Multi-level Gameplay

Wahey! My letter to the editor of Gamasutra about Ernest Adams' article, Multi-level Gameplay, was published! Here it is (just in case the link is broken or it mysteriously vanishes):

On 'Multi-level Gameplay'

Ernest Adams' recent article, 'Multi-level Gameplay', was a good read. As someone who played the game Archon as a child I found myself nodding in agreement with his insight about its major drawback being that tactical play overshadowed any strategic play.

I haven't yet played the Infinite Space games mentioned, however, whilst reading the article I thought that perhaps Will Wright's Spore was a prime example of multi-level gameplay -- you begin as a microscopic organism, improving your physical structure with various add-ons via evolution, much like Infinite Space's ship-building. Eventually you move from controlling a single organism to managing a tribe of creatures, and then onwards to a city, and the world, and multiple planets and so on. I'd offer Spore as a counter-example to Mr. Adams' closing argument that "gigantic" multi-level games are "too hard".

Also, the article reminded me somewhat of game designer Ben Cousins' work regarding hierarchy in games -- it's very much to do with breaking a game down, however it has more of a focus on drilling down to the level of "atoms", or player actions, and measuring the various levels of multi-level gameplay in terms of "density" (frequency) of player actions. Such measuring can be of help when trying to identify/design gameplay "sweet spots".

I just thought I'd mention the above two items that came to mind in case they're of interest to other readers or Mr. Adams himself, who has once again written a thought-provoking article.

Off With Their HUDs!

Greg Wilson's article Off With Their HUDs!: Rethinking the Heads-Up Display in Console Game Design is on the money. It's very much in line with my ideas about videogame graphics being split into game-world and HUD.

Greg talks about reducing the obtrusiveness of HUDs for 3 reasons: avoiding HDTV burn-in, improving gameplay immersiveness, and simplifying the UI of videogames for "casual gamers". I don't think HDTV burn-in is as important a reason as improving immersiveness is, and as for "casual gamers", I hate that term and its implication -- it's as if people who only occasionally play videogames are simpletons and need special guidance. It's akin to melodrama or having constant asides during your favourite television show where a narrator explains the facial expressions of the actors: "Jack is scared. Note the wide-eyed stare and the slightly ajar mouth." -- a solid user interface is beneficial for new and experienced player alike.

The best of the three reasons above is improving immersiveness of gameplay. A HUD isn't necessary in a game, and Wilson provides examples of showing players information via other means such as read-outs on in-game items like weapons, or sound effects, or making the screen flash red, etc. The article discusses how designers should decide what and what not to display to players in terms of information, but does not really touch upon how limiting/increasing information available to players alters the gameplay. This is where my ideas come into play, so to speak.