I have to start by being completely up-front about the fact that I haven't played Braid. I had assumed it had only been released on XBox 360 and PC but in searching to read about it in advance of GameCity, I find that it is out for PSN. Oh dear.
Nevertheless this session with the creator of the game, Jonathon Blow, in which he presents the game live via a project and talks the audience through elements of creating the game was absolutely fascinating and compelling from start to finish.
What is eminently clear from the presentation and the Q&A is that Jonathon is an enormously smart individual. From the way he tells it, the technology of the game was comparatively simple to put together but working out the laws of the universe in the game, how time travels through it and how this impacts upon the puzzles was of prime importance. At times, the discussion bordered on the philosophical. "There's been more focus on the text than the game design," he explains, "so I'm going to take about the design."
The assembled crowd is clearly in awe of the achievement represented by this game and the audience hangs on every word. It's clear that Jonathan is among like-minded people; there's a lovely moment where the Braid process hangs and he sheepishly calls up Task Manager to kill the process, muttering sarcastically when Windows asks if he is sure. This is followed by a knowing ripple of laughter from the audience and a recognition that even a feted indie developer is beset by the same problems as the rest of us.
I'll present some of my highlights of the presentation, because it was really great to be there and I really felt this session deserved its own blog entry:
Nevertheless this session with the creator of the game, Jonathon Blow, in which he presents the game live via a project and talks the audience through elements of creating the game was absolutely fascinating and compelling from start to finish.
What is eminently clear from the presentation and the Q&A is that Jonathon is an enormously smart individual. From the way he tells it, the technology of the game was comparatively simple to put together but working out the laws of the universe in the game, how time travels through it and how this impacts upon the puzzles was of prime importance. At times, the discussion bordered on the philosophical. "There's been more focus on the text than the game design," he explains, "so I'm going to take about the design."
The assembled crowd is clearly in awe of the achievement represented by this game and the audience hangs on every word. It's clear that Jonathan is among like-minded people; there's a lovely moment where the Braid process hangs and he sheepishly calls up Task Manager to kill the process, muttering sarcastically when Windows asks if he is sure. This is followed by a knowing ripple of laughter from the audience and a recognition that even a feted indie developer is beset by the same problems as the rest of us.
I'll present some of my highlights of the presentation, because it was really great to be there and I really felt this session deserved its own blog entry:
A "Mario clone with crappy graphics"?
Jonathan started by presenting his original prototype - produced in 9 days. He described it as looking like "a Mario clone with crappy graphics" and highlighted that one of its failings was that the USP of the time-manipulation wasn't introduced until world 2, meaning that only the most enthusiastic player would make it past the initial levels to the really interesting features. This was why the final Braid would introduce the time-control from early on.
It interested me that he highlighted how quickly the player is in control. The opening title screen has the player able to move the character around and take part. Jonathan felt it was essential that the player would be straight in. This echoed, to me, what Jonathan Smith (Travellers' Tales) has said earlier about Lego Star Wars, that one of the key features was getting the players in and messing about as soon as possible - are people put off games by the layers of introduction, menus and tutorials that front so many games as standard?
He also showed how puzzles were framed, in the sense that he wanted to try and make sure all puzzle elements were on-screen at the same time and that where they were not, this was a deliberate choice. In fact, he said that with three years polishing, "everything" in the game that was present or not present was for a definite reason. (although he debunked any theories about the cloud in the final screen representing some kind of secret, saying "I just wanted a vantage point to look down on my castle".
The presenter is pleasantly candid about mistakes, pointing out sections of the game where a particular puzzle design or enemy placement did not sit well with him and that he would remove if given the chance to do the game over. Although, he defends some of the more controversial levels that he describes as "not fun" for a lot of players, saying that the "not fun" levels were kept that way for a purpose and to provide the game with depth and make it a more complete experience.
And how does a game like this get created? There's a clue when Jonathan is asked "at what point did you know you were committing to the game for three years" and he answers "I didn't ... honestly two years in I was convinced i was always 6 weeks away from completion." As each new element got refined and improved it provided inspiration for new ideas and possibilities and the game kept growing. Many game elements came from studying the code itself, for example time-insensitive objects.
In conclusion...
The opening day of GameCity 5 was, for me, packed with content, interesting discussions and chances to meet people as enthusiastic about games as me.
Now it's late. My writing is probably deteriorating by the word and I shall be doing it all again tomorrow. See you then!
Photo used courtesy of GameCity with thanks
No comments:
Post a Comment