique rules to that variation.

Game Studio
Once again, unfortunately research was inconclusive.

Original Platform & control mechanism
This was a game designed to be played tabletop with a standard deck of playing cards.
While reliant on the cards and which specific set you have at any given time (all cards from ace through King), this is moreso a game of wits, utilizing your mind more than anything.

Control mechanism you used
Would the experience have been different using the original? How?
I stuck to the original method of play as it is the easiest to follow and typically doesn’t require much brain power other than planning strategy against one another. I had talked about adding the King as a modifier/wild card to spice things up and add confusion, though that isn’t any particular established rule, simply a rule made up by me.


Describe gameplay and mechanics
The game is comprised of at least two players, but is best played among groups of four or more. A standard deck of 52 playing cards is divided up evenly between all players, choosing to not use the entire deck is at the discretion of the player but must be split evenly regardless. Starting player is often left to the group, but the standard is that the player left of the dealer begins the game. Card suits aren’t important to the game as only the value is what will be called. The beginning player will start off at 1, placing down a card and declaring what card and how many of that card have been placed (Ex: placing down two 3-value cards). If this is accepted by all players, the play continues to the next who will follow the order in placing 2, then 3, and so on in order counting up as a pile of discarded plays builds up in the middle. The thrill comes in as players may choose to lie about which and how many cards they are placing, in which players will need to be keen on calling this out. If accepted and not disputed, the game continues as normal, but a player can be called out regardless of whether they have lied or not. If the liar is caught they must reveal their placed card and take the entire pile of discarded plays and incorporate them into their deck. However, if the accuser is wrong, they instead take the discard pile. The goal is to try to empty your hand completely and to avoid getting caught lying, which becomes increasingly difficult the less cards you have on hand. Strategy comes into play as one must be careful not to accuse blindly or act too hastily as to be caught. A battle of wits, players often engage head to head trying to sort out who is lying and who is telling the truth, creating an air of playfulness and allowing for a unique experience every game.


Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design
The art falls solely on the cards in this instance which actually serves as a strength. Given as this game relies on deceit, the cards having the same backing design is an excellent component as there is no way for others to truly tell what cards you have other than based on the player’s mannerisms. The simplistic design as well makes it so that the cards aren’t truly the focus at all, rather placing the focus on the players to each other, as you’d often find yourself looking at the other’s faces rather than the cards in hand.

Another strength is that, by design, this game is relatively simple to pick up and keep track of without actually focusing all too much. This way, you can actually have conversations and engage with other players without being too caught up in something.

One of the biggest weaknesses though is that this game is often to be played with speed, meaning that any slowness can be taken as hesitation. You often have to act fast to avoid other players suspecting that you are bluffing, so getting too distracted or looking at your cards too long will raise higher suspicion towards yourself. This can be a tad stressful as, if you are like me and don’t have your cards in order thus are often unable to get a proper look at what you actually have, it can appear to others that you are planning something rather than being confident to play, so it becomes harder when it comes time to lie as many are already expecting it.

What made it fun?
What makes it the most fun is when you’re among a group of friends who you know well as you can begin to read each other’s bluffs or simply start to mess with each other to keep the game fresh as you continue to play. What I’ve noticed is that the game will start off almost serious, with many making a genuine attempt to take victory. However, the mask quickly falls after a round or two as players naturally begin to team up to target others, and yet losing is met with laughter and jokes rather than frustration and arguments. It’s fun because it really isn’t complicated to pick up, so the focus starts to fall on the camaraderie between the players as you can strike up conversations or joke around without getting too sidetracked or disrupting the game’s flow. It almost feels like a game that’s designed to get you to talk to those around to you rather than actually focusing on the cards, and the nature of the crudeness to the name makes for an easy icebreaker that helps all involved feel comfortable as no one is so stiff and serious as to allow for an awkward air to linger. Personally, the lying is the most fun since it gets to such a ridiculous level that we can call each other out with just a look without even shouting. Being an absolute terrible liar, I can manage to keep the facade up for a good round or so, but eventually the others know me so well that I don’t even need to play, but it also comes with a greater and more satisfying shock when I’m the one winning after they thought they had me all figured out.

Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
Bullshit and many games that rely on reading others are most definitely influential when it comes to gaming. What is pivotal is the aspect of deceit and strategy which is solely dependent on the players, allowing them to feel integral to the game and therefore creates a deeper engagement. The players are what determine the game based on how each person chooses to play, making for a unique experience each time. Such mechanics can be seen in most of the latest popular games, a notable example being Among Us. Though not a card game at all and seemingly disconnected from the tabletop era entirely, it is related in that it is a game also focusing on deceit and strategy, having players rely on how well they can read one another and form alliances or how well they can bluff and pull a fast one right under everyone’s nose. Games like this also rely on the closeness between players, as aforementioned in why card games are so fun, as they can also transform into ridiculous antics that foster good conversation and laughs all around. What is also notable is this feeling of risk when playing that makes things interesting. In Bullshit you take risk when calling others out, as well as taking a risk to try and trick those around you without getting caught. As many other games, there is no interest if no one was to be called out, if we were just to continue to palace cards in order, and the game would be done in a round or so. It is in taking risk that the game grabs your attention and provides satisfaction and an adrenaline rush. Once again, modern games like Among Us utilize this feeling as well when you take risk accusing the wrong person of sabotage without becoming suspicious or becoming a target, or when you take the risk to take out other players without being caught. In a similar manner, if everyone did their tasks without interacting, the game would end quickly and with the same players winning game after game, which doesn’t make the experience too enjoyable. In fostering an environment where things could go wrong so you must act and think quickly, the player base retains interest and interacts with the game in a more meaningful and thoughtful manner.


How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
Personally, I’d rate this game a 3 (out of 5) since it’s not my favorite among card games, but it still makes for a great game among friends and leads to good conversation.

[EvelyT]

Journal # 2

Name of Game
Mancala


Game author (If known)
Based on the earliest version of Mancala, the original creator is unknown as this is a game that dates as far back as around 6000 BC. However, modern versions of Mancala can be attributed to William Julius Champion Jr., as he largely popularized the game in the states. He specifically created “Kalah” in 1940, which is within the Mancala tree.

Game Studio
Going off of the earliest Mancala game, this is inconclusive as well. However, based off of William Julius Champion Jr.’s contribution, he created the Kalah Game Company.

Original Platform & control mechanism
This was a game designed to be played in most any medium, from digital to table top, even in the dirt on the playground. It is played on a board split in half between two players, each side having six pits that hold four marbles/seeds each, with a much larger base at the right hand of each player. The large base is where final points are stored.

Control mechanism you used

Would the experience have been different using the original? How?
I stuck to the more modern version of Mancala, what is technically called “Kalah”. Personally, I find this version the most fun and easy to understand, though I don’t think other methods would’ve taken me much longer to pick up either.

Describe gameplay and mechanics
Modern versions of Mancala are played on a board split in half between two players, each player being given six pits as well as a collection base to the right hand of each player. Each of the six pits holds four marbles/seeds each, and the objective is to capture as many marbles as possible by the end of the game. To begin, the player must select a pit to start from, pick up all the marbles within, and move along the board counterclockwise, placing one marble in each following pit and respective base until they use up the marbles at hand. This action will alternate between both players until all marbles are captured at any player’s base. Any marble that falls into a base is no longer playable and cannot be stolen. If the last marble of a play lands in a player’s base, they have another turn until they play an action that doesn’t end with marbles in their base. If a player’s turn ends with placing a marble into an empty pit on their OWN side adjacent to a full pit on the opponent's side, the player then claims all the marbles in both pits and moves them to their base, taking another turn until they play an action that doesn’t end with marbles in their base. If one player runs out of marbles on their side, the game ends and any remaining marbles are claimed by the player with the remaining marbles on their own side. This game requires strategy and planning to make sure each move ends in an optimal advantage to the player.

Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design
Much like my comments with Cheat/BS, the greatest strength is the ease of entry into the game. The simple nature of the gameplay allows for new players to join easily, and with less stress on learning the rules, more fun can be had in the banter between players. This, however, can begin to form a weakness as well that I personally ran into, where my moves began to feel the same and the novelty of the game began to wear off. Since it is so simple, if there isn’t sufficient interaction between players to facilitate gameplay, the game itself starts to get a bit repetitive and predictable after two or more rounds.

The most glaring weakness is that by design, the game can be over very quickly due to the simplicity once more. There comes a point in the game where it is very obvious who the winner will be just based on how many pieces are left, so it almost feels like there is no point in completing the game as there is no chance to make a comeback or risk of losing. That is why I feel like the interaction between players helps to carry the gameplay since you can still make fun conversation that compels you to keep playing anyway. While simplicity may be a great aspect, it serves as a double edged sword here.

What made it fun?
I found it most fun when I was learning the rules along with my fellow players. Since it is a game that requires some time to analyze your moves, you could begin to see as we each started to develop a distinct playstyle despite never having played before. Much like when I played Cheat/BS, a lot of the fun can be facilitated by the fact that the game is so easy to pick up, thus you are able to focus on other aspects of the game instead of getting frustrated trying to figure out complicated rules or keep track of multiple things at once. Personally, I enjoy any game that allows me to focus on my opponent in a way where I can talk with them directly and have fun, emphasizing the in person connection and camaraderie that is at times rare in a digital age. Trash talk would begin to arise, all in good spirit and handled in a playful manner, which raised the stakes to the game and made it a fun challenge to show one another up as the Mancala grandmaster. My personal favorite parts were when a move I’d been setting up for a few turns finally pays off, and I can see the shift in my opponent as they realize the strategy I’ve managed to pull under their nose, akin to the satisfaction you gain from bluffing during a game of cards. Luckily, however, my excitement to play and lack of composure didn’t give me away as it typically would in a card game, which made it even more fun since I tend to stress out over whether or not I can keep a poker face.

Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
Given that Mancala is still wildly popular today despite dating as far as 6000 BC, to deny its influence would be criminal. I feel it has stood the test of time, as many games do, due to its simplicity and versatility. It truly feels as if it can be picked up by just about anyone in a matter of minutes, and it doesn’t require many resources to play. Mancala can be played in just about any medium, even having digital versions of the game to be played against a computer or other online players. The bar of entry is so low that you can create a board by simply digging in the dirt and finding enough stones to serve as game pieces for you and an opponent, making it both really cheap and accessible to any player. Mancala’s cultural impact is great and spans across generations and demographics much more than many games are able to accomplish despite having seemingly simple mechanics. Aspects that make Mancala fun can be seen in similar games and have even inspired the basis of others, such as the game “Trajan”, created by Stephen Feld. This game has a mechanic that requires placing and capturing seeds around the board, using strategy to plan where they land to gain an advantage based on their placement, much like the base aspects of Mancala. Mancala is timeless, and the play appeals to such a wide audience that it will likely continue to circulate for many more years to come.

How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
I’d give Mancala a 4 star rating as I have many fond memories playing it and quite enjoy the game on my own time. The only downside, is that at times the gameplay can get so repetitive based on who I’m playing or the strategy that I’m using, that it can feel boring and predictable.

[EvelyT]

Journal #3


Name of Game
Pong


Game author (If known)
Although assigned by Nolan Bushnell to do so, Pong was created by Allan Alcorn.


Game Studio
Pong was released by Atari, Inc. in 1972.


Original Platform & control mechanism
The earliest version of this game was meant to be played on an arcade style console, complete with a joystick as a means to control the player. By 1975, however, it too had become a home console game.


