Just wanted to give folks a heads-up that with the kind help of Kevin Harder of Telligent systems, I’ll be moving Ozymandias to the Graffiti content management system. Community Server is fantastic, but it’s a system that’s built to do so much more than just a blog. Useful if you need the functionality, but challenging to maintain easily. Hoping that Graffiti will make it easier to stay on top of the web tech parade. If you’re curious, Kevin’s site is on Graffiti, and you can also check out LetsKillDave.com as he recently made the same migration.
All legacy URLs should work after the upgrade – if you find any issues, please drop a note and let us know!
I know some folks have been frustrated by the need to be logged in to access some of your downloaded content on replacement Xboxes. This has been a known issue for quite a while – unfortunately, it’s a bit of a thorny beast and has taken a while. That said, a tool has been released to allow you to migrate your licenses once every 12 months. You can also check out a video of Major Nelson showing off the new functionality. Hope this helps a lot of you out!
Yep, it's one of those crazy double-post days!
Anyway, I just saw that an interview I did with 1Up around the Co-op Bill of Rights went up recently... thought some of you co-op fans might find it interesting.
Krotus and I swung by Digipen this morning to help judge Penny Arcade's PAX 10 entries. We spent the morning with around 50 industry folks checking out the latest indie games that had been submitted... and I have to say I'm continually astounded by the talent of folks out there. I'm not sure how public many of these titles are, but I'll say that I'll definitely be picking a few of them up when they ship (on whatever platform). One I'll highlight is Schizoid, from Torpex Games (and only because I know it's public). I'm a big fan of co-op gaming, and I have to say that these guys have really nailed an entirely new way of playing cooperatively together. The concept is simple - maneuver your ship into like-colored creatures to destroy them - but the interaction between you, another player, and those creatures really draws you in. (And if you really want a brain-bending time, try controlling the two ships yourself, one per thumbstick!)
Definitely swing by the PAX 10 booth if you make it out to PAX this year - I think you'll be impressed!
I have, and love it. This is the first Grand Theft Auto I've ever enjoyed. Earlier entries in the series just didn't do it for me. The controls were frustrating, and the humor was a bit too sophomoric in my opinion.
Then the reviews came out, and I figured I'd give it another shot. Several things have changed for the better. First, there's a real story that engages you - I'm actually interested in finding out what happens to Niko, and don't see getting bored of the game anytime soon. Controls have been fixed (though driving is still tricky), and multiplayer has been added - and I've had a blast online with friends. The open world has really taken a huge step forward as well. I loved Crackdown, but Liberty City is immense, and really does feel like a living place. Rockstar keeps hinting at an MMO version of GTA, and I can finally see the appeal.
Anyway, I suspect most people have already checked it out if sales are any indication, but if you haven't, because like me, you were turned off by earlier iterations of the series... give it a shot. I suspect you'll be pleasantly surprised!
Just saw that Computer Gaming World/Games for Windows Magazine has
finally ended their nearly 30-year long run. They'll be moving to the web, but it's startling for me to realize that this magazine (that I basically grew up with) is now a thing of the past. Changing times, indeed.
... to this and my life.
Though there may be a few segments here and there. Ahem.
Last week we published some thinking on what we'd like to see of future co-op titles. The problem we were trying to address is simply that the basic "bar" of what a co-op game should include isn't really defined, and game support seems to be all over the map. My co-worker Krotus and I thought we'd gin up some thoughts and see if we could get community feedback on them with the goal of ending up with a basic Co-op Gaming Bill of Rights (with full credit to Tycho of Penny Arcade for coining the term.)
We've gotten a ton of great feedback over the last few days from blog comments, Major Nelson, Co-optimus readers (and Bapenguin), as well as Evil Avatar readers. It's challenging to try and channel hundreds of passionate opinions in a simple, structured way that can be a useful tool for game developers. As such, I'll be upfront and say that not every comment or suggestion is included below. That said, we were encouraged by the positive community feedback on the initial draft, and feel strongly that the final version below is a great bar to target when designing a co-op game.
We also saw some interesting comments from folks who wondered just how popular co-op gaming actually is on LIVE. Although we've known for a while that it is quite popular, I realized that we hadn't previously been able to share any data. With that in mind I shook a few trees internally and got permission to share a few choice tidbits:
As of October 2007 (last time we pulled data):
- 64% of Halo 3 players had played Halo 3 co-op at least once
- 47% of Gears of War players had received the "Dom-Curious" co-op achievement
- 34% of Crackdown players had played co-op and killed at least one boss
(Note that all numbers above are for LIVE members who have played co-op.)
