Been a while.
I'll admit I slacked off. I could list a number of reasons for that, but I won't bore you - and myself - by enumerating them. Simple fact is that I got lazy, and I'm here to make it up to you. We, at Blood on Binary, have never stopped developing our games, even though it may seem like that since we frequently drop off on the PR and public presence.
One of the problems with this blog is that I felt unable to blog about non-Sacred Chronicle-things. I frequently had things relating to...well...non-gaming topics, and I didn't have a place for them. That has now changed, which hopefully will help to bring this blog back into focus for me. Behold: http://sunathalgeraan.blogspot.com/
Now that I've shamelessly plugged my personal blog, let me continue on with a little Sacred Chronicle update. It's about a little thing called a timetable.
At Blood on Binary, we are working hard on several projects. None of them are Sacred Chronicle. Most of our effort is being diverted to Escalation-Online, and getting a big release ready for sometime after the 1st of 2009. We also have several other, more classified projects underway, which are infinitely simpler than Sacred Chronicle. My baby's a big game, and it will take, in all honesty, more effort to produce than we can at this time bring to bear.
So what then of this blog?
If you're reading this, you're coming from one of several places. People from each of those places have very different backgrounds. My approach will be thus: I will blog about a specific topic each week (or possibly longer), and then discussions will be held on that topic. As a result, there will be very few surprises about the game to those who read this blog, but hopefully the end result will be that much stronger because of the diversity of the opinions which form a trial-by-fire for my ideas and plans.
I recognize that some things simply must be tested before they can be seen to be a benefit or a hindrance to the game. Those topics will be kept more to the outside of the discussions here, to the best of my efforts.
I also recognize that it will take some time for people to start reading this from the various places I will post it. To that end, no discussion topics will be posted for a week or two until I know that people have seen my various posts.
I'll close by saying that if you're reading this blog, I'd much appreciate it if you'd leave a comment to this post, signifying that you're here and reading. One of my excuses for ceasing the blog previously was because of my impression that nobody was reading, whether that perception was accurate or not. By all means, comment! I want your thoughts...mmm....thoughts. Yummy.
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Sunday, August 10, 2008
Why Do We Game?
By Kevin A. "Silverwolf" McKee.
I have a confession to make. I'm a gamer. Have been for years, starting off with old games like Commander Keen and Duke Nukem, continuing through current times with Age of Mythology and World of Warcraft. Even not online, I still am a gamer - board games, card games, and outdoor games such as frisbee. So I wonder, what is the attraction? Some would argue addiction - others, sheer competitiveness. But I think that it's a bit more complex than that.
For one, games provide a trial. They give us an opportunity to prove ourselves in various ways while under duress. Depending on the game, these ways can range from highly physical to highly mental, to highly personal. Those who win pass the trial, while those that fail need more work. Frequently, the problem or the reason of loss is not a gameplay factor. Most games are not that complex. Usually it ends up being some personality flaw - something showcasing a need for quicker thought or more sound judgement. In this way, games are more of a way to prepare yourself and/or keep yourself in peak shape in the desired attribute.
So, about that addictiveness...
People of all ages and backgrounds enjoy games. The type of games depend somewhat upon the person involved, but everyone games. This implies to me that there is something valuable in the act of gaming, something in our genes that drives us to play, to test ourselves. Individual games may draw more fire than some others - usually the bigger and more public the game, the more reviled it is. Why focus on how people that play WoW are addicted? Why showcase how professional football players can rarely move on? Why not instead and as a novel idea focus on how old women are "addicted" to various card games (insert stereotype of your choice here). Or, maybe, how fathers are "addicted" to playing baseball with their sons. That's why the addiction argument doesn't hold much weight with me. Games are such a universal concept that there must be more to it than just that.
Of course, the design aspect enters into the equation as well. In my experience, games with a rapid progression are more "addictive" in nature than those that are more slow-paced. Be it fast-paced in levels, fast-paced in build-up of troops, or just the speed with which the players move, quick games are more likely to be played more. Games with a lot of exploration also seems to be considered more addictive, at least for me personally. I know I love exploring both in online games and in real life, which I plan to have spill over into Sacred Chronicle. And so, in a roundabout way, I admitted it - I want my game to have addicitive elements. In my next blog entry I'll explain why, and what I hope to accomplish with Sacred Chronicle from a designer point of view, instead of a player point of view.
I have a confession to make. I'm a gamer. Have been for years, starting off with old games like Commander Keen and Duke Nukem, continuing through current times with Age of Mythology and World of Warcraft. Even not online, I still am a gamer - board games, card games, and outdoor games such as frisbee. So I wonder, what is the attraction? Some would argue addiction - others, sheer competitiveness. But I think that it's a bit more complex than that.
