Game research

I wanted to design a game that would be used on a mobile phone platform, because I feel that over the course of the next decade or so, there will be significant advancements between consoles and phone technologies, in which a merger will be the result. Smart phones are already on their way to this end, with devices such as the Android, and the Iphone. I feel that these current devices will become to steping stone for the standard at which mobile phones will become. I also conducted searches into touchscreen games, mobile phone games, mobile phone ergonomics & conventions, also some background information regarding my concept, Whack-a-mole. The underlying reason for my decision to use this platform for my game, was simply because mobile phones these days arent restricted to just text and calling people. They are having more and more technology intergrated into them, which is apparent in the touch screen technology that was intergrated into phones not that long ago, even though touch screens hae existed before this addition.

Microsoft, Apple and numerous other companies have began an arms race to develop the next standard fpr mobile phones. The app's store has proven that there is a way to make a viable profit for external applications, not only restricted to games, within this industry. In conjunction to this the hardware for mobile phones is still beoming more advanced, which indicates to me that, as I said earlier, over the next decade we will see new standards arise, and a time where applications and games will essentially be cross compatible between the phones of the future.


Phone ergonomics & conventions

Due to the amount of phones that have been on the market over the past few years, it can often seem difficult to adapt from one make to another. If you are used to a particular model, and switch to a totally different one it can be quite frustrating for some time. Take for example these three phones.

[ Show 3 images]


They seem to have similar layout for the buttons, however, the first only allows you to pick up an incoming call by pressing the green phone button located on the right hand side. The second phone also has this feature, but the buttons for pickup and end call, have switched positions. The final phone has its answer call button in the centre. As I said earlier, this switch of buttons can cause frustration for caller and reciever. Another Issue regarding these buttons are the text that often accompanies the icons. As you can plainly see, they are different for each model (providing they even have text). Which I find to be a useless addition for phones, as I believe Icons and imagery work far better at informing a person about something than text will. This is why most hazzardous or danger signs use colours and symbols that reflect their contents. They are also restricted in their content, because they have to represent something on a universal scale. If it was not like this, then the image in question would loose its power if it was to represent more than one thing. For example, if a 'biohazzard' symbol was also used to represent a 'Danger electricity' symbol, it would get confusing and loose its impact on people. It is the same thing, if greenpeace used the Nazi symbol for their campaigns, peoplw would have a different outlook on what the organisation were doing. There has been alot of research into this using primates and other animals to see if they can learn to understand what symbols mean, without them knowing or understanding spoken language. This research can be found here:
http://ec.europa.eu/research/research-eu/animality/article_animality18_en.html
http://ec.europa.eu/research/headlines/news/article_08_07_07_en.html
It is also known that all modern language drived from a language that was made up of symbols and pictures, such as Egyptian and Nordic. Infact our languages are comprised of symbols. The chinese language has many different symbols which represent words and sentences that make up every day conversations. So there is a great deal of evidence that supports the fact that pictures do indeed paint a thousand words. It is also really interesting, yet confusing that nearly all mobile phone buttons on/off button is usually the red, cancel button. This brings me onto another feature that nearly all phones share. The shapes of the buttons. As you can see from these examples, each of the main buttons are all different shapes. There is no universal design, so it means that you have to get acustomed to the interface. However, It is apparent that the main buttons are located in the same region across many phones, so atleast you know where to find them!


[ Image of upside down phone]