Hopefully this data will help put to rest any debate about whether or not co-op is appreciated by the community - I think the numbers speak for themselves (though I'd like to think the work we've done on LIVE to make it easy to play online contributed!)
Moving on, to better collect input we split the Co-op Game Bill of Rights into two basic buckets:
The "required features" section tries to capture aspects of co-op gaming that the community really feels are critical to the experience. Put another way, not having some of these features causes the co-op experience to be dramatically diminished in our humble opinion.
The "cool, harder to implement features" section attempts to capture those aspects of co-op gaming that we'd like to see more of, but recognize not all games can support, either due to cost, technical difficulty, or scale of the game.
So with all that said, we're pleased to present the community-driven, Co-op Game Bill of Rights: 2008 edition! (Yes, they may well evolve... over time it's likely some features that are in the "harder to implement" bucket may well become "required" in gamer's minds.)
Required Features All Future Co-op Games Should Have In Our Humble Opinion:
All co-op games should allow players to play cooperatively through the rich, single-player experience. Doing so through suspension of disbelief (ie, when cinematics refer to only a single player) is ok, though not ideal.
All co-op games should maintain group continuity. Specifically, once players have formed a group to play together, allow that group to stay together through levels, transitions, cinematics, etc. Consider enabling party leader/host migration if the party leader should have to leave. The game should never force players to rebuild their group after a mission.
All co-op games should allow players to communicate easily and effectively. Although voice support is common on consoles such as the Xbox 360, other platforms such as the PC should also support rich ways for players to communicate.
All co-op games should have flexible save points allowing players to save their progress and pick up from it at a later point without losing their progress.
All co-op games should support join-in-progress, where a player can join (and leave) another player's game at any point in time (also known as "drop-in/drop-out" support). Join-in-progress should be allowed regardless of the joining player's own, personal progress through the game.
All co-op games should allow the host to set whether anyone or friends-only can join. Players who join should also be able to invite their friends.
Games that allow split-screen and online play should support any combination of these two play modes. For example, two players can play split-screen on one console while allowing a third player to join their party over LIVE.
Players who join into a co-op game in progress are awarded achievements for their accomplishments, even if they haven’t gotten lead-up achievements. For example, joining a game in progress and then killing the fourth boss gets you the “4th Boss” achievement.
A game that allows co-op online play should also support co-op play locally, either through LAN or split-screen (ideally both). An online subscription should not be required to play co-op locally on a LAN.
Cool, Harder to Implement Features We'd Like to See in more Co-op Games of the Future:
Design core gameplay around the concept of two or more players coordinating and playing cooperatively together. This means game mechanics or puzzles that require two players to play together to progress, and not simply enabling two people to play through a standard FPS level together. Simple examples include Splinter Cell Chaos Theory and Army of Two with concepts such as dual-trigger activities (two buttons must be pressed at same time to open door, or double keys on doomsday machines), helping traverse terrain (boost up/rappelling), and combat coordination (dual-sniping, distract guard while companion attacks from behind).
Playing co-op should not result in a lesser experience than playing the game solo. Specifically, story and cinematics should A) be available to co-op players, and B) change to acknowledge additional co-operative players playing through the rich, scripted "single player" campaign. Examples include Resistance, Halo 3, etc.
Plan for game replayability and allow players to play through variants on the core, co-op game. Examples might include randomized enemy placement, multiple paths through levels or solutions to challenges, new more challenging difficulty levels, updated objectives, or allowing other online players to play "AI opponents" in your game.
Allow co-op teams to to personalize their in-game characters through skins, clothing, face-in-game, or other methods.
If your co-op game has distinct roles (such as guitar player, sniper, medic, etc.) consider adding role selection as an option when matchmaking.
If a multiplayer game supports AI, enable players to play as a co-op team against those AI opponents. Put another way, allow players to play against AI in a private, friends-only game if they wish.
Allow players of very different skill levels to play together effectively, either through handicapping/buffing or by providing a unique co-op helper role for the lesser skilled player. An example of this is the 'loot vacuum' role played by the second player in Super Mario Galaxy.
If additional, downloadable content is needed to play the game cooperatively online, consider ways of A) notifying a player up front of that need, B) linking the user to where they can access that content (needed for paid content), and C) if possible, consider sending the content directly to the user P2P.
Enable "try before you buy" by partnering cooperatively with another player who has purchased downloadable content. Allowing the purchaser to invite other players to play with that content for free (while the original member is hosting) lets a wider audience try your content... to everyone's benefit.
Build larger-scale co-op campaigns that allow greater than two players to play together. (One example of this are reports of Resistance 2 on the PS3 supporting 8 players playing cooperatively together at the same time.)
