Posted on Leave a comment

FTC agrees to investigate loot box monetization schemes in games

During a routine Congressional oversight meeting today, Federal Trade Commission chairman Joseph Simons agreed to begin an investigation into “loot box” monetization schemes in video games and whether they take advantage of young players.

While it’s yet unclear how this investigation will play out, the fact that the FTC plans to scrutinize loot boxes is something you should be aware of if you’re working on (or planning) a game that uses them.

“Given the seriousness of this issue, I think it is time for the FTC to investigate these mechanisms to ensure children are being adequately protected, and to educate parents about potential addiction or other negative impacts of these games,” New Hampshire Democratic senator Maggie Hassan told FTC leaders, referencing recent reports that exposing young people to loot boxes in games may be linked to gambling problems later in life. 

Hassan foreshadowed this request months ago, and it now comes in the wake of multiple countries cracking down on loot box monetization systems, including Belgium, the Netherlands, and South Korea.

While game industry stakeholders like the ESRB and the ESA have so far defended loot boxes on the basis that they’re not gambling, per se, critics of the practice (including lawmakers in states like Hawaii and Washington) have tended to focus on how predatory they can be, especially when it comes to young players.

Posted on Leave a comment

Video: Playing with Pride — When game culture & LGBTQ culture collide

“What do games have to do with sexuality?”

Journalist and documentarian Matt Baume opened his recent GDC 2018 talk with that question, using it as a launchpad to rocket into an excellent examination of how and why people in the LGBTQ community play games.

This is an important topic, especially if you’re making games that you hope will be approachable and attractive to a broad audience. Baume’s talk is chock full of video clips in which LGBTQ devs and players explain what games mean to them, how game culture and LGBTQ culture intertwine (or don’t), and what devs can do to better speak to and support queer culture in their work.

It’s a great talk that’s incredibly relevant to today’s game industry, so if you missed seeing it at GDC this year make sure to watch it now that it’s freely available to watch on the official GDC YouTube channel!

In addition to this presentation, the GDC Vault and its accompanying YouTube channel offers numerous other free videos, audio recordings, and slides from many of the recent Game Developers Conference events, and the service offers even more members-only content for GDC Vault subscribers.

Those who purchased All Access passes to recent events like GDC or VRDC already have full access to GDC Vault, and interested parties can apply for the individual subscription via a GDC Vault subscription page. Group subscriptions are also available: game-related schools and development studios who sign up for GDC Vault Studio Subscriptions can receive access for their entire office or company by contacting staff via the GDC Vault group subscription page. Finally, current subscribers with access issues can contact GDC Vault technical support.

Gamasutra and GDC are sibling organizations under parent company Informa

Posted on Leave a comment

Daily Deal – Mafia III, 75% Off

7.20c:
==
* Wraith Band: Attack speed bonus reduced from 7 to 6
* Wraith Band: Recipe cost increased from 210 to 220
* Bracer: Recipe cost increased from 210 to 220
* Null Talisman: Recipe cost increased from 210 to 220
* Sange: Recipe cost reduced from 650 to 600
* Yasha: Recipe cost reduced from 650 to 600
* Kaya: Recipe cost reduced from 650 to 600
* Bloodstone: Charges increased from 12 to 14
* Bloodstone: HP/MP regen per charge increased from 0.25 to 0.3

