Played: Baking Life (Facebook)

Reporting on the games I've played

Note: As of January 31, 2012, Baking Life has gone off-line and is no longer in development.

Casual social gaming has seen a meteoric rise in popularity over the past few years, especially with the rise of social networks like Facebook and the development of "new" mobile phones in the era of iOS and Android. One of the most popular forms of social gaming is the simulation game, like FarmVille, which is extremely popular on Facebook and I've had many friends try to coax me into playing. However, I've been pretty wary of the time commitments involved in playing these games, no matter how simple they seem, so I avoided them for a while.

Then PopCap Games, the maker of several puzzle and strategy games I enjoy (Plants Vs. Zombies, Zuma, Bejeweled, Peggle) purchased the company that made the simulation game, Baking Life. With PopCap pushing this game, I decided to see what drove so many friends to play these games and give Baking Life a shot. For the most part, after achieving a very high level, I wasn't particularly impressed, but I can definitely see the appeal.

The conceit of the game is that you own a little bakery and you need to bake stuff to sell to customers to make money to improve your bakery to bake more stuff to sell to more customers at greater cost so you can... you get the idea. There's not too much more to the game than there as there is really no end to the game. As you bake you will gain experience to gain levels which will let you bake a larger variety of baked goods which vary in selling price, cooking time and amount of servings. With the money you earn, you can buy different items to improve the variety of goods you can sell at once, sell coffee, and handle more guests.

The social aspect comes in that you can invite your friends to work for you for free (as your store grows you will need to hire more employees who take a cut of your profits) and friends can send you gifts from free servings of food to decorations for your store to components that you need to build or upgrade some of the equipment in your store. The more friends you have playing the more free stuff you can get. All that stuff and money comes in handy because the nicer looking your store, the more money you can earn per sale.

The gameplay is pretty dry and mechanical otherwise. You can be kept on your toes because you have to take your products out of ovens before they burn and the quicker baking recipes, but it's generally the compulsion to buy newer and fancier stuff for your store that's going to drive you and the game resembles Animal Crossing as a result. Oh, it's also a freemium game, and so you can actually spend real money in the game (well, Facebook credits) to buy premium items or upgrade your store without needing a certain number of friends to join. There is a method of getting the "Zip cash" used to buy premium items for free, but you don't get much and it takes a long time, so the game puts the pressure on you to pay up if you want a really nice store.

Presentation wise, the game has bright, bold and colorful flash graphics with a lot of variety when it comes to how you can dress up your store and different seasonal and holiday items available at appropriate times of year. While the game can chug a little on slower machines, overall, it's still not a hugely taxing game. The game has music, but after listening to it for a good long while, I got tired of it and turned it off. I also wanted to turn off the sound effects too, as they are kind of loud and without internal controls to adjust volume, but I sometimes needed the heads up when a baked good was done, so I usually kept it on, to some amount of frustration.

Overall, after the initial expansion and spiffing up my store, the lack of any real development in the game left me quite tired of the game, although I did keep playing to reach the self-driven goal of baking every recipe in the game once. I also didn't appreciate how earnest the game was about trying to get you to spam your friends into playing it and spam your Facebook wall with posts about it. So, while the game might have been a little interesting at first, it's very limited in dimension and hardly interactive in a meaningful way. However, the game's colorful graphics and ability to build your store as you see fit would probably be a draw for more expressive players who love to customize things and don't mind dry repetitive tasks to do so. But that's certainly not going to be enough to impress me and the frustrating social and freemium aspects of the game took a lot away from its limited enjoyment.

This might mean I'm simply the wrong type of gamer for these social simulation games and my problem isn't with Baking Life in particular, but the entire model of business. So, PopCap Games or no, I can't endorse Baking Life (or any of its similarly oriented social simulation competitors, especially those that encourage spamming). There is a segment of the population that will enjoy this, but I'm not it. 4/10.

