February 8, 2012

Flick It

The touchstone for a popular mobile app has, in the last two years, become Rovio's Angry Birds. Mention that game to most iOS developers and you'll either see Angry Birds induced anger froth forth, or an earnest explanation as to why their app will be even bigger than that.

Introduced December 11, 2009, the app seems a ridiculously simple concept, and on the face of it, it doesn't sound like much. Some green pigs have stolen the eggs of a variety of birds (Green Eggs and Ham, anyone?). You control the birds and you fling those birds via a stationary slingshot at structures of stone, glass and wood that the pigs have built around them. The birds either strike the pigs directly and destroy them or they knock down bits of the structures on top of the pigs and destroy them that way. A level can be completed (or failed) in well under a minute.

That's it.

The game has succeeded because while the characters and visual design are not the greatest, they are cute and reasonably well rendered and displayed. The extreme number of levels (and Rovio is constantly adding more levels at no additional cost to the player) and speed at which levels can be played are key points to its repeat playability. In addition, Rovio taps into the competitive players and the completionist players by including levels of winning. You can go on to the next screen if you kill all the piggies, but ... to unlock certain levels you have to have gotten a score high enough to earn you three stars. But, that's not all. Many levels have golden eggs hidden in them. Some are easily visible, some are not. You can play the game and succeed without ever hitting a golden egg, but to be competitive or completionist, you have to go back through and hunt down the golden eggs as well. For most people, new levels come out before they can complete all levels, including golden eggs and the three star level.

The game is constantly enticing players back with new levels or by social media (hearing about a golden egg for example).

Another level of engagement is the game physics. Honestly, the game seems to personify the definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results. The game physics are reasonably reliable, although if you talk to anyone who plays the game regularly you'll inevitably hear frustration that "there is NO WAY a damn pig would survive having four stone blocks on top of it" or "there is no way in HELL that piece of wood would not fall down in real life. Don't the game makers understand basic physics?"

The game physics, I have grown to believe despite my occasional frustrations, are this way very much on purpose. Players become convinced that they are "almost there" and if they "just do this a little bit differently" it will work. In addition, adding some random element to the physics means that no two players are getting precisely the exact same results on levels. I know I have attempted to count pixels before releasing my bird - expecting that if the physics are completely consistent, I could expect that bird to land in the same spot every time. That doesn't happen. It might be close, but it's never exactly the same. I suppose we could chalk up this random element as the air speed we can't see or feel, but it's become one of the elements I believe makes the game most addicting because you can do the same thing over and over again and it's not insanity - you don't get exactly the same results. It's not so far as to be inconsistent - it's small variances. I find this important to note since inconsistency will frustrate players and cause them to reject the game.

Combining the game physics with the rapid level plays, the plethora of levels and the various goals, the "addiction" level of the game tends to be quite high.

There are only a handful of games I continuously go back to and Angry Birds (in all its permutations) is one. The two other favourites are Iconfactory's Ramp Champ (developed very much prior to the release of the retina displays) and Tiny Wings by Andreas Illiger.

Both of these games are essentially designer-driven and as such are drop-dead gorgeous. The design certainly caught my eye, but the game play on both are also quite well thought-out. Ramp Champ is essentially either Skee-Ball or a target gallery game, depending on the level you play. You roll the balls up the ramp, hit targets or holes and get points. The points earn you tickets, just like in physical Skee-Ball and you exchange them for virtual prizes. There's a set of shelves for you to display (and interact) with your goodies and there's also 3 goals for you to hit per level with trophies received (and displayed in your trophy shelves) as well. You have fast play and lots of incentives to keep coming back to the game. After all, you have to save up to get some of those nifty prizes!

At first blush, this game should have gone just as viral as Angry Birds, but it didn't. It was certainly attractive enough to catch the eyes and attentions of people. Game play was fast and it was a variation on a well-loved and established game.

I believe it didn't achieve the same popularity for an extremely frustrating reason. In Angry Birds, the graphics are reasonable and cute, but they're not drop-dead gorgeous. The backgrounds from major "chapter" to major "chapter" change, but the individual levels within a "chapter" don't change much. The game pieces don't really change much either, other than the occasional addition of a new bird or new complication. Development time for Angry Birds is primarily devoted to level design, not visual design.