* Bounty Hunter: Agility gain reduced from 3.0 to 2.7
* Bounty Hunter: Track cast range reduced from 1200 to 1000
* Brewmaster: Cinder Brew activation mechanic has been reworked. It now ignites anytime a target is dealt 80 spell damage or more, dealing 20/25/30/35 DPS for 3 seconds. (If you activate it while the debuff is already going, it will extend the ignite debuff duration. If activated after the ignite debuff wears out, a new ignite debuff will be added)
* Brewmaster: Cinder Brew primary buff duration is no longer extended when activated (they are seperate debuffs now).
* Brewmaster: Level 25 Talent reduced from +200% Drunken Brawler Critical Strike to +175%
* Centaur: Stampede slow duration increased from 1.8 to 2.3 seconds
* Chaos Knight: Chaos Strike lifesteal increased from 35/40/45/50% to 35/45/55/65%
* Clinkz: Attack range increased from 640 to 650
* Clinkz: Burning Army base attack time improved from 1.65/1.5/1.35 to 1.5/1.35/1.2
* Clinkz: Level 20 Talent increased from +100 to +125 Attack Range
* Dazzle: Shadow Wave cooldown increased from 13/11/9/7 to 14/12/10/8
* Death Prophet: Base movement speed increased from 310 to 315
* Death Prophet: Level 10 Talent increased from +12% Magic Resistance to +15%
* Death Prophet: Level 20 Talent increased from -2s Crypt Swarm Cooldown to -3s
* Doom: Devour hp regen reduced from 5/10/15/20 to 4/8/13/18
* Drow Ranger: Marksmanship now deals bonus 120 physical proc damage against heroes
* Elder Titan: Astral Spirit attack damage per hero reduced from 20/40/60/80 to 15/30/60/80
* Elder Titan: Astral Spirit cooldown increased from 16 to 17
* Ember Spirit: Sleight of Fist bonus damage increased from 35/70/105/140 to 40/80/120/160
* Ember Spirit: Level 10 Talent increased from +200 Flame Guard Absorption to +250
* Ember Spirit: Level 15 Talent increased from +50 Flameguard DPS to +60
* Enchantress: Base armor increased by 2
* Faceless Void: Time Lock damage reduced from 30/40/50/60 to 25/30/35/40
* Gyrocopter: Strength gain increased from 2.1 to 2.3
* Kunkka: Tidebringer cleave damage increased from 150% to 165%
* Lina: Base armor increased by 1
* Lone Druid: Base armor reduced by 2
* Lone Druid: Agility reduced from 24 + 2.7 to 20 + 2.4
* Lone Druid: Spirit Link cooldown rescaled from 44/36/28/20 to 43/36/29/22
* Lone Druid: Level 10 Talent reduced from +175 Attack Range to +150
* Lone Druid: Level 20 Talent changed from +40 Spirit Link Attack Speed to -0.2 Spirit Bear Base Attack Time
* Luna: Agility gain reduced from 3.3 to 3.1
* Luna: Level 10 Talent reduced from +20 Attack Speed to +15
* Luna: Level 20 Talent reduced from +10 All Stats to +8
* Luna: Lunar Blessing night vision reduced from 250/500/750/1000 to 200/400/600/800
* Lycan: Howl attack speed reduced from 21/34/47/60 to 20/30/40/50
* Meepo: Divided We Stand XP gain reduced from 50% to 40%
* Meepo: Level 15 Talent reduced from +40 Poof Damage to +30
* Nature’s Prophet: Base armor increased by 1
* Nature’s Prophet: Agility gain increased from 2.4 to 2.8
* Naga Siren: Level 15 Talent reduced from +15 Agility to +12
* Outworld Devourer: Intelligence gain increased from 2.7 to 3.0
* Outworld Devourer: Base armor increased by 1
* Outworld Devourer: Equilibrium slow from 12/20/28/36% to 12/22/32/42%
* Outworld Devourer: Arcane Orb no longer ignores Ancients
* Phantom Assassin: Level 15 Talent reduced from -4 Armor to -3
* Phantom Assassin: Blur manacost increased from 20 to 30
* Puck: Intelligence gain increased from 2.4 to 2.7
* Sand King: Base damage reduced by 2
* Sand King: Strength gain reduced from 2.9 to 2.8
* Sand King: Agility gain reduced from 2.1 to 1.8
* Spectre: Haunt damage increased from 40/50/60% to 40/55/70%
* Spirit Breaker: Greater Bash damage reduced from 16/24/32/40% to 12/20/28/36%
* Storm Spirit: Intelligence gain increased from 3 to 3.2
* Storm Spirit: Static Remnant damage increased from 120/160/200/240 to 120/170/220/270
* Slardar: Level 20 Talent changed from +50 Attack Speed to +30% Lifesteal
* Slark: Pounce duration reduced from 2.75/3/3.25/3.5 to 2.5/2.75/3/3.25
* Slark: Dark Pact manacost from 55/50/45/40 to 60
* Slark: Shadow Dance duration from 4/4.5/5 to 4/4.25/4.5
* Slark: Agility steal now also occurs when an enemy dies within 300 units from you with the debuff, rather than only when you get the killing blow
* Slark: Level 10 Talent reduced from +8 Agility to +6 Agility
* Slark: Level 20 Talent reduced from +2s Pounce Leash to +1.5s
* Slark: Level 25 Talent reduced from +120s Essence Shift Duration to +100s
* Timbersaw: Strength gain increased from 2.1 to 2.4
* Timbersaw: Whirling Death tree bonus damage increased from 10/14/18/22 to 10/15/20/25
* Tusk: Strength gain increased from 3 to 3.4
* Undying: Level 20 Talent reduced from +6 Tombstone Attacks To Destroy to +5
* Undying: Level 25 Talent increased from Gains Reincarnation 200 CD to 250 CD
* Ursa: Fury Swipes damage reduced from 12/18/24/30 to 10/16/22/28
* Ursa: Level 15 Talent reduced from +16 Agility to +14
* Venomancer: Base agility increased by 4
* Venomancer: Level 15 Talent increased from +6% Poison Sting Slow to +8%
* Visage: Strength gain reduced from 3.2 to 3.0
* Visage: Grave Chill cast range reduced from 650 to 625
* Visage: Level 20 Talent reduced from +80 Familiars Movement Speed to +60