For one, games provide a trial. They give us an opportunity to prove ourselves in various ways while under duress. Depending on the game, these ways can range from highly physical to highly mental, to highly personal. Those who win pass the trial, while those that fail need more work. Frequently, the problem or the reason of loss is not a gameplay factor. Most games are not that complex. Usually it ends up being some personality flaw - something showcasing a need for quicker thought or more sound judgement. In this way, games are more of a way to prepare yourself and/or keep yourself in peak shape in the desired attribute.
So, about that addictiveness...
People of all ages and backgrounds enjoy games. The type of games depend somewhat upon the person involved, but everyone games. This implies to me that there is something valuable in the act of gaming, something in our genes that drives us to play, to test ourselves. Individual games may draw more fire than some others - usually the bigger and more public the game, the more reviled it is. Why focus on how people that play WoW are addicted? Why showcase how professional football players can rarely move on? Why not instead and as a novel idea focus on how old women are "addicted" to various card games (insert stereotype of your choice here). Or, maybe, how fathers are "addicted" to playing baseball with their sons. That's why the addiction argument doesn't hold much weight with me. Games are such a universal concept that there must be more to it than just that.
Of course, the design aspect enters into the equation as well. In my experience, games with a rapid progression are more "addictive" in nature than those that are more slow-paced. Be it fast-paced in levels, fast-paced in build-up of troops, or just the speed with which the players move, quick games are more likely to be played more. Games with a lot of exploration also seems to be considered more addictive, at least for me personally. I know I love exploring both in online games and in real life, which I plan to have spill over into Sacred Chronicle. And so, in a roundabout way, I admitted it - I want my game to have addicitive elements. In my next blog entry I'll explain why, and what I hope to accomplish with Sacred Chronicle from a designer point of view, instead of a player point of view.
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
What Is Honor?
By Kevin A. "Silverwolf" McKee.
Honor is an ephemeral concept. You can rant and rave about how people these days don't have any sense of morality or honor, and will do anything just to get ahead. Then, five minutes later, you can turn around and make somebody else have the exact same rant. No two people's senses of honor are exactly the same, and this creates conflict with both sides thinking they are in fact the ones that did right and are just.
Honor in games, then, can be used as an agent to trick players to advancing the plot, a main plot device itself - or an unintentional X factor that can add flavor to the game world. An example of this would be the "druid peace pact" in Blizzard's World of Warcraft. Although it has declined over time, the "druid peace pact" was a concept invented by the players themselves, where all druids in the game, regardless of Horde or Alliance affiliation, would leave each other alone and/or lend assistance where needed. This wasn't built-in to the game system. It wasn't designed to happen. But due to the lore of the game, and the honor of the players involved, it happened anyway.
The concept of honor can be related to the notion of chivalry - which some say is archaic. The more decadent our culture becomes, the more chivalry becomes archaic, generally speaking. Whether this is a bad thing or not, I cannot say. Honor can be a powerful tool for good, helping complete strangers form bonds with one another and assist each other in times of need. Honor can also become a weapon of evil, spinning webs and continuing cycles of hatred, all in the name of honor. Much of the same can be said for religion, but that remains another blog entry.
The problem with honor is that it has become a rather confused meaning throughout the centuries. It was something akin to the warrior's code, originally...a code of conduct for how one should live his life. In slightly more modern times, it became much more negative in nature. If you offended someone in any way, it became an affront to his honor, usually ending in a duel situation. Thus, honor metamorphosed into a system of suffering, ending many innocent lives because of its imaginary ideals: ideals which nobody could live up to and would eventually become the death of a civilization. In this light, it is perhaps a positive ending that honor has become such a muddled and dead thing.
And so, I personally come to this conclusion. Honor is a conditional system. In this time and place, it may be the best we are allowed to have. In an ideal world, though, honor would be almost certainly considered an evil thing. In said ideal world, unconditionality would have to take precedence. You don't save someone's life because they may one day repay that debt. You don't spare a fallen warrior's life on the battlefield because he may one day return the favor. You do it because it's the right thing to do. I'm curious, what impressions do you, the readers, have of honor?
Honor is an ephemeral concept. You can rant and rave about how people these days don't have any sense of morality or honor, and will do anything just to get ahead. Then, five minutes later, you can turn around and make somebody else have the exact same rant. No two people's senses of honor are exactly the same, and this creates conflict with both sides thinking they are in fact the ones that did right and are just.