Control mechanism you used
Would the experience have been different using the original? How?
I played a modern version of Pong which can be played on pc, using my mouse to move the paddle up and down. I feel I would’ve enjoyed the original experience more as I am much fond of older arcade games, and I find the joystick controls to ironically be much easier to navigate. I feel limited by the range of motion and dpi of my mouse, so I feel a joystick would give a more consistent experience.


Describe gameplay and mechanics
Pong is a game that can be played between two live players or even single player against a computer. The objective is to bounce a ball back and forth trying not to miss in order to defend one’s own goal, which is done so by moving a “paddle” up and down the screen to where the ball may bounce. Points are earned when a player successfully gets their opponent to miss hitting the ball back, thus falling into their goal. According to research, the original game was played up to whoever scored 11 points first, but more modern versions may play up to a higher or even lower score. Many versions have a difficulty setting that may be adjusted when playing against a computer, typically ranging from easy to medium to hard, and the difficulty will increase subtly by intensifying and speeding up the ball bounces in an attempt to get the live player to miss.


Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design
Much like other games I’ve played, many of the strengths lie in the simplicity of the game. It is very straight forward, which makes it easy to pick up and understand, allowing for one to play endlessly as they would like.

The simplicity of the art design is one that I count as a strength as it doesn’t bog you down too much visually and create confusion. Typically, when playing games like Pong that progressively begin to get faster, it is important to focus in order to avoid missing when things get too fast. Because there is not much going on visually, it is easier to keep track of the ball and where it is going, unlike modern games in which at times I can’t even keep track of which player is mine, causing me to lose at critical moments.

While a personal strength, for others it may be a weakness as lack of visual engagement can become boring fast, and with lack of attention holding elements, some players don’t see longevity in the gameplay.


What made it fun?
I find that much of the fun from Pong personally comes from the nostalgia factor that I have for the game. I even had a handheld version of Pong growing up that I took everywhere, so I have fond memories of the game. I personally prefer to play older games, and among the others, it was the easiest to pick up and really get into immediately without frustration. Though having played a computer version for class, I have played arcade style versions of it as well, which I find to be even more fun as you have the social environment of being in an arcade, and I find the joystick controls to be much more consistent and easy to navigate. This play-through in particular though was fun as the game felt like a way to relax, and I could easily fit it into the scope of my other homework. I tend to often skip out on playing games as I don’t have much time to dive into them or fit them into my schedule, but Pong was simple enough as to not cause much disruption and playing put me into an almost Zen state. I enjoyed focusing on the repetitive nature of the back and forth which was almost hypnotic in a way that allowed for my brain to finally slow down and relax. Of course I did get overwhelmed again once the difficulty started building up, but it wasn’t a cause of frustration, and I still went back to start a new game quite a few times.


Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
Pong is often considered to be one of the earliest forms of video games, and thus I believe has been an influence in demonstrating that the industry is lucrative and that there is success to be found in both arcade games and at home video games. It helped to bring video games to attention and cement it as a legitimate form of entertainment for people, which has grown into the massive industry that we know of today. In particular, I see a lot of Pong’s modern influence to have reached the app store surprisingly. Having originally been an arcade game, many of the games still designed in an arcade style are now on mobile devices, primarily to make for easy access anywhere. There are even many simple arcade style games released constantly with similar back and forth mechanics, either having to jump back and forth avoiding spikes instead of necessarily hitting a ball back for example, and even in apps like the table hockey games. It is an important staple in the roots of what we know today to be video games, but even in its original state it continues to persist as a game that is fun on its own merit rather than what it evolved into.


How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
Honestly, even with the nostalgia factor I’d still give it a 3 star rating. While I do find it fun, it’s a game that I play when it comes across me, not one I go out of my way to search for.

[EvelyT]

Journal Entry #4


Name of Game
Donkey Kong

Game author (If known)
Donkey Kong was created by Shigeru Miyamoto.

Game Studio
Donkey Kong was released by Nintendo in 1981.