Posted on Leave a comment

Meteorfall: Journey to get new content this December

Meteorfall: Journey quickly became one of our favourite card games after it was released in February this year. Since then it’s had countless patches and two major content updates, the most recent of which was in September.

All of this has been for free, and developer Slothwerk is getting ready to add yet more content in a new update coming this December.

Titled ‘The Queen of Shadow’, this new patch is modest but adds some interesting twists to keep the game fresh. Firstly, it adds a new skin ‘Rose, Queen of Shadow’. Not just cosmetic, this new visage also comes with a changed start deck, with 10 new cards added to Rose’s loot table:

  • Corruption
  • Bewitch
  • Acolyte’s Hood
  • Enfeeble
  • Helm of the Bat King
  • Devil’s Bargain
  • Soul Chalice
  • Feedback
  • Amulet of Cosmic Horrors
  • Dark Presence

The update also comes with tweaks – a big-fix for Mining Pick and an few UI revisions. The full patch-notes (for all the patches to the game to date, as it happens) can be read here, such as they are.

Are you still enjoying Meteorfall? Will this update make you go back? Let us know!

Posted on Leave a comment

The road to a German release of Attentat 1942, a game scrutinizing Nazi occupation

The following blog post, unless otherwise noted, was written by a member of Gamasutra’s community.
The thoughts and opinions expressed are those of the writer and not Gamasutra or its parent company.


We were in the middle of an ordinary team meeting, just about to order our lunch. Then, with a small bleep, an email notification popped up. 

And just like that, we got official rating from German regulators and we could finally release our game in Germany. ​​

Attentat 1942 is a historically accurate game about atrocities of Nazi regime in Czechoslovakia during occupation by Third Reich. As such, it contains Nazi symbols. Entering the German market with swastikas and without an official “stamp” could mean a lawsuit.

Not being able to present our game to German audience felt wrong. The game was done, polished and ready to ship. It was already available in most countries around the world. But we couldn’t pull the lever and ublock it for German players. Or we could pull it and risk dragging our team and Charles University to court.

That changed with that email. Enclosed within it was our brand new 12+ rating, issued by the German regulatory office USK (Entertainment Software Self-Regulation Body). A seal of approval, a stamp that allows us to distribute Attentat 1942 to our German neighbors.

We felt relieved, excited, happy and – we have to admit – kind of victorious, because the journey to get our game published in Germany took a really long time. Let us show you how we got there.

Game about Third Reich’s crimes not available in Germany?

Attentat 1942 was released on Steam a year ago, on October 31, 2017. It deals with the assassination of Reinhard Heydrich, ruler of the Nazi-occupied Czech lands. It is based on extensive research conducted by professional historians and on testimonies of survivors. The game combines interactive comics, video-interviews and archival film footage – we want to show the profound impact the war and the totalitarian regime had on the lives and minds of ordinary people. And it looks like we succeeded.