Honor in games, then, can be used as an agent to trick players to advancing the plot, a main plot device itself - or an unintentional X factor that can add flavor to the game world. An example of this would be the "druid peace pact" in Blizzard's World of Warcraft. Although it has declined over time, the "druid peace pact" was a concept invented by the players themselves, where all druids in the game, regardless of Horde or Alliance affiliation, would leave each other alone and/or lend assistance where needed. This wasn't built-in to the game system. It wasn't designed to happen. But due to the lore of the game, and the honor of the players involved, it happened anyway.
The concept of honor can be related to the notion of chivalry - which some say is archaic. The more decadent our culture becomes, the more chivalry becomes archaic, generally speaking. Whether this is a bad thing or not, I cannot say. Honor can be a powerful tool for good, helping complete strangers form bonds with one another and assist each other in times of need. Honor can also become a weapon of evil, spinning webs and continuing cycles of hatred, all in the name of honor. Much of the same can be said for religion, but that remains another blog entry.
The problem with honor is that it has become a rather confused meaning throughout the centuries. It was something akin to the warrior's code, originally...a code of conduct for how one should live his life. In slightly more modern times, it became much more negative in nature. If you offended someone in any way, it became an affront to his honor, usually ending in a duel situation. Thus, honor metamorphosed into a system of suffering, ending many innocent lives because of its imaginary ideals: ideals which nobody could live up to and would eventually become the death of a civilization. In this light, it is perhaps a positive ending that honor has become such a muddled and dead thing.
And so, I personally come to this conclusion. Honor is a conditional system. In this time and place, it may be the best we are allowed to have. In an ideal world, though, honor would be almost certainly considered an evil thing. In said ideal world, unconditionality would have to take precedence. You don't save someone's life because they may one day repay that debt. You don't spare a fallen warrior's life on the battlefield because he may one day return the favor. You do it because it's the right thing to do. I'm curious, what impressions do you, the readers, have of honor?
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Developer Blog: The Role of the Developer
By Kevin A. "Silverwolf" McKee.
As a developer, I sometimes wonder my role is. I look around at the big companies and I see very little developer presence there. There's maybe a hint here or there, a nudge or a whisper. Our PR person tells me (in no uncertain terms) that one of the things I'm supposed to do is blog, so I blog. As a developer, I also develop. I put in long hours writing until my wrist hurts and I'm ready to break my keyboard. I have to make sure everyone's work matches with my vision, while avoiding creating hard feelings amongst my friends and teammates. And above all, I increasingly see, I must become a symbol, a meeting of developers and players.
I still remember the wonder I always felt when I saw a developer write something, before I began developing myself. It was always special, like I had been gifted by their almighty presence. The other day, somebody told me that developers are like rock stars in the eyes of the public, and I think that's the case. You speak, and people will listen. But it's a "cool" kind of speaking, not dry, boring, and generally insincere - ala most politicians. That said, as with rock stars, a certain frequency is required. Some rock stars only need release updates every few years, whereas others need to update far more frequently. Those that keep their fans posted often have more loyal followings.
Depite this, the same does not appear to be true of game companies. Although our PR constantly assures me that blogging is a good thing, and having a visible presence in the community is important, I look at big companies and I don't see it. Their games still sell millions, hundreds of thousands of people still play them. And so I wonder, how do they do it? I don't think they're right, in any way shape or form. A game is a pact between the developer and the player to create the most enjoyable experience for all. This view is impossible to maintain without a strong, visible position by the developer. Games such as World of Warcraft (a favorite example of mine due to its success) are wildly popular, but could be so much better with a constant interplay between the developer and the public.
If we developers are to be "rock stars of gaming," then accessibility must be the first priority, before new content or even revising old content. The players shouldn't feel that it is some special privilege to be heard or to converse with a developer. The "rock star status" is not something I desire. I'm a gamer myself, so I know how it feels. A more perfect synergy of developer and gamer needs to happen before any game can be truly "next-gen." Developers are increasingly spending more and more of their time behind closed doors - releasing products, saying a few meaningful nothings about them, and then retreating to their caverns and closets to produce something new, before repeating the entire process all over again. I argue that it should be the other way around, and I intend to be an example of a present and visible developer.
As a developer, I sometimes wonder my role is. I look around at the big companies and I see very little developer presence there. There's maybe a hint here or there, a nudge or a whisper. Our PR person tells me (in no uncertain terms) that one of the things I'm supposed to do is blog, so I blog. As a developer, I also develop. I put in long hours writing until my wrist hurts and I'm ready to break my keyboard. I have to make sure everyone's work matches with my vision, while avoiding creating hard feelings amongst my friends and teammates. And above all, I increasingly see, I must become a symbol, a meeting of developers and players.