Original Platform & control mechanism
The earliest version of this game was meant to be played on a traditional arcade cabinet, mainly utilizing a joystick. The main button included functions to jump, but additional buttons serve in choosing if the game will be 1 or 2 players.

Control mechanism you used
Would the experience have been different using the original? How?
I played a modern emulator using keyboard controls, which was actually a pretty crummy experience. As a big fan of old fashioned cabinets and joystick controls, as well as having played on a similar yet more modern cabinet, playing the traditional way feels the best. The controls are almost more intuitive as each hand is clearly assigned a task rather than having to struggle through accidentally hitting the wrong key while playing, as I typically do.

Describe gameplay and mechanics
Donkey Kong is a platformer in which you play as Jumpman, moving up the platforms and dodging obstacles thrown your way in order to save Pauline from the ferocious Donkey Kong. The platforms are tilted in different directions, and you must navigate left, right, up and down, utilizing ladders in order to reach the top. The main obstacles thrown by Donkey Kong are barrels, which can be dodged by jumping. You must also avoid fireballs that will begin to chase you throughout the level as well. There are hammers that are placed throughout the levels the Jumpman can pick up to destroy barrels and earn points, however jumping is disabled when held until the item is used up. Each level will present a different challenge, whether dealing with moving platforms or increased obstacles, so the player must be on alert as they only have 3 lives before a game over. Upon reaching the top, you claim victory over Donkey Kong for a moment before continuing to the next level and so on until you lose.

Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design
The sprite designs, while seemingly simple today, are quite intricate for what was out at the time. This I believe allowed for more success in that players could begin to relate to their characters more, place themselves into Jumpman’s shoes and follow along his journey to help him succeed. This increased reliability and likability of the characters creates a bond between the player and the sprite, compelling a player to want to follow along and keep playing to reach victory, which is a great strength for any game.
As for a weakness, once again by today’s standards the graphics aren’t considered great anymore, and once getting over the initial excitement and nostalgia, it may be easy for players to grow bored of following along and not continue the game unless a strong passion is already existing.

What made it fun?
Many of these games personally hold their fun in the nostalgia factor, as I’ve written before. I remember first being introduced to these games by my dad, even if there were more modern games by that time, simply because those were the games we could get our hands on, and those were some of the best childhood memories I have. While the online emulator was not my favorite, I additionally hopped onto a remaster on my Nintendo Switch, which paired along with my retro controller, made for what I feel to be a more authentic experience over playing on my pc. In particular, as with most games, I liked that I could still enjoy the story without having to go out of my way to get into it when I am limited on time. Not that I don’t enjoy story rich games, but with limited time, the faster I can understand the story, the better. With Donkey Kong, even though it is simple, there is still a story driving the goal, and it is one I’ve been keen to follow since I’m already a Mario fan as it is. I feel it would have been even more fun playing with another player as personally, the puzzles/randomness wear off after a while, so having had the ability to compete would make the experience a bit more novel and keep me playing much longer than I did.

Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
Donkey Kong started introducing deeper stories into games, even if this one is still a simple story by today’s standard. According to research, it was among the first platformer games, especially to include a jump feature, and pioneered the genre into what it has become today. Obviously, with its success it has created the face of Nintendo, Mario “Jumpman” Mario himself, a household name recognizable across generations young and old.
This is a game that, despite being made out of initial failure, has allowed for a genre to grow and gain an audience, and I’d likely say that without its success, we wouldn’t have many of the story rich games we do today. In addition, while their creation may have eventually come forth, platform games probably wouldn’t be as prevalent or popular as they are if not for the advent of Donkey Kong and its continued persistence in modern media.
Its influence most notably persists directly in the Mario games, as mentioned earlier. Many of the same mechanics can be seen at the core of modern Mario games, and arguably this allows for more experimentation in controls as newer titles come out. Being that the jump button was once an innovation itself, many new Mario games, most notable Mario Galaxy, sport a variety of new mechanics that aren’t present in other Mario games, but having a strong base game that dates back all the way to Donkey Kong allows for the developers to take a few more liberties to heighten the game even more.