Just to quote a few Steam reviews: “Definitely a unique game, if you have even the slightest interest in events depicted, I thoroughly recommend it.” – “It’s a fascinating interactive experience.” – “Fantastic idea, would like to see more games like it.”

We were so happy that our hard work of several years had paid off and people all around the world were voicing how Attentat 1942 helped them to understand what Nazi totality was like in Bohemia. 

But our happiness was diluted by the fact that people from our neighbor country, coincidentally also the third largest gaming market, couldn’t play it. If you were a German player, searching for Attentat 1942 in any game store would return nothing. 

Documentarists could, developers couldn’t

Why? §86a of the German Criminal Code forbids the use of “symbols of unconstitutional organizations”, a policy that was adopted after World War II. The only exception is “the context of art or science, research of teaching” which is widely used by book authors, documentarists, theatres and museums. And games, right? Right?

Well, not until recently and here’s when the USK we already mentioned comes in. Established in 1994, USK is a private regulatory body whose stamp would protect us from protracted trial. And until lately, it categorically didn’t allow any game with Nazi symbols. Every applicant had to declare that their game didn’t have any unconstitutional symbolism in it. You had either to change your game or give up. What was created as a measure against games being used as a means of promoting horrendous ideologies became an obstacle for games that have opposite intentions. 

Creators of Wolfenstein 3D had to make a special version without Hitler or any Nazi symbols. Just Nazi-like-enough but not really Nazi, that it would not get approved. What was an option for a shooter was not for Attentat 1942, though. How to make a historically accurate game about Nazi period without Nazi symbols? That was impossible.

And it gets even more absurd.

Fast-forward. It’s May 2018 and we’ve just won the “Most Amazing Game” award at A MAZE festival. To be honest: a huge success! But we couldn’t show the game at the festival and the jury had to play it behind closed doors. Why? Because A MAZE takes place in Berlin, Germany and without the USK rating, Attentat 1942 could not be publicly exhibited (or, more precisely, the organizers of the festival decided they don’t want to risk a lawsuit).  

Our friends, developers of Through the Darkest of Times, a game about civil resistance during Third Reich, wrote about us in their Gamasutra blog post about their struggles (which we urge you to read) this: 

“To emphasise this: A historical game about an attack on one of the worst German Nazi criminals, made in the country of their historical victims, could not be shown nor distributed in the country of the historical perpetrators due to a law made to protect the people from Nazism.”

We found allies among A MAZE organizers. They were unhappy that they couldn’t show our game without risking a legal recourse, so they decided to open the debate. A panel discussion was staged, people met and discussed the issue. We learned a lot about the legal details involved and felt immense support. While we left A MAZE happy, the joy was a little bittersweet.

The times they are a-changin’

We thought at length what to do, because we really felt that Attentat 1942 should be available in Germany. There was the option of releasing the game without USK rating, but that would mean risking a long and uncertain lawsuit for Charles University and the Czech Academy of Sciences. Particularly our historians insisted on following German denazification laws and established procedures and did not want to release the game in Germany without official age rating. Changing the game also didn’t make much sense as we didn’t want to give up historical accuracy. That’s why we decided to complete the German translation, apply to USK for a rating and if being dismissed due to Nazi symbolism, oppose this decision in court and hope for a verdict in our favor.

And then a surprise came. On 9th of August, German “Oberste Landesjugendbehörde”, the highest youth-protection office, changed the rules which bind USK. Developers wanting to get an USK rating now didn’t have to certify that their work doesn’t contain any unconstitutional symbolism. Games would be reviewed one-by-one, individually judged with regards to their social adequacy. But what it would mean in practice, that was still uncertain…

We submitted Attentat 1942 for rating, hoping for the best. We were among the first ones and nobody knew what to expect. In principle, USK could still refuse our game. It was up to them.

We were waiting, with German translation and website ready.

Together, on the road to future

And that takes us back to the beginning. Our friends at Through the Darkest of Times got their demo approved by USK and could show their game at Gamescom. Developers of the mobile game My Child: Lebensborn about raising an enemy’s child in a post-war society got the rating too. Our hopes were up, but we resisted the urge to cheer aloud.