Links:

Progress Report: World of Warcraft - The Hinterlands

Reporting on games as I play them

The Hinterlands lies just north of the Arathi Highlands and is the next area that Eastern Kingdoms questers will encounter. The Hinterlands was particularly less visited before the Shattering as those questing in the Eastern Kingdoms would get breadcrumb quests down to Stranglethorn Vale after completing Arathi Highlands, so it's a zone that I had little experience with, except during holidays when I would run up there to take care of whatever meaningless tasks I needed for the achievements. Although the revamp of the zone does improve its accessibility and flow, like the Highlands before it, it doesn't really have an interesting story or memorable moments and proves to be a rather dry experience.

The basic story in the Hinterlands is about trolls, especially if you're Horde as you align yourself with the Revantusk trolls as well as a group of Forsaken who are both battling the Vilebranch trolls. Along the way you do a lot of random killing and fetching for the locals and that's about it. There is a bit of story sprinkled into the region as the trolls in their huge temples are trying to call down the spider goddess, Shadra, and that's about the most interesting the region gets.

The problem with this is, that like the Horde presence in the Highlands, there's just nothing really compelling about what's going on in the Hinterlands, nor any connection between what questers experienced in the Highlands and what they experience in the Hinterlands, making it all seem even more like a bunch of randomly assembled quests. At least the conflict between the Horde and Alliance in the region (via their Wildhammer dwarf and Revantusk troll proxies) is actually seen a little, but for a contested zone, the Alliance and Horde are surprisingly at peace.

At least the zone doesn't feature any group quests as those made the rather dead zones of Hillsbrad Foothills and Arathi Highlands difficult to complete. However the Hinterlands does contain a rare world-drop quest that completionists might tear their hair out while trying to acquire, killing everything in the zone perhaps five times over to find. Although the final fight of the zone is mildly interesting, overall, the Hinterlands is much like the Arathi Highlands in terms of lacking flavor and story and is not a compelling experience. On the plus side, when you're done, you get sent right into a much more dynamic experience in the Western Plaguelands.

Links:

Zone Index:

Inbox: Munchkin 3 - Clerical Errors

New for me

So far, expansions to the Munchkin game haven't been particularly innovative, adding to the bulk of the cards without adding new mechanics. However, the expansions do work well to keep things fresh and some of the additions do add further strategic considerations. Clerical Errors largely continues that so Munchkin lovers who are just looking for a standard expansion will find it a good second expansion to add to their game.

The advertised "new" items to Clerical Errors is both a new race, Gnomes, and a new class, Bards. Overall, both are fairly powerful additions to the game and should give players more options in terms of the race and class they'd like to be. Because of the amount of addition the game makes, a number of new versions of old cards are also added to keep the ratios in the game appropriate. I don't know how successful it is as in our plays through the game we've encountered some uneven distribution of cards here and there, but that might simply be on account of the luck of the draw.

The sense of comedy in Clerical Errors is still pretty amusing, frequently making puns "Tequila Mockingbird" or fun of fantasy conventions "Chainmail Bikini" and the illustrations are modestly amusing too. Sometimes we did find that our hands were bloated with items we couldn't use because of the specificity of class and race, but again, that might just be a matter of the luck of the draw.

Overall, Clerical Errors is a decent addition to the game. It doesn't really add anything new, but some of the cards added (especially many of the new curses) do add some spark to the way that the game is played and it's all done with good fun in mind. Even though it won't add dimension, Clerical Errors is still good for those wanting to add some more options to their Munchkin game. 7/10.

Links:

Narrative not a game mechanic?

Introduction
I just stumbled upon Raph Koster's "Narrative is not a game mechanic" and found that it contains some stuff that I do not really agree with. Now, thinking somebody on the internet is wrong happens all the time, but I think this article brings up some stuff that warrants a reply. While it has up a few good points, it also contains views on a few concept that I think can be quite damaging when trying to expand upon the medium of videogames.