How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
This would personally be a 3 star out of five for me.

[EvelyT]

Journal Entry #5

Name of Game
Pitfall (Atari 2600)

Game author (If known)
Pitfall was created by David Crane.

Game Studio
Pitfall was released by Activision in 1982.

Original Platform & control mechanism
The earliest version of this game was meant to be played on the Atari 2600 console using a joystick controller that has an additional red button on it for a jump/action option. This is meant to be a single player experience, having the player compete against themself each run.

Control mechanism you used
Would the experience have been different using the original? How?
I played a modern emulator using keyboard controls, which has become the norm for accessing what are considered to be older games. While the interface was quite nice, one made to mimic the original console and controls, I will always have a gripe for the keyboard controls as they tend to have a latency that prevents me from properly enjoying the game. As I’ve mentioned before, a joystick experience would be much more pleasant as that is my preferred play method.

Describe gameplay and mechanics
Pitfall is a semi side scrolling platformer, in which the player has 20 minutes to navigate through the level in order to find treasure. While moving side to side, the screens do load one at a time between areas rather than in one continuous environment. Controlling the Main Character, Pitfall Harry, the player must explore the jungle, avoiding perilous obstacles such as logs, alligators, scorpions, and other such jungle traps in order to successfully beat the level and walk away with the treasure. Each level, the player will start off with 2,000 points with the goal being to end the game, either by running out of time or losing lives, with the most points possible. To gain points, the player may collect treasure found throughout the level, but they may also be lost if the player fails to dodge an oncoming log or falls into a hole. The player also has 3 lives, all of which can be lost by falling into quicksand, the swamp, or a tar pit, as well as running into fire or any of the ferocious animal enemies. These can all be avoided by jumping, hiding on ladders, or by using vines to swing over.

Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design
The sound design is particularly stunning in that it is a bit more sophisticated than games I’ve played in the past. In particular, there are more unique sounds that trigger when certain events happen which draw you further into the environment. My favorite is when the player navigates over to use a vine, in which an 8-bit George of the Jungle type cry will play out, adding charm and whimsy to the game at hand.
The art direction in this game is also of note as it shows how games are becoming much more cohesive and consistent in the story they are trying to tell across all mechanics and components of the game. Many games at this time were beginning to tell stories that made more sense as a whole narrative, and this game does so by using both mechanics and enemies that would realistically be used/found if exploring a real life jungle.

What made it fun?
While not my most favorite game ever, it was simple to control and actually made a lot of sense. Out of the three games, it had the smoothest most intuitive controls, and it had the clearest story as well. Everything within the game served a purpose and was intentionally done, which made the game more engaging, immersive, and believable, in turn leading to a much more pleasant gaming experience. While a bit frustrating due to not being played in the intended format, I’m sure the original joystick mechanics would’ve made for a more pleasant experience all around in addition.

Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
Pitfall seems to demonstrate that not all games necessarily need to have a definite win state, which of course other games have done in the past, but this one executes this principle a bit more neatly. The game is all about trying to compete against yourself each playthrough in order to see if you can make it farther, score more points, defeat more enemies, and find more treasure, not because you’re trying to reach some overarching end goal or win screen, which many games have come to utilize in recent times. This feels like it is one of the staple platformers that has perhaps inspired the form in which many exploration games today will switch from one environment to the next when reaching the end of the screen, rather than keeping one continuous scrolling environment.

How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
This would personally be 2 stars out of five for me.

[EvelyT]

Journal Entry #6


Name of Game
The Oregon Trail

Game author (If known)
The original Oregon Trail was co-created by Bill Heinemann, Paul Dillenberger, and Don Rawitsch.

Game Studio
The original Oregon Trail was released by MECC (Minnesota Educational Computing Consortium) in 1971.

Original Platform & control mechanism
The original version of the Oregon Trail was meant to be a text based game played on computer for education purposes, with main mechanics being point and click and typing inputs. In particular, it was made for Apple II.