Then, on September 13 that email came and the following week we launched Attentat 1942 in Germany as the first officially released PC game with Nazi symbolism after the USK policy change. 

We sent out several emails, clicked a few buttons in the store admin pages and just like that, German players could buy our game and immerse themselves in the dark realities of the Nazi occupation.

To be honest: it feels great. We are honored to finally present Attentat 1942 to German players, as we think reflecting on history is important. And it seems like German players and public thinks so too. We got a lot of attention from German media including a piece in Spiegel, positive reviews, a spike in our downloads graph and most importantly, a lot of support from the players.

The rating itself is just a little virtual stamp with two numbers and a plus sign. But the satisfaction is innumerable. 



 

Posted on Leave a comment

Video: How being a Dungeon Master inspired The Bard’s Tale

In this GDC 2018 postmortem, Michael Cranford shares the vision that led him to the conception of The Bard’s Tale series, walking through the design and development decisions inspired by his years as a dungeon master.

Cranford discusses how the games grew from an expression of his personal love for the genre and desire to surpass the experience of tabletop gaming, explaining his vision behind the games which helped illuminate a trajectory in gaming that still remains strong.

It’s an insightful talk that’s definitely worth watching, so developers shouldn’t miss the opportunity to do so now that it’s freely available on the official GDC YouTube channel!

In addition to this presentation, the GDC Vault and its accompanying YouTube channel offers numerous other free videos, audio recordings, and slides from many of the recent Game Developers Conference events, and the service offers even more members-only content for GDC Vault subscribers.

Those who purchased All Access passes to recent events like GDC or VRDC already have full access to GDC Vault, and interested parties can apply for the individual subscription via a GDC Vault subscription page. Group subscriptions are also available: game-related schools and development studios who sign up for GDC Vault Studio Subscriptions can receive access for their entire office or company by contacting staff via the GDC Vault group subscription page. Finally, current subscribers with access issues can contact GDC Vault technical support.

Gamasutra and GDC are sibling organizations under parent company Informa

Posted on Leave a comment

Leadership shuffle sees IGDA board name new chair and vice-chair

The International Game Developers Association (IGDA) has selected Vesa Raudasoja (pictured) as the organization’s new chair of its board of directors.

Announced earlier today, Raudasoja will take over the role of board chairman while former IGDA chairman David Seltzer remains on the board as chair emeritus. 

Raudasoja previously served as the organization’s vice-chair, and is also a game consultant and developer based in Finland who helped foster IGDA Finland into a chapter with more than 1,700 members and 12 hubs.

In addition, current board member Emily Greer (co-founder and CEO of Kongregate) will fill the role of vice-chair. Lucien Parsons continues as treasurer and Renee Gittins remains as secretary for the IGDA. 

Posted on Leave a comment

Review: Royal Adviser

The kingdom weathers a period of transition, and the time is ripe for a savvy council member to consolidate their power and make a play for the throne. This is the setup of Royal Adviser, which wants to give you the world, wants to provide an occasion of droll social bonding while running a demanding, skilful contest of numbers and wits.

Not for nothing have games like these, now clustered under the big-tent genre of ‘social deduction’, become rather popular in the past few years. They’re a smart hybrid, difficult to design and playtest thoroughly but immensely satisfying when done just right. Which Royal Adviser, does, mostly. Advisedly.

First, a little background on similar games. In social deduction, the game’s goals and stages are bolstered by secret teams, individual win conditions, betrayal mechanics and a voting system. So there’s that tension between the outward facts of the game and the inward truth: who’s a werewolf, who’s a fascist, who’s the hidden baddie, etc. And the meat of the experience comes from guessing individually & arguing publicly what these social secrets are.

RA2

So is Royal Adviser any good? The app itself is easy to use, and the game quite nuanced and fairly well-made. It’s loads better than most similar apps and, but at the same time makes a poor showing when compared to the tabletop giants which preceded it.

