<![CDATA[Kotaku: jason rohrer]]> http://cache.gawker.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/kotaku.com.png <![CDATA[Kotaku: jason rohrer]]> http://kotaku.com/tag/jason rohrer http://kotaku.com/tag/jason rohrer <![CDATA[ Disjunctive Play and Otherness: Between ]]> Jason Rohrer (of Passage, Gravitation, and others) has put together a very different experience in his latest, Between. Hosted by Esquire as part of their 'Best and Brightest 2008' feature, it's a two-player game with a twist. In his latest Gamasutra feature, Ian Bogost takes a look at the game and the element of disjunctive play we find — a game designed to highlight just how far apart we all are, not bring us together:

When we talk about games, we normally use the language of conjunction, whether through accompaniment ("to play with") or conflict ("to play against"). Whether for competition, collaboration, or socialization, multiplayer games aim to connect people in the act of play itself.

Between takes on a very different charge: it aims to remind players of the abyss that forever separates them from another. In the face of this gulch, the best we can do is to attempt to trace the edges of our cohort's gestures and signals, as players of Between do when they interpret the origins of the weird, mottled colored patterns that appear as if from nowhere on their screens.

If most multiplayer games are conjunctive, Between is disjunctive. It is a game that aims to disturb notions of cohesion rather than to create them. And if any common sympathy arises from the experience, it is a feeling of comfort in the commonality of one's inevitable isolation.

Both Between and Ian's piece are worth a look — the issue of Otherness as related to gaming and the potentials for disjunctive play are certainly interesting to contemplate, and Between is worth a play simply because it's a very different multiplayer experience than most of us are used to.

Persuasive Games: Disjunctive Play [Gamasutra]

]]>
Kotaku-5096755 Sat, 22 Nov 2008 12:30:00 MST Maggie Greene http://kotaku.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5096755&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Artistic Saturday Timewaster: Estamos Pensando ]]> Kotakuite Daniel Novais sent me an email this past week, asking me to take a look at his "little short artsy game" called Estamos Pensando (Portuguese for 'We Are Thinking'). Inspired in part by Jason Rohrer's Passage, Estamos Pensando is a sweet, sad, and polished little game. Daniel said that he's now trying to work on something a little happier, since one comment on Rohrer's Gravitation noted that these 'artsy' games are usually depressing. There are Portuguese and English versions of the game, and gameplay is quite simple. The game has apparently gotten some nice initial reviews since its submission to the Brazilian symposium SBGames 2008 festival, and it's worth a little bit of your time.

Estamos Pensando [We Are Thinking] [wall jump explained]

]]>
Kotaku-5073449 Sat, 01 Nov 2008 14:30:00 MDT Maggie Greene http://kotaku.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5073449&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Learning from Go: Single Player Game Design ]]> Jason Rohrer's 'Game Design Sketchbook' has an interesting meditation up on the nature of single player game mechanics — a lot of the achingly simple, but endlessly challenging board games that Rohrer points to require a minimum of two players. Rohrer's question is how to make a single player game that doesn't rely on typical mechanics to provide depth and challenge? Is it possible to have a game with the (gameplay) depth of go without falling back on AI or randomness or 'physical' contests? Well, in short, no:

Can you make an AI-free, randomness-free, physical-challenge-free, single-player game with gameplay depth akin to that of Go?

Is there any hope for the single player art game that seeks to provide that kind of depth at the gameplay level?

I now firmly believe that the answer is "no." The proof comes from considering how one might go about winning, or doing well at, such a game. If there is a single, optimal path to victory, then systematically finding that path is the main task in the game. Once the path has been discovered and documented for future use, the game's depth is exhausted. If there are multiple possible paths to victory, finding the rest after you've found one is an optional act of completionism, an exploration of mechanical depth.

He provides the fruits of his exploratory labors in the form of a board game-type game called i45hg. It's an interesting piece to digest even if you don't bother with the game — as Rohrer points out, a lot of things that failed as single player experiments would've 'sprung to life' with two or more players.

Game Design Sketchbook: Testing the Limits of Single-Player [The Escapist]

]]>
Kotaku-5035264 Sun, 10 Aug 2008 14:30:00 MDT Maggie Greene http://kotaku.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5035264&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Weird Artistic Timewaster of the Day: Regret ]]> Jason Rohrer (creator Passage, Immortality, and others) is back with another game, this one with the theme of regret (bet you never would've guessed from the title). Rohrer and a journalist writing about the design process game up with the theme, after nixing such topics as "stop snitching," "torture policy," and "stop-and-frisk." The game itself deals with feeding animals ... sort of:

I wanted to make a game about how regret feels, but not necessarily about how to overcome regret. We both agreed that we should avoid the Deepak Chopra self-help angle.

