Originally released on the Sega
Dreamcast and PlayStation 2 in 2001, Rez
(United Game Artists, 2001) is a cyberpunk rail-shooter with an aesthetic
heavily influenced by films like Tron (1982),
Hackers (1995) and a variety of
cyberpunk literature. The game’s soundtrack features a dynamic techno song for
each level, to which the player’s actions add additional layers. In terms of
Hunicke, LeBlanc, and Zubek’s “aesthetics of play,” Rez and its spiritual successor Child
of Eden (Q Entertainment, 2011) operate
primarily on the “aesthetics” of challenge and sensation (Hunicke et. all, 2). They provide
the arcade-y challenge of a rail-shooter while inviting the player to sit back
and enjoy the raw sensory information of pulsing music, vibrant colors, and the
rumble of the controller in his hand. This article seeks to explore the
differing ways that these games approach progression during a first playthrough and how these approaches affect challenge and player
tutorialization. Since these games are so similar and come from the same
developer, they will provide a useful tool for understanding how a slight
difference in the way progression is handled can adversely affect the game as a
whole. For the purposes of this article, all references to Rez refer to the Xbox Life Arcade rerelease: Rez HD (Q Entertainment, HexaDrive, 2008), as it is the easiest
version to acquire.
For the purposes of this article we
ought to define “progression” as a quantifiable movement towards the end of the
work. In a film, this might just mean that after ten minutes of watching, the
viewer is ten minutes closer to the credits. But since both Rez and Child of Eden have fail-states which force the player to restart a
level, we must understand that progress only occurs when certain conditions are
met within play. Since both games are rail shooters, forward movement within
the level proceeds at the pace the developer sets, the player’s role is to
shoot down incoming projectiles and shoot as many enemies as they are able.
Progress within the level is undone by player death. We might term any progress
which can be undone through a failstate as micro-progress, any progress which
cannot be undone through a fail state as macro-progress. [Note: Because I am attempting to use a quantifiable standard for
progress, neither of these models account for increase of player skill as a
form of progress, as that would be beyond the scope of this paper.]
Completing a level in either game is the method by which the player can make
macro-progress in either game. And while micro-progress is treated almost
identically in both games, Rez and Child of Eden treat macro-progress in
markedly different ways.
A first playthrough of Rez operates on a semi-linear, multi-layered
progression path. What this means is that there a linear order to the levels
but multiple objectives must be completed to finish the game. On a first
playthrough, new levels are unlocked by completing the preceding level. Level 1
is of course available from the start, completing it unlocks level 2, and
completing level 2 unlocks level 3. Once a level is unlocked, the player may
replay it if they want in order to gain more health or complete another
objective. This is the pseudo-linear element described above. The multi-layered
element is that the final level, Area 5, is not unlocked by completing Area 4.
Rather, it is unlocked by completing all of the four preceding levels with a
100% “Analysis Rating.” Progress within each level is made possible by shooting
special “transition blocks” along the way, hitting one of the blocks on the
first try results in a 10% increase in Analysis and progression within the
level. Failure to hit the target results in a loop until it is hit. Since the
Analysis requirement is built into how the level itself progresses, the 100%
Analysis requirement will often result in the first time player having to
repeat only one or two of the initial four levels because there is a high
chance they already got “100% Analysis” on at least one level without actively
trying to do so.
This repetition acts as a delayed tutorialization, where the designer introduces an additional function to a mechanic
which has become familiar. This also requires the player to improve their
skills in a way that will be important for Area 5, where failure to shoot the
transition block causes the player to take damage. The new requirement thus
works into building the game’s difficulty curve. Originally the player only had
to survive Area 3 and unlocked Area 4 but now has to both survive Area 3 and prioritize shooting the transition
blocks in order to unlock Area 5. The addition of a new and clearly explained
challenge requires more of the player than was previously necessary, but in a
way that is manageable and useful for tutorialization. Lastly, multi-layered
progression rewards skilled play. In theory, a skilled player can unlock all
four initial levels and achieve 100% Analysis on a first attempt. This allows
skilled players to bypass needless repetition and progress through the game in
accordance with their skill.