That’s putting the horse before the cart, though. Forget how it feels, how does Royal Adviser play? Well, everyone starts with a hidden objective, like raising the happiness or military stat of the kingdom past a certain threshold. Each round is split into a series of small, subtle player actions clustered around a big vote. Most actions are private and hidden, subtly adjusting the kingdom stats or peeking ahead at future voting decisions. So most of the game’s conflict revolves around this subtle game of cat-and-mouse.

RA3

Just like in Reigns, the overall status and well-being of the kingdom is divided into Happiness, Military, Wealth and Religion. And also like in Reigns, the decisions made by the adviser are by-and-large stat trade-offs, shifting strength from one area to the next while creating pockets of inequality. But while the voting in public and alliances are encouraged, each court member has a different endgame.

To make this vote possible, the players each have an ‘influence’ stat which quantifies the exact degree they can sway the proceedings. My favorite twist, though, is the very powerful, (sometimes self-destructive), j’accuse option. If you believe another player is acting obviously and has thereby revealed what their ultimate goal is, they can declare what agenda another player has. If the guesser is correct, they take half of the target’s influence. In the reverse case, the opposite happens. Most games don’t have such an open-ended nuclear option, never mind put it so readily in the player’s hands. Scorched earth, baby.

RA4

90% of the game is subtle, granular and slow-moving. Alliances are proposed and rejected, manipulations raise and lower stats by a single point. It’s a pass-and-play game, so this pace of play means there’s time for snacks and little side talk. Not much, though, because savvy players need to keep track of pretty much everything going on. The small actions add up to patterns which point to specific player strategies and goals. Unlike, say, Avalon, Resistance or Werewolf, the game isn’t broken up into teams of goodies and baddies, red vs. blue. Instead, from the get-go everyone is a rogue agent looking out for number one. In a way this sidesteps the greatest drawback of social deduction games: sometimes they become a very specific, very narrow type of puzzle. Hunt for the outlier, cluster around the normies. It becomes a race to construct a maximally coherent logical account, and people’s testimony, the whole social atmosphere just gets ‘mechanized’ as part of the game’s normal decision space.

Royal Adviser, thanks to its free-for-all format, doesn’t fall prey to this at all. It has individual moments of betrayal and confrontation but in general plays more like a long bout of public policy than an extended village (witch) trial. It reminds me of a more complex Candy Chaser: you win by advancing your agenda in a race against the other players but must balance the need for speed against the need for secrecy. The ‘social’ component is side-lined. No shouting matches based on who wiggled their chair or ‘looks suspiciously’ a fun but loaded phrase which has launched many a dispute.

RA5

The game is a little too ponderous for its own good, having stripped out too much of the dynamism and discussion the social brings to pass-and-play. It’s not quite Werewolf and not quite Castles of Burgundy and suffers from being betwixt. The influence-ranking is a nice way of qualifying votes, and it can get redistributed to other players through slander and accusations. Still, this is actually a better game than its digital format allows: the fluency of play and turn turnover (yes, really) obscure some of its best moments.

Really well-made from both a gameplay and app-perspective, the actual experience falls a little short. Add to that the fact that there is no play-vs-AI and no real tutorial and the game’s good points start looking a little inconvenient, even downright shabby. It’s a good game for pregaming main events, like before a movie, meal or some other gathering, and it avails itself well of these opportunities, but the limited functionality and longer playtime make it more suited to online or AI play, both of which do not exist in the game’s current form. Taken on its strengths and merits from a design and game hobbyist perspective, Royal Adviser is stellar. The reality is less intriguing, though still worth a try for its divergent take on social deduction & betrayal-style games.

Posted on Leave a comment

For Lucas Pope, Return of the Obra Dinn was a bunch of appealing design problems

This year, Papers Please developer Lucas Pope released his latest game, the mercantile murder mystery Return of the Obra Dinn.

Recently, Pope was kind enough to join us on the GDC Twitch channel for a conversation about making Return of the Obra Dinn, where he talked about the harrowing engineering and design problems he had to overcome — and how working to solve those problems is intensely appealing to him.

Pope: Papers Please was kind of a design first project where I had the idea for the mechanics. This one, Obra Dinn was visuals first, so more art focused. I wanted to make something 1-bit. And just kind of banging on that for a while ended up with this setting on the ship, and then after a few months, the core concept of figuring out how people died.