My initial design ideas used 2-D platform mechanics as a foundation. Imagine making a mistake like missing a jump, but not dying from that mistake. Instead, imagine that mistake coming back to haunt you, forcing you to replay that jump again in the future. Imagine a level that becomes longer and longer as the regrettable past portions of the level are injected ahead of you - a future populated by past mistakes that you must replay.

Using familiar mechanics as a foundation can work, but I'm more interested in devising new mechanics that are the best possible fit for the topic at hand. I cast the net a bit wider and came up with the design that involves feeding animals. Oh, and killing them, too.

Worth a look this weekend if you've got the time — I didn't have much time to play around with it, maybe after I'm safely ensconced in LA for our E3 get together. Here's hoping traffic doesn't suck.

Game Design Sketchbook: Regret [The Escapist]

]]>
Kotaku-5024685 Sun, 13 Jul 2008 11:30:00 MDT Maggie Greene http://kotaku.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5024685&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Weird Artistic Timewaster of the Day: Immortality ]]>

We've mentioned Jason Rohrer's weird little works before, in the form of Passage and Gravitation; now with his 'Game Design Sketchbook' column at the Escapist, he puts up new little games monthly. This month features the theme of life, death, and immortality (appropriately called Immortality):

We generally assume that immortality is good, just as we assume that death is bad. Of course, universal immortality (all six billion of us) would be physically impractical. But what about individual immortality? What about for you? If you could become immortal, would you?

Immortality is a game about that question, and it's also about the converse of that question: Does death have some fundamental value that we usually ignore?

Immortality [The Escapist]

]]>
Kotaku-5018589 Sat, 21 Jun 2008 15:30:00 MDT Maggie Greene http://kotaku.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5018589&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Jason Rohrer's 'Game Design Sketchbook' ]]> rohrerperfectionism.jpg Jason Rohrer, designer of weird little artistic diversions Passage and Gravitation, has a new column over at The Escapist focusing on prototyping and game design; each month will have a new discussion of a (playable) prototype. I love prototyping discussions, and it's so much the better when the things are playable; I just think it's a nice way to illustrate points about game design. This month, he introduces a little (simple) game called Perfectionism:

The trap of perfectionism is particularly treacherous for computer programmers, since we're saddled atop of Turing-complete programming languages that are capable of doing almost anything. Every bug is fixable. Every behavioral rough spot can be smoothed over with just a bit more coding, a smidgen of extra special-case logic. Programming isn't like carving something out of marble, where if your sculpture's nose is too small, you must either live with it or start over with a fresh block of marble. Our code bases can be massaged indefinitely.

In designing a game to explore this issue, I thought about players tweaking some set of game objects toward a goal, but forcing them to decide how far toward the goal they needed to go. If we give the players multiple sets of game objects and goals, and force them to divide their limited time among these "subprojects," they will need to make interesting decisions about which projects to polish, which to leave flawed, in which to skip completely. This is quite different from traditional level-based game designs, where players must finish a given level before moving on to a subsequent level.

It's an interesting read and it's nice to actually be able to play a prototype of exactly what's being discussed in the article.

Game Design Sketchbook: Perfectionism [The Escapist]

]]>
Kotaku-368332 Sat, 15 Mar 2008 15:30:47 MDT Maggie Greene http://kotaku.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=368332&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Weird Artistic Timewaster of the Day: Gravitation ]]> gravitation.png Back in December, I mentioned a little game called Passage. Well, Jonathan Blow clued me in to the fact that Jason Rohrer is back with yet another weird, artistic little game, this one called Gravitation:

I'm not going to provide an in-depth explanation for Gravitation. I'm hoping that most people will understand it as it stands. However, it involves more complex game mechanics than Passage, and it is trying to express something much more subtle .... The mechanics themselves are relatively simple, but the emergent behavior harbors a lot of texture. Know that there are no "accidents" in this game design. Everything you notice about the game, and every subtle interaction that you experience, is intentionally packed with meaning. Gravitation explores how a particular corner of my life feels, as only a game can.

It's definitely worth a quick play through; Windows, Mac OSX, and Linux versions are available.

Gravitation: a video game by Jason Rohrer

]]>
Kotaku-362660 Sat, 01 Mar 2008 11:30:19 MST Maggie Greene http://kotaku.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=362660&view=rss&microfeed=true