Consider adding a simple co-op play mode to games that aren't necessarily designed with co-op in mind. One example is Eternal Sonata, a traditional RPG that allows multiple local players to control different characters in combat.
If game content needs to be unlocked in order to access it, share the unlock between single player and co-op modes. For example, in Guitar Hero III, unlocking a song or guitar in single player mode makes that song available in co-op mode (and vice versa.)
Allow a player to jump to another player's camera view (with appropriate permission, and taking potential cheating or game balance issues into mind). This provides a useful tool for one player to assist another player through a level or challenge.
[Edit: have posted an updated Co-op Gaming Bill of Rights based on everyone's feedback here. Enjoy!]
Happened to read Penny Arcade today and was rather taken by a quote of Tycho's:
Army of Two is forward thinking in that your equipment and cash persist, no matter where you are playing or who you are playing with. Where it is less forward thinking is that you can't join a friend's game unless you have already beaten the level they have selected. In many games, but especially in co-op, people are going to be traveling through the game at their own pace, and players should be enabled in their efforts to play this cooperative game cooperatively however they like. It's as though we need to create a kind of Co-op Bill Of Rights, so delineate in clear terms what we consider bedrock in terms of functionality. In essence, we'd like the games to cooperate with us.
In particular I was particularly stuck by the comment about defining what a gamer considers bedrock functionality for co-op gaming. This sort of thinking is very similar to some of the thinking we do with the industry around platform features, and it got my co-worker Krotus and I chatting about what features might be considered as being the basic "bar" for a co-op title. The industry has come a long way in just a few years, and we wanted to see what we might come up with that we'd like to see in future titles. A little bit of whiteboarding later we came up the list below... and would love your thoughts on it!
I should note that any thoughts posted here aren't any sort of official Microsoft communication or commitment. Just because we might all have some good ideas on what a co-op game should look like doesn't mean the industry will necessarily follow them. That said, there are also a lot of great designers and producers out there looking for ideas - something here might just spark a thought they can run with... so have at it! A first stab is below - looking forward to your feedback, and I'll commit to publishing a "final" draft here once everyone's chewed on it a bit (final being relative since these sorts of things evolve over time).
Required Features All Future Co-op Games Should Have In Our Humble Opinion:
All co-op games should allow players to play cooperatively through the rich, single-player experience. Doing so through suspension of disbelief (ie, when cinematics refer to only a single player) is ok, though not ideal.
Players can join a co-op game in progress at any point within the game's story, regardless of their own, personal progress through the game.
Players who join into a co-op game in progress are awarded achievements for their accomplishments, even if they haven’t gotten lead-up achievements. For example, joining a game in progress and then killing the fourth boss gets you the “4th Boss” achievement.
A game that allows co-op online play should also support co-op play locally, either through LAN or split-screen (ideally both). An online subscription should not be required to play co-op locally on a LAN.
Cool, Harder to Implement Features We'd Like to See in more Co-op Games of the Future:
Design core gameplay around the concept of two or more players playing cooperatively together. This means game mechanics or puzzles that require two players to play together to progress, and not simply enabling two people to play through a standard FPS level together. Examples include Splinter Cell Chaos Theory and Army of Two with concepts such as dual-trigger activities (two buttons must be pressed at same time to open door), helping traverse terrain (boost up/rappelling), and combat coordination (dual-sniping, distract guard while companion attacks from behind).
Story and cinematics change to acknowledge additional co-operative players playing through rich, scripted "single player" campaign. Examples include Resistance, Halo 3, etc.
If additional, downloadable content is needed to play the game cooperatively online, consider ways of A) notifying a player up front of that need, B) linking the user to where they can access that content (needed for paid content), and C) if possible, consider sending the content directly to the user P2P.
Build larger-scale co-op campaigns that allow greater than two players to play together. (One example of this are reports of Resistance 2 on the PS3 supporting 8 players playing cooperatively together at the same time.)
[Edit: wanted to point out that Co-optimus is having a great discussion in their forums on this topic, as well as Major Nelson's blog comments on the same. Great feedback folks... keep it coming!]
Mark Deloura just pointed folks to a great web-based trivia game called For the Love of Gaming. It's focused on oldschool trivia questions, and I got seven of 15 right. Maybe I'm too oldschool and the old noggin is fading? [sigh] ;)
Check it out!
Sure most of you have seen, but some of the big news for Microsoft at GDC this year was around allowing XNA Game Studio games to be shared via the community on Xbox Live. You can find the official release here, and should also make a point of reading through Letskilldave's posts as well.
A few folks have asked me how this is different/better/worse/etc than Nintendo's Wiiware announcement. Well, simply put, in my opinion Creators Club is infinitely more open and accessible:
- The Creators Club "portfolio" is not managed, meaning Microsoft doesn't approve game concepts. The community filters for inappropriate content, but that's it.