Ramp Champ's development time focused both on level design and drop-dead gorgeous, intense-focus-on-the-little-details visual design as well. The result was far fewer levels. They added in-app purchase of additional levels and did seasonal levels before Rovio added Angry Birds Seasons to the mix, but it was one level per season whereas Rovio had one "chapter" per season with 15, 30 or more levels to it.

Ramp Champ has a loyal and devout following and when the retina display iPhones came out and especially when the iPad came out, players begged for an update to the game. Several of the Iconfactory designers said it would never happen. The graphics would have to be recreated at the different resolutions in order to maintain the standards they'd already set in the visual design of the levels. The ROI for the update, which many users would insist should be free, was just not worth the time. The same went for the additional ramp packs – it wasn't worth the time and effort to produce more levels if the purchases weren't forthcoming. Without continuing support for the ever-changing world of iOS and without adding more levels, the game essentially flat-lined.

Similarly, Tiny Wings also had fast game play with multiple goals per level and also had gorgeous graphics. It got quite a bit of buzz in the design community when it first came out, but I rarely hear about it now. The basic gameplay for this game is you have a bird with tiny wings - he can't fly far, but if you land him just right in the valleys, you essentially slingshot him high up in the sky and give him a speed and distance boost. You have various basic goals, gathering coins, getting to a further island before night overtakes you and more specific goals to each level.

I eventually lost interest in the game because despite the fact that the colour, textures and arrangement of the hills and valleys differed (along with the goals), the basic background was essentially the same. Combining that with the increasing difficulty of the levels and I eventually got bored. (Granted, I have a low threshold of boredom, but I can also be quite obsessive about completing all goals.) It became the same look and the same goals in my mind as the game progressed. There was not enough change to keep my interest. I'm sure that Andreas Illiger kept the backgrounds relatively similar in order to cut down on development needs, but that trade-off is a portion of what finally made the game boring to me. I understand that Tiny Wings was voted iPhone game of the year for 2011 and even landed a top spot in the App Store until Angry Birds Rio was released. Still, despite its success, the buzz around it has not reached the viral levels and penetrated popular culture in the way that Angry Birds has.

Angry Birds is not a brilliant game in and of itself. It is a brilliant understanding of why we play games. It fits a need for us to have something to do whilst we wait in line at the store, wait for a plane or unwind before bed. We don't have to make much of a time commitment to the game in order to succeed at it. It's constantly introducing new things - environments, characters, complications. Its random elements ensure the game is never exactly the same and its incredible wealth of levels ensures that even if you replay a level you've not only beaten, but three-starred, you'll most likely have forgotten just how you did it last time. It understands our need for constantly challenging ourselves, our propensity for boredom and our desire to compare our achievements to others.

It also understands the fine balance between design and business practicality.

It's not a choice I would prefer to make. As a designer, I want stunning graphics all the way through my game. But I have to admit that what truly keeps me coming back is both the challenge of "almost getting it" and new levels. If Angry Birds had stopped releasing new levels and challenges both, I'd have deleted it long ago.

Posted by Red Monkey at 8:25 PM | Comments (0) | Design | People Say I Have ADHD, But I Think - Hey Look, A Chicken | Stumble

February 5, 2011

610

Well, because I get going on something and can't really let go of it, I decided to see if all of my Fisher Price Little People would fit onto my big-ass drawing table. There are a handful of peoples still downstairs in the basement - like the orange scuba-diver dude and the ones I customized into Leia, Han, Luke, Ben, Chewie and Vader. And the ones I made into the Village People who stand in front of the Firehouse from the old Village playset. And probably a few strays I'd forgotten to bring up with the others.

Anyhow, click through for a larger image....

Posted by Red Monkey at 11:01 AM | Comments (1) | People Say I Have ADHD, But I Think - Hey Look, A Chicken | hobbies | Stumble

December 11, 2010

Busy, Busy (New, Improved, with SWORDS!)

It's been busy around the Red Monkey homestead the past couple of weeks. Besides the big Plants Vs Zombies project, I've been sick for the last week. Our choir's cantata has final rehearsal later this morning and then the performances are tomorrow morning and tomorrow evening. Plus, our neighborhood has a big to-do today as well.

And, while this is not a review blog, this is something of a review post. In my own, story-telling, rambling-but-focused kind of way.

