GameMakersToolkit
patreon
Behind the scenes - scrapping an episode
🕑 Added 2015-09-19 11:40:25 +0000 UTC Hey Patreon backers! So, here's something a bit different. The script of a scrapped version of the episode on Nova-111. The video was about 80 percent made before I started anew.I think it's an interesting look at the way I write these things. You see, two of the most important factors in a video, for me, are clarity and flow. I want my point to come across clearly and for the video to have a helpful, understandable structure.
I realised late into the process of making my video on Nova-111 that it wasn't good enough. Here's the original script, and then my notes will follow.
//
Hi, this is Mark Brown with Game Maker's Toolkit, a series on video game design.
What does indie game Nova-111 have in common with Lara Croft's bra size?
The answer is that they were both the result of a programming accident, that the designers decided to keep. The story goes that Tomb Raider artist Toby Gard accidentally increased Lara's bust to 150 percent, and the rest of the designers at Core were like... "Keep it".
Nova-111, on the other hand, started out as a standard turn-based game, designer Eddie Lee tells me. The player and enemies shifted from grid square to grid square in deliberate turns, and tried to bump into each other to do damage, like in a dungeon crawler.
But then, a bug crept into the code and an enemy started moving around between turns, ignoring the rules of the genre. And instead of trying to fix it, the team at Funktronic Labs decided to build an entire game around it.
And thus we get what is, quite possibly, the first real-time, turn-based game.
It's different from Fallout 3, where you get to choose between fighting in real time or in the turn-based VATs mode. Different from Final Fantasy's Active Time Battle, where each character is working to a different timeline. And different from whatever Valkyria Chronicles was trying to do.
In Nova-111, some parts of the game are turn-based. Like these critters who gear up to rush you, then fling themselves at you, but only when you move meaning you can almost always dodge out of the way.
But some parts are in real time. Attack this gelatinous blob and a timer will start ticking down - regardless of turn order. If you're not quick enough, the blob will split into two. Same goes for these exploding enemies, that detonate after a couple seconds.
Here's why this is cool. In fact, here is the specific moment that made me actually yelp out loud, because I realised the system had potential. These enemies move in turns, these stalactites fall in real-time, which allowed me to set up a system where the stalactite fell on an enemy who was trapped in a different set of rules, powerless to move out of the way.
Now it's interesting because it's not just two different systems coming together. It's two different disciplines, almost like two different games are fighting for dominance.
Lee reckons that the two genres use different parts of your brain, with turn-based games tugging on the bit responsible for planning and thinking ahead to consider the ramifications. And real-time games engaging the more reactionary, flight-or-flight part.
And I'm certainly a testament to the genres being wildly different. I love turn-based games, but I rarely play real-time strategy games more complicated than Plants vs. Zombies because I just find them overwhelming.
So when you put them together, it feels like you're being pulled in opposite directions. Trying to set up a situation where a turn-based enemy gets wiped out by a real-time bullet, or gets stuck in trail of toxic goop that will be gone in a few seconds is a mind-bending clash of disciplines, but it feels damn good when you pull it off.
And this mix of genres allows the game to move at different rhythms at different times, as it switches from a slow and deliberate dungeon crawler like 868-Hack to a rapid-fire roguelike such as the rhythm-driven Crypt of the Necrodancer which punishes you for standing for still.
But. And here's the rub. Nova-111 does not do enough to capitalise on that potential and the opportunities to mix the real-time and turn-based mechanics in interesting ways are sadly few and far between.
For starters, most enemies that attack in real time are simply about pulling you out of the fog and into the middle of a group of enemies. Like the Latch, which hurts you if you don't defeat it quickly. Or, they're about making you run away. Like all the explosive enemies.
There are too few enemies that let you do something more mechanically interesting with the genre hybrid, like the stalactites and these zappers.
And while the attacks that combine real-time and turn-based mechanics are fun, they're never mandatory.
And, as we discussed in the video on The Swindle, if there's a complex solution - like setting up an attack where a turn-based enemy is caught up in the explosion of a real-time bomb - and an easy solution - like bumping into the enemy three times, the player will almost always take the easy route.
Unless you encourage, reward, or plainly force the player to do something complex and fun, they'll do something easy and boring.
A bit later in Nova-111 you face enemies that are invincible. I assumed that they would only be hurt by real-time attacks, in a way to encourage or force more creative play. But no. They're just invincible.
And even if real-time attacks do more damage than standard ones, the game is so painfully easy that those attacks are not a significant advantage.
Also, the game's focus soon shifts from combat to puzzle solving. And while these conundrums, with their polarity-switching buttons and laser-stopping robots, are quite good they rarely make use of the turn-based, real-time gimmick in any interesting way. It only really comes into use when you stop time for a few seconds, letting you move freely without advancing to the next turn.
Compare this to something like The Magic Circle, where its main mechanic is the ability to hack into and recode enemies. This is used everywhere, in every combat encounter and every puzzle. The mechanic is given room to grow and time to adapt. Whereas in Nova-111, you could forget that it's even there.
Now, maybe some of these ideas were raised during the game's development and they just didn't work for whatever reason. It certainly went through many changes - Lee says the team tried enemies that move entirely in real-time, and also a fuel meter that drains regardless of turns, to keep you moving constantly. Both were deliberately left on the cutting room floor.
But, whatever the case, it's clear to me that the game falters when it should shine. And while I enjoyed the game, and finished it, I ultimate can't recommend that everyone go rush off and buy it.
But for game designers and those interested in the craft, it is certainly worth seeing for yourself. To see how a genuinely innovative mechanic can be born, but neglected. To see that you shouldn't discount any idea as impossible until you prototype it - even one as mad as shoving two disparate game genres together.
But also to see that you should embrace your mistakes, and any other unexpected quirks that come out of development. Lee says "You never really know what is good until you actually try it. And during that journey, you encounter wonderful things that will completely change the course of your game. It's really scary but also beautiful in its own way."
//
Okay, you may be wondering how it's much different, other than starting with a joke about Lara Croft's breasts and the later addition of the three "lessons".
Well, the main issue is that the points are made in a different order (culminating with Lee's motivational quote at the end), and in this configuration it... sort of breaks the entire conceit of the episode.
Because I criticise the game, and then end on a quote about the benefits of keeping accidents and mistakes, the video could be read like this: "You should embrace mistakes, so you too can make unsatisfying games that don't reach their potential!"
It's not the most motivating message, is it? So I changed it, to make it much clearer that it was the developer's execution of the idea that let the game down, not the idea itself. The idea is great!
Also, as I watched my recorded clips of the game I felt I was being a bit harsh. There were smart ideas I didn't touch on in the original script, and felt needed to be addressed to present a more balanced opinion.
It also felt a bit rambling, and slightly review-y. I used the 3 lesson structure to fix that, hopefully.
Finally, I didn't like the opening being a gag Lara Croft's boobs. In retrospective, this was actually quite a grim moment for the games industry, all things considered. I didn't want to make a big joke of it, but decided to keep in a reference to it.
So there we go. A critique of a critique. If I critique this blog post I think the universe will have no choice but to swallow itself whole. I'll do it! Don't try me, I'll do it!
/Lemme know if there's anything specific you'd like to me to reveal. Maybe the tools I use to make the episodes, or the way I make certain effects, or whatever. I really don't like talking about myself and deleted this thing three times because it was so self indulgent, but hey, maybe one person will enjoy it
I'm eating Pom bears and now my iPad has greasy fingerprints all over it/
Comments
Jon Gill
Thanks for the insight into your process! For me, hearing the reasoning that goes into crafting a good video is just as interesting as the contents of the video itself.