It’s basically me taking what I played as a kid, which was Macintosh Plus games which were 1-bit. For the time, they were actually high resolution. It was only 512×342 or something crazy like that, but it’s on a 9-inch screen so it’s very sharp, very striking for me as a kid. And I played a lot of games that way. And I specifically remember never thinking—it’s hard to remember not thinking something—but for me I never thought, “I want more colors here.” To me it always looked beautiful in one bit.

 

“I specifically remember never thinking…’I want more colors here.’ To me it always looked beautiful in one bit.”

And so Papers Please had some level of art in it, but it wasn’t really art-focused. And I like to pretend I’m an artist, so I thought what I wanted to do was take this 1-bit style that I played as a kid and try to make it legible and playable now using modern technology. So that was the idea. And then I mocked up a few things. What’s interesting to me is that the title screen for the game is the first thing I ever mocked up in one bit in Photoshop, and it’s also the first thing I made in Unity. It didn’t change in the entire four-and-a-half years. Basically, once I got that working it taught me that it was possible and it could look cool and that sent me four years down the line.

The first thing I did was I played some old actual Mac first-person games, and the best one I could find was something called Colony. And it’s a very low-poly, just-the-walls kind of thing. But one of the things from playing that game, and also playing some modern 1-bit games, [modern 1-bit games] take the render and they dither it, and it looks cool but you can’t see what’s going on. You can’t see anything in these modern games. In Colony you can see everything very clearly and I decided that everything is going to have an outline. 

So geometric shapes are going to be outlined. If it’s against white it’ll have a black outline, if it’s against black it’ll have a white outline. So it’s always an inverse, so the shapes and geometry are always clear to see. So the thing about that is that it removes any mystery about where you are or the environment. Everything is perfectly defined, basically, which was fine because I wasn’t making a horror game, so I didn’t want to hide things from the player. You could tell where you were at all times, [which is] what I was going for. So that was on the surface, the simple thing, how could I make this work where everything is outlined. 

But as the production progressed, the bigger problem became comfort–viewing comfort. Because you’ve only got two colors to work with and you need to make shades out of those using dithering. But dithering is not a technology that you want to use in a moving picture, basically because it gives you a headache, more or less. There’s too many high contrast, flashing pixels. So the real magic for me in making this work was solving that dithering problem and figuring out how to make it so people could play a four-hour game without getting massively uncomfortable.

The first solution is just to increase the resolution. So your pixels are smaller so that when you dither your eyes are fooled more into thinking it’s a tone instead of just a bunch of dots. I wanted it to be 1-bit but I also wanted it to be low-resolution. That was partly because of production—it makes it easier to create this thing when it’s not super high-res—but also I just like that style more. I like the low resolution, I like trying to do more with less pixels. 

 

“The real magic for me in making this work was solving that dithering problem and figuring out how to make it so people could play a four-hour game without getting massively uncomfortable.”

When I decided I couldn’t raise the resolution to solve that, I put off the problem for a long time, couple years, and then finally when I had enough to sort of sit down and play a lot of [the game] full-screen in front of me, I changed the dither pattern, basically. It wasn’t [about the dithering] trying to be shades so much as much as it was trying to be a wood cut, more pattern style. It worked fine to me, it looked ok, but in the Tigsource dev log which I kept for the game, nobody else liked it. Everyone hated it.

I went back to the drawing board and devised a dithering technique that keeps the dither sort of fixed when you’re looking around, so when you turn your head the dither pattern is not sliding across as you would expect; it’s moving with the scene. That took a lot of time to get right, and in the end you don’t really notice it. My hope is that you don’t get sick as much as you would have with the other one. I’m not gonna say I fixed everything, but it makes it much more comfortable to look at when you’re just standing there looking around.

Pope: I think there were four [characters] in the initial demo for this in 2014. That was easy. Whatever dialogue or characters or text I wrote then was with nothing else in mind. I didn’t have any of the story written at that time, just kind of “ok these guys will be fighting over something and the captain ends up killing a bunch of them or whatever.” And that worked for the progress I’d made at that time. And I kind of stuck with this idea, that the game would be about figuring out how people died. I stuck with that for a long time, until I realized that that’s not hard to tell usually. You can usually see that pretty easily.