Once upon a time, I used to LARP. For the non-nerds, that's not only Dungeons & Dragons style role-playing, it's "Live Action Role Playing." (I find as I get older I have to add the D&D reference or people think I'm talking about a totally different kind of role-playing and sword takes on a really disturbing meaning.)

My next-door neighbor, Jim, started a chapter of NERO (New England Role-playing Organization) at our college back in the early 90s. We used PVC pipe as the core for our swords and covered them with relatively thick pipe insulation, added some open-cell foam for a tip and used duct tape to both adhere everything together safely - and add a bit of colour. That's when I first learned you could buy duct tape in multiple, happy colours.

At any rate, yes, we'd dress up as our characters and go out to a park and have fun. Jim and the people who helped found the group in our area were quite excellent at getting good storylines set up and amazingly, we had a wonderful group of people to help build these stories. A good LARP group is part improvisational theatre, large part nerd and mostly people who remember what it's like to find wonder and joy in the world of make-believe.

The group, in short, was a delight.

Since moving away from there, I've not found another group like them, but being a geek, I do still keep my eye out for similar groups ... and equipment.

And that's how I discovered Calimacil.

A few months ago, I bought one of their swords because I'd been eyeing it for about two years ... a foam sword I could horse around with, go to Renn Faires without having to bind it, etc etc. To me, this is far more fun than a metal, bladed sword that I must always be careful with and can never forget it's a frigging weapon. Now, fencing swords - that's different again, that's a sport where you get to use the things. But the buying of a display katana or broadsword just to hang on your wall confuses me.

At any rate, I bought this sword a few months back and LOVE it. First of all, this is no kids' Nerf sword. This is no lightweight, torn up in two days kinda toy. It's got some serious heft to it. I originally found it somewhere else, unfortunately, and was a little bit in trouble once it arrived.

You see, my partner has an allergy to latex.

Oops. Most foam-y things have latex in them, including those fancy memory-foam beds and pillows. And a lot of foam swords.

However! I finally discovered Calimacil's website and was saved - these swords are latex-free! WOOHOO!

This meant I could begin conning other half into picking out a sword for her so we could play.

I also discovered @calimacil on Twitter and began gleefully following. I combed through their site, watching some of the videos showing how tough these swords are, reading about how to repair in case of damage, etc, etc. In short, I was totally geeking out on this stuff.

And then they tweeted that they'd uploaded a new sword test. I watched the vid:

And replied: I need this job RT @Calimacil I uploaded a YouTube video -- Calimacil Rapier Test http://youtu.be/wL7mCgsZT9o?a
[note that's the same link as to the embedded video above]

And they started replying. After much back and forth and honestly delightful conversation in which I came off as ridiculously earnest and terribly fanboy (and therefore I won't repeat), something truly delightful happened. The long and short of it is, they shipped me a sword for review here on the blog! I gave them a list of the various things on their site that I was interested in for them to pick something and ship it to me. Quite by happenstance, they sent the very sword that my partner was hoping for.

Originally, she thought I'd have to buy a short sword in order to spar with her because her sword is shorter than mine and I have longer arms. After the arrival of the sword, however, I think we'll be relatively evenly matched. Her sword is much lighter since mine is a bastard sword.

We've done a little monkeying around so far, but my in-depth review will have to wait until next weekend, unfortunately. Calimacil is located in Canada, and customs takes forever to clear, which meant the sword arrived this week ... which is honestly my insanely overloaded week. So, next weekend, look for a specific review of the falchion they sent.

Meanwhile, if you've got an overgrown nerd in your life, please go give a look at Calimacil's website. They might seem pricey if you're not into this sort of playing around, but I promise you, it's because it's QUALITY stuff. Watch a couple of the videos where they twist the blade or flip the quillon around - you'll see what I mean. I'd like to give them more than a little love for how nice they've been to me. I know I'll be ordering more from them (I'm really intrigued by the bow and arrows).

Full Disclosure: They sent me a sword in exchange for me writing some kind of post on my blog. They didn't tell me what to say, give me a timeline, word count or try to influence my opinion. I'm geeked about it and writing exactly what I feel about not only the sword they sent, but their site and other items in the product line that I paid for.