I still remember the wonder I always felt when I saw a developer write something, before I began developing myself. It was always special, like I had been gifted by their almighty presence. The other day, somebody told me that developers are like rock stars in the eyes of the public, and I think that's the case. You speak, and people will listen. But it's a "cool" kind of speaking, not dry, boring, and generally insincere - ala most politicians. That said, as with rock stars, a certain frequency is required. Some rock stars only need release updates every few years, whereas others need to update far more frequently. Those that keep their fans posted often have more loyal followings.
Depite this, the same does not appear to be true of game companies. Although our PR constantly assures me that blogging is a good thing, and having a visible presence in the community is important, I look at big companies and I don't see it. Their games still sell millions, hundreds of thousands of people still play them. And so I wonder, how do they do it? I don't think they're right, in any way shape or form. A game is a pact between the developer and the player to create the most enjoyable experience for all. This view is impossible to maintain without a strong, visible position by the developer. Games such as World of Warcraft (a favorite example of mine due to its success) are wildly popular, but could be so much better with a constant interplay between the developer and the public.
If we developers are to be "rock stars of gaming," then accessibility must be the first priority, before new content or even revising old content. The players shouldn't feel that it is some special privilege to be heard or to converse with a developer. The "rock star status" is not something I desire. I'm a gamer myself, so I know how it feels. A more perfect synergy of developer and gamer needs to happen before any game can be truly "next-gen." Developers are increasingly spending more and more of their time behind closed doors - releasing products, saying a few meaningful nothings about them, and then retreating to their caverns and closets to produce something new, before repeating the entire process all over again. I argue that it should be the other way around, and I intend to be an example of a present and visible developer.
Sunday, July 20, 2008
Developer Blog: What Is A Hybrid?
By Kevin A. "Silverwolf" McKee.
So you may ask, what is a "Massively Multiplayer Online Hybrid Game," as Sacred Chronicle is described as. An MMOHG is to my knowledge a new style or subgenre of MMO. But before we get to what's new or different about it, let's talk for a moment about traditional MMOs before getting to that point.
MMOs have to this point been primarily various forms of role-playing game (MMORPG), such as Everquest or World of Warcraft. There have been a few odd first-person-shooters (MMOFPS) here and there - Planetside pops to mind. Admittedly there have been numerous subgenres and variations on the MMORPG theme - there exist MMORPGs in a range from classic-fantasy (Lord of the Rings Online) to modern-fantasy (such as Hellmouth: London) to science fiction universes including Stargate and Star Wars. MMOFPS games are a bit more limited; and rightly so. Shooter implies guns, and obviously the newer, bigger, and flashier guns have more appeal than an ancient Colt from the Civil War, however badass it may be to charge up Gettysburg in a game.
Developers of these various games also tend to have their own style. So-called "Korean MMOs" infamously have many of the same features and visual styles, feeling much like clones of each other. This clone effect can even be continued through to the more mainstream MMOs. Games such as Everquest, World of Warcraft, Lineage, and Age of Conan all have a lot of bleed-through. There are still quests tell you to go kill X numbers of fish-like creatures because some magician or scientist or hunter somewhere wants you to, and being the cold-blooded mercenary you are you'll do it for a few gold coins and a chunk of a mystical quantity known as "experience."
These games are all wildly popular, drawing in hundreds of thousands of dollars (if not more) for their developers and publishers. People complain less about the homogeneity of the games they play and more about what developers do or don't do to their favorite class or playstyle. There are Player vs. Environment experiences, which usually take on the form of both leveling/questing content and instance runs which allow everyone the ability to kill the dragon without needing a line you stand in until it's your turn. They also have a crafting minigame whereby everyone can feel useful by contributing to the phantom in-game economy, and a Player vs. Player function to let gamers feel competitive and flex their e-peens.
A few games mix it up from time to time. A notable example I can think of quite easily is the Opening of the Gates of Ahn Qiraj, of World of Warcraft fame. This massive server-wide event allows everyone the opportunity to contribute directly to a war event, to open the Gates of Ahn Qiraj and kill the Old God, C'thun. The epic quality and cooperation inspired among the player body is marred only by the failure of any consequences if the player body does NOT complete the event. It just sits there. There's no consequence to leaving C'thun to stew amongst his insect worshippers, despite assurances by the Bronze Dragonflight that the world is in peril.