Control mechanism you used
Would the experience have been different using the original? How?
I played a modern emulator in a point and click style method of play, of course using the keyboard for text input. Of all the emulators I’ve played thus far, this is the closest to the authentic way this was meant to be experienced, and actually made for quite fun and pleasant gameplay.

Describe gameplay and mechanics
The original version of the Oregon Trail (and subsequent versions to a degree) is a text-based strategy and resource management game in which the player roleplays and leads a team, typically 4 other npcs aside from the player, on a journey to Oregon. It was created to be an educational game for kids, and thus teaches about the importance of thinking through and planning your actions with logic and strategy, managing resources and money, and caring for others along the journey instead of just yourself. The player has the choice to start off buying supplies from Ox, Clothing, ammunition, food, and spare wagon parts with a set amount of $400 dollars to start, from then leading their group through the historical Oregon Trail. The player will make stops at forts, settlements, and landmarks on their journey in order to stock up for supplies or trade with others on the way. Many things can go wrong on the journey that are unexpected, such as bad weather, disease, lack of food and water, and many more obstacles, so the player must make choices carefully and for the betterment of their group.

Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design
The premise seems so simple on the surface but actually leads to a wide scope of the imagination. I actually feel that in having limited graphics, players can immerse themselves in a roleplay and truly believe they are setting off with their friends to face the odds and make a life in Oregon. In having such a simplistic design, each player can truly tailor their experience to be unique to themself, which in turn makes it a game worth going back to over and over.

Another strength is the seemingly linear nature of the game, in which you can travel only forward without saving, thus you must think and plan carefully in order to get the best outcomes. However despite this there is still so much that the player can control to create a unique game, so it has a sense of rigidness and freedom that coexist throughout the game.

What made it fun?
My favorite feature was being able to add my friends into the mix, even if it was a single player game, and just navigating through the different scenarios they had to endure. I’ve always loved team RPG games, and this is almost like an earlier version of those games in my opinion. I prefer logic and strategy games, so it was so fun to actually get to experience the full game and even win instead of struggling to get through the first few levels as I have so far with the other games. Resource management is a personal favorite mechanic I look for in games, and it fills my heart since I tend to hoard supplies and overprepare my team, making for a game unique to me where resources won’t be an issue, so I can face the uncontrollable and random chance events without having to worry much about the elements I’m meant to control myself.

Now that you’ve played it, Why would this game be considered influential? How does it fit into the evolution of games?
The Oregon Trail is a timeless and incredible game that has helped pioneer both edutainment games as well as text based rpg games. Its success demonstrates that you don’t have to put fancy effort into graphics, with a good story and mechanics, the player’s imagination can be the strongest tool to have as a game element. Many remasters have come after it to keep it relevant across generations, and it also seems to have inspired many games in terms of the resource management mechanic. It is so prevalent in pop culture that “You have died of dysentery” has become a world famous line in reference to the game. Games such as the Oregon Trail help to emphasize story over mechanics, and while mechanics are important, a story in a game is equally as important and not to be overlooked.

How would you rate this game (1-5 Stars (5 stars good))
This would personally be 4 out of 5 stars :]

[Professor Watkins]

Graded to here.

[EvelyT]

Journal Entry #7



Name of Game

Super Mario 64


Game author (If known)

Shigeru Miyamoto


Game Studio

Nintendo


Original Platform & control mechanism

The original Super Mario 64 was intended to be played on the Nintendo 64 video game console, along with the original N64 controller. The main movement was dedicated to the control stick, the action buttons for additional camera movements along with the left and right bumpers. A is for jumping, b is for hitting, and the z bumper is for crouching.


Control mechanism you used

Would the experience have been different using the original? How?

I played on my original Nintendo 64 console for this one, though I also own the updated Nintendo Switch port. Between the two, honestly the Switch port is better in that a lot of the controls are cleaned up and a bit more instant. In addition, the controller layout for the updated Switch version is a little more intuitive, and the dual joystick design is what I’m most used to, one for the character and one for the camera.


