Renga in Blue: Difference between revisions
From IFWiki
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
* [http://bluerenga.wordpress.com/2005/02/05/soup-cans/ Soup cans]. Discusses the difference between in-world non-story-related puzzles, and metaphorical non-story-related puzzles. Suggests that the latter can be used effectively in IF. | * [http://bluerenga.wordpress.com/2005/02/05/soup-cans/ Soup cans]. Discusses the difference between in-world non-story-related puzzles, and metaphorical non-story-related puzzles. Suggests that the latter can be used effectively in IF. | ||
* [http://bluerenga.wordpress.com/2005/02/17/designing-multiplayer-puzzles/ Designing multiplayer puzzles]. Suggests that there are three principles of designing a good multiplayer puzzle: (1) Asymmetry: the players must not all do the same things. (2) Uniqueness: the players must have different powers or options, either temporarily or permanently. (3) Dependency: the players are dependent on each other for successfully carrying out their own task. | * [http://bluerenga.wordpress.com/2005/02/17/designing-multiplayer-puzzles/ Designing multiplayer puzzles]. Suggests that there are three principles of designing a good multiplayer puzzle: (1) Asymmetry: the players must not all do the same things. (2) Uniqueness: the players must have different powers or options, either temporarily or permanently. (3) Dependency: the players are dependent on each other for successfully carrying out their own task. | ||
* [http://bluerenga.wordpress.com/2005/03/22/gradation-of-failure/ Gradation of failure]. Discusses the difference between instant-death puzzles, and puzzles that only give you a slight disadvantage when you fail to solve them. Relates this to IF specifically. | |||
===Conversation=== | ===Conversation=== | ||
| Line 18: | Line 19: | ||
* [http://bluerenga.wordpress.com/2005/02/07/fatalism/ Fatalism]. Suggests that letting the player carry out 'stupid' or 'dangerous' actions is often a better design choice than saying that this is 'too dangerous'. "Being able to hit the door one is frustrated with is a form of catharsis, even if it results in player death via stubbed toe." | * [http://bluerenga.wordpress.com/2005/02/07/fatalism/ Fatalism]. Suggests that letting the player carry out 'stupid' or 'dangerous' actions is often a better design choice than saying that this is 'too dangerous'. "Being able to hit the door one is frustrated with is a form of catharsis, even if it results in player death via stubbed toe." | ||
* [http://bluerenga.wordpress.com/2005/08/08/statistics-in-interactive-fiction/ Statistics in interactive fiction]. Discusses the use of [[RPG]]-like statistics in interactive fiction. | |||
==General topics== | ==General topics== | ||
Revision as of 23:05, 18 October 2009
Renga in Blue is Jason Dyer's blog about interactive fiction.
Game design
Puzzles and non-puzzles
- Structural elements vs. puzzles. Discusses the dividing line between a puzzle and a structural element of play. (The latter term is replaced by 'natural action' in a later post.)
- Natural action. Suggests that natural actions, that is, actions that are not puzzles, conform to one of the following three criteria: (1) there is direct instruction to the player, (2) they are repetitions of a puzzle in identical contexts, or (3) they are connected enough to a player’s background and context that no thought is required. Asks the question whether there could be an enjoyable game with only natural actions.
- Soup cans. Discusses the difference between in-world non-story-related puzzles, and metaphorical non-story-related puzzles. Suggests that the latter can be used effectively in IF.
- Designing multiplayer puzzles. Suggests that there are three principles of designing a good multiplayer puzzle: (1) Asymmetry: the players must not all do the same things. (2) Uniqueness: the players must have different powers or options, either temporarily or permanently. (3) Dependency: the players are dependent on each other for successfully carrying out their own task.
- Gradation of failure. Discusses the difference between instant-death puzzles, and puzzles that only give you a slight disadvantage when you fail to solve them. Relates this to IF specifically.
Conversation
- Conversational cutscenes. Argues that menu-based dialogues are not necessarily less interactive than asktell-systems. Suggests that there are three ways around the infodumping NPC: (1) have the reply depend on the mood of the NPC, as in Galatea; (2) have the reply depend on the situation in the game; (3) have dialogue options that are mutually exclusive.
- Telling ambiguity. Argues that 'tell X about Y' is problematic, since it will often lead to ambiguities.
Assorted topics
- Fatalism. Suggests that letting the player carry out 'stupid' or 'dangerous' actions is often a better design choice than saying that this is 'too dangerous'. "Being able to hit the door one is frustrated with is a form of catharsis, even if it results in player death via stubbed toe."
- Statistics in interactive fiction. Discusses the use of RPG-like statistics in interactive fiction.
General topics
Taxonomy of games
- Categories of interactive fiction. Outlines five kinds of interactive fiction: parser-based IF, gamebooks, CYOA, hypertext and chatterbots. (Several visual files linked to in the post have disappeared from the net, so this entry is now of limited use.)