"Game"
The word game is a very broad and fuzzy one. I can refer to boardgames, gambling, politics, drug dealing, sports and whatnot. For more part of the the article, Raph seems to be talking about videogames (given the black box analogy and that he specifically says "racing videogame"), but then later on slot machines and choose-your-own-stories are used as examples. Now one can see this as just using simply making a point, but I think the unclarity leads to an important issue: Videogames are very different from other games like chess, football, etc even though they are often lumped together.

The main reason why videogames are different is because they strictly impose rules upon the player. It is not really possible to play a videogame wrong, whereas playing football or chess (the physical versions) the wrong way are very easy. A videogame is more than a few game-rules, it is every single rule that you can possibly experience. Even basic laws of nature like friction and gravity play an essential role in a videogame. Videogames are not about following a specific rule-set, they are about being present inside a virtual world. The only way to really play a videogame incorrectly is to change the very fabric of its virtual reality, or to find some kind of exploitable flaw. (This is not strictly true, as one could say playing Mario and only running back and forth the first few pixels is not the correct way to play it, but I think I make my point).

In case you want more discussion on this, Chris Deleon goes into the issue a bit deeper here. My main point here is just that when discussing videogames, it is very common that all other kinds of games get thrown into the mix, and that is exactly what happens here. This does not mean that we should try and learn from other kind of games, but when we want to talk about the strength and weaknesses of our medium, we need to be clear what it is we are really talking about.

(I know I do say "game" when I really mean "videogame" from time to time. I hope I have become more clear on what I mean in later posts though. Also note that I sometimes simply use "game", after having just said "videogame" to make the text less repetitive. With that said, I hope I do not get too hammered because of improper usage :) )


A series of problems
This is something that have annoyed me for some time. It is the idea that videogames must pose some kind of challenge to the player. It leads to all kind issues, most importantly the idea that one needs to have trial-and-error in videogames. In my mind it is this kind of thinking what has been holding back videogames for quite some time.

In Raph's article, this thinking is best exemplified by:
"Cut the problem inside the black box, and you have a slideshow."
Once you get into this kind of mindset, I feel that there is so much you are missing out on. For instance, Amnesia would not have been possible to create if we had not let go of the belief that every meaningful interaction must have some kind of problem and challenge at heart. It is also a statement that makes videogames like Dear Esther impossible to create. It even dismisses a lot of what makes Silent Hill so great as bad videogame design. Needless to say, I think this is a very silly statement to make.

My view on the core of videogames is not that should to provide us with problems, but to immerse us in engaging virtual worlds. Sometimes problems are useful for doing this and sometimes not. But they are never what lies at the core of the experience.


Feedback is for fun
The way the article talks about feedback (graphics, sound effects, etc) is in a very simplistic manner: They are simply there to enhance the underlying mechanics. I believe that feedback, in any sensory form, can be a lot more than that. I think that visuals, etc can lie at the front and the mechanics can be a way of exploring them, hence you tweak the gameplay according to your visuals instead of the other way around.

Instead of seeing feedback as rewards for problem-solving, I think we should see them as a way to increase the feeling of presence in our virtual worlds. It is the ability to "kick back" that makes the virtual worlds of videogames so compelling and so different from other media like novels and film. If we see feedback as a tool of immersion, we can also stop seeing all interaction as problems. I think this brings forward a more inclusive view of what a videogame can be and is also much better at forming a platform for evolving the medium than the old narrow view.


"Narrative"
I think there is a quite a confusion with words in the article. Narrative, in film theory, is how the story is told (how characters and plot are put together). When Raph talks about narrative in the sense of choose-your-own-adventure games, he is really referring to the plot. It is not narrative, but plot (ie some very specific events), that act has the reward for the player whenever they provide input.

It is much better to say that narrative is the subjective entirety of the session. This also goes along with Chris Bateman's view that all games tell a story and more interestingly that all art are games of some form. One could also take the view (which I do not) that narrative is, like in film, the way in which the story (plot and characters) are told, in which case narrative would be an umbrella term for game mechanics. In any case I do not think Raph's usage of the word is correct and a better title for his post would be "Plot is not a game mechanic". By saying it this way, I think the main point gets no stranger than "animations/sound/etc are not gameplay mechanics".