So, to bring back to the point of the post, what IS an MMOHG? I define a hybrid game as utilizing aspects of numerous genres of games, and blending them all into a cohesive whole which tells a story. I have seen a number of hybrid games for singleplayer, or limited multiplayer, but never a massively multiplayer version. Although I am reticent to reveal too many details this early in the game's life, with almost a year and a half until the beta is scheduled for release, Sacred Chronicle will involve elements of a FPS, an RPG, a real-time strategy game, a "Myst"ery game, and several other gameplay elements from yet other genres. Player consequences are also introduced into the mix, giving the world of Sacred Chronicle a serious feel. To my knowledge, Sacred Chronicle is the first such game to be developed, although I may well be wrong on that. Regardless of whether it iss the first or the last, me and my team intend to mix things up with this game, and create an enjoyable experience for all. I'll leave it to you, the readers and fans, to determine if we're successful or not, and to the game reviewers and pontificates to figure out who was first.
So you may ask, what is a "Massively Multiplayer Online Hybrid Game," as Sacred Chronicle is described as. An MMOHG is to my knowledge a new style or subgenre of MMO. But before we get to what's new or different about it, let's talk for a moment about traditional MMOs before getting to that point.
MMOs have to this point been primarily various forms of role-playing game (MMORPG), such as Everquest or World of Warcraft. There have been a few odd first-person-shooters (MMOFPS) here and there - Planetside pops to mind. Admittedly there have been numerous subgenres and variations on the MMORPG theme - there exist MMORPGs in a range from classic-fantasy (Lord of the Rings Online) to modern-fantasy (such as Hellmouth: London) to science fiction universes including Stargate and Star Wars. MMOFPS games are a bit more limited; and rightly so. Shooter implies guns, and obviously the newer, bigger, and flashier guns have more appeal than an ancient Colt from the Civil War, however badass it may be to charge up Gettysburg in a game.
Developers of these various games also tend to have their own style. So-called "Korean MMOs" infamously have many of the same features and visual styles, feeling much like clones of each other. This clone effect can even be continued through to the more mainstream MMOs. Games such as Everquest, World of Warcraft, Lineage, and Age of Conan all have a lot of bleed-through. There are still quests tell you to go kill X numbers of fish-like creatures because some magician or scientist or hunter somewhere wants you to, and being the cold-blooded mercenary you are you'll do it for a few gold coins and a chunk of a mystical quantity known as "experience."
These games are all wildly popular, drawing in hundreds of thousands of dollars (if not more) for their developers and publishers. People complain less about the homogeneity of the games they play and more about what developers do or don't do to their favorite class or playstyle. There are Player vs. Environment experiences, which usually take on the form of both leveling/questing content and instance runs which allow everyone the ability to kill the dragon without needing a line you stand in until it's your turn. They also have a crafting minigame whereby everyone can feel useful by contributing to the phantom in-game economy, and a Player vs. Player function to let gamers feel competitive and flex their e-peens.
A few games mix it up from time to time. A notable example I can think of quite easily is the Opening of the Gates of Ahn Qiraj, of World of Warcraft fame. This massive server-wide event allows everyone the opportunity to contribute directly to a war event, to open the Gates of Ahn Qiraj and kill the Old God, C'thun. The epic quality and cooperation inspired among the player body is marred only by the failure of any consequences if the player body does NOT complete the event. It just sits there. There's no consequence to leaving C'thun to stew amongst his insect worshippers, despite assurances by the Bronze Dragonflight that the world is in peril.
So, to bring back to the point of the post, what IS an MMOHG? I define a hybrid game as utilizing aspects of numerous genres of games, and blending them all into a cohesive whole which tells a story. I have seen a number of hybrid games for singleplayer, or limited multiplayer, but never a massively multiplayer version. Although I am reticent to reveal too many details this early in the game's life, with almost a year and a half until the beta is scheduled for release, Sacred Chronicle will involve elements of a FPS, an RPG, a real-time strategy game, a "Myst"ery game, and several other gameplay elements from yet other genres. Player consequences are also introduced into the mix, giving the world of Sacred Chronicle a serious feel. To my knowledge, Sacred Chronicle is the first such game to be developed, although I may well be wrong on that. Regardless of whether it iss the first or the last, me and my team intend to mix things up with this game, and create an enjoyable experience for all. I'll leave it to you, the readers and fans, to determine if we're successful or not, and to the game reviewers and pontificates to figure out who was first.
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Welcome
This is for Sacred specific information such as screenshots and download links. While our Blood on Binary spot will occasionally feature parts from this area, you will find the main source right here!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