Posted by Red Monkey at 7:49 AM | Comments (3) | People Say I Have ADHD, But I Think - Hey Look, A Chicken | Stumble

June 27, 2010

Dear Adobe

Seriously? What is unexpected about File>Quit? I'd say that was pretty definite. I mean, it's not ambiguous like File>Ummmm, I think I might want to-OH LOOK! Shiny!

I mean it just does not inspire confidence to spend over $1000 oil-soaked clams on your software when you can't even get the programs to understand that the Quit command means quit.

Waaaaait. I get it. Every time I send in a crash report, I'm added to a list, right? And then you guys randomly send a beachball or "unexpectedly quit" command the los interwebz for every time I send in a crash report. Just identifying us troublemakers, eh? Well, I'm too smart, I just won't - hey! That's the idea, innit? You think that'll make us complain less? Well, you won't win that ...

I think this is what they call a vicious circle.

Posted by Red Monkey at 7:41 PM | Comments (0) | Design | People Say I Have ADHD, But I Think - Hey Look, A Chicken | Stumble

March 6, 2010

Toasted

Several friends on Twitter were discussing various home kitchen incidents today. I won't name names, but the exploding rice in the microwave was not the kind of "honey, I exploded the microwave" I was thinking.

Which all reminded me of the toaster we had in Austin, back in the days when a toaster was a major kitchen appliance and cost, apparently, 80 bazillion dollars. Our toaster no longer had a working timer. The toast would not pop up and Mom would not splurge on a new toaster. This one still worked, after all, you just had to stand there by it and count to sixty. Then pull the lever up and voila! Toast!

So, Grandma was visiting and Mom had to go run some early morning errand. She tasked Grandma with getting us fed breakfast and getting us dressed for the day. Presumably so we could all go shopping at the mall, not exactly a great motivator for me. Mom gave me her serious face and told me to {insert booming announcer voice here} "Make sure Grandma counts to sixty at the toaster."

My little sister is in her chair, eating breakfast and Grandma and I retreat to my room to pick out clothes for the day. Honestly, I didn't need help, I was SIX, for crying out loud and I can dress myself, but you know, it's Grandma and any attention is good, so I GUESS she can come help me pick out "appropriate" clothes. Let me give you a hint. It was the 70s. There were no appropriate clothes. *shudder*

My two and a half year old sister (maybe it was 3.5?) comes strolling into my room and I'm puffing up to holler at her about how this is MY room and she is supposed to be eating breakfast, when she pipes up with:

"Grandma, the kitchen is on fire." And calmly walks back into the fiery kitchen to eat her breakfast.

Grandma and I exchanged that utterly panicked look and took off running for the kitchen.

Flames were shooting up out of the toaster, but luckily, nothing else had actually caught fire yet. There was soot on the light fixture and the cabinets, but they weren't even blackened yet. We lucked out.

My sister was back at the table, calmly eating breakfast and just kind of watching Grandma put the fire out and begin the cleaning process. Grandma was trying to get everything perfectly cleaned up before Mom got back ... and of course no one was going to say a word about this to Mommy, right?

And of course, Mom came back just before Grandma could get the light fixture back together.

Somehow the flaming toast was actually my fault ... even though Grandma was the adult who really should have remembered to count to sixty.

Come to think of it, Grandma's the one who taught me to clean up and hide my wrong-doings ....

We did, however, get a new toaster after that fiasco.

Posted by Red Monkey at 7:37 AM | Comments (1) | People Say I Have ADHD, But I Think - Hey Look, A Chicken | Stumble

December 7, 2009

Timmy Plays in the Snow

So of course, the day after I take some snaps of Timmy the Red-Nosed Reindeer Monkey, it snows here which is pretty much the perfect backdrop for a reindeer monkey. I snagged Timmy, set him up, told my dogs to shut it, I would be back inside momentarily and then had to dodge a neighborhood kid who wanted to talk to the doggies in the window. (And of course, the dogs wanted to talk back. Loudly. Not letting in a word edgewise.)

But I did manage a good snap of Timmy in his natural environs:

I think you can see the full effect of his glowing nose a little bit better here maybe. Certainly better than last night's too-dark and orange shot.

Posted by Red Monkey at 6:05 PM | Comments (0) | People Say I Have ADHD, But I Think - Hey Look, A Chicken | Sketches | Stumble