This might seem like a useless discussion in semantics, but I honestly think it is quite important. Right now, story, plot and narrative are mixed up to mean pretty much whatever, making discussions like "should our game focus on story" pointless. Language is our main tool for thinking, and if we cannot have a proper terminology, we will not be able to think properly.

The article's example from Batman: Arkham City is to me a very clear example of this kind of bad thinking. By saying that the "video of the Joker playing on a television set" is a narrative element, but then dismissing the entire climb that came before it as such, one is really missing out on the strengths of the videogame medium. For me I the Joker video is pure plot, a bit of needed exposition and not what is interesting. What is interesting is the climb up the cathedral. Here the player takes on the role of becoming Batman and, while performing interactive actions, forming a very compelling narrative.

As I have written before, in order to improve story-telling in games we need to consider stories beyond their plots.


End notes
Most of this post has been about meaning of words and of how to approach some concepts, but I hope that I still showed that it is a very important issue. Videogame is a medium that have grown from simplistic simulations, arcade machines and boardgames. This legacy has put its mark on a lot of nowadays thoughts on design, many of which are holding the medium back. The only way to move forward is to reassess this line of thinking and remove ingrained preconceptions of what a videogame is and needs to be. Not until we break the bonds of the past can we freely explore the future.

Best of 2011

Since 2012 is here I thought it might be a good time for a short best of 2011 list! Note that only games that have been released during 2011 are included (and not games that I have played last year). So without further ado, here are my top picks from the past year (starting in reverse order, to make things exciting!):


3 - Portal 2
What I liked the most about Portal 2 were these little moments where you really felt immersed in the world. For example if you hesitate to follow Wheatly's advice and a make a not very safe looking leap down, he will try to persuade you using hilarious quips. These (unfortunately sparse) moments created this kind of special connection to characters you rarely see in games. There also exists a very strong sense of place in Portal 2. I think this is mostly created by how the dialog and environments come together and interact. Unfortunately most of this is in the first third or so and the game becomes more and more drawn out during the end. There is also a lot of really lackluster puzzle sections where you are simply trying to find the right area to place a portal. Despite these short comings, Portal 2 had me quite engaged and proved to be one of the better experiences of last year.


2 - To the Moon
I think the most interesting aspect of this game is how it in some ways is a culmination of a 25 years JPRPG pixel dramaturgy. The emotional displays of the simplistic sprites are very limited, but are used to perfection and creates a very powerful and mature narration. The game also feature very interesting take on puzzles and action. Sometimes it is possible to decide how much challenge you want and at other times the activities are irrelevant and simply there to make you more connected to the world. Unfortunately this is at its best at the start of the game and it gets progressively worse. The end even contains a terrible action sequence.
What really brings the game home though, is how To the Moon manages to bring up mature themes in a way that is extremely rare in videogames. These play out in fairly non-interactive situations and thus are not any kind of revolution. But simply seeing a game where the core experience is a meditation on love, relationships, memory and what is really important in life, makes me really happy and hopeful.


1- Sword and Sworcery
This is by far my favorite game from last year. The videogame's strong focus on making something that blends interaction, music and visuals creates a really engaging experience. This is truly a game that aims to take you inside a another world and it is all about living it instead of trying to beat it. Another thing I really liked about it is how the game does not force you into continuing playing it. Sword and Sworcery actually explicitly tells you to take a rest and come back later between chapters. In an industry where it is all about getting players hooked and never stop playing, this is extremly refreshing to see. Combined with this, the game also asks you to reflect upon it and encourages the player to not just have a shallow, addictive experience. I really hope to see more of this! The game is not without flaws of course. There are lots of problems with the often annoying combat, repetitive puzzles, the twitter integration did not feel needed and some of the writing feels a bit too quirky and lazy. Still, Sword and Sworcery is quite the thing and I urge all of everyone to give it a go.


Now I am interested to hear which 3 games from 2011 were your favorites!
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)