But it wasn’t until I had a lot more of the game done that I realized the real fun part would be figuring out who they are. Because that would lead into ways I could create clues in the environment and have the player kind of work out a Clue-like or Moriarty-like, it’s this old game, logic puzzle to figure out who people are.

So that design shifted. And that shift happened kind of late, I wanna say. Working out the narrative structure for this game was pretty tough, because you can only tell the story when somebody dies, first off, and then I also needed to have this almost unbroken chain of bodies going back through time which, you know, probably isn’t that normal.

I decided to break it all up into chapters or disasters and lay everything out like that. That structure was extremely difficult to figure out, which tied my hands a bit because I might have changed the design in a different way if I hadn’t put all that work into the story. But once I put all that work into the story, I was stuck with it and I had to figure out a way to make it work, and that way was basically the book, and focusing more on the identities than the means of death.

 

“In most cases, you had to change everything about your production and how you made the game to get from that first initial [prototype] to the end.”

When I decided it was going to be on a ship, I thought that would be easy because I could model four decks of a ship no problem. That was my first big mistake on the game. But once I decided that, I did a lot of research on these ships and I started building a ship, and I don’t know why but I looked at the number of people you’d need in order to sail one of these ships and it was maybe 120, 200 people. And obviously I knew—ok I’m smart enough to know I couldn’t do 120 people but maybe I could do 80. 

So my first number was 80 people. And then when I actually made all the characters I realized, damn, the most I could do was 60. I’m going crazy doing these characters, so I’ll stop at 60, but this was all before I’d worked out the story. So if I’d worked on the story first, there’d be 12 people on the tiny sailboat basically. But because I worked on the ship and the reality of what you would need to work on this ship, I started super high and I felt like every time I cut it down I was going to compromise the game, not realizing that I was still going to kill myself to try and finish 60 people. 

At that time I wasn’t thinking about much in arranging the story, or the player’s experience or anything, I was just thinking about “I need a bunch of people for this ship and I’ll figure out the rest later.” And I had the manifest still, and that’s all I had was just a list of names. So the project kind of scaled at different times. At some point this doesn’t scale so I gotta scale up. And then I move over to some other thing and that doesn’t scale so I gotta scale up. And they all kind of scale in different ways, without really changing the other elements of the game because I didn’t want to remake them. Or I felt like I could still do something good with them so keep those and scale this guy up.

But everything that I had for that demo did not scale. So the fact that there were four characters there, I was already pushing up against all the pipeline and tools, custom things I created to make those four guys. So there was no way that the tools and the systems that I had would scale up to 60 people. That added almost another year of scaling up to the point where I could make the full game from the demo. And this is true of every game I’ve ever worked on. If you look at the first prototype of anything, it’s hard to imagine how much time it took to go from that to the final thing, because in a lot of cases it looks just like the final game with some small differences. But in most cases, you had to change everything about your production and how you made the game to get from that first initial thing to the end. 

Pope: When it comes to design I’m a big fan of rigid core mechanics. [In Obra Dinn] something very basic and simple that you’re doing is you’re kind of filling out a matrix of features for your list of identities. Something about simple and core, just as a slightly OCD engineer–I like that. That’s where I come from on the design side.

On the other side I really like taking those things and making something interesting out of them story-wise. You know, there are people around the world who do all kinds of jobs all the time and many of those jobs are boring and mundane but those people have interesting lives to me. 

“In every project I do, I approach it like an engineer, as if there’s a problem that needs to be solved.”

I like trying to capture the interesting parts of a mundane experience. And that works really well when you like mundane mechanics, because those two interests go together really well. It’s kind of what directs me to pick an idea and then develop it and then evolve it into a full game.

In every project I do, I approach it like an engineer, as if there’s a problem that needs to be solved. If there’s no problem, then I’m not that interested. But if there’s a problem, if there’s some restriction or some limitation, then I’m interested suddenly. That’s why I have one bit, that’s why I have simple mechanics that you wouldn’t expect to build a story out of–because solving those problems are the most interesting and fun parts of game development for me.