next »

[Sock Puppet]

I don't know if there is a proper term for this but something I've been interested in recently is games where a single core mechanic and the goal of the game are directly linked. I'd call them self contained mechanics but here are some examples of what I mean. 

Cananbalt - jumping to stay alive, Proun - rotating around cable to reach the end, Tower/World of Goo - building a tower to see how high you can build it.

Just for contrast I would think Braid doesn't fit into this category as a number of mechanics are combined to make the puzzles. E.g rewind and the non-rewind keys.

The reason they're interesting for me is that I think they make a good design target for indie games. You can work on the central mechanic and not have to rely on an complex world around the player for the game to be interesting. I think these type of games usually have a charm and generally don't seem too gimmicky.

Interested in anyone thoughts on this or if you have any other examples of games that are similar?

   

[I_smell]

I'm makin a game right now where the plot is that you're being chased through time, but the mechanics are nothing to do with that. It's all about like-- rocket-jumps.

The only place it kind of bothers me is when I have to describe the game to people, and I end up having to describe two seperate things.
I'm not super worried about it though; one of my favourite games is Bioshock, and that story is practically nothing to do with a first-person shooter.
One game I love that joined everything together really well was Mass Effect, where they made a game full of interesting characters, and then you spend most of your time in conversations with them. You also solve people's problems because you're a space-cop.

I've seen it called "ludonarrative dissonance" which means "when the game and the story split each other apart"-- but that's kind of pretentious sounding, so don't worry about it.

[gimymblert]

@OP

basically sonic (self contain) vs mario (rely on world)

[XRA]

arcade games!  
well, not in all cases.. but I'd argue arcade games encompass a lot of that, especially ones prior to established obvious genres.
I prefer games that are driven by their core mechanic too, which I think is what is being discussed.

[Sock Puppet]

I guess it can be a fuzzy definition but I'd say Sonic wasn't self contained. He performs a lot of different moves and interacts with lots of elements like springs and loops.

Osmos is another example I think. It achieves a lot of depth from just one consistent interaction.

I think these games are certainly arcade or casual in nature because the core mechanic is enough of a hook on its own without the need for an epic story.

[Feral_P]

I think I understand. I would say it's not neccesarilly just having a single rule that's the best, but making a game where the rules and environment (a form of rule, I suppose) interact with themselves and eachother; it creates complexity out of simple rules.

For example, in Osmosis, movement affects your size, and also the world (matter is expelled into it). Your size affects what you can absorb, which in turn affects your size. The world provides constraints for you to move about in (you could be absorbed) and sometimes, with the 'gravity' levels, affects your movement and itself (moving other blobs). Your size limits how far you can move.

And so four simple rules creates rich gameplay.

In the case of canabalt, there really is only one mechanic plus the environment. Except the environment does influence your jumping in a few ways; obstacles slow you and whenever you roll, you can't jump. Add to that, the fact you can't stop, which effectively means the environment is always moving, and you get something that can sustain interest.


EDIT: What I'm trying to say is: rules should interact as much as possible, while remaining simple themselves. Just for clarification.

[mirosurabu]

@OP

basically sonic (self contain) vs mario (rely on world)

basically sonic (everything)

But... they both rely on world.

Canabalt too relies on world but the gameplay is so minimal the world is not quite obvious. Albeit procedurally generated, the world is defined by verbs such as jumping on buildings, jumping through windows, falling down between buildings and running into crates.

Those that don't rely on world rely on another player or AI (e.g. many arcade games, fighting games) or they rely on a type of gameplay where past interactions provide context for future interaction (e.g. Tower of Goo).

Otherwise, it's just a minimal game where everything emphasizes the core mechanic.

[gimymblert]

What I mean is that the world does not add new interaction to sonic, everything is just an extension of moving.

In mario, the character alone is not complete, turtle shell, differing blocks, items etc... have huge impact on interaction, they are new interaction by themselves. That's how mario as a series sustain itself, by adding new gimmick with each new entry (yoshi, feather, transformation, eggs, P block, bee suit, 3D, 4 player, etc...).

[Nix]

I think the key defining characteristic of a "self contained mechanic" is: can you prototype just the mechanic (no level or world), and have it keep your attention for more than five minutes. Canabalt was probably fairly entertaining when it was just a series of repeating, constant width and height rectangles that you jump on with a circle that moves across the screen. Super Mario, on the other hand, would be rather boring if you had nothing to do but run around the screen and jump (unless you're a game developer yourself, in which case you might spend half an hour doing just this. That doesn't count).

When I was developing Flash games, I tried not to explore any ideas that weren't "self contained mechanics" (I keep doing quotes because I feel like there has to be a better term for this sort of thing). They really are a different class of game.

[Sock Puppet]

Nix, that's definitely how I see it. They're a different type of game but it's kind of hard to categorize them exactly. I've read other people refer to the prototypes of these types of games as toys and by adding on some sort of goal you get a game.

I've been trying to focus only these types of games as well. I'm finding it hard though as they tend to be quite abstract.