Another unusual ergonomic feature that has come to my attention, and is actually really interesting, is that almost every mobile phone has its screen sittuated at the top, and the buttons below. I am unsure why the phone as been designed like this, but the idea behind it was so your thumb could do all the work on the number pad. If you take your phone in your hand, you will notice that your thumb is actually sittuated at the top of the phone, not the bottom, where the numbers are. In addition to this, if you write a long text message, or play a mobile phone game for long periods, your thumb will begin to ache. This is because the design isnt ergonomically sound. The easiest fix for this, is to design a phone, where the number pad is above the screen. You can try this by turning your phone upside down, and moving your thumb across the pad. It feels very different, but alot better. There has infact been a paitent made for the design of a phone like this, carried out by an irish inventor. The 'new scientist' magazine has covered this and an article was published early 2007, so this idea is not new. The link is http://www.newscientist.com/blog/invention/2007/02/upside-down-mobile-phone.html
I find it equally as strange in that I cannot find any phone that has been specifically designed like this, although I think the nokia 7600 came close, due to its unusual shape, forced people to hold it different to how they would usually hold a phone. Perhaps this sparked the idea for a new design, who's to say?
The only issue with this idea of an inverted phone interface, is that now we have taken a step from tradtitonal touch pad phones to touch screen phones, people are using them differently. For example, people now text and navigate the interface using their index finger more, or turning the phone on its side, and interacting with it as if it were a game pad. So the question pops into my mind, do we really need a phone to have an inverted design now there are new ways to interface with them?
An ergonomic study was conducted in australia for the use of mobile phones. It was conducted in 2004, so the material is out dated, but its point is still valid none the less. The study was used to find out if erconomics were a factor in mobile phone design. Its results, to me, arent that supprising.
"Our preliminary studies of the latest phones suggest the buttons are only appropriately sized for five-year olds,". "And if the current trend of shrinking phones continues, soon the buttons will only be big enough for three-year olds."
These comments came from one of the sceintists in the study. She goes on to say, that another problem regarding these phones, was vision. Due to the human visual sense decreasing around the age of 40, using such small devices, puts even greater strain on the eyes, which causes greater visual degredation. This research is quite concerning, as it means that using mobile phones could be contributing to poor eyesight. With that said, a product marketing manager for sony ericsson, has noted that because cameras have started becoming integrated into mobile phones, the odds that screens will get smaller are very slim. And we can plainly see, five years on, this predicition has most certianly come true.
With regards to my previous statement, about companies assuming that thumbs are being predominantly used for mobile phone interfaces, Older users of the device, are generally using their index fingers to use the buttons with. I believe this is the case because when phones were introduced, and text messaging wasnt available, this method was the standard for its time. As the standards change, I think that people are reluctant to change how they operate the interface of phones. For example, phones which were ring dial operated, required the index finger to dial the numbers. I believe that because my father has grown up with this standard, he still remains to use his current mobile phone in a similar fashion, where as myself, I operate both the house phone, and mobile phone by using my thumb to dial the numbers. As i mentioned earlier, the new touch screen interfaces have started seeing both methods getting combined into a new standard. The scientist, Dr Head, who was interviewed for the ergonomic study, states that "A device should adapt to a person. A person shouldn't have to adapt to a device,". The research gained from this study, does have some weight, because a study published in 2002 had found that the thumb has now become the most dexterous digit for people under the age of 25. Also a british report, published in 2004, regarding mobile phone use in eight metropolitan areas found that thumbs are getting bigger and more muscular, that could be due to mobile phone usage. The American Society of Hand Therapists, have called this 'Nintendo Thumb', which is "a swelling at the base of the thumb, linked to the dependence on the digit when playing video games".

Mobile phone games

The first mobile phone game was snake, which was released in 1998 and was pre installed on select nokia models, such as the 6110. It was actually designed in the late 1970's, and was called 'Worm' at the time, and was created by the company 'Gremlin'. The game in itself was very simple and straightforward. Games for phones at this point were very basic, and resembled very, very early console games in terms of graphics and sophistication. The problem with this was, the games were limited to the hardware of the actual phone. Because of this huge limitation, the games developed were entirely monochomatic and monophonic, and the games were no more indepth than pacman, Which still did not stop them becoming a huge success. This success can even be seen today, with the latest Orange advertisement making a reference to the game snake. All games at this point were also pre installed, not download or upload. For the best part of 4 years Nokia had majority control over this market, but in 2001, with the advancements in mobile technology, other developer companies began emerging, and soon, there was a vast amount of competition in mobile gaming. From this point onwards, mobile phones started becoming more widely used, much more advanced microprocessing technology was developed, data storage cards and with the advent of colour phones, games were developed in their droves. It was now possible to download games onto your phone. Popular console games such as Pac-man and space invaders were being created for mobile phones too. Research from 2008 showed that mobile phone games were now a very sucessful industry, reaching over $5 billion. Today you can even get very sucessful games such as Guitar hero for mobile phones, which tells me that the industry for console games has now reached a point where they are able to go into cross platform genres. This is apparent with a companie called CCP Games, sittuated in Iceland. They have designed an MMORPG set in the far future. They recently held a fanfest in which they discussed some ideas for what they plan to do in the future. One of their plans is to integrate a mobile phone minigame, which affects your account for the online game. They plan to do this across as many platforms as they can, including the Xbox, PS3 and even applications such as Facebook. The link to view this video is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNhPig8inEY&feature=SeriesPlayList&p=E7A45268BF4505BC. The video is roughly an hour and fourghty minutes long. This tells me that projects such as these are proving that there are no boundaries between games an the technology that is used.
The only issues that lie between mobile games and their popularity, is the fact that there is still a wide technological gap between consoles and phones. This is due to their dependance on the hardware they use. This means that the industry is limited to casual gamers, and people who have 20 minutes to spare on a bus journy. Also I feel that most users are acustomed to the graphical advances seen in many games developed for consoles today, whereas the mobile games offer much less in terms of the graphical content displayed. Perhaps the biggest of these issues is that mobile phone games are currently restricted to the service provider your contract is with. This means you cannot purchase any game you like. You would need to ensure that the game is compatible with your current phone. With the possible addition of new standards being developed, I believe this will be overcome.