- There is no additional charge for a "dev kit" - it's your PC, with the ability to develop for the Xbox 360 and Zune platforms as well. Interesting tidbit I heard at GDC - apparently you really have to be a developer at an existing studio to have a chance of getting a Wiiware dev kit. I've even heard that you're automatically unable to get a Wiiware dev kit if you ask for it to be shipped to a home address... seems to cut out a bunch of the indies! :(
- You can develop on multiple platforms: PC, Xbox 360, and Zune
I've also had a few folks asking how these XNA games might compare to "professional" Live Arcade games. Simply put, XNA Game Studio games can be quite performant. No, you're not going to create Gears of War in C#, but you can do almost any of the existing LIVE Arcade games out there. You can download the XNA Launcher for free until the 24th and see some of these games for yourself. Check them out if you're curious - but remember, get the launcher now if you want to see them!
Just came across a map of the Star Trek universe that's worth sharing. It's a bit frightening in that someone actually spent the time to document this, but it's awesome nonetheless. Every time I see a territorial boundary map like this I long for a virtual game version. Am hoping Sins of a Solar Empire satiates that desire somewhat - hearing good things about it so far.
Hoping to post more often going forward - things have been a bit crazy with some projects, and GDC being a month early didn't help anything either. Will be at the show next week, though... looking forward to spending some time in the City by the Bay!
Just noticed that BAPenguin of Evil Avatar Fame has launched a new website focused on co-op gaming called Co-Optiumus. From the press release:
With virtually no other websites dedicated to co-op games, gamers are having a hard time finding the information they need for their co-op experience. Co-Optimus.com fills this void by providing an extensive database of games that feature a co-op mode across nine platforms including the Xbox 360, Playstation 3 and Nintendo Wii. The site also features user reviews, ratings, and matchmaking as well as discussion forums to help find a buddy for all your co-op needs.
I think it's a great idea, and encourage you all to visit! My hope is the site evolves over time and allows you to drill down into a library of co-op games by the way you like to play them. For example, sometimes I like partnering up with a friend and blazing through a rich, scripted, full-story single-player experience with full co-op support (Halo, Gears of War, and Eternal Sonata are good examples). Other times I might like to play something with less plot but still a fun co-op experience (a side-scrolling arcade shooter perhaps). And other times I might be looking for a "co-op light" or "date night" (to coin a few phrases) sort of game, where there's a primary player, and others can interact in a light-weight way (Zack and Wiki's secondary pointer support is one example, or even just playing a story-based MMO like Final Fantasy where your partner is enjoying the plot/visuals, making suggestions, but not having to pick up the controller herself).
One other thought might be to track the level co-op support is built into a game, and whether obvious integration opportunities are skipped/cut (and hence potentially frustrating to a gamer). Eternal Sonata jumps to mind here again - the game allows players to control other characters in combat (while a single player acts as primary driver through the overland). Unfortunately, that co-op support doesn't extend to online.
Been watching this with a great deal of interest, and wanted to pass along a good article in case you weren't aware of the ramifications of this auction. Simply put, one of the last wide-ranging/penetrating wireless spectrum chunks is coming up for auction. The plans of the eventual winner will have a huge impact on how (and whether) we can expect to see a useful nationwide broadband network anytime soon here in the US.
Why are all these companies so excited? Because the 60 MHz of spectrum that’s about to be auctioned is the last prime real estate for mobile communications that will be available in the U.S. for decades to come. And it lies in the 700-MHz band substantially below the 800- to 850-MHz and 1900-MHz frequencies already used for U.S. mobile phones. In this case lower is better since 700-MHz signals propagate better, spreading farther and penetrating buildings more easily than higher frequencies. This greater range means that each 700-MHz cellular antenna can service a larger footprint, which means fewer cells (those interlocking service areas that a “cellular” network is made up of) will be required overall. That should, theoretically, make it cheaper—$5 billion cheaper according to some estimates—to build a national wireless network.
Thought it was quite forward-thinking of EA to release source under the GPL for SimCity, one of Will Wright's classic games. I'm especially curious to see what new revisions (art assets, sound, gameplay mods, etc.) people might come up with. Check it out!
"The key thing here is to peek inside the mind of the original Maxis programmers when they built it. Remember, this was back in the day when games had to fit inside of 640k so some "creative" programming techniques were employed. SimCity has been long a model used for urban planning and while it's just a game, there are a lot of business rules, ecosystem modeling, social dependencies, and other cool stuff going on in this codebase. It may not be pretty code but it's content sure is interesting to see."
More Posts
Next page »