Describe gameplay and mechanics

Super Mario 64 starts off as Peach has invited Mario over to her castle for a surprise. However, upon arriving, he finds that she’s been kidnapped and locked away by the evil Bowser. The player must work to save the Princess from her own castle, going through enchanted paintings in order to collect enough power stars to unlock different levels and find her. On the surface level, the most a player needs to start with is 0-3 stars, but they will need more and more in order to unlock deeper into the castles. Each level consists of about 5 stars each for a grand total of 120 stars, though not all 120 are needed to beat the game. There are additionally hidden stars that contribute to this total overall. The player is able to maneuver with the basics, jump, double jump, triple jump, punch, and crouch. However, by combining this, you get a whole new set of moves that can help you in different scenarios. Such combos are the A+Z, which will result in pound. Then there’s Z+A (difference in order) which will get a backflip. Given that each level presents a different puzzle, even several puzzles within one same level, these moves must be used in different combos in order to most efficiently beat each puzzle.



Describe strengths & weaknesses of art & design

The simplicity of the designs are amazing. Yes they look high fidelity now, especially on more modern tvs that capture every detail and make the faults more obvious, however, they look fantastic on older tv’s. I remember playing this originally on an old crt television, and I remember thinking how absolutely great it looked. You can more clearly tell who the characters are supposed to be, and you get a more expansive and fleshed out environment that actually makes sense and is pleasing to look at. Something about the simplicity of it also personally strikes me as a positive as they don’t make me sick to look at. Some old 64 games give me really bad motion sickness, but Mario 64 has never caused eye strain.

As for weaknesses, I may be clouded with nostalgia, but I can recognize that I absolutely hate the camera movement. It’s very rudimentary, and while it works better than the previous PS1 game I had played, it was very frustrating having to finesse Mario into a position where the camera would be just right. This was also particularly frustrating because the angle of the camera was also linked to how he moved in some aspects, so it would make Mario difficult to control at times since the direction would flip, and so I’d need to change the analog stick direction.


What made it fun?

My favorite feature will 100% be the soundtrack. Yes the gameplay and the puzzles are really engaging actually, but the most iconic aspect will forever be that soundtrack. The entire time that I was playing, I was singing out the tunes, knowing the songs by heart. Especially because a lot of the songs were particularly well composed, it always had you hooked, fully immersed and having the full experience of the Mario world. In addition, I enjoyed that this game was truly open world, even if we’ve seen other games like this before. You had the ability to explore the entire castle in whichever order you pleased(with a reasonable amount of stars). Given this freedom, which was implemented as a game mechanic, you could discover castle secrets and unlock additional stars that help you complete the final game. You could also go back in gameplay, so it wasn’t linear, which I enjoyed. As a result, I could replay my favorite levels whenever I wanted, regardless of if I’ve beat them already or not.

Additionally, perhaps both of us were clouded with nostalgia, but I really enjoyed the pull it had on others. That is to say that despite the game only being one player, my brother still stuck around and watched me play. We’ve both played it plenty of times, we both know how it ends. However, we


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

Super Mario 64 is a personal favorite of mine, and I’d consider it influential in that way. It was a really charming experience, and it brought together a lot of elements, surprisingly on a cartridge, that people had been wanting from Nintendo games. It has this ability to still draw an audience years later, enough for two remasters across two very popular consoles. The open world experience is very expansive and immersive, with more contained experiences within. It’s almost like one complete game made up of smaller games, which honestly allows for a larger audience reach as there is a little something for everyone, and you can tailor your gameplay to your own style. For example, I absolutely hate doing any levels that heavily rely on Mario’s flight cap, but luckily I don’t need to complete these levels in order to finish the game. As a result, I’m able to skip a few levels that I don’t like and still get the full gameplay experience and even beat the game.


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

This would personally be 5 out of 5 stars :] This game absolutely has my heart.