Touchscreen games

Touchscreen games arent restricted to mobile phones. The nintendo DS and even the Ipod touch uses such games. From the reseach conducted and examples that I have seen, it is apparent to me that there is a large market for these games. I feel that because the technology within gaming is relatively new, its potential has not yet been fulfilled. I have noticed that games released on a touchscreen platform, either involve a degree if user interactivity, (I.E. using a stylus to write information down) or are re-releases of arcade games. (Dungeon crawler,Sword of Fargoal). This gives me inspiration in that, to achieve a level of game that could potentially sell and be enjoyable, I would need to include these features. I have also come to the conclusion that the game I develop would have to be easy to pick up and understand, else the player would be reluctant in buying it. A balance of challenging and entertaining would also heavily come into consideration. With this said, I believe a simple 2D arcade game would be a perfect choice, because they can be addictive if designed correctly and because It should require very limited coding and designing time constraints.

Games

Upon looking into the touch screen games genre, I looked at two games, that were based on the Whack-a-Mole Arcade game. The game was originally created in 1971, by Aaron Fechter. With this basic design it was sold onto a company called "Bob's space racers". Aaron did not realise the potential of his invention, and in doing so, he failed to get the protective patient for it. From here it sold world wide to predominantly carnivals and arcades. The game has changed since then, and has had many upgrades, but it is essentially the same game. I have found two flash versions of the game which I found reall interesting. The first is essentialy a remake of the original. The score system is, you hit a mole, you gain a point. If you miss, you loose a point. This is a very good idea for the game, as it prevents cheating by constantly tapping the mouse button. I feel that it would also help with hand eye coordination development skills.
The second version of the game is basically the same. The difference is, the designer has given it some variation. For example, If you hit one of the moles as they pop up, there is a chance it will act out one of three animations. Also, a very good feature to this addition, is the moles pop up from random locations, not set ones on the screen. This makes the game more challenging and fun for the player, due to the even greater random setting. A big factor in playing games I think, would be the game rules themselves. I feel that rules which are set in place, give players boundaries and limits that they can work with. Alot of games today are sold without any instruction books with them, but people still have an inherent ability to know how to play the game. I think that this is because rules are transfereable from all aspects of games, work, and life in general, and applied to games. Rules are also set up to prevent people gaining unfair advantages over other people. I would guess that games without these sorts of rules would have a much smaller fan base as oppose to a game with a more ridgid structure of rules and boundaries. If we look at the whack-a-mole game, and break down its rules, you will notice that each player gets an equal set time frame, say 2 minutes, to hit as many 'moles' as they can. The moles will pop out of their holes in a random order, in which the player has the opportunity to generate a score. This system ensures that players have the same time frame, and a fair chance to guess where the next mole will pop up, with a set time limit to hit the mole. In addtion to this, there is a high score system, where players can have a healthy competition to see who can win. Every fair ground will have one of these whack-a-mole games, and it is guarenteed that people will use it and have a good time playing it, because essentially, no matter what platform this type of game is on, it is still a fun game to play, which is why I think it has lasted so long, and probably will last for years to come. I will take these games and ideas on board, and hopefully it will help me create my own version of the game, because fundimentally, a good game will always be a good game.

Conventions within games
Generally most successful games will have a powerful rule system in place, as I have explained. these rules define the essence of the game, in that players will know the limitations of themselves, and what the game has to offer. I personally believe in giving the player as much fredom within a game as possible, without damaging these core rules. I feel this way because I get the sense that newer games are no longer looking at playability. The seem to be "spoon feeding" new gamers, due to the fact that games now can usually be completed within a matter of days, where as I remember spending weeks on some games when I was a child. I believe that giving players more fredom with a game is entirely possible, but I also think that it is sure to be very challenging, because you would need to find a balance between rules and fredom. too much of either will surely detere the player from playing the game. Games also have similar interface content, in terms of, a main menu, where you can view options screens, quitting hte game, starting the game, saving the game, etc. For example, the majority of playstation games respond to the start button on the pad as being a pause button. Or the Escape key on a PC pausing the game and bringing up some form of menu. I think these conventions are quite possibly a corner stone in games design, purely because the majority of players will automatically know what each key does. This isnt restricted to games either. For example, pressing the Escape key will also close some windows with certian programs, E.g. MSN messenger. This can cause a problem also, in that when you are designing certian software, you need to be aware that you yourselfs are restricted to certian rules before anything can be desinged. You ofcourse can break the mould and design something entirely different, but in doing so you are taking a big risk, in that you cant be sure if your program will be a success atall.


Ergonomics & Conventions links -
http://www.ergoweb.com/news/detail.cfm?id=961
http://www.hfes-europe.org/badergo/bad41.htm
http://www.infovis.net/printMag.php?lang=2&num=18

Mobile phone games -
http://www.answerbag.com/articles/The-History-of-Mobile-Phone-Games/455adc5b-1122-ebc9-55ce-28560e5b8fcf
http://www.eamobile.com/Web/
http://www.handson.com/
http://www.namcomobile.com/
http://www.ehow.co.uk/about_5279970_history-mobile-phone-games.html?cr=1

Touchscreen links -
http://toucharcade.com/

Games links -
http://www.bobsspaceracers.com/whac-a-mole/moleknows.htm
http://www.addictinggames.com/whackamole.html
http://www.molepro.com/products/game.htm
http://fun.familyeducation.com/games/family-games/45713.html