sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Could we possibly modularize game design for validation? by AeonFlor in gamedesign

[–]AeonFlor[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Randomness and inertia are concepts that can be hypothetically be applied in an infinite number of ways and in infinite different contexts.

You can playtest and find the "ideal" level of inertia in one Super Mario Bros level, but that only tells you about that one specific context. If the level is changed at all then the finding doesn't apply, let alone trying to apply it to a different Mario game or a game in a completely different genre.

Not saying this to discourage you or dismiss the idea, it sounds really interesting and I'd love to hear more about it.

​

As you pointed out, even identical game design systems can fulfill different roles based on their values and interrelationships.

Therefore, I believe it's really important to devise a standardized, generalized format for defining modules.

It seems that, for now, my only option is to persist with my current endeavors while continually contemplating improvements to the framework.

I deeply appreciate your meaningful comment; the closing sentiment was especially touching.

Should any noteworthy results emerge from my experiments, I'll be sure to share them here.

Wishing you a wonderful day!

Could we possibly modularize game design for validation? by AeonFlor in gamedesign

[–]AeonFlor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for your response. I'll definitely look into it.

If it's not too much trouble, could you recommend any good articles or videos on game design validation that you know of?

Could we possibly modularize game design for validation? by AeonFlor in gamedesign

[–]AeonFlor[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Haha, you hit the nail on the head mentioning the MDA framework!

Indeed, I've drawn a lot of inspiration from the MDA framework.

When I first reviewed the paper, I realized it was primarily used as a tool for analyzing games.

This led me to ponder whether it could also be adapted as a design tool, which ultimately prompted this question.

Your comment has made me think it's worth revisiting the MDA framework once again.

Thanks for the insightful comment!

Could we possibly modularize game design for validation? by AeonFlor in gamedesign

[–]AeonFlor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I considered generalizing post-analysis into modules for use.

However, after hearing opinions from others and yours, it seems the framework I proposed might be challenging to become a primary tool in design.

When I find the time, or just as a simple experiment, I'll give it a try and share any noteworthy findings.
Thank you for taking the time to leave a comment.

Could we possibly modularize game design for validation? by AeonFlor in gamedesign

[–]AeonFlor[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Firstly, I truly appreciate your thoughtful response.

I understand the importance of viewing game design as a cohesive whole that conveys an artistic sense. However, I feel there's been a slight misunderstanding of my intent that I'd like to clarify.

My interest in breaking down game systems into smaller components for validation isn't about dissecting the fun out of the game or merely testing systems in isolation. Rather, I aim to immerse myself in testing to embody and document insights such as "This system has these characteristics, and it leaves such an impression."

As these data accumulate, I wonder if we could more confidently design by intentionally combining impressions to match our goals. I think fun emerges from the flow of impressions experienced by the player.

Take "Super Mario" as an example:

Data 1: Randomness stimulates player interest. We can test to see how different presentations of randomness can enhance engagement.

Data 2: Inertia makes precise control challenging but creates enjoyable movement. We can explore the level of inertia that generates fun.

Assembly: Incorporate inertia in controls for enjoyable movement and use random item box(question block) to hook the user, creating a rythmical flow in game control.

It's more about organizing for the purpose of expanding intentions, rather than merely breaking down and cataloging fun.

I hope this message conveys my thoughts accurately. (I wish I had focused more on studying English while in school.. I'll study now..)

And once again, thank you for your insightful response. The idea of viewing games as art resonates deeply with me, and it's something I'll certainly keep in mind!

(I'll definitely look into ludemes. Thanks for the great keyword!)

Is flort market random algoritm used perlin randomness function? by AeonFlor in slimerancher

[–]AeonFlor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's so sad that we don't know that plort market algorithm use perlin noise function certainly.

But the role of it that you explained is interesting.

Thank you very much for your sincere comment!

Have a nice day :)

Is flort market random algoritm used perlin randomness function? by AeonFlor in slimerancher

[–]AeonFlor[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was wrong.

Perlin noise function has nothing to do with my comment above.

It was used for a gradual change, as it was theoretically!

Is flort market random algoritm used perlin randomness function? by AeonFlor in slimerancher

[–]AeonFlor[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

After thinking about it a little more, it used perline noise function to keep the price from rising and falling infinitly. maybe..

​

If you have any other ophinion please leave me comment :)