By contrast, one can define Child of Eden’s progression path as
non-linear and single-layered progression path. Whereas Rez’s levels are unlocked via a 1 to 1 progression, Eden’s levels unlock by accruing the
necessary amount of “stars.” The player gets stars at the end of the level and is
awarded 1-5 stars based on their score which is based on the percentage of
targets hit, power-ups picked up, and points from combos. Level 2 requires 2
stars to unlock, level 3 requires 8 stars, and so on. (Note: I cannot find a source that will break down the number of stars
needed per level, and after a first playthrough, the level selection screen
does not show how many stars were needed to unlock the level). In theory
this system is designed to reward skillful play by allowing the player to
unlock each level without repetition if they get 4-5 stars on every level. The obvious problem with this is that if the player fails to get 4-5 stars per level, they must replay old levels to
add more stars to their total. The requirement that the player continually
replay already beaten areas results in a sort of “calculus of time for
benefit,” whereby the player will naturally gravitate towards replaying the shortest and easiest level in order to gain more stars faster. Additionally, the score that the player receives is
hidden from them, meaning that the player does not know how well they did until
the end of the level. While real-time scoring mechanics can be problematic in
games like Hitman: Absolution or Deus Ex: Human Revolution, in an arcade
style game like Child of Eden, the
calculus of knowing the value of each action is not just helpful but necessary
when the player is being judged based on score. The problem with this system is
that the player is being punished without knowing how to improve. In essence he
is being told to improve but not how to improve. Rez asks the player to improve by requiring they prioritize certain
targets, while leaving considerations of point totals for future playthroughs and “Score Attack” mode. By contrast, Child of Eden’s use of scoring as its primary judge of progression makes improvement into a myriad of
unclear actions rather than something simple (maybe the player needs to get more power-ups, or prioritize
enemies with higher point values or perform more “perfect” combos).
In point of fact, the
implementation of the score system in Child
of Eden is counter to the function of a score system for this type of game.
One might argue that the purpose of a score system in an arcade-style, challenge
focused game is to communicate to the player the difference between skilled
play and the baseline play needed for progression. Take the scoring mechanic of
Pac-Man as an example. In Pac-Man, the player progresses from
level 1 to level 2 by eating all the dots—i.e. an easily communicable baseline actions.
Extra points can be acquired by eating the cherries or strategically leading
the ghosts into traps and devouring them. The extra points allow the player to
earn extra lives, which help progression but are not required for it. Sub-baseline
play is gauged and punished within the game’s rules through death and loss of
lives. Death communicates what the player should do in order to achieve the
baseline for progression: avoid the ghosts. Meanwhile, the score system defines
and communicates above baseline (i.e. skillful) play—eating bonuses, ghosts, pellets
while still not dying. The score system is also visible during play, allowing
the player to gauge how far above baseline they are playing. The problem in Child of Eden is that above baseline
play is critical to timely progression through the game, yet the only metric
the game gives the player for what contributes to above baseline play is hidden,
making conscious improvement difficult.
The sad fact is that Child of Eden’s star mechanic has a very
simple purpose: it exists
to slow player progression and increase the game’s length. If Child of Eden measured progress like its
predecessor, it would only be about a one hour long game. The star system could
have been tied to bonus features instead of baseline progression, but marketing
wisdom says that players want longer games, so instead of being one hour long like its predecessor, Child of Eden is three hours long for an equal amount of content. It is true that a game that uses
challenge as one of its core aesthetics ought to tie challenge and progression
together, and the most skilled of skilled players might finish Child in one hour. But difficulty is not inherently the same as challenge. Macro-progression
ought to be closely tied with the requirements of micro-progression. When
macro-progress diverges from successful micro-progress, as it does in Rez for Area 5, the game must
communicate what is required of the player in order to continue progressing. A
challenge based game, needs to increment through additional clearly
communicated challenges, not through repeated demonstration of old skills.
---------------
Citations:
HexaDrive. Q Entertainment. RezHD. Microsoft Game Studios. 2006.
Xbox 360.
Hunicke, Robin. LeBlanc, Marc.
Zubek, Robert. “MDA: A Formal Approach to Game Design and Game Research.” 2004.
Portnow, James. "Extra Credits: Mechanics, Dynamics, Aesthetics." Youtube. Penny Arcade. 1 Nov. 2012. Web. 14 June, 2013.
Q Entertainment. Child of Eden. Ubisoft. 2011. Xbox 360
No comments:
Post a Comment